Criticism of Carnoustie

[Mark_Rowlinson]

In 1999 they slammed the place. I don't remember much about Harrington's win - I may even have been away. It seemed to me that they got things very right this time. What do you think?

[David_Tepper]

Mark -

If I remember correctly, Carnoustie in 1999 was criticized for narrow fairways and very deep, thick rough.

With the warm, dry weather in Scotland this summer, the rough was not nearly as punishing this time. I think that was likely the biggest difference between then and now.

DT

[Thomas Dai]

Carnoustie = Car-nicely!
And being burnt-up and fiery makes it even nicer.

Atb

[Don Mahaffey]

Mark -
If I remember correctly, Carnoustie in 1999 was criticized for narrow fairways and very deep, thick rough.

With the warm, dry weather in Scotland this summer, the rough was not nearly as punishing this time. I think that was likely the biggest difference between then and now.
DT

Maybe, but the course has fairway irrigation. They just didn’t use it this year.

[Ryan Coles]

Mark -
If I remember correctly, Carnoustie in 1999 was criticized for narrow fairways and very deep, thick rough.

With the warm, dry weather in Scotland this summer, the rough was not nearly as punishing this time. I think that was likely the biggest difference between then and now.
DT

Maybe, but the course has fairway irrigation. They just didn’t use it this year.

They used it plenty Don until they closed the course a few weeks ago. I’ve read this was for divots to germinate, however it seems lots of Open courses now play on mats in the lead up.


I personally couldn’t care less about winning score. However the weather was benign and winning score was 4 Under ‘4’s’. It managed to be testing without being one dimensionally, boring. Not easy to achieve with how good the guys are with the equipment they have.

[Jerry Kluger]

I think it speaks of quality when the best player wins and Molinari certainly deserved it.  On some show before the tournament began, they noted that analytically Molinari was the favorite - it was based upon his age, scoring, and other factors I cannot remember.

[jeffwarne]

They clearly used fairway irrigation-the fairways were perfect, shockingly uniform turf in terms of density and tightness.
Looked like a dormant bermuda fairway after an early hard frost.
I actually took a photo while standing in the first fairway as I walking out.


They obviously turned it off, or down.
Nearby courses without irrigation have lost grass-not just dormant-but dead with black sandy soil exposed in many areas. Hopefully they get some rain soon but meanwhile the playing conditions are excellent for the most part but dormant can only last so long before dead in places.

[Don Mahaffey]

I wasn’t implying they didn’t use it all year, just not used to manage any color, or so it seems.  I’m not sure I’m a great fan of the difference in soil moisture between the greens and approaches. I heard more than once comments that landing on the green help control bounces-when my thinking has always been one of the aspects I love about links Golf is the ball reacts the same whether it’s two yards on the green or just off the green. But I admit I didn’t see a lot of difference.  I guess keeping the greens manageable means you can get the rest of the course super fast.  That’s a big difference between USGA and R & A.

[Sean_A]

I think they went too heavy with the greens. The greens never came close to matching the fairway firmness.  To be fair, once fairways get that parched this will almost invariably be at odds greens and fairways.  Folks say conditions were perfect, but I think a bit greener fairways and browner greens would have been best.

Ciao

[Tommy Williamsen]

I played Carnoustie in 1992 when I could play a bit. I played the puppy tees and didn't break 90. I still remember every hole and most of my shots. It was one of the most difficult courses I ever played. If the greens had more slope and undulations I never would have finished. The setup for the Open, if not perfect, was excellent. I agree with Sean that it would have been nice to have had the greens firmer, but when the best players in the world can only shoot -8 and have two pretty benign days, I'd say the R&A should be congratulated.

[George Pazin]

[Note: this is not a criticism, just an observation, and from tv at that!]


The one hole that seemed most affected by the conditions was 18. It really seemed to be more pedestrian than previous Opens - just blast it, doesn't really matter if it ends up in the rough.


Having said that, I wouldn't wish for 18 to play as it did in the past couple Opens. I'd prefer an easier 18, with an opportunity for birdie, to the potentially brutal 18 from the past.


The Open courses always look phenomenally interesting and compelling to me - the humps, the hollows, the bunkers that look to truly be hazards. Hope to experience them in person someday.

[Tom_Doak]

While watching the telecast today, I paused to remember the awful condition Carnoustie was in when I lived in the UK in 1982.  They had lost The Open and lost a lot of grass, and overseeded the fairways with bluegrass (!), so that it didn't play much like a links at all.


The R & A has done a few things in relation to its championships of which I did not approve, but their commitment to bringing The Open back to Carnoustie saved the golf course, and saved the town from losing its life blood.  Americans wouldn't go there in any numbers were it not for the course still being on the rota.

[Thomas Dai]

While watching the telecast today, I paused to remember the awful condition Carnoustie was in when I lived in the UK in 1982. They had lost The Open and lost a lot of grass, and overseeded the fairways with bluegrass (!), so that it didn't play much like a links at all.
The R & A has done a few things in relation to its championships of which I did not approve, but their commitment to bringing The Open back to Carnoustie saved the golf course, and saved the town from losing its life blood.  Americans wouldn't go there in any numbers were it not for the course still being on the rota.

+1
The diamond was always there, neglected as it was for far too long. And now thankfully it's shining brightly once again!
atb

[Jon Wiggett]

Tom,


when I first played it in 1983 it was in poor nick though probably average for a muni but then again the greenfee was £3 for juniors and £12.50 for adults so certainly good value for money. Despite it condition I enjoyed my rounds in 1983 and the following few years far more than when I played the upgraded version in 2001. I think it had lost some of its charm and most of its value for money.

[Adam Lawrence]

[Note: this is not a criticism, just an observation, and from tv at that!]


The one hole that seemed most affected by the conditions was 18. It really seemed to be more pedestrian than previous Opens - just blast it, doesn't really matter if it ends up in the rough.


Having said that, I wouldn't wish for 18 to play as it did in the past couple Opens. I'd prefer an easier 18, with an opportunity for birdie, to the potentially brutal 18 from the past.


The Open courses always look phenomenally interesting and compelling to me - the humps, the hollows, the bunkers that look to truly be hazards. Hope to experience them in person someday.

The biggest reason for this was that the fairway was so firm, and the hole was playing downwind, that a decent straight drive was going more than 350 yards. In the last few groups yesterday several players hit their tee shots almost to the crossing path -- that isn't much more than 100 yards from the green, on a near 500 yard hole.


Now for sure the properly wispy rough certainly gave people more confidence to let fly with the driver. But that, imo, is as it should be on a links. It's the 1999 rough that is the outlier.

[David Davis]

I'd say overall pretty good, if we are comparing it to typical US Open then great. (Excluding Shinny and Merion)


I side with Sean on the greens being too green and when they were able to approach them with so much backspin that the ball spun back several feet that was too receptive for me given the conditions of everything.


I kind of figured they needed to do that to keep the greens in good conditions for the 4 days but wasn't sure.

[Anthony_Nysse]

They clearly used fairway irrigation-the fairways were perfect, shockingly uniform turf in terms of density and tightness.
Looked like a dormant bermuda fairway after an early hard frost.
I actually took a photo while standing in the first fairway as I walking out.


They obviously turned it off, or down.
Nearby courses without irrigation have lost grass-not just dormant-but dead with black sandy soil exposed in many areas. Hopefully they get some rain soon but meanwhile the playing conditions are excellent for the most part but dormant can only last so long before dead in places.

Their Superintendent commented that they turned off fairway irrigation 3 weeks prior to the start of The Open.

[Sean_A]

I'd say overall pretty good, if we are comparing it to typical US Open then great. (Excluding Shinny and Merion)


I side with Sean on the greens being too green and when they were able to approach them with so much backspin that the ball spun back several feet that was too receptive for me given the conditions of everything.


I kind of figured they needed to do that to keep the greens in good conditions for the 4 days but wasn't sure.

Yes, I saw too many guys short-sided from rough who were able to impart loads of spin in hitting terrific shots...often blind. IMO, that shouldn't be happening...especially downwind! Just a bit too conservative with the water.  All in all, a damn good Open with the course being a big reason why it was enjoyable to watch.

Ciao

[Adam Lawrence]

They clearly used fairway irrigation-the fairways were perfect, shockingly uniform turf in terms of density and tightness.
Looked like a dormant bermuda fairway after an early hard frost.
I actually took a photo while standing in the first fairway as I walking out.


They obviously turned it off, or down.
Nearby courses without irrigation have lost grass-not just dormant-but dead with black sandy soil exposed in many areas. Hopefully they get some rain soon but meanwhile the playing conditions are excellent for the most part but dormant can only last so long before dead in places.

Their Superintendent commented that they turned off fairway irrigation 3 weeks prior to the start of The Open.

Yes, when public play stopped. Craig mentioned this on Facebook before the championship.

[George Pazin]

The biggest reason for this was that the fairway was so firm, and the hole was playing downwind, that a decent straight drive was going more than 350 yards. In the last few groups yesterday several players hit their tee shots almost to the crossing path -- that isn't much more than 100 yards from the green, on a near 500 yard hole.


Now for sure the properly wispy rough certainly gave people more confidence to let fly with the driver. But that, imo, is as it should be on a links. It's the 1999 rough that is the outlier.

I had forgotten about the wind, thanks for the reminder. I do prefer the 18th with the wispy rough - the whole course, actually.

[Peter Pallotta]

I thought to myself that the reason the fairways really 'worked' and truly 'meant something' (in terms of playing the game) is because the bunkers at Carnoustie were definitely *not* randomly created by -- or the fortuitous result of -- grazing sheep & rabbits or wind and time and erosion. On a relatively flat site, no one ever sought out (or, to my eye, seemed to care to seek out) spots where bunkers would look 'natural', but instead focused on where they 'needed to be' in order to provide interest & challenge given the varying wind and turf conditions. Drier, faster turf led to the many and various bunkers meaning 'one thing', and slower wetter turf would have them meaning 'another': same bunkers, same places, but -- in this sense at least -- 'random' in how they suggest and impact choices and options and play.   
Peter

[Kalen Braley]

Put me in the camp of the greener fairways and browner greens as well....seems like it would play more difficult that way too.  Less run out on drives and more bouncy approach shots.


Even if Carnoustie was in good shape, but didn't have the Open mystique, I doubt it would get much visitor play.  Seems like a relentless beastie of a course and with so many other fun and quirky options in the UK, why choose that?

[Niall C]

Kalen

You are absolutely right about the unrelenting challenge of Carnoustie even if the pro's and the conditions reduced the fearsome 18th (and the 10th) to a drive and a chip. However it is still a terrific course that lots of people love to play and I'm one. Yes, there's little chance of me playing to my handicap round there but I still love the challenge. Not all links have to be short/quirky to enjoy. You can have fun in different ways.

If it didn't have the Open, or I suppose when it didn't have the Open, it still got a lot of local (ie. UK play) play however now that it is firmly on the Open rota it's attracting a different financial demographic which has resulted in green-fees going through the roof. But then that's the case with all the top UK courses, it seems.

Niall

[Mark_Fine]

As Sean alluded to, the one thing I would have liked to have seen was the firmness of the greens more closely match the firmness of the approaches.  That has always be a pet peeve of mine - firm greens and soft approaches or vise versa - yuck!!  It is very tough on many courses to get these two things in sync. Color doesn't concern me; it when a ball reacts very differently if it lands in the approach vs on the green. 


I would have also liked to have seen more wind but nothing you can do about that.  Never like seeing a links course played without its primary defense.  At least there was some wind on Sunday.  Overall I would give the set up high marks!

[Joe Hancock]

Interesting comments on an interesting course. I heard it here, and on TV: If the greens were undulating, it would be near impossible to play(paraphrasing). But, that’s in direct conflict of what we’ve been told, and subsequently discussed on this very forum. Haven’t we all decided the best way to perplex the better golfer is by providing greens with internal contours and funky reads? Carnoustie has it backwards....length, really tough bunkering (positioning and depth/ difficulty to extricate onesself), dry fairways, softer, flat greens.....


While I don’t understand it all, I sure did appreciate the tournament as it unfolded on a wonderful golf course.