10 Round Splits

[Sean_A]

And arguing Golspie is more interesting is one thing; saying it's 7-3 [which implies Golspie is twice as good by some metric] is kind of ridiculous without a good explanation, considering how highly Dornoch is ranked overall.

Thats interesting...it never really dawned on me to think of a 7-3 course comparison as one course being twice as good as the other.  It never dawned on me to think of a course as twice as good as another course period.  It would be fascinating to see the "math" behind this sort of analysis...on second thought, no, no it wouldn't.

Ciao

[Ira Fishman]

Sean,


See my Post at #19.  I am a history guy, not a math whiz.


Ira

[Jim Nugent]

... And arguing Golspie is more interesting is one thing; saying it's 7-3 [which implies Golspie is twice as good by some metric] is kind of ridiculous without a good explanation, considering how highly Dornoch is ranked overall.

Tom, don't you give Muirfield a 10 on the Doak scale, and North Berwick something lower?  I also seem to recall you saying there is nowhere you'd rather play than N. Berwick.  If these various facts are right, it shows the metric, whatever it is, is pretty flexible, isn't linear or perhaps even positively correlated.   

I wondered after seeing your statement about Berwick why you don't give it a 10.  Or do you now? 

[James Brown]

For data:


My actual splits:


Dornoch: 12
Brora:  2 (didn’t discover it on my first trip, now on the rota)
Golspie:  1

[David Davis]

Lahinch 0 v Cypress Point 10 - come on, if I could play Cypress 10 times next month no way would I bother flying back and forth to Ireland even though I love Lahinch. I can always play Lahinch, Cypress is a drop everything, mortgage the house kind of experience.


[/size]Golspie 2 v Royal Dornoch 8[/color][/size]Pasatiempo 2 v Pacific Dunes 8Woking 3 v Castle Stuart 7Mid Pines 2 v Bandon Trails 8 - obviously as I'm already going to be at Pacific Dunes for at least 8 days and given I'll also play Old Mac 8 times then I'm going to need a few more days.Lahinch 5 v Ballybunion 5[/color]

[Ira Fishman]

David,


The great thing about this exercise and gca.com generally is the freedom to agree to disagree.  For what is worth, degree of difficulty in getting access to a course (either how private or location) was not a factor in my splits. 


Interestingly (perhaps) is that the only one of yours that I would feel the need to argue against strongly is Woking v. Castle Stuart.  The quality of the architecture at Woking is to me far superior both getting to and on the greens.


Ira

[Ronald Montesano]

Kevin, that is a downright ridiculous ... ly good response to my proposal. I afford you your opinion, as it is laid out so well. I stand by mine. No doubt ECCC is wonderful golf. It didn't move my spirit like FBa did, ergo my impetus for stating as I did. I won't lie about writing 9-1 as a way of encouraging a response from some erudite source. 10-0 would have been silly.

Forsgate Banks 9 v. Essex County 1 ... I played both on the same 2017 trip. FB has what I consider playable danger. Those cavernous maws are playable, but what a shot you'll have! It's the thrills that get me, despite being a flat-out wuss when it comes to roller coasters and other such rides.

I consider myself a big fan of Charles Banks, and love Forsgate Banks as much as the next guy, but a 9-1 split is downright ridiculous. The green sites at Essex County may not be as bold as Forsgate, but they certainly present strategy and intrigue to keep the golfer on his toes. I would even go so far as to argue that the quality of golf at Essex County is better than Forsgate. The Par 3s at both courses are world class, and I truly mean that. The 9th at Essex County may be the weakest hole of the bunch, but it still is a wonderful hole that requires precision shotmaking. The 7th at Forsgate, and 11th at Essex County are in the highest class of Par 3s in New Jersey, but neither facility has the edge in Par 3s.


The Par 4s, like the Par 3s, are full of strategy, but are simply better at Essex County than at Forsgate. The first at Essex County is the only weak Par 4 on the course. Otherwise, you’d hear a range of answers as to what the best Par 4 is. Is it the 4th? 14th? 18th? The list goes on. At Forsgate, the case is the same, but there are a few “weaker” holes than at Essex County. I’m not a huge fan of the 4th, and I’m not all that doting of the 18th hole either. I find that 18th to be out of character with the rest of the golf course, give it’s such a tight driving area, and the green, at least in the times I have played it, lacks multiple pin positions. That being said, there are still plenty of wonderful Par 4s, such as the 1st, 5th and 10th that give the golfer options off the tee. As a result, I have to give the edge to Essex County in this category.


Finally, the Par 5s. I have to give the edge to Forsgate here. There is not a bad 5 there, while Essex County lags behind. While the Par 5s aren’t bad at Essex County, the 7th and 13th are strategically similar, while the 8th presents a challenge for long hitters off the tee, and a second shot for short hitters. None of them are mind blowing, but are no slouches. When compared to Forsgate, Forsgate’s Par 5s are strategically interesting, and require a plan if action before playing. The 8th is one of the best Par 5s in the state, while the 9th forces the golfer to decide whether or not to go for the green, and where to lay up should he decide not to. The 13th, isn’t on the same level as the 8th and 9th, but a wonderful green couples makes for a precarious wedge shot when the pin finds itself on the top right shelf. The Par 5s at Forsgate are better than those at Essex, but don’t give a massive advantage.


In reviewing this, a 6-4 split in either direction would make sense. I find myself at a 6-4 split for Essex County. That being said, I find it too difficult to justify something higher than a 7-3, since both courses are so good, and offer many similar quandaries for the golfer.

[David Davis]

David,


The great thing about this exercise and gca.com generally is the freedom to agree to disagree.  For what is worth, degree of difficulty in getting access to a course (either how private or location) was not a factor in my splits. 


Interestingly (perhaps) is that the only one of yours that I would feel the need to argue against strongly is Woking v. Castle Stuart.  The quality of the architecture at Woking is to me far superior both getting to and on the greens.


Ira

Ira,


I can appreciate your love of Woking. It's an excellent course with a wonderful old school feel to it even though I think the 17th hole is a complete flop and way out of context there. I really like most of the front 9 and would say that the 3rd is likely my favorite hole and maybe one of the most strategic on the course.


In no way is it architecturally IMO even close to Castle Stuart. On top of the architecture many of the things I love about links golf are done so well at CS that there is just no comparison. Here are some to give you an idea of what I mean:


1. Firm and fast conditioning.
2. Ability to actually utilize the ground game on most holes.
3. Windy conditions.
4. Amazing setting and views.
5. Incredible variety.
6. Wonderful bunker and waste area shaping.
7. Wonderful greens and surrounds.
8. Some of the best turf I've played on.


All of the above are just simply much better than Woking and I have to tell you again, I really like Woking a lot.

[Sean_A]

David,

The great thing about this exercise and gca.com generally is the freedom to agree to disagree.  For what is worth, degree of difficulty in getting access to a course (either how private or location) was not a factor in my splits. 

Interestingly (perhaps) is that the only one of yours that I would feel the need to argue against strongly is Woking v. Castle Stuart.  The quality of the architecture at Woking is to me far superior both getting to and on the greens.

Ira

Ira,

I can appreciate your love of Woking. It's an excellent course with a wonderful old school feel to it even though I think the 17th hole is a complete flop and way out of context there. I really like most of the front 9 and would say that the 3rd is likely my favorite hole and maybe one of the most strategic on the course.

In no way is it architecturally IMO even close to Castle Stuart. On top of the architecture many of the things I love about links golf are done so well at CS that there is just no comparison. Here are some to give you an idea of what I mean:

1. Firm and fast conditioning.
2. Ability to actually utilize the ground game on most holes.
3. Windy conditions.
4. Amazing setting and views.
5. Incredible variety.
6. Wonderful bunker and waste area shaping.
7. Wonderful greens and surrounds.
8. Some of the best turf I've played on.

All of the above are just simply much better than Woking and I have to tell you again, I really like Woking a lot.

David

All you say is true.  There is little doubt in my mind that Castle Stuart is one of the top 15 courses in GB&I....and probably top 5.  Yet Woking has an undeniable charm (and a walk which is miles better than CS's) which Castle Stuart does not.  Woking is a seriously good course, comfortable top 50 GB&I...so plenty good enough to do the job.  For my time and money, its hands down Woking if I am looking for a place to play on a monthly basis and I prefer Woking to CS. 

I spose this response is why I don't understand the idea of a 7-3 split to mean one course is twice as good as the other. The nuances of golf and why we are drawn to courses is almost inexplicable....which suggests that we don't fully understand why.  All that really matters is that we can identify what floats our boat and go with it.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Pick a few famous clubs/resorts from around the world that have two or more courses and say how you’d split 10 rounds there -


St Andrews
Royal Melbourne
Winged Foot
Sunningdale
Etc
name some yourself and how you’d split your 10


Atb

[Jay Mickle]

Pinehurst #2 vs #4.
#4 scheduled to open Sept. 20

[Jim Hoak]

I saw the jab at Pat M. a few posts back, when he said that you shouldn’t have an opinion on a course till you had played it several times in different weather.  Ok, that’s overstated.  But I do think it is equally wrong to state an opinion on a course you’ve never played—or even seen—even on tv—but just were sure you wouldn’t like it because a good friend told you about it.