[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally


I'm conscious that we're going off at a tangent in terms of what this thread is about but I think Prestwick is actually a good example to discuss in terms of whether a classic old links should be upgraded/improved/tweaked, feel free to use whatever word you like.


If I can summarise your argument which seems to be that on a point of principle there shouldn't be any changes to classic courses other than, for example, that needed by renewal of bunkering. What if the clubs themselves identify a particular hole/feature or whatever that could be better, and you know it could be better, would you still stand on your principles and tell them not to change it ? I appreciate that we are getting into that grey area.


Niall

I’m not saying that on a point of principle, classic courses shouldn’t be changed. I’ve never said that.


I’m saying I don’t think Prestwick needs much change; and so the club would be better served by having a consultant architect hired to keep an eye on things than they would by starting with a “we need to get an architect on board to recommend improvements” approach. The latter approach will end up with more than they need.


In fact, if I put it a different way, every top-end club should find a sympathetic architect that starts with a “spend zero money” approach. Only then do you know you have someone who will safeguard your course over a 10 year consultancy. As the architect learns the course, small changes might be recommended and most importantly, misplaced in-house changes will be stopped.

[Bryan Izatt]

Interesting discussion and not at all off topic, whatever the topic was.

The more I've played the course the more I've come to appreciate the 6th to 9th holes.  If nothing else they provide a nice counterpoint to the more compact tumultuous holes near the clubhouse 1, 2, 3, 13, 15, 16, and 17.

Niall, you must have been there more than a few times as it's in your neighbourhood - could you suggest one or two "improvements" that you think might fit. They have added some back tees, like the waterlogged 7th I guess to "improve" the length challenge for modern players with modern equipment, but that strikes me as a lost battle for a space-restricted course like Prestwick.  Moving bunkers around might "improve" the experience for some and reduce it for others.  Other suggestions?

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole #10 Arran 414 Yards

From the 9th green you make a right turn and head back towards the sea across Pow Burn and towards the Isle of Arran.  The 10th is the fourth long par 4 in a row and ends the run of long 4's.  It plays more or less into the wind and is gently and then abruptly uphill at the green so it plays longer than it's yardage.

There is an expansive view from the tee with the fairway and the green in the distance laid out before you.  The fairway crosses the low valley between the Himalayas ridge and the seaside barrier dune and is not all that interesting terrain.  The tee shot is a bit of a Cape type with heavy rough to the right if you miss on that side or don't carry the ball far enough on your line.  There are four bunkers up the right side and three up the left to capture wayward drives or even second shots.  Note the black and white stakes both left and right - they are helpful in getting a line if you miss in the rough on either side.  I don't know why many other courses don't do this too.





The second shot into the wind must carry up to the plateau where the green is located.  The ridge will kill any momentum if you come up short, or worse will direct the ball into the bunker well short of the green.





From up closer you can see that the green lies on the land and has a lot of contours and tilts from back left to front right.  Like a lot of old Scottish links the next tee is immediately behind the green.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 11 Carrick 168 Yards

The 11th plays along the side of the large seaside dune and is a bit downhill.  It is a medium to long par 3 depending on the tees you are playing.

The vista beyond the green gives you some idea of how high up the seaside dune is and how low the valley where the 4th hole is.  The green is protected by six bunkers that aren't all very obvious.  The green slopes right to left so the hidden left bunkers will collect a lot of balls.


 


From beside the bunker 25 yards short the tilt of the green is more obvious.  Note the flag coming directly towards us.  This hole often plays into a significant wind.





From the left side of the green you can see one of the three hidden bunkers.  At this angle the green also appears to slope from front to back and away from the tee to add some interest.  As you can see from the flag, the wind has changed direction in a matter of minutes.  The weather was turning nicer at this point.  There is a walking path beyond the fence along the dune top where sometimes there will be casual spectators.

[Ben Stephens]

Its always a delight to have people like Bryan and Sean plus others on this site to give a real view of these courses - some well known and other not so well known. Thank you for your time and effort to produce these very nice threads

[Sean_A]

Ally

I'm conscious that we're going off at a tangent in terms of what this thread is about but I think Prestwick is actually a good example to discuss in terms of whether a classic old links should be upgraded/improved/tweaked, feel free to use whatever word you like.

If I can summarise your argument which seems to be that on a point of principle there shouldn't be any changes to classic courses other than, for example, that needed by renewal of bunkering. What if the clubs themselves identify a particular hole/feature or whatever that could be better, and you know it could be better, would you still stand on your principles and tell them not to change it ? I appreciate that we are getting into that grey area.

Niall

I’m not saying that on a point of principle, classic courses shouldn’t be changed. I’ve never said that.

I’m saying I don’t think Prestwick needs much change; and so the club would be better served by having a consultant architect hired to keep an eye on things than they would by starting with a “we need to get an architect on board to recommend improvements” approach. The latter approach will end up with more than they need.

In fact, if I put it a different way, every top-end club should find a sympathetic architect that starts with a “spend zero money” approach. Only then do you know you have someone who will safeguard your course over a 10 year consultancy. As the architect learns the course, small changes might be recommended and most importantly, misplaced in-house changes will be stopped.

I think the issue is two fold. First, Prestwick did need a bit of bite which 6-9 provide.  Second, unfortunately, and this is usually the case, bite tend to have less flair and more focus on length.  I don't think there is much question 6-9 don't fit well with the remainder of the course.  How to improve the holes is a matter for a very good archie...because these aren't at all bad holes. At this time, I would probably side with Ally.  In the present climate the club could spend a ton of dosh and get something which may look different to what is there now, but quite similar to many other courses. IMO, its a bad risk to take unless the powers that be are clicked into non R&A thinking.  I don't much see the point in any serious work unless the goal was to provide a more cohesive 18 design.

Ciao

[Ben Stephens]

Ally

I'm conscious that we're going off at a tangent in terms of what this thread is about but I think Prestwick is actually a good example to discuss in terms of whether a classic old links should be upgraded/improved/tweaked, feel free to use whatever word you like.

If I can summarise your argument which seems to be that on a point of principle there shouldn't be any changes to classic courses other than, for example, that needed by renewal of bunkering. What if the clubs themselves identify a particular hole/feature or whatever that could be better, and you know it could be better, would you still stand on your principles and tell them not to change it ? I appreciate that we are getting into that grey area.

Niall

I’m not saying that on a point of principle, classic courses shouldn’t be changed. I’ve never said that.

I’m saying I don’t think Prestwick needs much change; and so the club would be better served by having a consultant architect hired to keep an eye on things than they would by starting with a “we need to get an architect on board to recommend improvements” approach. The latter approach will end up with more than they need.

In fact, if I put it a different way, every top-end club should find a sympathetic architect that starts with a “spend zero money” approach. Only then do you know you have someone who will safeguard your course over a 10 year consultancy. As the architect learns the course, small changes might be recommended and most importantly, misplaced in-house changes will be stopped.

I think the issue is two fold. First, Prestwick did need a bit of bite which 6-9 provide.  Second, unfortunately, and this is usually the case, bite tend to have less flair and more focus on length.  I don't think there is much question 6-9 don't fit well with the remainder of the course.  How to improve the holes is a matter for a very good archie...because these aren't at all bad holes. At this time, I would probably side with Ally.  In the present climate the club could spend a ton of dosh and get something which may look different to what is there now, but quite similar to many other courses. IMO, its a bad risk to take unless the powers that be are clicked into non R&A thinking.  I don't much see the point in any serious work unless the goal was to provide a more cohesive 18 design.

Ciao

Sean,


Based on previous Prestwick threads on GCA they have more land and maybe they could do a Seaton Carew have 21 or 22 holes if they want to have future R+A Championships? This would mean the 1925 course can remain as it is with sympathetic restoration or renovation.


Ally


Isn't the sympathetic architecture approach ideal for a golf course architecture practice that we know with safety first approach and links with the highest authority in golf 


Cheers
Ben

[Niall C]

Guys


You really need to get over your M&E phobia 


I don't think there is any suggestion that Prestwick would ever hold another Open, it simply doesn't have the facilities even if you could find a way to move people round the loop which you can't. This academic exercise or discussion is about seeing if you can't make a better course by tweaking the holes on the other side of the Pow Burn without even touching the routing.


Firstly I recognise those holes aren't at all bad I'm just suggesting that they might be made better. I'm also not suggesting trying to make them fit with the rest of the course in the sense of spectacular and dramatic features as the land simply doesn't give you that.


To answer Bryan's question as to what I suggest I'd answer generally rather than specifically and that would be to look at the bunkering. Firstly in terms of maybe rationalising it or simplifying it with fewer bunkers but making those bunkers more strategically placed. I get the impression on those holes that bunkers have been added over time such that any overall strategy has been lost in the mix. Nothing wrong with that really as that is true with a lot of older traditional links however with the better links the ground is more interesting than you have on the Prestwick holes.


Secondly I'd look at the design of those bunkers. In terms of the fairway bunkers I'd give them a slightly higher face for that bit more visibility, angled more towards the green and irregular in shape. In saying that I appreciate the existing bunkers aren't all perfectly circular pots. The next thing I'd do is reshape the ground in front of them to making them more gathering bunkers. Maybe lower it, put a few folds in there, but nothing dramatic.


I'm not sure what I'd do with the green complexes, probably retain the internal contours and rework the bunkers to fit into the strategy for the hole. Indeed if retaining the internal contours I'd look at greens first and how that would dictate strategy.


Finally I'd put one long sandy waste bunker between the 8th and 9th holes for the whole length of those holes. Actually only kidding  .


Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Excellent stuff. Pretty sure the 9th is named after the man himself rather than any building. The Earl of Eglinton was a founding member of the club and I think the first or second Captain.


Looking at those holes "across the water" I can't help thinking that if the bunkering had a bit more character, nothing dramatic but certainly a bit more visible, and perhaps more strategically placed those stretch of holes wouldn't be maligned so much.


Niall

All those are good strong holes. The holes I would get shot of are 14 & 15. I don't think 14 is a bad hole, but I think 15 is *****. The release of those two holes creates much space. Two new holes north of the present 10th could add nearly 400 yards to the length. All of a sudden you have a course that could stage the OPEN, ticking three important boxes, you now have space for the practice Ground or Tented Village, the course is long enough and some major bottlenecks for golf and spectator movement are gone. The idea of an OPEN at the old home once every 25 years must have been thought about though and the club are happy as they are. The 20 hole idea is a good one though.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Niall,


I said nothing about M&E and do not have a phobia about them. I have a phobia about design firms coming in to courses that they know only in passing and recommending large changes, especially when they are working on 30 courses in a similar manner.


You say things could be improved. My issue with that:


1. I think that I could improve every single course in the world. I’ll always find something that I reckon I can do better because no course is perfect.


2. The above is the exact reason that things shouldn’t be done. My improvement will be different to the next man’s improvement. There is no absolute. So where does it stop?


That said, with Prestwick - sure, move a few of the bunkers on 6-10 in an understated way. I could get on board with that from a distance. But I don’t know the course very well so my opinion shouldn’t hold any weight. Long standing  members with an eye might know why they are placed where they are placed.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 12 Wall 459 Yards

The 12th is a shortish par 5 often played into the wind along the lower part of the seaside dune ridge.  The fairway tilts some from right to left and with the tees offset to the right of the fairway a fair number of tee shots will scoot across the fairway into bunkers or the rough up the left side of the fairway.  There are some seven bunkers up the left side all the way to the green.  There are frequent interactions on this hole with players on the 4th hole going in the opposite direction.





The second shot, for those attempting to reach the green in two, has to deal with the most interesting feature of the hole - how to deal with the wall fronting the green.  The small gap could provide an opportunity to run a long shot through although with the tilted fairway the left bunker could end up being the resting place.  As a three shot hole, a wedge over the bunkers and wall is the way to go.





From closer in you can see a bit of the green in the dell behind the wall.  It tilts decidedly from right to left.

[Niall C]

Ally


I can't agree. Using your logic, no one would ever make any changes other than changes required by necessity.


Adrian


Hopefully you only intend taking the 14th and 15th out of the routing on a temporary basis  to facilitate the Open ? As an aside, the 15th would be an interesting first extra hole in matchplay.


Niall

[Ally Mcintosh]

Not far off actually, Niall.


The problem with GCA is that everyone always sees a way to make something “better”, myself included.


I just ask for architects and club committees to start with a “do nothing / do the stuff that doesn’t cost anything” attitude. If they are patient enough to live with that for a couple of years, maybe they have then earned the entitlement to graduate to that slightly bigger idea that they have been harbouring for a while.


Some courses deserve more respect than others. You know what pisses me off: Architects who are invited in to historically significant clubs and two day visits later have put a “master plan” on the table to “improve” almost every hole.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 13 Sea Headrig 412 Yards

Sea Headrig is another of the iconic holes at Prestwick, known both for its bumptious fairway and crazy green.  Playing into the wind generally it is a longish par 4.  The tee is up on the high dune and offset to the right of the fairway but the fairway and green are visible from the tee.  The fairway is quite wide as it is shared with the 16th coming back.  There is one small pot bunker hidden in the middle of the shared fairway and it can be in play on both holes.  Unfortunately my photo is from below and left of the tee so the lay of the hole is not so clear.  The second picture looking across from the 16th tee shows the tee for the 13th up on the dune at the top of the steps in the middle of the picture.








Following are two photos of the the glorious linksland fairway.  Some very interesting lies are likely to be obtained off the drive.  From here the green looks innocuous.








From up closer to front of the green you can see the severe drop off to the left which is not really pinnable making the actual usable green quite small.  A running approach shot will be difficult too with the many hummocks in front of the green.  The backstop may or may not be helpful depending in where you are coming from.  There is also a drop off to the right rear.  This is a very difficult green to hit in regulation for most of us.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole 14 Goosedubs 303 Yards

Apparently "dubs" is a Scottish word for swamps and Goosedubs was a swampy area to the left of this hole which is now just rough. It is a short (perhaps driveable par 4 that is a bit of a dogleg left so picking a line where your yardage will get you in the fairway is the only question on the tee for most of us.

After the rollicking 13th hole this hole is a bit of a letdown.  From a tee on the seaside dune you drive towards the parking lot to what is pretty much a featureless fairway and a green laid on flat ground.  There are a couple of bunkers on the right side to be avoided and three more strung across the fairway.  The crossing bunkers would be out of reach for most of us, but for the long bombers they could probably be carried.  The downside is that they might run through the green and into the parking lot.  The hole plays as a bit of a dogleg left so picking a line where your yardage will get you in the fairway is the only question on the tee.





The second shot is a take-dead-aim short iron over the crossing bunkers.  As the bunkers are some 30 yards short of the green I guess they provide some deception since the green is laid on flattish ground and there is no background other than the clubhouse to aid in depth perception.  Since most people play by yardage these days I'm not sure the deception is worth much.  The green is not particularly interesting.

[Jeff Schley]

Bryan,

Thank you for taking the time to catalog this course with such detail and illustrations.  Quick question, what is the prevailing wind at Prestwick?  Would be interesting to imagine arrows in that direction when looking at google earth overlay of the course.  Thanks.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 15 Narrows 322 Yards

The hole name says it all and tells you nothing about another iconic Prestwick hole.  Some people will hate this hole because it's too perplexing and it's unfair.  I find it intriguing and fun and frustrating as I've yet to  play it successfully.

The hole is hard to describe other than it is a short par 4 with a very constricted corridor weaving its way through some 15-20 foot high dunes, so I'll just post the aerial view to show the layout of the hole.  The aerial, of course, tells you nothing about what the hole looks like or plays like on the ground.  So, you'll want to know how narrow Narrow is  - just 15 - 20 yards wide past the lobe of fairway on the right side.





The tee is squished between the 14th and 18th greens so there is some danger from incoming shots from both sides.  Not far in front of the tee there is a dune ridge crossing that basically blocks any view of the rest of the hole.  A line along the footpath to the fairway will line up with the very right edge of the green.  The two players on the top of the dune left are on the 16th tee which is not too far left of the green.





From the right side of the fairway near the right lobe you can see that the green is behind a significant crossing ridge.  If you miss the fairway right you may end up in the crater bunker nestled in a hollow or in the rough with a questionable lie.








When you finally get to the green you'll find that it slopes precipitously from left to right in a valley between two dunes.  Leaving you approach shot to the right of any pin is probably a good idea - downhill putts can be treacherous.  The following view is from the bottom right of the green with one of the 16th tees at the top.  Great fun or horribly unfair, this hole.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan,

Thank you for taking the time to catalog this course with such detail and illustrations.  Quick question, what is the prevailing wind at Prestwick?  Would be interesting to imagine arrows in that direction when looking at google earth overlay of the course.  Thanks.

The prevailing wind is from the South-West off the Irish Sea.  On this day the wind was moving around as the weather was clearing up.  By the 15th hole it was from the North-West. 

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 16 Cardinals Back 272 Yards

This is a quirky little par 4.  For many longer hitters than I this could well be a driveable since the wind will be mostly down and across from the left.  The fairway such as it is is shared with the 13th and is quite rumpled.  There is the small hidden pot bunker in the middle of the fairway.  The front of the green is wide open while there are two bunkers at the back to catch balls that run though.  The danger is impassable rough on the right or the end of the Cardinal bunker for the long hitters.  There can certainly be danger from our drives for players marching down the 13th or for the group in front playing off the 17th tee which is immediately adjacent to the right of the green.





The approach, if you keep your drive right of the hidden pot is fairly straight forward except for the humps and bumps and the inconvenient truth that the green runs away precipitouslt to the back (and, hence the bunkers at the back).





From the front left corner of the green you can easily see how the green drops away just behind this forward flag.  Prestwick has a really interesting set of greens that would never be built on a modern course.

[MCirba]

Bryan Izatt,

Thank you so much for this tour and for your thoughtful commentary.

Prestwick is the one course in Scotland I'd play first tomorrow out of those I haven't played.  Your pictures have only further whet my appetite and I appreciate the time and effort you put into sharing this with us.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Bryan Izatt,

Thank you so much for this tour and for your thoughtful commentary.

Prestwick is the one course in Scotland I'd play first tomorrow out of those I haven't played.  Your pictures have only further whet my appetite and I appreciate the time and effort you put into sharing this with us.

Yes thank you Bryan, very much enjoyed your tours.

[John Mayhugh]

I just ask for architects and club committees to start with a “do nothing / do the stuff that doesn’t cost anything” attitude. If they are patient enough to live with that for a couple of years, maybe they have then earned the entitlement to graduate to that slightly bigger idea that they have been harbouring for a while.


Some courses deserve more respect than others. You know what pisses me off: Architects who are invited in to historically significant clubs and two day visits later have put a “master plan” on the table to “improve” almost every hole.

This!!!!!!!

I've only spent an afternoon at Prestwick (two times around), and have little doubt that individual holes could be improved. But the course, as it is now, is practically perfect - at least to my tastes.

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole 3 17 Alps 378 Yards

The Alps hole is the last of the iconic holes at Prestwick.  It may be a sub 400 yard par 4 from all tees but it is by no means short in length or short in excitement and mystery (especially for those playing it for the first time).  The hole may feature only one bunker but it is the mother of all bunkers on the course or maybe even golfdom. 

The hole plays pretty much straight away and there is only one real requirement for the drive - keep it on the fairway and try to get it as far down as possible. Of course the ridges and bumps in the fairway are all conspiring to knock your ball into the junk.  To make matters worse the fairway is a mere 22 yards wide for the most part.  If you miss the fairway then you most likely will miss having one of the most exhilarating second shots in golf.





If you manage to hit the fairway you might have an uphill or downhill or sidehill lie, but rarely a flat one.  The following photo from further down the fairway than most of will reach shows the Alps that need to be traversed.  The stone blocks on top of the ridge offer alignment aids although I really haven't figured out how they work.  Regardless you'll have to hit the ball high and far.  Since you'll most likely playing for a specific yardage you had better have an excellent idea of how far you really hit the ball and the effect of the wind of the day.  You don't want to overestimate how far you carry the ball.





From on top of the dune ridge you get a wonderful view of the gargantuan bunker and the green beyond.  The bunker is very deep (count the steps on the stairways)  and is usually full of wet heavy sand.  The green is wide and relatively shallow and is really a valley from left to right.  Balls that are too long will come to the middle as will ones to the front edge of the green.  The green also tilts from right to left.  The second phot is from the 18th tee right front of the green. 

[Bryan Izatt]

Hole # 18 Clock 247 Yards

What would a Scottish links course be without a final hole that returns to the close proximity to the clubhouse -so Prestwick's 18th has that going for it.  It also provides an opportunity for most to have a go at the green on a short par 4 with an above average possibility of a birdie, so it can leave a positive thought in your mind at the end of the day.  Otherwise it is a forgettable hole.

A few years ago now, playing with a now-deceased friend and in a favourable tail wind I ran a 4 iron off the tee across the hole, but then missed the 12 footer for eagle coming back and had to settle for an easy birdie.  So, perhaps it's not so forgettable a hole.

The tee shot calls for a fade off the tee since the tee is offset right of the fairway line.  Long hitters will need to be careful not to power their drives through the green and OOB by the clubhouse or in the parking lot.  The bunkers should be easy to avoid.  I think the second one on the right is more about protecting the tee on the 15th.  The area around the clubhouse is tight indeed.  The rough ridge that defined the right side of the fairway is about 3 or 4 feet high and catches a surprising number of balls.  It provides something of cape feature for the drive.  It used to be that the lower level was rough but from this photo it appears they may be trying to use it as fairway now, although that seems counter intuitive with the 15th tee and fairway over in that direction.





From the fairway short of the green you can see that the green just lays on the ground and flat ground at that.  The only concern would be to not blade a second shot through a window in the clubhouse or off one of the cars in the parking lot.

[Thomas Dai]

Thank you Bryan. A magnificent course tour. Course tours akin to this one take ages to put together so well done.
Atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()