[Ben Stephens]

Having just watched an interesting documentary by the R&A on Sky Sports last night re: St Andrews.


Interesting to know that Allan Robertson came up with the idea of double greens and was master of the greens. And that he and Old Tom fell out over the Gutty ball.

Old Tom became the master of greens after leaving Prestwick and the current front nine on the Old Course did not exist as the course played narrower with the back nine more or less it is. Old Tom cleared the gorse bushes and widened the Old to create the front nine as it is today.

The evolution of the design of the Old Course has hardly changed since Old Tom's last changes/modifications to the course. I wonder if he was alive now would he make further changes to the Old Course or leave as it is?


Just can't help feeling if the weather is benign at next years Open the winning score could be 24 under or so. Is it time for change or create a composite to create a course that is more of a challenge to modern day professionals.

[Niall C]

Ben

I'm sorry I missed that. One thing to note is that the course had one major evolution after it was widened and that was the reaction to that widening which some thought made the course too easy. As a consequence a slew of bunkers were put in up the right side on the holes on the way out, hence the strategy of dicing with those bunkers for an easier approach or alternatively play safe up the left and have a harder shot to the green.

Can't recall off-hand the timing of that, possibly late 1890's and again in 1906 from my dodgy memory banks. Hopefully Bob Crosby will chime in as I'm sure he will be able to explain it better and John Low's involvement. Alternatively try and get a hold of Scott Macphersons excellent book.

As for your notion that the pro's will shoot low at next years Open, so what ? Does that make it any less of a course ? We need to stop the ridiculous idea of designing and tweaking courses in order to try and produce a certain winning score when the big boys come to town.

Niall 

[Thomas Dai]

A StA composite course is something I’ve mentioned a few times. It’s out there.
Might be an opportunity for two events - might even make a few more ££££ for those involved.
1) The Open when at StA be played over a composite course
2) An Old Course Open, an annual event, played over TOC as the course was in the balata and wood era.
Atb

[Ben Stephens]

A StA composite course is something I’ve mentioned a few times. It’s out there.
Might be an opportunity for two events - might even make a few more ££££ for those involved.
1) The Open when at StA be played over a composite course
2) An Old Course Open, an annual event, played over TOC as the course was in the balata and wood era.
Atb

Could be a composite of holes on the New and Jubilee course and leaving the Old Course as it is.

Will the Old Course end up like Musselburgh or be under water in the near future??

[Thomas Dai]

A StA composite course is something I’ve mentioned a few times. It’s out there.
Might be an opportunity for two events - might even make a few more ££££ for those involved.
1) The Open when at StA be played over a composite course
2) An Old Course Open, an annual event, played over TOC as the course was in the balata and wood era.
Atb

Could be a composite of holes on the New and Jubilee course and leaving the Old Course as it is.
Will the Old Course end up like Musselburgh or be under water in the near future??

Composite starting on TOC#1 and finishing on TOC #16/17/18 for choice. Some TOC others as well maybe otherwise using holes from the New, Eden, Jubilee. Could even play some holes from a tee on one course to a green on another?
TOC maybe more like Prestwick than Musselburgh. A treasured friend. Bit like retro racing cars. Still hugely loved and cherished but not quite up to it now that technology has moved on.
Lots to potentially debate.
Atb

[BCrosby]

Niall - New bunkers were added on the right side of the outward nine over the winters of 1899/1900 and 1904/5. A couple of other bunkers were added at other places at the same times. Low was involved in both sets of changes as a member of the Green Committee and later defended the new bunkers.


The 'trampling down' of whins on the right side of the outward nine were the reason bunkers were added. The feeling at the time was that those holes had become too easy without some penalty for playing out to the right.


Interesting is that there were several suggestions at the time that the problem could be fixed by building cross bunkers across the the corridors of those holes. X-bunkers were very popular circa 1900. I have long suspected that Low first articulated the basic principles of strategic gca in reaction to such ideas. I have not found any statement by Low that says that explicitly in the context of the new bunkers at TOC, but the timing is right and he adamantly opposed to Victorian gca to the end of his days. 


Bob     

[JESII]

Is the feat of reaching 24 under less impressive, less worthy, than reaching even par?


Surely that player has all the shots, no? Surely they had the nerve to deal with certain challenges along the way.


If the expectation becomes "how to birdie all of the easy holes" as opposed to "how to par all of the hard holes", what has been lost?

[Adrian_Stiff]

The Open at St Andrews is all about the OLD course, it is the SPECIAL open and the reason why it goes there twice as much as the others. If she gets ruined by H & S considerations in the future then maybe some sort of composite will be needed.


If -24 wins then so what, but I expect it will blow a bit.


There is still room to take this course to 7500 if wanted.
3-4-5-6-7-8-9 can all go back 20-50 yards and the 9th green 'could' go back another 50.
10-11-13-15-16 even 18 could go back to the old 380 tee.


Should it be done? Probably not.


What must happen is the course remain as close as it can to it's original, which is more important than a once in 5 year event.

[MCirba]

Is the feat of reaching 24 under less impressive, less worthy, than reaching even par?


Surely that player has all the shots, no? Surely they had the nerve to deal with certain challenges along the way.


If the expectation becomes "how to birdie all of the easy holes" as opposed to "how to par all of the hard holes", what has been lost?

Jim,


Generally I agree with the "let them shoot what they're going to shoot" contingent except to remark that I find the regular weekly birdie-fests dull as dishwater and frankly unwatchable.  The Majors, by and large, used to provide more drama through players under pressure and disaster a few bad swings away but bomb and gouge has eliminated that viewing interest nearly entirely.

[JESII]

I agree and don't want to divert this thread more than to say I think good and interesting architecture, maintenance and set up can make professional golf much more exciting than the average weekly Tour event. They are set up for bomb and gauge to succeed. The R&A could do some really cool things with TOC if they wanted.

[Anthony Gray]

 The weather is the key always when it comes to score. I fear they will -lace the pins on ledges and turn it into target golf and who can three putt the least match. Peter Alliss always made the tournament for me more than the final score. The thought of a composite course makes me nauseous. There are short holes that can golfers can put up big numbers on. The errant gorse, OB and deep bunker shot is still there without changing the architecture. 

[Tom_Doak]

 The weather is the key always when it comes to score.
.
.
.
The thought of a composite course makes me nauseous.

Well said.


It seems unlikely to me that the R & A, who run The Open, would let what befell Musselburgh also happen to the course in their back yard.  Plus, Musselburgh fell out of the rota because it was only nine holes and too crowded and all the posh clubs moved away, NOT because the scoring was low.

[Niall C]

The Open moved from Musselburgh because HCEG moved to Murfield. At that time the R&A, HCEG and Prestwick took turns hosting the Open so when HCEG moved so did the venue. That didn't go down well with the locals at Musselburgh and they set up a rival tournament that lasted a couple of years.

Your not going to have the same scenario at TOC. On the face of it a composite course makes sense in terms of it allowing more spectators to view the golf however you then lose your USP which is the course itself. Will they give that up ? Well I just found out that I've been unsuccessful for the ballot for tickets for next years Open at TOC. Clearly there is a lot of demand and the R&A might just be tempted in due course. Just saying.

Niall

[Thomas Dai]

Curious as to what proportion of the spectators onsite at StA or watching on TV know anything about holes 2-16, more likely 2-17 at TOC? Must be a good chance that a composite course could wonder around all over the New, Eden and Jubilee and numerous folks wouldn't be aware that the rest of the holes on TOC weren't being used. Might even get some nice sea and beach views!
atb

[Kyle Harris]

If -24 is indeed to be the winning score I’d imagine figuring out a way to post -25 is sufficiently challenging.

[JESII]

Yes...but more importantly, how about if that attitude prevailed at the courses hosting Major and PGA Tour events?


Wouldn't that alleviate a lot of the ails people complain about regarding modern golf renovation?

[Matt Wharton]

I must say I find this talk of a St. Andrews composite course to be blasphemous as well as nauseating. I know it may just be a fun thing to imagine but really, we're talking about The Old Course at St. Andrews, the HOME of golf! When I visited and played TOC in 2019 I remember Gordon McKie, Course Manager of TOC telling me The New Course is a better test of golf, but the R&A would never move The Open because ALL the history is on TOC.


I too don't want to see -24 because I don't find birdie fests compelling drama, but at the same time the fact the R&A sets up the course and then doesn't care what the winner shoots is one reason why the R&A is superior to the USGA when it comes to contesting a major championship IMO.


Cheers,

[Niall C]

I too don't want to see -24 because I don't find birdie fests compelling drama, but at the same time the fact the R&A sets up the course and then doesn't care what the winner shoots is one reason why the R&A is superior to the USGA when it comes to contesting a major championship IMO.

Matt

I'm one of the few on here that tends to stick up for the R&A but in this instance I think you give them a bit too much credit. It's hard to set up a course to produce a certain score when you are so reliant on the weather playing ball to do that as you are on a links. For sure they don't want the course to be a push-over but equally they are a bit sensitive over criticism such as they got for Carnoustie in 1999, even though I think a lot of the criticism there was misplaced.

As for drama, I tend to think there is more drama and interest in seeing the pros try to birdie a short par 4 which they are expected to birdie, rather than an endless procession of big hitters getting birdie on reachable par 5's with a drive, approach and two putts. In a way it is also levels the field for the shorter hitters.

Niall

[Matt Wharton]

I too don't want to see -24 because I don't find birdie fests compelling drama, but at the same time the fact the R&A sets up the course and then doesn't care what the winner shoots is one reason why the R&A is superior to the USGA when it comes to contesting a major championship IMO.

Matt

I'm one of the few on here that tends to stick up for the R&A but in this instance I think you give them a bit too much credit. It's hard to set up a course to produce a certain score when you are so reliant on the weather playing ball to do that as you are on a links. For sure they don't want the course to be a push-over but equally they are a bit sensitive over criticism such as they got for Carnoustie in 1999, even though I think a lot of the criticism there was misplaced.

As for drama, I tend to think there is more drama and interest in seeing the pros try to birdie a short par 4 which they are expected to birdie, rather than an endless procession of big hitters getting birdie on reachable par 5's with a drive, approach and two putts. In a way it is also levels the field for the shorter hitters.

Niall

Niall,


My sentiments for the R&A are rooted in my disappointment and disagreement with the USGA going back several years, although I still continue to pay my USGA membership dues annually.  I agree with you about short Par 4s being exciting, especially if there is some risk if one is not successful in their execution of playing the hole. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()