[Padraig Dooley]

As we head towards Master's Week, there's always a few articles about the evolution of Augusta and sometimes a discussion about when it was at it's best.
But rather then a thread about Augusta, how about when do you think your own club was at it's best?
No need to name your club but how old is it and when do you think it was at it's best? EG 70 years old, was at it's best 30 years ago or at it's best now etc.
Shouldn't golf courses be at their best now? As we have more knowledge on architecture and agronomy then at any other time in history.

[mike_malone]

As we continue to make changes to our course with an eye to what the 1926 photos show which I believe is great several older members tell me we are ruining the course. It seems they prefer the course they played when they were younger and better golfers. Who knew?

[Ken Moum]

The last two courses I have been members at are definitely not at their best today.


Shawnee CC in Topeka, where I was a member for 20 years, was clearly better some time shortly after WWII.  I have aerial photos from back then, and the loss of the green surface, as well as the encroachment of trees is so dramatic as to make me sad.


I'd say several of the greens are around half as many square feet as they were back then, and some rectangular greens are now round.


Fairway width dropped from 50+ yards to less than 25 in some cases.  We haven't been members for several years, but shortly before we moved, the club went broke (over a 1988 clubhouse rebuild) and the new owners aren't particularly interested in it's Donald Ross roots, not that the club was much better.


Where we are now, the course was built in the late 80s with bent greens in Mesa, which probably wasn't a great idea, but converting to bermudagrass greens that don't hold as well didn't help it much. I played it a fair number of times in the early 90s when my brother was a member so I have some recollection of those days.


 It, too, has had lots of volunteer trees added over the years, and there are quite a few places where I am pretty sure rough lines have been moved in.  Plus, lack of $$ means the 40-y.o. irrigation system is a big problem for several reasons.


Nevertheless, both courses are still among my favorite places to play.

[Thomas Dai]

Whilst appreciating that this is essentially about courses themselves I find it difficult to differentiate this aspect from the experience on a course as a whole.
Regrettably with the increase in popularity, over-popularity, of golf especially since Covid but also with more and more golf tourists (myself hypocritically included) golf has largely lost something. It’s lost peace and quiet. It’s lost tranquility, calmness and serenity. It’s lost its ability to be a refuge away from the hurly-burly of the outside world. The desire for manicured conditioning and a growing desire for fairness hasn’t helped either. Maybe it’s a society thing? Maybe it’s population, expectations, media or whatever?
Maybe it’s time to take a stroll down the garden path, enter an old geezer like shed (containing an indoor golf simulator) and lock the door on the outside world!

Atb

[Sean_A]

Whilst appreciating that this is essentially about courses themselves I find it difficult to differentiate this aspect from the experience on a course as a whole.
Regrettably with the increase in popularity, over-popularity, of golf especially since Covid but also with more and more golf tourists (myself hypocritically included) golf has largely lost something. It’s lost peace and quiet. It’s lost tranquility, calmness and serenity. It’s lost its ability to be a refuge away from the hurly-burly of the outside world. The desire for manicured conditioning and a growing desire for fairness hasn’t helped either. Maybe it’s a society thing? Maybe it’s population, expectations, media or whatever?
Maybe it’s time to take a stroll down the garden path, enter an old geezer like shed (containing an indoor golf simulator) and lock the door on the outside world!
 
Atb

Hurly burly? We were the only folks playing Scarista today.


Ciao

[Tim Gallant]

I think North Berwick's best is either now, or at the tail-end of the 20s. The course you see today is still almost identical to the one that Hutchison & Sayers remodelled. There are trade-offs for both being superior.


Argument for now:
- 9 has middle bunkers, which make that hole much more interesting. These were moved from the right to centerline in the 90s / early 2000s
- 11 used to play to the putting green on the practice range. It was only moved to its current position in the late 40s.


Argument for 20s:
- Size and scale of bunkers was much more in keeping with the terrain
- Bunker scheme on 5 and 12 made more sense then than it does today. Those are the two most heavily changed holes from a bunker perspective. 12 used to only have 2 bunkers until the 90s/00s. Now it has 8, and the hole is not better for them. If I was to make any significant changes at NB, it would be to remove two of the four bunkers on the inside of the dogleg, and remove the lone pot on the right. I'd also remove the two left greenside bunkers.
- Green size at 3 and 4 has reduced. 3 used to play right up against the wall, and down more towards the front bunker. 4 used to play as a reverse 'L' shape. Those would have been fun to play.


All-in-all, I think it's a toss-up. All the greens are pretty much as they were, so it gets into subtleties.

[Clyde Johnson]

I think North Berwick's best is either now, or at the tail-end of the 20s. The course you see today is still almost identical to the one that Hutchison & Sayers remodelled. There are trade-offs for both being superior.


Argument for now:
- 9 has middle bunkers, which make that hole much more interesting. These were moved from the right to centerline in the 90s / early 2000s
- 11 used to play to the putting green on the practice range. It was only moved to its current position in the late 40s.


Argument for 20s:
- Size and scale of bunkers was much more in keeping with the terrain
- Bunker scheme on 5 and 12 made more sense then than it does today. Those are the two most heavily changed holes from a bunker perspective. 12 used to only have 2 bunkers until the 90s/00s. Now it has 8, and the hole is not better for them. If I was to make any significant changes at NB, it would be to remove two of the four bunkers on the inside of the dogleg, and remove the lone pot on the right. I'd also remove the two left greenside bunkers.
- Green size at 3 and 4 has reduced. 3 used to play right up against the wall, and down more towards the front bunker. 4 used to play as a reverse 'L' shape. Those would have been fun to play.


All-in-all, I think it's a toss-up. All the greens are pretty much as they were, so it gets into subtleties.

Hopefully you'll have the best of both eras, in a few years or so!

[Tony_Muldoon]

One think that has not improved links golf is ever tighter fairway cuts.


Today there's less hanging lies and more divot strewn collection areas.


Not sure how far back we'd have to go.


The divots also reflects the increased no's playing and the lengthening of the season: all the more reason to go back.






Tim nice post. Did the 4th  green extend at the rear to the right or the left? I've always felt it was the least 'natural' looking green.

[Thomas Dai]

Hurly burly? We were the only folks playing Scarista today.

Reckon the locals were tipped off who was coming to play and revised their playing itinerary accordingly!
Have a good trip. Looking forward to reading your write-up.
Atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()