Australia--there are more under ranked great courses

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Those who were fortunate to watch RM and those many times more fortunate to have played RM, you can appreciate absolute greatness.  I contend that Australia is under represented in Golf Magazine's World rankings.  Darius Oliver's book does a great job of showing the best courses.  I was impressed by Metropolitan, both Penninsula courses, Victoria, and even the Norman Moonah course ( there are few poor features, but many super holes).  Probably, very few raters have made it down under.  Those who have, probably have only played the 4 world rated courses--they are more than worthy, but there are other great courses!

[TEPaul]

From what I've seen of a few Australian courses on TV, always during a professional tournament, they do seem like very impressive architecture. The thing that particularly impresses me is what I call their "ideal maintenance melds". It seems that those courses are maintained to highlight all the available options of their architecture, particularly the run of the ball (ground game option), while their greens appear to be maintained in such a way that even touring pros can't seem to rely on their stock aerial games all day long. In other words, those courses appear to have the ideal BALANCE between the aerial and ground games. This obviously makes thoughtful decisions more significant---eg no option appears to be a sure thing! Courses that are maintained this way appear to require a player to almost "feel" the course and what the ball will do on it!

The other aspect I admired at RM last week during the Heineken Tourney was the condition of the rough---playable but "iffy" in spots---thin but clumpy in spots! That's the kind of random lies a golfer should get in rough, in my book!

In a word, the architecture down there looks good but the maintenance practices and the results of them appear to be completely superlative to produce the kind of golf that should be played on those types of courses.

[Matthew Mollica]

Tom,

As usual, you raise some very good points.

The consistency of the areas off the fairways (I don't think of them as true rough) as exactly as you said - iffy. Shots into greens of the hardness seen at RM require pretty pure striking, and good trajectory and spin control in order to grant a short putt. When off the fiarway at RM, there often exists the sneaking suspicion in a player's mind that they can still get a club to the ball well enough to make it onto the green the way they wish. Execute correctly, and it's "pass me the blade". Fail, and you're usually in more trouble than you were in missing the fairway from the tee. The maintenance sees the player with just enough rope to hang themselves. I makes for far more interesting golf.

As an aside, in the Pebble Greens thred, I can't believe that no-one said anything about the softness of the greens, instead everyone focussed on the poa and the problems this creates with prints / seed heads etc. Sticking those greens with an kind of shot, is almost as easy as throwing a tennis ball into the grand canyon. The premium on fairway position and quality iron play would be so much more appropriate at Pebble if the greens were akin to those at RM.

RMD,

The under-appreciated Aussie courses are well represented in Darius Oliver's book. Royal Adelaide, Kingston Heath, and several others would be at the top of the list, including New South Wales.

For those who haven't got a copy of Oliver's book, hurry up and get it. It is the quintessential guide to Australia's great golf courses. Awesome photos and a great reference, especially for those who can't make it down under.

Matthew

[TEPaul]

If RMD's initial post is in the form of a question, from what I've seen from afar, I'd say there are courses in Australia that certainly are under ranked in the world.

[Mike_Clayton]

I'm not sure that our courses are under-ranked.The top four are clearly Royal Melbourne,Kingston Heath,Royal Adelaide and New South Wales and all four are in Golf Magazines top 50.
I think there is a significant gap between these courses and the next few including Victoria,Woodlands,Metropolitan and the Moonah course at the National -  all in Melbourne or close by - and Kennedy Bay in Perth.
No one overrates the courses in Sydney or Queensland and Kennedy Bay is miles ahead of the competition in West Australia
The maintainance meld Tom talks about is really only championed in Melbourne as courses in the rest of the country tend to be less well set-up when it comes to grassing lines and the use of rough.
Nor are there many significant courses in rural Australia because it's pretty basic golf enjoyed by participants who care little about architectural subtlety.There is lots of great land for golf but no population base to sustain it finacially as there is in America.

However the good news in Barnbougle Dunes and St Andrews Beach will really turn some heads.In time I think it will come to be seen as the most significant work for a long time

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I just reviewed the Golf Magazine list and feel that all of the big four coureses should move up the list a few slots.  I rate RM number 1 among the list.  I am only missing Augusta and Sand Hills in the top 20.  I felt that Metropolitan and Victoria were not quite as great as the great 4, but not significantly less great.  I'll take Metropolitan over any of Fazio's greatest any day!  I played Penninsula in a tournament and found it to be a cool psychological grind--I was wiped out mentally every day having to think strategically on every tee.  A poor tee shot on 5 South (incorrect line--too conservative) forced me to change strategy on 7 and 8.  I think  Australia is due a few more additions to the World 100, not just the two soon to open masterpieces!

[RichMacafee]

In my opinion the par 5's at Victoria are the only thing preventing it being a great course. Nearly all of the par 4's give you 2-iron, 3-wood & driver options off the tee, and they really make you think. And it has some fantastic par 3's. The presentation of the course is now first class after Mike's restoration work.

Put Woodland's par 5's on Victoria and the 'great 4' becomes a 'great 5' immediately.

[TEPaul]

"However the good news in Barnbougle Dunes and St Andrews Beach will really turn some heads.In time I think it will come to be seen as the most significant work for a long time."

Mike Clayton;

Your last sentence is a pretty powerful statement. You must have a number of reasons in your mind to say this, be they subtle and sophisticated, general or whatever. Whether they are strictly architectural, maintenance related, setup, thought provoking, accomodating, strategic, risk/reward related, a throwback to some former principles of golf architecture or some new wrinkle, I'm certain we'd all very much like to hear what your reasons are.

[tonyt]

I don't think that if a pile of raters came out annually and played the top 15-20 Australian courses, that a handful of them would suddenly get elevated to the top 100. I think one or two would, partially because their increased exposure would be an asset. It would also mean that those excluded would have been subject to a more educated omission than in the past.

Australia's better courses are underrated. They don't all deserve to be added to the elite rankings lists, but because they are not known due to their omission, learned overseas golfers tend to speak only of a small handful of courses at the top. The drop off after these is not some gaping abyss. There is loads of quality golf to play, and any visitors seeking direction from a number of antipodean posters on these boards would find many courses that offer excellent golf on quality architecture.

There are many fine courses discussed on these boards that don't threaten a top 100 standing, but I'd be silly to not have a game if I was in town and fortunate enough to be invited. Many of you could list quite a few such places. The underrated claim for Aussie courses is more justified if we say that by comparison, they are unknown and more likely to be passed up by a passing traveller.

[Mike_Clayton]

Tom

I meant the courses would be the most significant for some time in the context of Australia only.The most significant work done here was done back in the mid-twenties thanks to Mackenzie's influence and Morcom who built all his work
Not a lot - if anything -  of truly world-wide significance - like Sand Hills or Pacific Dunes - has been done here since.
We have built a bunch of resort courses and courses as part of housing developments but few stand alone courses on great land.
Barnbougle though is different. There are  probably fifteen holes down there that would earn a place in the best 40 holes in Australia.
Two great short par fours-4 and 12 -multiple lines and options a fantastic short par three - 7- and two par fives on the back nine -11 and  14 - that will be really fun.It obviously has a mixture of two shot holes of varying lengths that are simply great holes.
St Andrews Beach is also coming along nicely. That, too is a beautiful piece of land with a number of really good holes full of shots that are fun to play.

Rich,
I couldnt agree more with your assesement of the par fives at Woodlands.They are fine holes especially fifteen which is one of the best in the country.
Nine at Vic is a very good hole - although without the strategic options of 12 at Kingston Heath of 15 at Woodlands -  and 18 is simply a two shot hole that has none of the strategic options of a great short par five. It is a pretty good par four though.
Eight is the same and should be called what it is - a par four.
With the fairway opened up on the right and the fairway bunker moved down thirty yards it could be one of the best par fours on the course.
Victoria is perhaps four or five years away from where it should be but I am optomistic they will get there.

[Matthew Delahunty]

Mike,

I'm assuming from your rankings list for Golf Australia that you weren't as lucky as your colleagues to get a game at Ellerston?

[Mike_Clayton]

Dela

I actually had a trip organized but something else came up.
I also have a bit of a problem with rating a course almost no one can play or see.
That is not the case with any other course in the world.
What is the point except to make the owner feel good and to boost the profile of the designer - who by all accounts did a fabulous job.

[Brian Walshe]

Mike,

I'm struggling with the argument that Ellerston is so exclusive it shouldn't be rated.  How many people have to play it before it can be rated?  I'm guessing that if I front up to Augusta National or any other ultra-exclusive club that they won't let me on, which is no different to Ellerston. The number of people that play Augusta might differ to Ellerston but doesn't the argument then become one of an arbitary number of rounds?

You could also argue that by rating Ellerston you are doing no more than tickling Kerry's ego but by rating RM aren't you just tickling the ego of the RM Committee and members?

By the way - if you do play Ellerston I'm still available to caddy  

Brian

[Mike_Clayton]

Brian

The difference between Royal Melbourne and Elleston is that anybody can walk on and look - and learn - from Royal Melb.It is also relativly simple to get a game.
Augusta opens it's doors every year for a week.Until a few years ago anybody could have watched the practice rounds at least.
I would have ranked Elleston if I had seen it but I think I have a problem with it not making any contribution to the game here- which, of course is the perogotive of the owner. He can do what ever he likes.
Royal Melbourne is the one great course in the world that opens it's doors to a regular tour event every year - which is a significant contribution.
They put up with the slights of last week about their course being obsolete and ' not in the top 150 in the world' and who would blame them for withdrawing from professional golf.

[coota]

The point was raised earlier about economics and the degree to which it impacts on the prevalence of good courses in Oz.

Royal Melbourne and it's like aside, golf in Australia is surpisingly egalitarian with every little country town having somewhere to bash a ball about - I spent 5 years in a mining town with 3 golf courses and not a blade of grass on any of them.

While this is good, it is also bad as we tend to be a bit tight arsed about fees and as a result many courses built on superb land are a million miles away from the potential that the land would suggest, simply through lack of financial resources or will.

I live in Perth which is built on several thousand square miles of the best sandy golfing terrain you could ever wish for, but we have hardly a decent course with with which to bless ourselves.  Courses like Lake Karrinyup and Mt Lawley are very good, but so far from what they should be as to be tragic.  Albany golf course in the south of the state, should be one of the greatest and rawest links in the world, but the money is  simply not there.

I cannot see this changing in my lifetime.

[Mike_Clayton]

coota

I couldn't agree more with your thoughts on golf in Perth.The city has the best golfing land of any city in the country - by miles.You only have to drive around it to see all that sand and the great indigenous vegitation to imagine how many great courses they could have.
One can only imagine what Mackenzie would have done if he had landed in Perth instead of Melbourne.
Mt Lawley especially could be so much better if they could learn the lessons of a course like Woodlands which exploits its potential to the maximum.

[coota]

Work on remodelling Mt Lawley has started, a bit early yet to tell if it will be brought up to scratch or butchered. At least they have recognised the need to lift the standard, I just hope it turns out ok.