Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Ally Mcintosh on June 15, 2010, 08:56:29 AM
-
The question is in the title... It really means which courses have room for the most improvement (in your opinion)?... But obviously, I'd like to hear why and what ideas you would have...
... Also, which courses have actually undergone recent makeovers and are they improvements?
Wide topic - most likely tackled before...
-
Possibly not viable now, but I'd like to restore some of the original routing at Prince's. Still it has many fine holes but almost all play along the valleys of the low dunes and parallel to the shore. I'd like to see at least two of the original holes which crossed the dunes back in play, but it doesn't fit so easily with the current routing.
-
This comment also applies to Patrick Mucci's thread above about courses being overshadowed by their neighbor.
The New Course is certainly overshadowed by the Old at St Andrews.
I think that a program of new bunkering, more in play off the tee, and perhaps some zipping up of some greens, could move the New into contention with the old. With the exception of the double green at 3/15, and the marvelous swale in the 5th green, I can't think of many distinctive features in the greens. The routing is terrific.
So there's my candidate, the New Course (1895 "new"!)
-
Tralee Golf club, the Sandpines (missed opportunity) of Ireland.
-
Possibly not viable now, but I'd like to restore some of the original routing at Prince's. Still it has many fine holes but almost all play along the valleys of the low dunes and parallel to the shore. I'd like to see at least two of the original holes which crossed the dunes back in play, but it doesn't fit so easily with the current routing.
Jamie - I was going to say Prince's too. I don't think a restoration of the pre-war championship routing is completely out of the question - I know there is some movement in that direction. The only question in my mind is to what extent the original landforms survived the war.
-
The last two holes of Machrihanish. Spectacular 16 hole course with a horrible ending. My friend suggested building a par three left of the 8th green that flows towards the back of the 9th tee. Then turn 17 and 18 into a par 5. There's something about 11 I don't care for, but I like how the hole goes east instead of continueing back south.
-
Possibly not viable now, but I'd like to restore some of the original routing at Prince's. Still it has many fine holes but almost all play along the valleys of the low dunes and parallel to the shore. I'd like to see at least two of the original holes which crossed the dunes back in play, but it doesn't fit so easily with the current routing.
Jamie - I was going to say Prince's too. I don't think a restoration of the pre-war championship routing is completely out of the question - I know there is some movement in that direction. The only question in my mind is to what extent the original landforms survived the war.
That would make we Sarazen fans very pleased!
-
amie - I was going to say Prince's too. I don't think a restoration of the pre-war championship routing is completely out of the question - I know there is some movement in that direction. The only question in my mind is to what extent the original landforms survived the war.
I think the bulk of it is still there, certainly 17 of the original 18 greens survived. I'm not in favour of a complete rebuild, but I'd like to see a couple of the original holes.
What do you mean by "some movement in that direction"? I've seen course improvement plans and this is not even on the long term agenda I think. Next major work is a restoration of the old clubhouse and dormie houses to provide onsite accommodation (work began on phase 1 last week)
-
This comment also applies to Patrick Mucci's thread above about courses being overshadowed by their neighbor.
The New Course is certainly overshadowed by the Old at St Andrews.
I think that a program of new bunkering, more in play off the tee, and perhaps some zipping up of some greens, could move the New into contention with the old. With the exception of the double green at 3/15, and the marvelous swale in the 5th green, I can't think of many distinctive features in the greens. The routing is terrific.
So there's my candidate, the New Course (1895 "new"!)
I would second the NEW COURSE. The fairways need some TLC and as you say Bill, the greens need a little zipping although I always found them to have some pretty decent but subtle features and approaches.
-
I'll nominate Cruden Bay. Its the only course I've been angry with, not angry with myself for bad golf but actually angry with the course. How can a course start so well have a couple of holes that would be mediocre on an inland course then later on have 4 holes all with blind or semi blind approaches. I quite like quirk but the finish at Cruden Bay is a crushing let down.
I imagine that it would be difficult to do anything worthwhile with the two holes at the hill (8th/9th) but the surely something could be done with the last half a dozen holes after all there is some good terrain which could make some really interesting golf.
If its not being greedy I would nominate another sacred cow and that is Dornoch, too many plateau greens for my liking.
Niall
-
Of the ones I have played I would nominate Pyle and Kenfig particularly the dunes area of the back nine is absolutely spectacular and a wasted opportunity even though there is a Colt front 9 which has improved vastly in terms of playing conditions in the past few years. The area where the back nine loop is has a few extra holes internally which has massive potential to be Wales's no 1 course. There is enough dunes in this area to built 5 to 8 more courses :o
Cheers
Ben
-
I would like to nominate The Eden.
The evisceration of this course when the practice facility was crudely inserted was a sad day and something desperately needs to be done with the added holes out the end which feel they were stolen from a 20 quid municipal course somewhere and dropped in by helicopter.
-
I am not quite sure what make over means, but courses which I think an excellent modern designer could vastly improve if the current designs were scrapped are:
Cruden Bay
Burnham & Berrow
Hillside
Turnberry (the one which bugs me the most)
Ciao
-
I would recommend a make-over of Ballybunion-Cashen. A great piece of property and a missed opportunity.
I would also flip the nines at Portstewart. The front nine is so dramatic that the back is a letdown. Rather play the back first and build up to the back.
-
How about Royal County Down? It is my favorite experience in golf, but it has the potential to be even better. First, there are some great dunes towards the back of the property (although they may be unavailable due to ecological regulations). Second, if the club would carve up the Annsley then it could add some great holes to the back nine. Third, a few simple alterations would really improve the present back nine.
Ex. IMHO
Excise #14 and tee #15 from the present 14th tee (or thereabouts).
Excise #10 and put the 18th green where the present 10th green is situated. This would make a hole that bends left and then back right into a natural valley somewhat like #11 at Oakland Hills (or is it #12?).
A few of the greens on the back could be reworked.
I guess rather than make a good course great I would rather see a great course made the GREATEST.
-
I'd love a crack at Cruit Island.
-
I am not quite sure what make over means, but courses which I think an excellent modern designer could vastly improve if the current designs were scrapped are:
Cruden Bay
Burnham & Berrow
Hillside
Turnberry (the one which bugs me the most)
Ciao
Sean
Good call on B&B - those dunes on the B9 surely could have been touched moreso. Royal St. David's for the same reason particulalry on the F9.
-
I am not quite sure what make over means, but courses which I think an excellent modern designer could vastly improve if the current designs were scrapped are:
Cruden Bay
Burnham & Berrow
Hillside
Turnberry (the one which bugs me the most)
Ciao
Sean
Good call on B&B - those dunes on the B9 surely could have been touched moreso. Royal St. David's for the same reason particulalry on the F9.
The problem with Burnham was two-fold. Land became available as the sea receded. This means the course evolved in a piece meal fashion out of necessity. Money too has always been a bit of an issue. If the spine of dunes separating the front and back nines and some of the dunes on the Channel Course were used in a new course it could be a cracker. Mind you, it would take a lot of earth moving to pull it off. I am afraid that a big chunk of the dunes has now been sacrificed to reservoir - making it more difficult to envision a new course even if it were nothing more than a pipe dream. There is also the issue of sea coming back as there seems to be some evidence for this. Any new new design would likely (wisely?) have to take this into account as well.
Ciao
-
Ally,
An interesting topic, probably because there have been so few links courses that have had significant makeovers, especially in recent years. And I think this is down to what Wade touches on, ecological issues. So many of these courses run through dune systems that have now been designated SSSIs (Site Special Sceintific Interest) and this would make any major work virtually impossible. Look at how the only two new authetic links courses I can think of that have been built recently (Askernish and Mach Dunes) by virtually nothing more than mowing the existing grass. I'm no expert but its possible that if a lot of these links courses hadn't been built through dunes way back in time, then even fewer of these rare habitats would exist as they would have probably been developed over by something less sympathetic than a golf course?
However, as this is a hypothetical discussion...
I agree with wade that some work at Royal County Down could really lift that course, at the very least do something to 17 and 18.
I can see Sean and Kevin's point about Burnham, but I think I'd rather see some of the flatter holes moved a touch closer to the dunes perhaps, rather than wholesale changes just to get the course more amongst the big dunes.
How about Saunton? 2 good courses there, but I would much prefer to improve the quality of the East course and then maybe have a small relief nine holes, if by using some of the land from the West course you could really improve the East (to Open Championship standard perhaps?) then is that not better use of the land?
Cheers,
James
-
James
The problem with pushing holes more in the dunes from the current layout would only create more valleyish holes. I am tyhinking #4 cutting through the Channel 9. #10 green being pushed right - though I like this idea if more fairway was created left. #11 being pushed right, but I really like this hole as is! What else is there to do to get dunes more in play without wholesale changes?
Ciao
-
Ally,
An interesting topic, probably because there have been so few links courses that have had significant makeovers, especially in recent years. And I think this is down to what Wade touches on, ecological issues. So many of these courses run through dune systems that have now been designated SSSIs (Site Special Sceintific Interest) and this would make any major work virtually impossible.
I'm not sure about this James...
I agree with you in relation to those above who talked about moving courses in to new Dune territory (such as RCD at the back)... That's an easy out and more often than not, impractical (often to do with ecological) issues... The question was more to do with improvements within a current site footprint (give or take a little) and there you rarely have the same ecological issues to deal with... In fact, taking Ireland as an example, ALL existing golf courses are NOT given statutory legal protection, meaning that development within the site boundaries is a free-for-all (more or less).... The SSSI / SAC conservation issues only come in to effect with new sites... I can't see Scotland and England being a whole lot different...
-
Sean,
You are probably right. I just wouldn't want to see wholesale changes, just to bring the dunes into play. When I first played Burnham I was so blown away with the holes through the dunes that I often considered the likes of 7 and 11 a bit dull, but with more plays and a few words from you, I've grown to love these holes.
Ally,
My only experience of development on a SSSI site was from about 7 or 8 years ago when I did a design to renovate an old farm building surrounded by SSSI land, which didn't come to anything. However, I got the impression that there would be very little chance of doing anything in the SSSI other than leaving it alone, or perhaps something which would enhance the biodiversity.
As far as golf courses are concerned, I suppose my "virtually impossible" comment was based on how I interpreted the possibilities of working in a SSSI site for larger changes as you mentioned. I cant imagine a remodelled green or some new bunkers or tees would be that difficult to achieve, but completly new holes to replace existing ones may prove trickier.
I think its great that we have links courses surrounded by such fantastic flaura and fauna, but at the same time it would be great to be able to improve these courses where required.
Cheers,
James
-
James,
I'm not for necessarily developing in to SSSI land (although each case to its own)... What I'm saying is that land owned by existing golf courses is never deemed to be SSSI or SACs (certainly in Ireland)... Completely new holes are almost always on the agenda should you be staying within the existing land...
And the spirit of this thread is to suggest changes within existing land...
-
The question is in the title... It really means which courses have room for the most improvement (in your opinion)?... But obviously, I'd like to hear why and what ideas you would have...
... Also, which courses have actually undergone recent makeovers and are they improvements?
Wide topic - most likely tackled before...
I think it is considerations like this, that ruined some of the classics in the first place, so to be on the safe side: Hands Off! ;D
-
This has become quite scarey, thankfully most "improvements" will never happen. It would be nice to restore the EDEN to 18 holes.
There are so many bad courses needing help we should avoid changes to the good or great.
I mentioned the NEW COURSE, I also think the KINTYRE COURSE could really use the help. AILSA has a couple boring holes but Kintyre seemed to have 14 or so, and could be spruced up giving them a good 36 holer.
-
OK Guys... Don't take it too seriously...
Many courses have room for improvement, not just tinkering for tinkerings sake... or driven by other agendas (such as difficulty for tournaments)... And the question is hypothetical after all...
-
No question: St Enodoc. All I'd really need is the biggest mower they have and about 12 hours to wield it!
-
Cruden Bay.
Anthony
-
Conwy. I don't want a new course, it's hard enough as it is. However, I'd like a train load of dunes delivered so that we might undo the flattenings that took place during military occupation in two world wars.
As I understand it, there is no possibility of further development in the dunesland around Pyle and Kenfig for ecological reasons. That is probably true of Harlech, too.
How about Royal Troon? Would there be a way of reworking Old and Portland to give a championship course with more teeth to the opening half? (Not wishing to undo MacKenzie's contributions, whatever they may have been, of course.)
What could you do by amalgamating Royal Aberdeen and Murcar?
-
What could you do by amalgamating Royal Aberdeen and Murcar?
Very little considering the out and back nature of Balgownie (and to a lesser extent Murcar)... The only way this would work is by placing the clubhouse in the middle. Then, you would have to assume that the clubhouse half of the Murcar land is superior to the clubhouse half of the current Royal Aberdeen layout... and I'm not sure that keeping some of Murcar's best land would trump losing some of Royal Aberdeen's best land and holes...
-
James,
I'm not for necessarily developing in to SSSI land (although each case to its own)... What I'm saying is that land owned by existing golf courses is never deemed to be SSSI or SACs (certainly in Ireland)... Completely new holes are almost always on the agenda should you be staying within the existing land...
And the spirit of this thread is to suggest changes within existing land...
Ally,
Sorry, I seem to have wandered a touch Off Topic with this, but just to wrap up, as far as I can tell, there are many golf courses on land that has been designated SSSI, so pretty much any work they do would need some form of approval. Here's an interesting little article...
http://www.egcoa.org/uploads/Wildlife%20on%20golf%20courses.pdf
However, when I first mentioned it I was only speculating on why more links courses hadn't had wholesale changes or anything beyond a slight tweaking?
So, to get back to the topic of which courses...
I have no love for Hoylake, so I'd quite happily give most of the early and laste holes a complete make-over!
On a more subtle front, I didn't play Golspie on my recent trip to the Highlands but I remember it as a little gem, but with a few holes around 13, 14, 15 that were unmemorable. If these could be given a makeover or replaced it could really improve things?
Cheers,
James
-
Good article James...
I figured there might be some crossover in England but I knew that in Ireland, no golf courses are deemed special areas of conservation... For clubs who want to develop their existing land, this leaves less of a problem with planning... Whether it is the right thing to do from an environmental point of view is a separate issue...
Do you know of any existing clubs in England that have been refused permitting for renovations / redesigns because the site is registered as an SSSI?... As the article states, the SSSI designation was often given because the area was a golf course...
At The World Forum, Paul O'Brien stood up and suggested that we lobby for The Old Course to be designated a World Heritage Site to stop any further development...
-
Ive always fancid the job of upgrading B&B although I would not change lots as I think B&B is pretty perfect for many of its holes:
I would make a new green at 3 on the plateau behind (+40 yards) taking the green out of the blind hollow, 5 and 6 I would add say 25 yards per hole, 7 would be my most radical change, go back to the old tee (+50 yards) elevating the first part of the fairway up to 320 yards (1 metre elevation above the water table) then dogleg the hole into dunes on the right. At 8 I would elevate the fairway as 7 generating the material by excavating a pool. 10 I woud try and add 30 yards, 11 add another 40 yards with a tee to the right of the 10th green in the dunes. At 14 I would soften the approach to the green.
This would just take B&B over the 7000 yards. Sean does not approve of losing his beloved 7th hole and my 3rd green proposal, I know we have discussed it before, but I really think 3 and 7 could turn into a crackers.
-
Ive always fancid the job of upgrading B&B although I would not change lots as I think B&B is pretty perfect for many of its holes:
I would make a new green at 3 on the plateau behind (+40 yards) taking the green out of the blind hollow, 5 and 6 I would add say 25 yards per hole, 7 would be my most radical change, go back to the old tee (+50 yards) elevating the first part of the fairway up to 320 yards (1 metre elevation above the water table) then dogleg the hole into dunes on the right. At 8 I would elevate the fairway as 7 generating the material by excavating a pool. 10 I woud try and add 30 yards, 11 add another 40 yards with a tee to the right of the 10th green in the dunes. At 14 I would soften the approach to the green.
This would just take B&B over the 7000 yards. Sean does not approve of losing his beloved 7th hole and my 3rd green proposal, I know we have discussed it before, but I really think 3 and 7 could turn into a crackers.
Adrian
Unfortunately, I think your upgrade is a downgrade - tee hee. Actually, I think its a mixed bag. No way would I reco changing #7 to your spec. #3 green is a holdover from the very early days (as are #s 15 & 18) so I am not in favour of another plateau green to replace it.
#10 has had about 25-30 yards added - it will make no difference to the flat bellies. In fact, it may make the hole easier as going left in the neck of the fairway past the bunker would often be taken out of the picture. I could see slapping in a bunker on that left side to throttle guys back a bit. But I think the hole would then play best from the front tee so guys can consider having a crack at the green.
I am all in favour of jacking up 7 (so long as the spine and green are raised with it), 8 and 16 fairways with the 16th being the most critically necessary. They just built a reservoir and I have no idea what happened to the sand. I sugested capping #16 from about 120 out, but folks laughed and said this isn't America. The fairway still gets wet and is weedy mess. Chalk one up for America in this instance.
The new course is ~6950. One day folks will learn that adding yards on its own does not combat length very well. I would much rather see added tees focus on width rather then length. The new tee for #13 is a case in point. Sure, the hole is 40 or 50 yards longer. But this just takes the bridle path out of play (one eliminated option) and makes the hole play easier, not harder. At least before the flat bellies had to shape the shot when going over the bridle path - now its up the gut. I don't see why they couldn't call the old tee a par 4 from the championship tees and par 5 from the medal/daily tees. Instead, we wasted money building an ugly tee which requires a long walk away from the ultimate target of the clubhouse. I am not a fan of this sort of brainless yardage extension and often times - thats all it is.
Ciao
-
Cruden Bay.
Anthony
Anthony
Interested to hear what changes would you make as I thought you considered the course damn near perfect.
Niall
-
Cruden Bay.
Anthony
Anthony
Interested to hear what changes would you make as I thought you considered the course damn near perfect.
Niall
Niall
9 on top of the hill needs to play along the cliff. Also tee boxes on 13 and 14 need to be on the edge of the ocean like on 15. The course would not play differently only enhance the beauty of the place.
Anthony
-
Tralee Golf club, the Sandpines (missed opportunity) of Ireland.
How so? This isn't a loaded question -- I've never been to Tralee, and don't know much about it. What should be done?
-
Sean - With respect, your loved opinion of 7 is a very minority one amongst most golfers...To most its the minger of the course, and very few are in favour of a blind green like the 3rd, equally back tees are for just a few so its a case of just bringing golf courses up to what is the right sort of length to stage championships. Back tees dont really worry the normal golfers.
This site likes width but championship golf calls for accuracy, so thats narrowness, fairways for championship golf are 20 metres wide sometimes, most people cant keep a 5 iron within that corridor, but the good news is that grass can be grown for championships and cut for normal play.
Opinions on whats better or worse will aways occur. What one person likes another will disike, arguing with an opinion is not easy because its subjective. I quite like the 3rd green where it is in that hollow but with the green visible with a skyline back ground and that hollow as fairway in front of the green I think it could be much better, but it needs a bit of tweaking as the vision and the way it would play is not perfect at the moment, but it could be.
I like the spine in 7 but thats all its got, that sort of thing can be recreated, but to take the green to the right into the lower part of the dunes could be much more interesting than the present backdrop (nothing).
-
Anthony
i don't think anyone would argue that Cruden Bay would benefit from a change to no 9, any kind of change really as its pretty featureless.
The 14th does have a tee up near the beach but which I like but not for any views but for the fact that it means your hitting the fairway at an angle which is something I like as it suits all games, those who want to play safe to those that want to take on the tiger line.
As for the other holes, I don't think giving them a nicer view really addresses what I see as the weaknesses but then what I consider a weakness might be what you like about them.
Niall
-
Anthony
i don't think anyone would argue that Cruden Bay would benefit from a change to no 9, any kind of change really as its pretty featureless.
The 14th does have a tee up near the beach but which I like but not for any views but for the fact that it means your hitting the fairway at an angle which is something I like as it suits all games, those who want to play safe to those that want to take on the tiger line.
As for the other holes, I don't think giving them a nicer view really addresses what I see as the weaknesses but then what I consider a weakness might be what you like about them.
Niall
Well said Niall.
-
Tralee Golf club, the Sandpines (missed opportunity) of Ireland.
How so? This isn't a loaded question -- I've never been to Tralee, and don't know much about it. What should be done?
Must fess up. Sorry I can't be much help as I haven't been there either. The "missed opportunity" is from either the CG or from Doak himself on this site. Relating it to Sandpines, which many on this site have called a "missed opportunity" is all I can take credit for.
-
Sean - With respect, your loved opinion of 7 is a very minority one amongst most golfers...To most its the minger of the course, and very few are in favour of a blind green like the 3rd, equally back tees are for just a few so its a case of just bringing golf courses up to what is the right sort of length to stage championships. Back tees dont really worry the normal golfers.
This site likes width but championship golf calls for accuracy, so thats narrowness, fairways for championship golf are 20 metres wide sometimes, most people cant keep a 5 iron within that corridor, but the good news is that grass can be grown for championships and cut for normal play.
Opinions on whats better or worse will aways occur. What one person likes another will disike, arguing with an opinion is not easy because its subjective. I quite like the 3rd green where it is in that hollow but with the green visible with a skyline back ground and that hollow as fairway in front of the green I think it could be much better, but it needs a bit of tweaking as the vision and the way it would play is not perfect at the moment, but it could be.
I like the spine in 7 but thats all its got, that sort of thing can be recreated, but to take the green to the right into the lower part of the dunes could be much more interesting than the present backdrop (nothing).
Adrian
The spine is all #7 needs. Its a subtle hole which causes head scratching. Another reason I wouldn't move that green is the far left tee for #8 would effectively be abandoned. Not good - not good at all because width it what makes golf interesting and eliminating a tee which creates two completely different ways to play a hole for the sake of yardage on a previous which is fine the way it is - is bad business. I don't mind the odd back tee for the one or two bigger events Burnham holds annually, but I wouldn't want the club to get wrapped into the idea of "championship golf" because imo championship golf is bad for golf design. Furthermore, Burnham isn't a real champiionship design anyway so why go thru the motions? The best ams tear the place apart unless the weather is up - in which case it wouldn't matter much at all if the course were 300 yards shorter. Unfortunately, I think your way of thinking is what holds sway at Burnham at the moment even though the vast majority of members can't understand why or why they should pay for it. I expect that in the near future more changes to come - likely additional bunkering to tighten the course up. What a shame.
Ciao
-
Nefyn and District
-
Good article James...
I figured there might be some crossover in England but I knew that in Ireland, no golf courses are deemed special areas of conservation... For clubs who want to develop their existing land, this leaves less of a problem with planning... Whether it is the right thing to do from an environmental point of view is a separate issue...
Do you know of any existing clubs in England that have been refused permitting for renovations / redesigns because the site is registered as an SSSI?... As the article states, the SSSI designation was often given because the area was a golf course...
At The World Forum, Paul O'Brien stood up and suggested that we lobby for The Old Course to be designated a World Heritage Site to stop any further development...
Ally,
I'm not aware of any courses being prevented from developing. In fact I know Burnham to be a SSSI and as Sean has mentioned we have recently had several new tees and bunkers added as well as a large reservoir. I think Natural England are a lot more open to these developments these days, but maybe they stood in the way of them in the past???
Sean and Adrian,
Thinking it over a bit more, the flatter holes still have the larger dunes as a backdrop, which is very pleasant, so no need to go running every hole through the dunes themselves. The one change I'd make at Burnham would be to cut the 7th fairway further to the left (not quite a makeover in the spirit of this thread, but an improvement none the less). This would hopefully make the central spine more of a key feature of the hole?
And Adrian, you should join us in September to see some of the changes that Sean mentions.
Cheers,
James
-
Good article James...
I figured there might be some crossover in England but I knew that in Ireland, no golf courses are deemed special areas of conservation... For clubs who want to develop their existing land, this leaves less of a problem with planning... Whether it is the right thing to do from an environmental point of view is a separate issue...
Do you know of any existing clubs in England that have been refused permitting for renovations / redesigns because the site is registered as an SSSI?... As the article states, the SSSI designation was often given because the area was a golf course...
At The World Forum, Paul O'Brien stood up and suggested that we lobby for The Old Course to be designated a World Heritage Site to stop any further development...
Ally,
I'm not aware of any courses being prevented from developing. In fact I know Burnham to be a SSSI and as Sean has mentioned we have recently had several new tees and bunkers added as well as a large reservoir. I think Natural England are a lot more open to these developments these days, but maybe they stood in the way of them in the past???
Sean and Adrian,
Thinking it over a bit more, the flatter holes still have the larger dunes as a backdrop, which is very pleasant, so no need to go running every hole through the dunes themselves. The one change I'd make at Burnham would be to cut the 7th fairway further to the left (not quite a makeover in the spirit of this thread, but an improvement none the less). This would hopefully make the central spine more of a key feature of the hole?
And Adrian, you should join us in September to see some of the changes that Sean mentions.
Cheers,
James
Boony
It would seem make over means some tweaking. Since Burnham is the course I play most here is what I would like to see happen.
#2: create tee further left on top of dune
#3: Use lower left section of daily tee on #17 as championship tee
#4: build a large, blind bunker to the right of fairway; extend fairway further right at about 220 out up to where the ground rises suddenly around 260 out (I am sick of looking for balls over there - smae goes for next suggestion); widen fairway left for second shot - near the 100-75 yard area
#6: build new tee right of the right tee - sort of behind the fifth green
#7: create fairway between bunker and oob (as you suggest); fairway cut to the water on right then again about 50 yards short and up to the green (I want to know if the ball is in the hazard or not plus the rough saves balls in the winter); tear out shrubbery behind green; sand cap right side of fairway to water; eliminate rough patch in fairway
#8: fairway left of new bunkers; create a proper fairway right of the water; sand cap right side of fairway to the water and up to the bridge; eliminate rough patches in fairway by extending dune line from left with sand capped fairway
#10: bunker on left maybe 40 yards short of #11 tee; fairway cut much further left over the hill; move green just in front and right of the right tee for #11
#12: create tee for par 3 as originally intended (perhaps used mainly in nthe winter)
#13: abandon new tee in favour of old tee - maybe create another tee left
#14: smooth out hollows right of the green
#16: create one large fairway with #3; build new tee on end of dune where current tee exists - maybe 25 yards forward and further right (makes the green drivable for more moderate hitters, but one must go over all the trouble and the green isn't receptive from this angle); sand cap fairway from about 125 out from the green
#18: take out left greenside bunkers (let balls kick left into trouble)
Ciao
-
I don't know if would be possible or not, but bringing back the original Princes would be my vote. It was such an important design historically.
-
TOC...
A way too wonderful piece of property to have been trusted to to a first time architect with no proven track record (god).
I say get Tommy Fazio in there to punch that baby up ;) ;D
-
Castle Course in St. Andrews: take some of the overcontouring out of the greens so that they could stimp higher than what they do now. Or at least loan golfers a heavy mallet putter for long putts.
-
Ballybunion Cashen-I'd like to make it over into a goat track/hiking trail. Oh, wait a minute......
-
personally, I'm against tinkering with ancient links course - they should remain as an unapologetic archeological statement of their era. Once one starts tinkering with them it never ends and nearly always leads to the quirk being dumbed down.
The only excuse to alter an ancient links is to restore it back to it's original.
-
James B/Ally
Re SSSI, I know that Silloth had a bit of a job getting permission to build a new 5th green. The new green is further back into an area previously "untainted" by the golf course. On the plus side English Nature did provide a grant to help with clearing away the gorse.
John C-S
I have some sympathy with your views however as most links courses have evolved with constant tinkering what particular era are you preserving ? Maybe we should limit changes to tinkering which somehow suggests less draconian changes than make-over which suggests to me complete redecoration and obliteration of the past. If thats your thoughts I'm all for it.
I love playing old links, and inland courses, where you can still make out old greens/tees/bunkers etc.
Niall
-
Niall,
As you said, most links courses are now unrecognisable from when they were first designed... John's view is a romantic one. That said, I hate the idea of getting rid of any of the individual stuff that is out there and in particular the remodelling of greens for the sake of it... but as I said before, it's a hypothetical thread...
With regards to Silloth, thanks for that... Again though, you are talking about development outwith the current course footprint. I doubt the same problems would arise for tinkering within the current course... Individual cases of course...