[Jim Johnson]

What's with the negativity about the book?

The way I see it, any book on golf course architecture/construction/design/etc. etc., decently written, with interesting anecdotes about how the particular course evolved, is interesting, and worth the read. After all, there aren't that many books like that in the marketplace.

Jeesh.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Scott--
You need to look no further then the inside front flap of the book for clarification of this point.  The Castle course is the first championship course built by the Links Trust since 1914.  The course they've built weren't championship courses (you said it yourself).  And the courses at St. Andrews Bay weren't built by the links trust (something you also said).

But the Links Trust only came into existence in 1974 so how could they have built the courses from 100 years ago, such as the New and Jubilee.  And wasn't the redesign of the Jubilee a very material change to the course, so much so that it could almost be considered a new course.

But other than stretching the facts a bit I quite like the book.

[Chris Kane]

But the Links Trust only came into existence in 1974 so how could they have built the courses from 100 years ago, such as the New and Jubilee.  And wasn't the redesign of the Jubilee a very material change to the course, so much so that it could almost be considered a new course.

They were built by the precursor to the Links Trust, which was a division of local government. 

[Wayne_Kozun]

But the Links Trust only came into existence in 1974 so how could they have built the courses from 100 years ago, such as the New and Jubilee.  And wasn't the redesign of the Jubilee a very material change to the course, so much so that it could almost be considered a new course.

They were built by the precursor to the Links Trust, which was a division of local government. 

The book seems willing to split hairs when it comes to where courses are located so why not do the same when determining who builds them?  I believe the R&A also played a role in the building of the New and Jubilee alongside the town council did it not?

[Sean Walsh]

I have walked half the course (more than a year ago) and will not attempt to critique it other than to say it provides a grand scene.  Hope you hit a nice flat ball if you get the opportunity to play there.

As to the reason for it being built.  I think like Chris it is money. 

Was there an absolute need for it?      No. 

Will it help local golfers play The New and the Jube?    Yes it will.  Mainly because visitors will play it instead of the New and the Jube.  It costs more, it must be better is prevailing thought.  As a result the slowness of New/Jube will be largely remedied and locals will return to 4 rather than 5 hour rounds on them.

As to The Eden not being a championship course at its inception that is bunk.  It was considered too difficult and although out grown by equipment improvements 14 of its holes are still a match for its siblings.

P.S.

Welcome Scott.

[Scott Macpherson]

Harry Colt design the Eden course in 1913. They lost holes 1,2,17,& 18 to the driving range in more recent times. I wish I had had an opportunity to play his original layout. By all accounts it was quite something.

I believe Donald Steel redesigned some of the Jubilee course in the early 1990's (not exactly sure what year). They were some significant changes such as the 10th hole.

s

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()