News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Why
« on: October 02, 2010, 07:03:46 PM »
did they build Celtic Manor specifically for the Ryder Cup?  Nobody is getting to the par-5's in two, there is little risk vs. reward, and for a course in Wales it looks awfully American, not necessarily a good thing.

So, why would they build a course specifically for the Ryder Cup yet have it so poorly designed?  Is it not the point of a match play course to offer as much risk vs. reward as possible and is Celtic Manor not the complete opposite of that!?

Why do they do build it in Wales yet stray away from fast, firm, links golf?

The course is a travesty. 

As if the K-Club wasn't bad enough...

Why Celtic Manor?  What were they thinking??
Logged

Marty Bonnar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2010, 07:30:05 PM »
removed
mostly cos I don't really care.
FBD.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 07:32:12 PM by Marty Bonnar »
Logged
The White River runs dark through the heart of the Town,
Washed the people coal-black from the hole in the ground.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2010, 07:34:47 PM »
Jordan -

There are already 2 or 3 threads (containing plenty of moaning & groaning) on this topic already working. Check them out:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46063.0/

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46062.0/

DT
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 07:43:24 PM by David_Tepper »
Logged

Matt_Ward

Re: Why
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2010, 08:15:24 PM »
Jordan:

Simple two-word answer ...

TERENCE MATTHEWS

mucho $$$$

make sense ? not in traditional golf terms but it's how sports operates today.
Logged

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2010, 08:27:45 PM »
Jordan

The course is a travesty?  Why?

While i don't think its great by any stretch of the imagination, its not a travesty.  The guys can't get to e par 5 because their balls are landing in their own divots.  While I would never fly over there to play that course, it doesn't look terrible.....in my opinion, its just not great.

But, that said, I can't believe they picked this place either.
Logged

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2010, 09:02:54 AM »
Jordan

To answer your basic question, yes it has to do with money, but also to do with promoting the game in Wales and no matter what you think of the course it will have done that very successfully. Wales will have had a tremendous amount of exposure and visitors as a result of the Ryder Cup being there. That includes the build up, during and after. Can't be a bad thing surely ?

Niall
Logged

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2010, 09:22:15 AM »
Jordan - there is virtually no new land left in the UK where you could build a proper links course on true linksland as opposed to the faux courses we see near St Andrews.

Taking the bus from the station to the course yesterday it was impossible to see how Newport will have gained anything from the RC or the promotion of Wales.
Logged
Cave Nil Vino

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Why
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2010, 09:45:11 AM »
Mark,

Ther is actually plenty of dunes land and links land left in thie UK and Ireland, including a huge stretch of dunes up the road toward Swansea.  But, most or all of it is off limits for building new golf courses ... because when people think of building golf courses they imagine the sort of highly artificial new courses as the 2010 and not a real links.
Logged

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2010, 10:31:07 AM »
Tom - agreed plenty of land where you could build a links course but hardly any where you would be allowed to. The land you see adjacent to the back nine at Pyle and Kenfig looks fantastic but zero chance of getting permission to build. Never been to Ireland so cannot comment on their planning policies.
Logged
Cave Nil Vino

Adam_Messix

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2010, 11:53:17 AM »
There are plenty of wonderful courses that could host the Ryder Cup with all of the necessary infastructure and the like.  However, the PGA of the UK and the European Tour which control the Ryder Cup see it as the only single money making event and they have to take it to the highest bidder.  Look no further than the last two European Ryder Cup venues and they have a similar type set up, mega rich owner who has held many European Tour events and REALLY wants to make a name for their resort by holding the Ryder Cup.  It involves a lot of money to the associations over there.  Actually when you think about it, the Belfry (the U. K. PGA's home), Valderrama, the K Club, Celtic Manor, and looking ahead Gleneagles have all held many European Tour events and it certainly leads to a major edge for the home team. 

In the U. S., our PGA looks at the Ryder Cup as a way to gain venues for the PGA Championship (and a major money maker too).  Our next three venues have all held multiple PGAs and have more scheduled.  I don't blame the PGA of America for this, they want to take the Championship to what they consider "great" venues.  I'm sure they were miffed when The Country Club backed out of the 2005 PGA after hosting the 1999 Ryder Cup, so they are now pretty much insisiting on multiple PGAs before considering a Ryder Cup.  Being as the Ryder Cup is booked so far out in the US (I think up to 2020), it's difficult to position yourself to host the Cup in the U. S.  It wouldn't surprise me if the Atlanta Athletic Club hosted it sometime down the road. 
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2010, 04:49:46 PM »
Jordan,

Did any thought at all go into your comment about the par 5s?  I ask because even my 14 year old, with no interest in architecture, understood that they were not reachable in 2 because of the conditions (you noticed it was wet, I assume?), rather than because of design.  It's easy (all too easy, it seems) to knock CM but in doing so we should, at least, apply some intelligent analysis.
Logged
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2010, 05:00:51 PM »


Bluto: [belches] Why not?
Logged
"... and I liked the guy ..."

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2010, 05:06:39 PM »
Quote from: Niall Carlton on October 03, 2010, 09:02:54 AM
To answer your basic question, yes it has to do with money, but also to do with promoting the game in Wales and no matter what you think of the course it will have done that very successfully. Wales will have had a tremendous amount of exposure and visitors as a result of the Ryder Cup being there. That includes the build up, during and after. Can't be a bad thing surely.
Unless your impression of Wales is that it sure rains a lot.  That will be the main exposure they get out of the event.  I dont't think that will help to sell the place as a golf destination.
Logged

john_stiles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2010, 05:42:09 PM »

As to new coastal/links courses in UK or Ireland,  does the process have to go through a European Union review ? 
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2010, 05:50:36 PM »
No part of the planning process goes through the EU.
Logged
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Richard Choi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2010, 06:09:46 PM »
There may be a bunch of things you can critcize about this course, but complaining about the par 5's because they are unreachable is a puzzlement, to say the least.

If the people who are in charge of the setup wanted the par 5's to be more reacheable, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS TO MOVE UP THE TEES!

There are 5 tee boxes on most holes, if they wanted people to reach par 5's in two, they would be. How the heck is that the fault of the golf course architecture???

Seriously, all these whining about the golf course is just getting ridiculous.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up