[Sean_A]

Just thought I would bring this thread back.  I must say the course looked VERY intriguing on tv.  I most impressed by the variety of holes rather than the width of the corridors.  Speaking of width, how wide are some of the fairways?  Many fairways don't look super wide to me - has the course been tightened a bit?

Ciao

[David_Tepper]

"Just thought I would bring this thread back.  I must say the course looked VERY intriguing on tv.  I most impressed by the variety of holes rather than the width of the corridors.  Speaking of width, how wide are some of the fairways?  Many fairways don't look super wide to me - has the course been tightened a bit?"

Sean -

I played CS on May 31, which was the 3rd time I have played the course, having played it once in 2010 and once in 2011. The fairways can be any where from 40 to 60 yards wide in spots. I believe a fairway bunker or two have been added on 2 or 3 holes, but the course has not been "tightened" in any appreciable or noticeable way. The rough lines were as wide this May as they have been since the course opened.

Today was the first day the tournament was played (either this year or last) with any real wind at all and it was interesting to see how much higher the scores were today vs. the first 3 days of this year's tournament. My guess is the scores, on average, were 3 to 5 shots higher today than they were over the first 3 days. An it really was not very windy there today.

DT


   

[Sean_A]

Thanks David.  There must be a visual trick going on because if CS's fairways are 40-60 yards wide (and they don't look over-wide to me) than it seems hard to believe Trumps's are 40-70 yards wide.  I tell you what though, if Hawtree has fairways that wide he did a brilliant job in routing the course.  One of the biggest problems with courses in large dunes is how unforgiving they are. 

David, how wide would you say corridors are at CS?

Ciao 

[Jon Wiggett]

I just spent the 5 days of the tourament working for Nike in the tented village and got to see quite a bit of the golf. The course looked absolutely amazing. Hats off to Chris Haspell and the rest of the greenkeeping team in producing a course of such high quality in what have been quite challenging conditions. Good to see that the course played tougher with a stiff breeze.

Jon

[Philip Gawith]

Sean, from recollection some of Castle Stuart fairways are more like 80 yards wide. Maybe they have narrowed things for the pro's and maybe the figure i cite does not apply to all fairways, but there is no doubt at all that the design is very generous fairways, but with demanding green sites. you are definitely invited to flail away off the tee, in the knowledge that you may land on the short grass but be in the wrong place.

[DMoriarty]

From the aerial it seems that some might be overestimating the width by a bit.  Most of the irrigated fairway corridors are around 50 yards wide with a few exceptions which are closer 80 and a few narrower too.   All of the white and yellow lines in these two pics are at 50 yards, to give some idea . . .

[David_Tepper]

DMoriarty -

Please don't confuse us with the facts!

DT

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty -

Please don't confuse us with the facts!

DT

Sorry.  Pesky habit.

[Sean_A]

From the aerial it seems that some might be overestimating the width by a bit.  Most of the irrigated fairway corridors are around 50 yards wide with a few exceptions which are closer 80 and a few narrower too.   All of the white and yellow lines in these two pics are at 50 yards, to give some idea . . .

Mr M

Thank you.  I was really hoping my eyes weren't playing tricks on me. 

Of course, the widths you point out at CS really highlight how bloody narrow so many big name links really are - now combine that with stupid rough and its a bad recipe with little excuse. At some point folks will cotton onto the fact that our great links are now often times quite constricted fields of play. What made them forgiving was the forgiving rough.  Take that away and there is often little cause to celebrate strategic golf.  As said before, I reckon the fairways at both Lahinch and Ballybunion are 7, maybe 10 yards less wide than 20 years ago. 

Ciao

[Niall C]

David

Thanks for posting the aerials. The pics look like they are from when the course was just being finished judging by the practice area being unseeded. Of course landing areas change depending on the wind and strength of player etc but I think on most of the top side holes the width is greater than you suggest or show. Bear in mind also those holes have restaining mounding down the sides to keep you in play as well as no bunkers.

The holes down the bottom are easily the best, particularly with some of the off-set tees used in this years championship. That they are the best comes down to a number of basic factors, namely the constraint of beach on one side and hillside of gorse on the other, the more interesting contouring and change of levels in the fairway ie. not just going forward but from side to side, and the offset tees as mentioned previously.

In comparison, the holes up top are pretty insipid imo.

Niall

[DMoriarty]

Niall,

So you think than an aerial photograph clearly showing the irrigated corridors doesn't accurately depict the width of these corridors Really?

So what do you think happened?  Do you think they added width to the course after they designed and built it?  If so, how so?   You note "restraining mounding" on the upper portion, so did they move all that as well to make room for their widening of the course?  Sounds like quite a project on a course already plenty wide.  

I'm sure you'll understand if I go with the aerial over your attempts at explaining how it is really wider than it looks in the aerial. I don't really see how the photos could be lying in this case.  

But while we are on the topic I don't understanding your point about what you view as "restraining" mounding.  If the fairways are 80 yards wide as some have claimed, then what exactly is being "restrained?"  

Honest question Naill, do you think it all possible that you and others have simply overestimated the width?  This seems most likely to me.  

[Jon Wiggett]

Hi David,

just to confirm

5 is 20 yards wider, as are 9, 13 & 16. Remember that is fairway width and there is quite bit more room outside this where the ball is easily found and playable with any club.

Jon

[DMoriarty]

Thanks Jon,

My only point is that while Castle Stuart obviously is plenty wide, the reports of the bulk of the fairways as measuring at 80 yards wide is obviously a great exaggeration.  For the most part, with a few exceptions, the irrigated corridors seem to be more in the range of 50 yards wide. As I said some of the fairways were wider and some narrower.  As for the holes you mentioned, I think you can see that extra width on the aerial.  I wasn't trying to peg the fairways at any set width, but was providing the 50 yard segments as a point of reference.

[Niall C]

David

To take no. 13 as an example, you measured the fairway well after the dogleg where even the big hitters weren't getting to. If you measure it at the dog-leg I'm fairly sure its a good bit more than 50m.

Niall

[DMoriarty]

Niall,

My point is a broader one - the estimates of the widths seem to have been greatly exaggerated - I am comfortable that the graphic I posted supports my point (especially if one realizes that those 50 yard segments are there only for perspective purposes.)    

But if you think my graphic ought to be doing something else or provide the exact measures of the portions you would like to measure, then please by all means go ahead and do your own graphic. I won't be offended.

As for the 13th measuring right before the dogleg it seems to be slightly less than 60 yards.  My point remains the same and I fail to understand your point, if any.

[Kalen Braley]

I took a look around on Google Earth as well, and would agree with Davids general sentiment.

There are a few wide spots of fairway, but most appear to be between 40 and 50 yards based on the green areas in the aerials.

[Niall C]

David

When I thanked you for posting the aerial photos with indicative corridor widths I was being genuine and merely passed comment on your observations based on an (old) aerial photo from god knows how high up. So no need to take the huff.

I'm also not sure of what exaggerations you are referring too but from my perspective 50 yards wide at the narrow bits with most of the holes on the upper deck being well in excess of that constitutes wide open, particularly with the lack of hazards either by way of bunkering or rough. Also as Jon says, the upper holes have flanking mounds which have little topsoil and consequently quite sparse grass and therefore act like the things they put down the side of bowling alleys for kids. Add that to wide open greens where it matters not a jot what angle you come in from and you have to ask yourself is this a landmark design or just the emperors new clothes.

I would certainly not say its a bad course or not enjoyable but it sure isn't great golf to my mind. I hope you do get over to play it some time and would very happily join in a game at CS to hear your views.

Niall

[DMoriarty]

No huff.  I think the photos and aerials speak to the width and based and that, your descriptions ("50 yards wide at the narrow bits with most of the holes on the upper deck being well in excess of that") and the descriptions of others strike me as exaggerated, but then maybe it is all an optical illusion which would be immediately resolved were I ever to make it over there myself.    Or perhaps if you spent a bit of time measuring on google earth as did Kalen and I think you too will find that the widths have been exaggerated.

As for you opinion that it "matters not a jot what angle you come in from," it is not shared by others who I know well and trust on these matters, so I am sure you will not take offense if I hold out hope for the at least until I get to see it myself.  

Thanks for taking the time to comment.  I wish I had seen the course so I could better carry my end of the conversation.

[Jon Wiggett]

No huff.  I think the photos and aerials speak to the width and based and that, your descriptions ("50 yards wide at the narrow bits with most of the holes on the upper deck being well in excess of that") and the descriptions of others strike me as exaggerated, but then maybe it is all an optical illusion which would be immediately resolved were I ever to make it over there myself.    Or perhaps if you spent a bit of time measuring on google earth as did Kalen and I think you too will find that the widths have been exaggerated.

As for you opinion that it "matters not a jot what angle you come in from," it is not shared by others who I know well and trust on these matters, so I am sure you will not take offense if I hold out hope for the at least until I get to see it myself.  

Thanks for taking the time to comment.  I wish I had seen the course so I could better carry my end of the conversation.

David,

here in GB most courses with fairway irrigation irriagate only the central strip. It seems to me that both you and Kalen are basing you point of view on old arials of the course taken when the course was not even complete and on the basis that if it is brown then it is not fairway where as Niall and others are basing theirs on actual experience from being at the course.


Jon

[DMoriarty]

David,

here in GB most courses with fairway irrigation irriagate only the central strip. It seems to me that both you and Kalen are basing you point of view on old arials of the course taken when the course was not even complete and on the basis that if it is brown then it is not fairway where as Niall and others are basing theirs on actual experience from being at the course.


Jon

Jon,  I'd be very surprised if during grow-in that the entire fairways were not being irrigated. Looking at the coverage and photos of  particular holes and at flyovers and such it seems to me that the aerials do a pretty good job of representing the width.   We've gotten used to narrower courses, so even 50 yards wide seems exceedingly wide and it is thus pretty easy to overestimate.

I understand your frustration though, in having someone who has never been there question your observations and Niall's. I'd be frustrated as well.   But sometimes it helps to turn to more objective measures for guide in factual questions.  While personal experience obviously trumps no personal experience, actual observable and recordable facts (such as represented in aerials and on scorecards) ought to trump personal anecdotal experience every time.

Also Jon I should probably mention that I am not basing my view only on the aerials or television broadcasts but on extensive discussions with others who have been there and even with those who know the place well, but see it differently that you and Niall.

[Jon Wiggett]

David,

based on what UK grow-in experience do you judge your opinion of being surprised if the entire fairway was not irrigated (I would also point out I never suggested this was the case)?

Where have I said that the majority of the fairways were 80 yards wide?


Jon

[DMoriarty]

Where did I say you said "that the majority of the fairways were 80 yards wide?"

I base my opinion on following the progress of the creation of this course fairly closely from the beginning, and on careful examination of the aerials, on videos of the course construction, on fly-over videos, on multiple photographs of very hole, and on speaking with others who have been there and who know the course fairly well.  If the irrigated portions shown on the aerial represent only the "center strip" of fairway, I'd be very surprised.   Take a close look at the google earth and zoom in on the image yourself (and compare with some of the things I have mentioned above) and tell me if you still disagree with me . . .

[Jon Wiggett]

David,

I wasn't implying that you had said that I had said the fairways were 80 yards wide but rather that I was not claiming such. Also, I did not say that CS's irrigation was only down a central strip but rather that this is not unusual in GB.

Oh, some fairway areas are not irrigated.

Jon

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()