News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #50 on: June 26, 2014, 03:39:34 PM »
The play now on the new 5th for anyone with a brain is two irons up to where a good tee shot on the old 6th would go. It may as well be a par 3. In the Ashton Vase, no one hits driver as the tee shot is so risky with virtually no reward as the hole plays too long to reach in two.

I was never a fan of the old 13th and the new one is uninspiring to say the least. In fact the par 3's with the exception of the 2nd (which is a lovely hole that hopefully they never lose) are where Bristol & Clifton across the road edge them out.

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #51 on: June 26, 2014, 03:56:41 PM »
Reference Bristol & Clifton - haven't B&C done some bunker re-work over the last year or so? I remember hearing adverse local comments about the very grainy, almost clingy, sort of new sand in the bunkers. Pretty difficult sand to play delicate shots out of as I recall.
atb

Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #52 on: June 26, 2014, 04:12:45 PM »
Thomas

I went there specifically to see the bunkers back in March and after some horrific weather I thought they were excellent. They have re-done them all with a bunker binder or similar resin. It seems to have worked in the short term with no contamination yet, but it is extremely expensive.

The colour of the sand is not to my taste and gives a 'dirty' appearance over time but they played exceptionally well. Probably just grumbles last year as it takes time for them to settle.

I did see a new layout for B&C a while back using new land behind the 13th and doing away with holes 5 6 7 & 10 but not sure if its going anywhere.

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #53 on: June 26, 2014, 05:43:14 PM »
Ryan,

Thank you for the information about B&C, a course I rather like, apart from the walk up that damn steep hill to the 14th green! That's one long steep climb - sore legs by the top! As to the bunker sand, it does indeed have a kind of 'dirty' look to it. I wasn't aware of the use of bunker binder/resin so thanks for this detail.

Interesting what you say about possible dispensing with holes 5-6-7, I quite like those holes, especially the 6th with it's nice green complex. Presumably issues with crossing the lane are having an impact? Curious about doing away with the 10th though. I like the hole, sneaky and cunning, especially with that little hump just in front of the green. Not at all easy with a front pin given the hump and the green falling away downwards to the rear. Presumably safety from the tee with the adjacent clubhouse and car-park is an issue on this hole too? As to possibly using the land behind the 13th I recall there being some land, used as pitch-n-putt area maybe, between the 1st green/2nd tee and the 4th/5th and 8th fairways.

atb

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #54 on: June 26, 2014, 06:08:05 PM »
I always think B & C and Long Ashton are quite hard to seperate and say which is better, to me they are quite equal. Some great holes at B & C, I like 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12. I think 13 is not quite right and the last five are a bit weak, for me 17 is very dull. 15 sort of has a charm because you can drive it.

The 6th is a redan though no average Bristol golfer thinks anything great about 6. 5, 6 and 7 getting dropped is all about trying to get planning for housing over the track until that happened I don't think the course will change.

I don't actually know who designed B & C.

A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #55 on: June 26, 2014, 06:11:36 PM »
Ryan,

Thank you for the information about B&C, a course I rather like, apart from the walk up that damn steep hill to the 14th green! That's one long steep climb - sore legs by the top! As to the bunker sand, it does indeed have a kind of 'dirty' look to it. I wasn't aware of the use of bunker binder/resin so thanks for this detail.

Interesting what you say about possible dispensing with holes 5-6-7, I quite like those holes, especially the 6th with it's nice green complex. Presumably issues with crossing the lane are having an impact? Curious about doing away with the 10th though. I like the hole, sneaky and cunning, especially with that little hump just in front of the green. Not at all easy with a front pin given the hump and the green falling away downwards to the rear. Presumably safety from the tee with the adjacent clubhouse and car-park is an issue on this hole too? As to possibly using the land behind the 13th I recall there being some land, used as pitch-n-putt area maybe, between the 1st green/2nd tee and the 4th/5th and 8th fairways.

atb

10th I think they have a h&s issue but the others are by choice rather than the road. The plan I saw showed current 1-3. New holes 4, 5, 6. Existing 4th becomes the 7th and skip across to the 8th without going across the road. Current 11th becomes 10th. 12th the 11th. 13th the 12th. 13 14 15 new holes. Play in from the existing 16th. Six new holes in total 5 of which are on new land. Yardage about 6700 up from current 6300. That area you mention is the practice ground/kids course which I don't think they're touching.

As I said, I'm not sure if it will happen..

Ben Lovett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Restoration v Improvement
« Reply #56 on: June 27, 2014, 01:34:15 AM »
I did the bunker shaping for Peter McEvoy on the current 7th, think he went on to complete the whole bunker project

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back