Ron Whitten's take on the golf course is unusually harsh.  He calls it "Royal O.B." throughout, and "a thing of the past."

I am concerned with the changes they've made to the course.  They've taken the OB away on the Dowie.  They've renumbered the course so that the normal 16th hole is the 18th (an easy birdie at the end), the good finishing holes become 1-2, and the intimidating first hole becomes the third.  These are the holes which gave the course a lot of its character, and I don't think it's right to mess with that.

I too thought that changing the order of the holes was a head-scratcher, but I think if there is a bright side (from a tournament standpoint) it is that the finishing stretch will now require some longer approach shots. The new 16th and 18th will be 550-yard par-5's and the new 17th will be a 460-yard par-4. It also shifts the stretch of dune holes (the regular 8-12) entirely into the back nine and perhaps makes these holes more of a factor on Sunday afternoon.

I played in the British Mid-Am at Royal Liverpool in 2004 and couldn't help but wonder about the regular 18th as a championship finishing hole. In that tournament more than a few players intentionally bombed it into the right rough, where the route was shorter and the angle was better than the standard tee shot threading all the bunkers. I bet we'll see a lot of wedges into that green (unless it is into the wind) and I don't think that's what the R&A has in mind for a finishing hole.

Maybe the R&A longs for the days of Faldo's 5-iron at Muirfield in '87, or Watson's 2-iron at Birkdale in '83, and wants to force the player to hit two long true shots to close it out. These days that means having a 550-yard par-5 finishing hole.

It was among Ron's most critical and sarcastic pieces. I think he got up on the wrong side of the bed on the day he penned this...or, perhaps he was in the U.K. and that confused his sense of left from right.

Having not seen the course I don't know if I can agree with the harshness of his review. I looked at the map and one of the things that strikes me immediately is the number of doglegs or angled tees. This brings into some strategic play from the tee which should be positive.
Kerry.

Tom,

Reading GolfDigest is about the same as reading the newspaper.  It has some things right, but gets some things wrong.  After you read it, you feel somewhat used, since you bothered to pay attention in the first place.  

I really don't know much about Royal Liverpool, but if scores go too low, then it will be seen as a failure.    I guess the article came off as presumptious and written from a lofty perch.  The author didn't convince me either way, but he made me wary of the venue.

Seems like the course could be won by a Euro, since it may lull the PGA Tour player to sleep, which doesn't mean a course is bad, just that the Tour player doesn't feel comfortable too far away from formulas.  I don't care who wins, just as long as I see some head scratching and lost looks on the players faces...then I'll enjoy it as a venue.

As soon as I heard that the first hole was been changed from it's order of play, I lost interest in any other changes..that initial tee shot was terrifying and now the guys dont have it..what a shame and what a cop out by the R&A..most dissapointing.

I agree with MWP here - we are talking about "The Open Championship" and the 1st was a great hole to begin with.

It signalled the fact that your opening shot is going to be tested and somewhat set the tone for most of the round. For mine Royal Liverpool places a high premium on getting the ball in the right position on the fairway. I thought it is the best opening hole on the Open rota.

Looks like Ron Whitten was too lazy to get his course history right.

Royal Liverpool comments.

http://iccheshireonline.icnetwork.co.uk/golferschronicle/news/tm_objectid=17226995&method=full&siteid=50061&headline=leading-golf-journal-writes-off-hoylake-for-the-open-name_page.html

I understand the concerns over the reordering of holes 17,18 and 1 changing the character of the course.  But I'd have to go along if these changes were necessary to accomodate the crowds around 1 and 18 and the Open would not be able to return to this historic venue without them.  

If nothing else Whitten's comments will put more focus on the course.  

Just left Hoylake; it will be a good Open.  I'm surprised that they will play all four of the par 5's to that standard.  There will be a lot of birdies/eagles.  The course is certainly narrower and harder that St. Andrews.  Like all Opens the par will only be defended if the wind blows.  The renumbering of the holes was all about the grandstands at 18.  No room at the regular 18 but 19,000 seats around 16(18).  There will be more bleachers here than ever and they need them; it is not a spectator friendly layout.

wow, that is BY FAR  the most scathing piece I have ever read by Whitten

It's the nastiest thing I have ever seen Whitten write. Surprising, for someone who knows so much about so many aspects of design. My bet is that he feels some pressure to be more criticial, and not to revert to his normally technical approach to reviewing. Of course, with this kind of commentary, he can also be cheeky and take pot shots without offending any of his American architect friends.

While he has in the past appreciated what links golf is about, it's certainly not evident here. You get the feeling he was in a foul mood when he came over and decided to take it out on the golf course.

I just saw this article and figured there had to be a thread on it.  In the article he describes the course as full of "weakly defended doglegs."  I would think any dogleg with Open rough and rock hard fairways would be pretty well defended.  

I've never been there.  Is he right or wrong?

Amazingly the R&A have responded .  From the BBC website.

The Royal and Ancient, the organiser of the Open, has rejected criticism of this year's venue, Royal Liverpool.

The Hoylake course was the subject of a damning article in the influential US magazine Golf Digest last month.

The magazine's course critic derided Hoylake for its extensive out-of-bounds and said it "isn't a blast from the past, it's a thing of the past".

But the R&A's David Hill rebuffed Golf Digest's claims and said Hoylake was "comparable" with other Open venues.

Hoylake has been off the Open rotation since Roberto de Vincenzo won there in 1967.

But recent improvements to the course's facilities and far easier access to the Wirral links thanks to the M53 motorway have helped convince the R&A to come back.

 


Golf Digest's Ron Whitten, however, is far from impressed with the decision to return to England's second oldest seaside links.

"(The course) hasn't changed with the times, except maybe for the worse.
Times have changed," wrote Whitten in the July edition of America's best-selling golf publication.

"When Roberto De Vicenzo won in 1967, first prize was $5,880. The last-place guy in this year's Open will earn more than that.

"But (the course) hasn't changed with the times, except maybe for the worse.

"Sure, it's 7,258 yards, par 72 now, 263 yards longer than it was 39 years ago. But it doesn't have one par-five that can't be reached in two with an iron, and its par-fours, which look long on paper, will play short on the ground because most are modestly defended dog-legs."

Whitten then points out that there have been as many "not-so-grand" happenings at the course as there have been notable firsts and historic achievements, before dismissing the course as "visually disappointing" and monotonous.

But Hill, the R&A's director of championships, was unimpressed by Whitten's barbed critique.

"It would have been nice if he had played the course. We would then have had more respect for the comments he made," said Hill.

"I think the week of the championship will tell if his comments were inaccurate or accurate.

"We would not have come back if we didn't think it was of the highest standard. It's in first-class condition and the top-class players coming here will enjoy it.

"Obviously, we're hoping for the variation in the weather that is the main protection of all links courses and what makes them such great challenges."