Portrush -- the best?

[TEPaul]

"Unless you have played multiple rounds there, I am sorry to say that your opinions should be taken with a large grain of salt.  They must be viewed as limited in their vaildity and that of an outsider looking in."

Ian, me boy----you have stated what so many of us that have to read these posts of Matt Ward's on golf architecture have known for so long----eg that he seems to act as if his "one time play" opinions are the "truth and the light" about certain courses and certain architecture. I doubt he'd accept your opinion on anything to do with Portrush since he's seen the course once. What does it matter to him that you virtually grew up there playing the golf course?  

But the real question is where should Portrush stack up in the top 10 in New Jersey if it could somehow be there?    

[TEPaul]

"Regarding multiple rounds as the benchmark in making one eligible to rate / assess courses -- I have no issue with a one time visit provided the person posting such can make a sound case and use appropriate examples where necessary. Sometimes the person making the argument of multiple visits uses such an argument as to render any other opinions as being groundless. Sometimes people who see the same portrait time after time after time may not see the flaws that may be present. No doubt it helps to see a course on multiple visits to assess the wind blowing from different directions, to name just one item."

Nice try, Matt, but you should know by now that kind of explanation and that kind of "portrait" analogy is never going to fly on this website, particularly not from you.  

Maybe you could start a thread explain to us what the differences you observe are from the first time you've played a great course compared to say the fiftieth time you've played a great course, if, in fact, you've ever done that.  

[Michael Whitaker]

how many rounds does it take to qualify to pass on comments on any course? Is it five, ten, fifty, a hundred?

Sometimes the person making the argument of multiple visits uses such an argument as to render any other opinions as being groundless.

This is coming from Mr. 1000-Course-Database who dismisses everyone elses opinions because they can only dip their toes in his vast pool of knowledge! Matt's usual argument is, "you can't dispute me because you don't know what I know." Now, when the shoe is on the other foot Matt cries foul.

Matt, do you ever wonder why almost every thread in which you participate eventually becomes contentious and combative? You claim to be a professional communicator... try acting like one and you might be better received.

[Robert Thompson]

I never intended to start a debate about fairway widths at Portrush when I launched this thread. Yes, it is tight -- but so is Merion, as was wisely pointed out.
Regardless of the fairway width, Portrush remains among the Top 5 courses I have ever played, and I think it is a better all around golf experience than County Down. But that's my opinion.
Do the narrow fairways hurt Portrush that much? I played a three wood off almost every tee and in a high wind, still shot right around 80. Did it challenge my game in every way -- sure did. Short fours were sometimes nearly driveable, while others proved elusive, forcing players to try to harness the wind the best they could.
It just seems to me that there wasn't a weakness in the course, which is why I asked the question in the first place.
I couldn't care less about the fairway width within this context.
The question was: is Portrush more exceptional than RCD? I appreciate both sides of this debate, though I'm not so keen on arguing about fairways.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I would rate Portrush above RCD because RCD has the two worst holes ever for great layout.  The 16th green is the size of 4 combined greens without any real slope or movement--I wonder if that had been the town football field that was simply mowed at green height. And an artificial pond in the middle of a fairway on a links course!  Or how about the decorative pines.  At least the the addition of the right bunkers makes 18 a decent hole.  Up until 16th tee RCD has to be the best course in the world.  There are no weaknesses at Sand Hills, only complete greatness.   I thought the fairways were fine at Portrush and it seemed like the Seniors were having more trouble on their approaches last year.  Until my 2nd shot on 17 I thought Portrush was the greatest course in the world( I played it the day after RCD).  17 and 18 are only decent and that knocks it below Sand Hills, R Melbourne, and PV on my top in the world list.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Ian I heard a rumour about the course record of many years standing being broken by a 13 or 14 year old this summer.  Is this what you're reffering too? Were conditions benign?

Is he another one to watch or was it a Colt from the blue~?

I think McDowell has reached the top 100 golfers in the world and with Clarke having been a top 10 player before his wife's problems, both honed their games there. Can any other course currently name a better brace and is it in part due to the lessons learned at Portrush or coincidence?  It's not as if every top 20 course in the world has produced a stream of great players.

[Jim Nugent]

Course record is now down to 61, according to  the article below:

"Rory McIlroy breaks course record at Royal Portrush
   12/07/2005
 
 
   Rory shot a course record 61 on the Dunluce Course in the second round, of the Magners Sponsored Championship with 2 nine's of 33 & 28 for an overall total of 132.."

[Tony_Muldoon]

Jim can you post the link -to cut and paste -it won't open.

[Jim Nugent]

Jim can you post the link -to cut and paste -it won't open.

http://www.gui.ie/main_frame.asp?pageref=/news_detail.asp?id=883&menuid=44

[Ken_Cotner]

Course record is now down to 61, according to  the article below:

"Rory McIlroy breaks course record at Royal Portrush
   12/07/2005
 
 
   Rory shot a course record 61 on the Dunluce Course in the second round, of the Magners Sponsored Championship with 2 nine's of 33 & 28 for an overall total of 132.."

Sure it wasn't Roy McIvoy?  

Ken

[Paul_Turner]

Is the 18th at Portrush really a weak link?  Sure it isn't on the spectacular land, but it still has plenty of interest with the bunker arrangement and the land does move a little.  

The pitch approach to the 17h  is the least interesting and has the ugliest backdrop.

[TEPaul]

Paul:

I don't think the 18th at Portrush is a weak hole at all. It's just as you say, it's on flat ground but it's a nice hole from tee through the green in my opinion. The second half of #17 sure is blah though. They should just put some clever bunkering scheme on the second half of that hole like #18 has.

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

I just had a quick look at the Portrush website.

http://www.royalportrushgolfclub.com/

The 17th does have a line of slightly diagonal bunkers on the left, it's so long since I've been there I didn't remember these at all.  There are approach bunkers on the 18th which almost mirror these.

[TEPaul]

Paul:

They should probably try putting a rather small bunker right in the middle of the 17th fairway out about 120-140 or so from the green. That would make the second shot so much more interesting for most players. I bet that would work well and if it didn't just fill it up again.  

[Ian Dalzell]

Matthew, Matthew, Matthew . . . . . .  .
I seem to have brought on reinforcements to fight my case, and to be honest they are doing quite well without me.

Robert Thompson never wanted this to turn out as it has, so I will end it now.  The course had stood the test of time for over 100 years with minimal changes, and is worthy of it's ranking.

Perhaps you would like to do a top-100 narrow fairways list, and portrush would get the #1 ranking.  That's one way to climb to the top, albeit on the Wardonian list!

[Ian Dalzell]

Oops . . there I go again with the exclamation points

[Matt_Ward]

Ian:

Who said the course is not worthy of its rating? I never said that. I enjoyed the course immensely -- I simply said -- let me say it slower so that there's no misunderstanding -- the Colt design doesn't need to be "stregnthened" through heavy rough and narrow corridors on a number of the holes. Dunluce is fully capable at being even greater if more width -- a few yards not a football field mind you -- were employed on a number of the extremely narrow holes.

I'm speaking about degrees -- nothing more than a bit of common sense given the high winds that routinely blow through the property.

Ian -- Ian -- Ian -- c'mon partner please allow me to speak for myself. I'll save the exclamation points since you've used them all up.

P.S. Ian -- if one visit disqualifies me from making comments about Dunluce as you have said -- what about the one time visits of people who came to Hidden Creek and pushed it up the ladder for top 100 status? Does the rule for the goose apply to the gander? Or is it simply because my name is Ward and there's is not?

[Robert Thompson]

Matt and co: Is there any truth to the fact that the fairways at Portrush have been narrowed? Unlike many courses, where it is clear they narrowed the fairways, I saw no indication of that at Portrush. The longer holes, like 4, were generally wide, while the shorter holes often had tighter corridors. I actually rarely found this a problem.
So is this a case of someone thinking they know better than Mr. Colt, or is it a case that some super or club has chosen to narrow the fairways. Or were they always this way?
Paul would probably know best, but from my experience with Colt -- at Toronto and Hamilton -- it is rare that his fairways are exceptionally wide. Fair, sure, but not wide. If Toronto or Hamilton grew the rough like Portrush, they'd be tougher tests for sure.

[Mike Worth]

I just want to add my 2 cents... It's always amusing when Matt makes an ass of himself through his involvement in topics where he has no idea that he the "B" Player when it comes to expertise about this particular course.   In fact, when it comes to Portrush, Ian would be the "A" Player and Matt would be the "D" player.  Matt has been told this before, but continues to charge ahead anyway.

These threads also (correctly) reinforce Matt's image as a 'drive by shooter" when it comes to evaluating courses.  This thread should be permanently moved to the top of the discussion board as a reminder to all.  Perhaps if Matt spent more than 4 hours in a lifetime at any particular course he might have more creditability on such issues.  It is worth noting that Matt only gets credit for spending 4 hours at a course when he's on time for his game, something that doesn't happen that often, from what I'm told.



Heed my advice, Matt, stop while you're behind.

[Ian Dalzell]

Matt,
Let's get specific and see how good your memory on that 1 visit of yours really was.  You are after all arguing with someone who grew up on the links there  - I am amused that you still feel your knowledge "trumps" mine.  You never came out and said that it was not worthy of it's ranking, but you are essentially saying it is "too narrow".  If it were too narrow, why does it always get ranked so highly in the eyes of most.  Are they all wrong?

Which holes specifically are "too narrow" and have "hay like rough" 2 paces from the edge of the fairway?  What is your definition of "too narrow" - 15 yards, 20, 30 ??  Why do all the posters on this subject seem to say that when they played there they did not notice what you refer to? Are there holes out there that are just unfair because of the corridors and length of rough?

It is one of the best courses in the world.  Hole #4 is one of the best par-4's in all of golf (IMO) and I won't sit by and watch you pick it apart like you do to other courses that didn't let you hit driver everywhere

And regarding Hidden Creek, many of the raters who have played have come back again to play or tour and I cannot speak for their reflections on the course.  The topic here is Portrush, and I am simply stating . . let me say this slowly for you . .that I feel more qualified to comment on the playability of the course than you do after 1 round.  Can you not at least agree with me on that

[Matt_Ward]

Ian:

Hold the phone -- I never said my knowledge trumps yours on Dunluce. What I did say was that I have a very good memory of where I play, the nature of what the course provides or lacks and how it stacks up against other courses of comparable status. You make it sound like I'm Joe Tourist with a 64-ounce brew in one hand who simply forgets everything accept to re-load with the next brewski.

You're the guy who disqualified me from making any comments on Dunluce. I then asked you how many times should one have to play any course before one can weigh in with comments? I then mentioned Hidden Creek because people who rated it among the nation's top 100 in a number of instances had only one visit there. If the one visit rule disqualifies me then the same protocol follows for others and at other courses. Candidly, I have no problem with one visit reviews provided there is some sort of analysis and thought to the stated position(s).

I also mentioned (for the upteen time) that Paul posted that folks from within the club decided to grow the grasses higher and narrow a number of the fairways. I have no knowledge of that and to the best of my memory you have not answered that particular point to date.

You also stated that I would not know the effects of a 3-4 club wind and I stated that in my time at Portrush the wind was a sustained 30 mph with higher gusts.

Another point -- hold the phone partner -- where did I say that #4 is NOT one of the best par-4's there or anywhere else in Ireland / Northern Ireland? Do yourself a favor Ian -- re-read my original posts from Portrush I short time ago and the 4th is mentioned in very glowing terms -- as it should be.

Ian -- I do agree that having multiple rounds does help in understanding a course but to say that no one -- more likely Ward himself -- cannot fathom a course from a visit is simply rubbish. I am a big fan of Dunluce -- I'll say that slowly and again for the upteen time -- all I said -- repeat after me -- is that a gentle tweaking of the width of certain holes encountered there would only more enhance what Colt originally provided. I don't see how having hay like rough off the sides of holes #5, #7, #9, #10 #15, to name just five is appropriate. The landing areas of where tee shots will land is in the 30 yard range with a tiny strip of secondary rough before you encounter the hay. Does Dunluce really needd to follow the lead of what Carnoustie did in '99 with the BO?

One last thing -- no less than 5 people who have played the course have communicated offline to me agreeing that the narrowness of certain holes at Dunluce was overdone and overly penal in nature. Maybe these same people don't have the time, energy or tenacity to have to go through this ping / pong game.

Regarding the overall world ratings of Dunluce I don't dispute it is rated highly -- I just believe the nature of what is there would gain even more ground by a review of what is done now. I laugh when people -- you included -- misrepresent my position to mean Ward wants to see 50-60 wide fairways. That's not at all what I have suggested. Many people here on GCA take the approach that wide fairways promote the playing of different angles to the green. I agree with that. I also believe that spending time for lost balls is a waste and no less than Mackenize agreed with this point. Ian -- compare Dunluce to County Down on the nature of how they reward / penalize driving and you will see the difference. I know I did.

SS1:

Glad you could crawl out of the hole you've been in recently. I'll take my chances as a "D' player anytime. Your charming voice has been missed by so many.

[Ian Dalzell]

Matt,
It is always convenient that those who agree with you do so "offline"  - very amusing

As always, it has been a pleasure to see you get your knickers in a twist and fight your stance no matter what the issue is.  I feel the fairway widths are appropriate and you don't

Ciao

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
Why do you seem to have the same problems as of late? (Everyone openly disagreeing with you as well as you disagreeing with EVERYONE?)

Ian, Honestly, I would just let it go. When Matt gets like this (all of the time) it is just not worth the time and effort. You have much better things to do like go out and enjoy the fantastic Hidden Creek, which, I dream of playing again and again and again someday, everyday. The course is a gem for me. Much more enjoyable then arguing with someone that clearly has issues with all of us--as if we even cared!

SS1, Glad to have you back. And the great thanks to both of you (Ian) for the great time at Pat's excellent get-together last May. The only problem was that it was a two or three day event, so we could enjoy the course that much more. The hospitality and THE GOLF couldn't have been any better!

(Well, maybe Mother Nature could have gifted us springtime in South Jersey a couple two or three weeks earlier!)

[Mike Worth]

Tom.  Thanks for welcoming me back from my hole.  I cannot take credit for Pat Mucci's gathering here at HC, that was all Pat's doing and I was not present.