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.


Mark_F

Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« on: December 24, 2005, 10:12:09 PM »
The 'Cups Country' region of the Mornington Peninsula an hour or so south of Melbourne has seen a lot of golf course construction in the past decade or so.  

Whilst the ubiquitous TWP have snaffled a fair bit of the action and come up with wincingly similar courses - crap - Greg Norman and the team of Doak/Clayton have managed to secure a bit of work for themselves too and come up with something totally different, although the land of Norman's Moonah Course at The National and Doak/Clayton's land at The Golf Club St Andrews Beach couldn't be more different.

Much of the Gunnamatta course at St Andrews Beach is between or alongside steep dunes, whereas the Moonah course landforms are much smaller than I had anticipated. The Moonah course is straight from the British Isles, aside from the sun shining, obviously.  And the clouds of flies.

Interestingly, deception is at play on both courses, much more so at St Andrews Beach, but nevertheless at Moonah too.  The first hole at the Moonah course appears unreasonably narrow from the tee, yet widens out behind the foreboding dune in front of you to a pretty wide fairway, a theme repeated somewhat throughout the course, whereas the Doak/Clayton deception tends to be in wondering whereabouts the flagstick is exactly located on the greens.

Another favourite deception at St Andrews Beach is that on five or six holes the flagstick can be (just) temptingly seen fluttering behind a dune from the tee, luring the golfer into heading straight for it, which is usually the worst angle.  There is a lot more thought required to play the Gunnamatta course - words such as unorthodox and quirky spring to mind, whereas the Moonah course is more straightforward, and obviously favours unthinking brutes. ;D

One of the biggest differences to me was the greens.  Every one on the Gunnamatta course is unique in size, shape and contour.  They also look as if they were simply there already. Conversely, I thought many of the Moonah course greens were repetitious, and obviously constructed - especially the sixth.

Doak and Clayton have a love of great short par fours, and Gunnamatta features several, all with multiple options to play.  Norman's Moonah course on the other hand, features one, the ninth, which appears to be there merely to link the eighth and tenth holes. The sixth and eleventh could also be classified as short/medium holes I guess, and whilst the eleventh is a beauty, the sixth too appears to have been forced into place to make the whole thing work.

Interestingly, on a very long - 6576 or so metres - course, Norman has gone for a mix of par threes, from short, to a couple of medium, and one long, whereas the Gunnamatta, a relatively puny 6070 metres, has two bloody long, one pretty long, and one medium par three.

Interestingly also, is that both courses have an (excessively) long par four to torture. On the Moonah course, it's all of 447 metres, slightly uphill to boot, and into the prevailing wind.  On Gunnamatta, its 452 metres, with a blind drive and 90% of the time into a howling gale so strong members really need mountain climbing cleats on their shoes to stay afoot. Neither work as par fours, or par fives for that matter. Pity, as there is a much better potential tee location at Gunnamatta than the two already there that would make it the hole it should be.

The bunkering also couldn't be more different.  The Moonah course's resemble ruggedly excavated pits, whereas those on the Gunnamatta are elegantly sculpted but nevertheless appear like natural scars.

The Moonah course is long and difficult.  The Gunnamatta, short and still quite difficult, although in a not so immediately challenging way.





 


TEPaul

Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2005, 10:41:31 PM »
Mark Ferguson:

Deception??

Visual decepttion??

Are you serious?? Thank God. In my opinion visual deception of all types is the logical and future next level of true quality golf course architecture.

Visual deception is the way of Nature before she was adulterated by things like golf course architects and landscape design "Art Principles" and the preconceptions of golfers. It's about time---Thank God.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2005, 10:43:08 PM by TEPaul »

Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2005, 03:29:37 PM »
  Mark, thanks for the insights and fine reporting.    

Love your remarks . . .   " There is a lot more thought required to play the Gunnamatta course - words such as unorthodox and quirky spring to mind, whereas the Moonah course is more straightforward, and obviously favours unthinking brutes. ;D "

Is this the concensus of those who have played them?

 And . . .  "On Gunnamatta, its ("excessively long par 4") 452 metres, with a blind drive and 90% of the time into a howling gale . . .  Pity, as there is a much better potential tee location at Gunnamatta than the two already there that would make it the hole it should be."  

 Perhaps a good place for "relaxed elasticity" ?  

  Also, as Tom Paul stated, "perceptions" may be the next  large exclamation for future golf hole design/play concerns. (And hopefully not just marketing lingo.)
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2005, 04:10:06 PM »
Mark Ferguson:

Deception??

Visual decepttion??

Are you serious?? Thank God. In my opinion visual deception of all types is the logical and future next level of true quality golf course architecture.

Visual deception is the way of Nature before she was adulterated by things like golf course architects and landscape design "Art Principles" and the preconceptions of golfers. It's about time---Thank God.

Tom,

Haven't golf course architects employed some form of visual deception all along. This statement of yours is curious to me. I thought visual is and always has been one of the bedrock principles of golf course architecture.

Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2005, 07:57:52 PM »
Mark, from your My Home Course report of Gunnamatta, what exactly does the 9th green do to get described as " . . . a (buried) epileptic break dancing hippopotamus."?  Any closeup pictures or further illucidating descriptions of it? The whole place looks special.

 
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

Mark_F

Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2005, 03:35:23 PM »
Tom Paul,

All right, there's not need to take the piss in quite that manner.

I was surprised that Norman engineered so much into his course that wasn't straightforward - maybe I am guilty of making erroneous assumptions about the designing ethos of player/architects.

Obviously?? Deception is widely 'practiced' on classic courses?

Norbert:

It all depends on the person.  Some love Gunnamatta's quirkiness, others are exasperated by it.  Same with Moonah, I guess.  Some like the challenge, others find it uninteresting and straightforward.

Re; the 9th green - it is a reverse tier green, with the high front falling down into the lower back.  It's great fun, and totally unique, but others don't see it that way.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2006, 01:46:00 AM »
Bump for David Kelly.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

George Blunt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Norman and Doak on the Mornington Peninsula
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2006, 06:20:32 AM »
Mark,

An interesting "compare and contrast".  

I have played both, and agree they have much to offer.

The biggest difference, to me anyway, was when you complete 18 at Moonah, you collapse into your chair, order a beer, and say, "Thank God I'm Still Alive" whereas at SAB you drown a quick one and start scheming about your next 18!

I hesitate to use the word "unique", but I have never seen such wide driving areas as at SAB; but, here's the cool part, the width almost compounds the difficulties - it can be so hard to get your bearings on the tee that the best lines are not immediately obvious - a huge tick in my book.  As you note, you can find yourself with a perfect lie, on the fairway, and wonder how on earth you can hold the green, let alone get near the flag.

I agree to a certain extent that the long par 4 at SAB is too tough, particularly the carry off the tee, but once the carry is completed it is a very forgiving, but long, 2nd shot.  5 on this hole is certainly not beyond, say, a 12 handicapper.  (now watch me eat my words next weekend!)

I am not sure that I agree with you regarding the long hole at Moonah - yes it is a brute, but it is a fairly straightforward 5 shot hole in most conditions - if this makes it a bad par 4 so be it.  Mike C explained to me that Norman's routing didn't leave him much alternative by the time he came back up to that high end of the property.

An interesting hole at Moonah is the semi-blind par three (12th?), which reminds me a little bit of Friars Head's 10th.  Quirky, rare, but eminently "playable" (whatever that means) and loads of fun.

I think both courses require multiple rounds, under different conditions, before they display their true character, which is surely a sign of worthy course.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Regards,

George

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back