Cruden Bay proposes dramatic changes to holes 4, 14,15 and 16

[Frank Pont]

As a keen participant of the game of golf, a golf architect and a Cruden Bay member I just got a rather disturbing letter in the mail from the club. Since I am an overseas member of Cruden Bay I got their annual financial statement today, which includes a detailed message from the greens committe.

In it they announced that they had asked an architect (Ken Moodie) for advice on the course last year. In his report the architect makes a number of recommendations (I use the exact words as used in the letter):

"Specificallly the architects report addressed the following areas of the course:

- redisign of the 4th hole, taking into consideration that the existing medal tee may be under threat of erosion and would require expensive engineering works to be made stable

- redesign the 16th green to strengthen the hole, make it fairer to good golf shots and to move it away from the the line of any extended 8th hole tee shot

- addition of a new par 3 hole at the end of the golf course after the 12th, to utilise the ground already owned by the club thus allowing us to take the 15th out of play

- redesign of the 14th green and approach, to strengthen the hole and to eliminate some of the blindness from the hole.

The intention at this stage would be for any works to commence at the end of the playing season if the members give their support to any proposals"

I am still shocked a couple of hours after reading this letter! The holes mentioned here (holes 4, 14, 15 and 16) are not only among the best at Cruden, they are among some of the most famous and characterfull in the world of golf.

Redesign hole 4 because it is expensive to repair an eroding tee?

Redesign and strengthen the green of the 16th hole and make it fairer?

Make a new par 3 to take the (worldfamous) blind par 3 hole 15 out of play?

Redesign the green and approach of the 14th hole (the worldfamous bathtub green) to eliminate some of the blindness of the hole?


Even though I do not know more of the details of the proposal, from what I read here I already find it hard to believe the proposed changes are serious. But maybe I am to critical or missing something here, and therefore am very interested in what you guys think of all of this!

In any case the greens committe ends the letter with: "any comments that you may have at this stage would of course be more than welcome". I hope many members and other golfers and architects who have a warm place in their hart for Cruden will follow this call!

[Paul_Turner]

The same team that rebunkered Coombe Hill and missed the mark by a wide margin.

[ed_getka]

I think the only changes I could support at Cruden Bay would be to add some interest to some of the flatter greens, but I certainly wouldn't let anyone touch #4.
    I would be very interested in hearing what some of the architects who post hear would change if they were asked to "improve" the course.
Frank,
   Thanks for posting this, if can remember I will try to email George Wallace and see what his thoughts are about the situation. In rereading your initial post I notice that you are an architect yourself. What changes would you propose if asked?

[Evan_Green]

As a keen participant of the game of golf, a golf architect and a Cruden Bay member I just got a rather disturbing letter in the mail from the club.

Frank

Will you remain a member of Cruden if they make these changes?

[Frank Pont]

I have a very high regard for Simpson, having played many of his courses on the European continent. In my humble opinion he was as good as Colt, and maybe even a bit more creative (and mad perhaps as well...).

When I restore Colt courses I go for the soft touch, focus on bunker and green complex restoration, look for good tee positions that add length if required without significantly changing the strategy of the hole.

In the case of Cruden Bay I think the course is unique because of the unorthodox way Simpson and Fowler used the terrain to create some very unusual holes. Its not so much the bunkering or greens that catches your attention (although some of the greens such as green 3 and 6 are very clever), its the unusual and smart little things (such as the fact that its very difficult to keep your ball on the green on the 16th green, esspecially with a tail wind when you effectively only have a landing area of a few m2, but when you miss the green at the back you have an exciting chip/put back. Is this UNFAIR?).

What would I change? The only hole on the course I really do not like is the 9th, which in my opinion is so bland that you almost would think Simpson put it in the round to make you realise how exciting the other holes are. Holes 10, 12 and 18 are good but not great and all the other holes are very very good!

To change the 9th is very difficult, and probably would require significant shaping/earthmoving. Maybe move the tee back to the right again towards where the current path leads up from the 8th green and make the hole a short right dogleg par 5 playing into the prevailing wind, with a lower and higher split level fairway...... I'll give it some thought, and maybe I should offer the club to my views....

[Frank Pont]

As a keen participant of the game of golf, a golf architect and a Cruden Bay member I just got a rather disturbing letter in the mail from the club.

Frank

Will you remain a member of Cruden if they make these changes?

I don't know, I love the place but this is cutting into the heart and character of the course. I guess I would, but it would hurt every time I went there.

Would you?

[Evan_Green]

As a keen participant of the game of golf, a golf architect and a Cruden Bay member I just got a rather disturbing letter in the mail from the club.

Frank

Will you remain a member of Cruden if they make these changes?

I don't know, I love the place but this is cutting into the heart and character of the course. I guess I would, but it would hurt every time I went there.

Would you?

I would probably feel the same way you do. It would hurt me to back and not see the course the way it is now. Take a look at the pics I just posted in the parallel thread and you'll see I absolutely love those holes.

[David_Tepper]

Frank -

I don't know how long you have been following this Discussion Group, but the possibility of these changes at Cruden Bay was raised & discussed here 3 or 4 months ago. If you scroll back a good bit thru the prior posts, you should be able to find the previous post on this topic.

May be someone will be able to find it and link it to this post.

DT    

[ed_getka]

Frank,
  #9 is the hole up on the hill that plays downhill to the open green right? Why can't there be something like a central bunker out in the fairway or in front of the green that makes you choose a way around?
   This was the only hole I played in 10 days in Scotland where it rained (poured actually) so I don't remember exactly, but it did seem to be  a bland filler hole.

[Paul_Turner]

I think a lot of the quirkier stuff at Cruden Bay predates Simpson?

[Doug Wright]

I don't know how long you have been following this Discussion Group, but the possibility of these changes at Cruden Bay was raised & discussed here 3 or 4 months ago. If you scroll back a good bit thru the prior posts, you should be able to find the previous post on this topic.

May be someone will be able to find it and link it to this post.

David,

Here's the thread I started after I returned from Scotland last fall. I heard this from a member I met at an area bar. I think the area behind the 12th green could lend itself to an excellent par 3, and I'm not a fan of the 15th. I also heard the 16th green would be moved closer to the shore--I'm less excited about that. As for the proposed changes to the 4th and 14th (neither of which I heard about), all I can say is  

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=20783;start=msg375809#msg375809

 

[Brian_Ewen]

Sad news but hardly surprising . Thanks for passing along Frank .

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=21545;start=msg394645#msg394645

I think the thread that David talks about is this one . It was a shame that Mr Cooper only posted the once .

Best Regards
Brian

[Robert Thompson]

The changes to Cruden Bay will not make the golf course better. Part of its success resides in its quirky nature. And what is this renewed emphasis on fairness. Vastly overrated.

[Mike_Cirba]

This is the first I've heard of such insanity.  Doesn't the club have any idea why so many folks are so fond of the course??!

In the words of Tommy, I'd rather have fiery hot needles inserted in my eyes than see courses like Cruden Bay changed to meet some modern idea of fairness and challenge.

Just totally, totally depressing...

[Frank Pont]

I think a lot of the quirkier stuff at Cruden Bay predates Simpson?

Paul, you are right, some of the quirky stuff was there before Simpson/Fowler.

Reading from the Cruden 100 yr book it says that 14 and 15 are Tom Morris original holes and that holes 4, 8 and 16 are Tom Simpson. Hole 8 already existed but Simpson moved the green further up on a plateau between the dunes.

It also said that Simpson critiqued the Morris layout for the fact that many of the Morris greens were laid out in simple places.

Overal the holes by architect

Simpson 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,11,13,16,17,18
Morris 9,10,12,14,15

[ForkaB]

Frantk

The Cruden Bay website lists these as the original OTM holes.

Hole yards Hole yards
1 213 10 500
2 323 11 344
3 296 12 293
4 251 13 239
5 315 14 271
6 310 15 288
7 280 16 229
8 213 17 417
9 208 18 300
total 2409 total 2881

Looking at the current scorecard, I can't see many of them as being one of these "originals."  Could we have some clarification, please?  Thanks in advance.

[T_MacWood]

I did a little bit of research on Cruden Bay when I was researching Simpson and I'm not sure the entire story there is known.

I'm not sure if Simpson spent his holidays at Cruden Bay or what, but his name was associated with the club early on, pre 1910. He wrote an article on the course in 1909 and his name appears at competitions before and after that date (as does Fowler after 1910).

I believe the first major redesign of CB took place around 1908 - Simpson wrote that he was impressed with the architects work. In 1911 Fowler wrote an article on plasticine green models in 1911 and said he had been introduced to the idea by Simpson at CB. This is probably when their partnership was formed.

I suspect Fowler carried out the redesign in 1908, most likely assisted by Simpson. I wonder if it was a similar case to what Colt found when he first visited MacKenzie at his home in Leeds.

The most common date for Simpson at CB is 1926. I could not find anything to confirm if there was a second redesign of the course at that time. I suspect there was based upon the drawings in the 'Architectural Side of Golf' in 1928.

[ward peyronnin]

Frank

I just opened my notice from the club today. I was impressed at first at the club's committment to restore the greens to a more traditional links type surface by a thoughtful considered multiple fescue overseeding program. Then my jaw dropped when i read about the changes.

Does anyone have any suggestions short of flying over for an as yet undated "EGM" meeting for an overseas member to be heard? I know all politics is local and I hate to get the fur up.

I have thought about priniting out the comments here on  GCA and forwarding with a cover letter expressing my opinion. Unles anyone can suggest something better please let your voice be read on this thread.According to their fincl stmnt 37% of their gross income is from temp members. surely they will listen.


Ward Peyronnin
 

[Jeff Fortson]

I sometimes wonder if many of the members at the great courses of Scotland really realize what gems they have.  Having played Cruden Bay many times over the years, I would be very disappointed with the proposed changes.  But, it won't be the first time.  I was there a couple of years ago and had the opportunity to play with the outgoing captain of the club.  On the 7th hole I commented on the fairway bunkers having been removed.  I considered them to be very strategic and maybe the best bunkers on the course.  The captain commented that he and a few others had never liked those bunkers and HE had made the decision to eliminate them.  I was speechless!  Much of the allure of Cruden Bay is its quirkiness, and I would hate to see these changes take place.
Ron

[Ross Cooper]

Hi folks -  Well Where do I start?

First an apology for neglecting the discussion board after my initial posting back in January - wow - that long ago! Unfortunately (well not for me) I started a new job and my attention has been devoted else where.

Secondly, thanks to all the contributors who joined the discussion/debate in the interim period - it has made interesting reading for me over the last hour or so.

I will attempt to address as many of the points raised in the discussions as I can - but not right just now whilst the masters is on tv.

Frank P - thanks, I rec'd your letter this week via the club and will reply to you under separate cover  - didn't realise we had an architect in the club membership.

One thing I'd like to correct at the moment is the fact that the architect Ken Moodie was brought in to look at proposals suggested by the club and not to identify proposals for improving the course. I will go into great detail as to why the proposals were suggested - which may not be clear to those who have not played Cruden Bay or have played it only once or twice. An important point to remember is that whilst we rely heavily on visitor income (in the accounts as temporary members) is that CB is a members club first and foremost and it is their opinion which utimately counts  - albeit with expert advice.

I look forward to adding to this discussion shortly.

Ross

Gary D - I will say hi to Ken - the chap with the tie!
Ed- G - don't believe everyting George W tells you!
Brian E - do you play in the NE?

[Mark Pearce]

In view of the recent thread on CB, wouldn't it be good to have gotten the full explanation promised by Mr Cooper for the changes?  It seems that at least the proposed changes to 14 are taking place.

[Philippe Binette]

It really seems that they are trying to fix what ain't broken.

Yes it's true, 14th 15th and 16th aren't conventional, are weird.... but are people playing golf for playing always the same 180 yards par 3 from an uphill tee to a green protected by a bunker n each side.

14th is a blind approach, but to a receptive green (it's a great driving hole)
15th is the coolest thing ever (maybe too hard for the average player (a forward could be built for the looser who doesnt't accept the challenge).
16th it is what it is

[Gary Daughters]

Mark,

If you haven't already, check out Ran's interview with Frank Pont.

It's still a bit mysterious to me.  They're adding a "spare" hole?

[Robert Thompson]

I will go into great detail as to why the proposals were suggested - which may not be clear to those who have not played Cruden Bay or have played it only once or twice. An important point to remember is that whilst we rely heavily on visitor income (in the accounts as temporary members) is that CB is a members club first and foremost and it is their opinion which utimately counts  - albeit with expert advice.

I find it fascinating that Cruden Bay would make such a change, or that someone with the club would be so near sighted. Truth is I've never met anyone who made the trip to Cruden Bay who found the quirky bits anything other than intriguing and most had the same response I did -- they wanted to go back. Considering most of these folks were paying 60 or 70 pounds for their round, and return time and again, to remove the charm from the course could hurt the club's revenue. Sure, the members count most, but if the visitors stop returning, it'll hit those members right in the pocket book. Perhaps they should have done some market research, but Mr. Cooper's comments seem to ignorant of the fact that if those visitors stay away, the club will have bigger issues than the 15th green.

Nothing had been done when I was there in 2006, and I know a couple of people who are returning soon, so we'll see. I must admit the tees on 15 and 16 strike me as a liability issue -- but that is a North American perspective.

[Don Dinkmeyer]

Having never played Cruden Bay, but following this thread by members and those who have played, I am struck by the absolutely authentic shock everyone has at the proposed changes.

Its like someone looking at your daughter's appearance and saying "Here's how we can make her perfect - of course she won't look the same, but you can still use the same name".

Count me as one of the shocked and saddened if it were to occur...