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.


David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« on: November 01, 2006, 11:53:14 AM »
I just finished taking my first look at Finegan's new book and it's astounding! What an effort! The photo's are first class and the writing by Finegan, as usual, was very entertaining. I think the book can double as a weight for a workout routine. ;D ;D ;D

I did notice that he has not changed his stance on Carnoustie. I have not played there (haven't made my first trip yet across the pond), but I have heard a few others make similiar comments about the course. Does anyone have an opinion on why they like or don't like the course?  Do negative comments in general come from possibly the course not being hard by the sea? Do positive comments stem from the Hogan mystique?(Which obviously should not have any bearing on the actual course itself). Any thoughts?
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Tom Huckaby

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2006, 12:02:35 PM »
I don't have the Finegan book - what was his take?

As for me... I've had a hate-love relationship with Carnoustie.  That is, first two times I played it, I hated it.  Too hard, no scenic beauty, very little charm.

Then I went back and played it again....

And found a lot to love.  It is tough, but not unfairly so.  There is a lot more beauty to be found if one's mind is opened.  The final four holes are maddening, but in a wry, good way I think.  There are greensites that are brilliant.  I now fall on the "love" side.  I'd just never expect to card a good score there.

BTW, side question:  

Do positive comments stem from the Hogan mystique?(Which obviously should not have any bearing on the actual course itself).

Why SHOULDN'T the Hogan mystique - as well as the Van de Velde tragedy - have a bearing on one's assessment of the course?  To me anything that one feels counts, and is silly to discount.  See my post on the "Lift and Separate" thread for further explanation....

TH

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2006, 12:18:55 PM »
Tom, I simply meant that just because Hogan won his only Open there doesn't mean that that in itself makes the course great. (And I'm a huge Hogan fan) I think that that can add to the overall experience, but it seems sometimes people will laud the course simply because of that, which isn't enough for me to go and play it if that's ALL that I hear. Which is why I started this thread to begin with. I appreciate your comments on your experience there and why you came to like it and that's what means more to me. The experiences of fellow golfers whose opinions I value. ;) ;) ;D ;D
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Andy Scanlon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2006, 12:24:23 PM »
I have only played it once, but I thoroughly enjoyed the course.  I agree that it is difficult but not unfairly so.  I don't think the fact that it is not hard by the sea should be a detraction -- Muirfield isn't either (though I am not insinuating that Carnoustie is in Muirfield's class, in my opinion).  It has some wonderful holes -- I particularly enjoyed 2, 6, 14, 15, and 17.  It's historical significance doesn't hurt, but historical significance probably helps a lot of other courses as well.
All architects will be a lot more comfortable when the powers that be in golf finally solve the ball problem. If the distance to be gotten with the ball continues to increase, it will be necessary to go to 7,500 and even 8000 yard courses.  
- William Flynn, golf architect, 1927

Tom Huckaby

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2006, 12:25:05 PM »
David:  understood.  I just do continue to believe that things like the "Hogan mystique" are silly to discount.  If you feel it, it counts.  Now of course this should not make up the totality - I'd say 5% is about right.  So yes, those who make this the totality are silly as well. But this belongs on the Lift and Separate thread.

So back to Carnoustie....

I do think a lot there depends on the golfer and his mindset.  If you go in looking for obvious scenic beauty or compare it to others in this respect, you'll be disappointed.  If you go in trying to match your handicap or getting pissed if you don't, you'll not like it either.  But if you have an open mind, heart, soul... I think there is a lot to love there.

I do hate the garish American-ish hotel behind 18 though.  Nice place to stay, comfortable if overpriced.. but man it ruins a lot of the feel.

TH

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2006, 12:38:15 PM »
Carnoustie is as good as any course in the UK (or for that matter, the world).  It gets a bum rap, IMHO, for the following reasons:

1.  Location.  It is not near anything of particular interest other than itself.

2.  Location.  Whilst sitting on a superb bit of linksland, that land is bounded by a very average small town on one side and uninspiring dunes on the other

3.  Location.  Being in a relatively uninspiring and ininteresting environment, it is a course that has not been blessed by the posh people that have made other courses (e.g. Dornoch, St. Andrews, Prestwick, etc. famous)

It is the Rodney Dangerfield of great golf courses.

That being said, I cannot think of a course I know that is better than Carnoustie, and I can think of very many which are more highly "rated" which are inferior.  Why?

1.  An incredible variety of holes and strategeis required to play them
2.  A classic routing that never takes you far from the last green to the next tee
3.  An intimacy that makes you know that you are playing a course and not just a collection of golf holes.
4.  Amazing holes such as 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, and 18 that blow away any of CB MacDonald's early 20th century "templates."

Today's designers ought to spend less time looking at the usual suspects and spend some time at Carnoustie.  We'd get better new courses if that were the case.

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2006, 12:39:13 PM »
Like it, love it

Tom Huckaby

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2006, 12:39:21 PM »
Bravo, Rich.  Exceedingly well-said.

So when do we get the book?

 ;D

Gary Daughters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #8 on: November 01, 2006, 12:40:59 PM »

FYI Carnousite is running a pretty fabulous deal.

http://www.carnoustiecountry.com/carn2/dream_ticket/dreamevents.htm
THE NEXT SEVEN:  Alfred E. Tupp Holmes Municipal Golf Course, Willi Plett's Sportspark and Driving Range, Peachtree, Par 56, Browns Mill, Cross Creek, Piedmont Driving Club

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #9 on: November 01, 2006, 12:43:22 PM »
Bravo, Rich.  Exceedingly well-said.

So when do we get the book?

 ;D

Huck

Goes to print in December.  On sale January.

Rich
« Last Edit: November 01, 2006, 12:44:34 PM by Rich Goodale »

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #10 on: November 01, 2006, 12:44:03 PM »
Huck:

Finegan, writing in "Blasted Heaths and Blessed Greens," (written prior to the Open returning there in '99) doesn't think much of the course. In short, he thinks it's long but boring, difficult but not thrilling, set on poor land, with something of an artificial, forced nature. Excerpting here:

-- "Pure difficulty, esp. when based largely on length, is scarcely a criterion for excellence, to say nothing of greatness."

-- From the 4th hole on, he calls it "a vast meadowy plain" devoid of true links qualities, "monotonously pedestrian" with holes neither "memorable or inviting."

-- Greens are "unmemorable" and "billiard-table extensions of the fairways."

-- Bunkers are fashioned and placed "in the most calculated and artificial fashion."

He does give it some due, saying the opening three holes are solid links holes. And he says about half the course is first-rate or outstanding, and he really likes 17. But he thinks two of its most famous holes -- the 14th, with the Spectacles bunkers, and the par 3 16th -- are mediocre and over-rated (he says the 16th is the most overrated par 3 "in the world"!!). He, too, had similar thoughts to yours -- didn't like it at first, and thought it might be an acquired taste. But, no, after several plays, "this historic links simply sits there, flat, severe, dour." But, in typical, gentlemanly Finegan fashion, he admits his opinion is probably in the minority, and he encourages folks to play it.

My own take, when I walked it a few days prior to the Open in '99, was somewhat similar. I actually do like the look of several of the pushed-up bunkers, and the ending trio struck me as pretty challenging for the game's elite. But I walked TOC a few days later, and to me there is no comparison (maybe that's an unfair one to make, but they are in pretty select company as rota courses, and thus invite comparisons). I do think the '99 Open was set up in the extreme, and in some cases over the top -- too long, too narrow, and too penal off the fairway, for a links subject to severe weather. So my judgement is probably clouded by that. But, in the end, it didn't look fun -- the golfing equivalant of castor oil.


Geoffrey Childs

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #11 on: November 01, 2006, 12:46:38 PM »
I agree with Rich.  Carnousie as a golf course is superb.  His analysis but for the rip at old CB is spot on.

The course is very playable but the hazards are well placed and exert penalty.  The greens and surrounds are among the best I've seen though without quirk.

I watched the pros play it in 50 mph gusts in the 1996 Scottish Open and it was highly entertaining and yet the course still played well.  I played myself the next day under those tournament conditions and it was easier to get around then when I play Westchester CC the Friday before the pros come to play The Classic.

Tom Huckaby

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #12 on: November 01, 2006, 12:46:45 PM »
Rich:

Fantastic - make sure to remind us - I shall be among the first purchasers again - I love these books you're doing.


Phil:

Thanks.  I would guess Finegan's view - and yours - is the majority take on what's come to be called "Carnasty."  And me debating Finegan about a golf course is like me taking on Ali circa 1967 in a boxing match.  So I'm fine to go with his take.   ;D  My personal take just falls along with Rich - who also said way better than I ever could.  But one other thing... I just did find fun there the last two playings.  I guess I went in expecting castor oil, and the more it wasn't like that, the more enjoyable it became.

TH
« Last Edit: November 01, 2006, 12:48:08 PM by Tom Huckaby »

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #13 on: November 01, 2006, 12:49:42 PM »
Phil

Finegan's is generally right about 16 but not 14.  I has all sorts of character, particularly with the new technology.  He is wrong, also to dis 5 and 6--both are great holes in their own ways.

Watch this space.  They have learned their lessons from 1999.  I think the course will blow all of your socks off next year.

Rich

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #14 on: November 01, 2006, 01:05:46 PM »
Sean

You should go back.  It was great in 1978, too, reaardless of what you and Finegan might have thought. :)

Maybe the BBGE foundation might comp you on the green fee?  Carnoustie is miles better than Pinehurst #2, not that Barney would know...... :o

Rich

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #15 on: November 01, 2006, 01:07:04 PM »
Rich:

I do hope the set-up is different than in '99. I think I've said this in a previous thread, but a bunch of golf nuts were walking around it during the days leading up to the '99 Open, and -- to a person -- we thought with any kind of weather/wind, the winning score would not be lower than +10. Van de Velde really did play 71 of the most brilliant holes of links golf in recent history. (The weather for the Open that year really was pretty benign.)

For me, the length and the narrowness of the fairway corridors in '99 -- combined with traditional firm, links turf and the distinct possibility of moderate-to-significant wind -- made it seem like an arbitrary course. That is, it was more a matter of luck than skill whether your ball landed in the fairway, and it was set up so long (this was '99, predating some of the technological advances yielding greater length) that you had to take driver off many tees. In that respect, it differed than Hoylake this year, where the top two golfers -- Tiger and DiMarco -- took two very different approaches to tee shots. I don't think course set-ups that yield arbitrary results (as opposed to very tough set-ups, ala Shinnecock or Pinehurst for recent US Opens) make for very good championship golf.

How do you think Carnoustie will handle this re. the length issue? Wider corridors? More recovery from rough (you didn't have to stray very far from the fairways in '99 to get into some truly penal areas...)


ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #16 on: November 01, 2006, 01:11:29 PM »
Phil

The corridors will be wider and the rough wispier.  The course will be a lot faster and firmer.  This year they stopped watering around June 1, and by mid-late July it looked like Hoylake.  This was all done under R&A orders.  Mother Nature willing, it will be a fun Open next year.

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #17 on: November 01, 2006, 01:20:46 PM »
I played it once with my wife some 12 years ago in absolutely miserable conditions.  40 mile an hour winds and horizontal, heavy rain all the way round.  I played like a dog and failed to break 100.  We both absolutely loved it and we had no hesitation in going straight back in to the starters hut to see if we could play a second round despite the fact that we were, even in our waterproofs, soaking wet (sadly we couldn't).  It is in the top five courses I have played that I want to get back to.

For what it's worth (and I know I'm about to commit an act of heresy) I enjoyed my round at Carnoustie more than the one game I have had at TOC and more than I have enjoyed playing North Berwick.  I expect to be asked to leave the school for saying that but the truth will out.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #18 on: November 01, 2006, 01:27:05 PM »
Sean

Finegan lies or has been misinformed (or drinking too much of Tom Paul's merlot).  There is very little significant which has been done to Carnoustie.  The landing area of 3 has been radically changed--it is cool, I think, though it is controversial (it is a mini-17 without a burn, if you can imagine that...)!.  The fairway bunkering at 6 has pretty much reverted to what it was after a silly experiment--Hogan's Alley is restored.  The trees behind 6 and 7 greens have been removed, making them more linksy looking.  There is some new mounding to the right of 17 and to the left of 18, mostly for safety and crowd control.  Neither is really in play, unless you are Van de Velde!

ForkaB

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #19 on: November 01, 2006, 01:49:06 PM »
SEan

Most of that is highly exaggerated.  One of the cool things about Carnoustie is that it is constantly changing, but not in the titainic waysz that you seem to think that Finegan has uincovered.  Bunkers have been heigtened and humps added here and there, but the course is very much as it was when Hogan won in 1953.  Greens have been rebuilt but only barely moved.

The primum mobile has been John Philp, the head greenkeeper, although Hawtree has advised on some of the more recent work.

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #20 on: November 01, 2006, 01:49:38 PM »
fwiw, a lot of great champions have won Opens there:  Cotton, Hogan, Player, Watson

199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Tom Huckaby

Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #21 on: November 01, 2006, 01:51:22 PM »
fwiw, a lot of great champions have won Opens there:  Cotton, Hogan, Player, Watson



Add:  Paul Lawrie???

A Sesame Street song comes to mind....

"one of these things is not like the other, which one is different, do you know?...."

Interesting - one could make an indictment of the 1999 setup based on this and this alone....

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #22 on: November 01, 2006, 01:57:09 PM »
fwiw, a lot of great champions have won Opens there:  Cotton, Hogan, Player, Watson

Add:  Paul Lawrie???

A Sesame Street song comes to mind....

"one of these things is not like the other, which one is different, do you know?...."

Interesting - one could make an indictment of the 1999 setup based on this and this alone....

I was going to add in exactly what you wrote Huck, but I figured someone would bring it up!

and wasn't Lawrie 10 back starting the final day?  I think it was the biggest final round comeback in major history

alas, he hasn't done any other great things since then I don't believe...
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #23 on: November 01, 2006, 02:44:00 PM »
I can see by the responses that there is debate as to HOW good the course is. Obviously everyone likes it to some degree or another, it's just interesting to see the varying degree of enthusiasm for the course. I agree the course has produced great champions in the past, but to go along w/ Tom and Paul, '99 was the exception. But I attribute that more to setup than anything.

Ultimately, we all should form our own opinions AFTER playing a course, and I will do likewise. I just wanted to get a general census of the course from the members here. I will say that if I only get there once in my life, and I only have 7-10 days, it may not make the cut of must plays. That maybe wrong on my part, but I think if I only got to play in Scotland once my list would be:

TOC (while there, The New and maybe Kingsbarns)
Royal Dornoch (while there, Brora and Nairn)
Muirfield
North Berwick
Cruden Bay
Royal Aberdeen


I list the courses in no particular order of ranking, I just have in mind of starting in the highlands and working my way down through Aberdeen, on to Fife and then the Lothian area, with additional courses thrown in the mix (Gullane, Dunbar, Levan, Lundin, Crail).

If I do make it back, I would definitely play Carnoustie. Proximity to the sea doesn't make a difference to me, (another great course of links qualities that springs to mind is Ganton in England and that is not near the sea) the quality of the land and the design does, and most importantly, how fun is it and will I remember it years from now.


"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Daryl David

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Carnoustie-Like it or not?
« Reply #24 on: November 01, 2006, 02:48:52 PM »
David,
Working your way down from the Highlands on the route you are suggesting it would be ashame to not include Carnoustie.  Your A list is perfect and I love the courses you are throwing in along way, but to say you would skip Carnoustie to hit say Ludin or Levin would be a mistake in my book.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back