Castle Course and Those Greens

[Mike Leveille]

I am just back from a trip to Scotland that included a round on the Castle Course.  Though I know the course has been discussed here in some detail, I thought I would pass along the general reaction of our group and the feedback we heard from locals and other visitors.

First of all, everyone in our group generally thought the course was good to very good from tee to green, with the only negatives being an overuse of the grassy mounds in the middle of fairways and some relatively long walks from green to tee, though these were rewarded with some absolutley stunning views.

Our reaction to the greens is a different story.  Each of us thought the greens were unnecessarily over the top and in many cases nothing short of goofy golf.  I do not have any photos, but the mounds and hollows are so severe as to make large portions of the greens unpinnable.  The remaining pinnable portions of the greens are often small plateaus where a chip or putt must be played perfectly or the ball will roll down a giant hill and back to the golfer or, if struck slightly too hard, down a giant hill behind the hole and either far away from the hole or off the green.  Greens that were particularly over the top include 2, 3, 4, 7 (back portion of green only), 12, 14, 15 and 18.

During our stay, we chatted with a number of locals and visitors, and everyone's reaction was similar to that of our group, with most people we spoke with saying that they would not play the course again because of the severity of the greens.  I am not sure of the target audience the Links Trust is trying to attract at the Castle (visitors, locals, a combination of both), but with the current greens (and a hefty greens fee) I would expect that in the next year or two the Castle will become significantly underplayed if something is not done about the greens.

We heard various rumors that the Links Trust is going to re-do at least some of the greens.  If true, it will be interesting to see which ones they re-do, and whether they tweak them or basically start from scratch.

     

[Jeff_Brauer]

Are they any wilder than the Old Course greens?  Those contours haven't stopped people from playing that course for about 500 years.

[Mike Leveille]

Jeff:

In my opinion, the Castle Course's greens are wilder than those on the Old Course and much less playable.  While the Old Course's greens have some huge humps and hollows, between the gigantic size of the Old Course's greens and the fact that there are large areas of the greens that are not severly undulating, they are challenging but very playable.  We did not find that to be the case with the Castle Course's greens, which have all the severe humps and hollows of the Old Course's greens condensed down into greens that are much smaller, with the end result, at least for us, being greens that were challenging but goofy.

Mike

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Whenever I have bumped up my green contours in severity, I get criticized by golfers, and then owners on behalf of golfers, much like you describe the Castle Course. 

One thing I have wondered about the gca's who do wilder greens - and that seems to include many of the minimalists, like Doak and Kidd, etc. is how they will be recieved long term.  CC seems to favor a lot of subtle movement in most cases.

While Golden Age and earlier greens do have a lot of contour, and it looks great, those guys never wanted putts to de-green or shots to the middle of the green be rejected off the green.  Colt wrote "in no case should a ball roll away from the putter like a swine possessed by the devil." 

Short version:  They designed sloping greens for 2-putting like we design flatter greens today.  So, is it right to design 4-6% slopes because they did it even though it makes courses much more difficult than they ever intended?

As to smaller flat pin areas, I think you hit it on the head.  The argument for doing so is that Tour players seem to be getting more accurate - or they are probably just hitting at greens from shorter distances, which increases accuracy.  But, should a new resort course be built for that level of play, or should it be toned back for the accuracy of the typical resort golfer?

Of course, the answer lies all over the map. I hate to think we should stop building challenging courses just because there are already enough of them out there.  But, only 5% of so should be designed to that level.  A strong case could be made theoretically that a new course in St. Andrews ought to be one of those, but the market will ultimately determine that.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Jeff isn't a god part of the problem the ability of Sper's to jack the speeds up?  The old course greens are not that fast and they work fine. 

I can think of dozens of courses where the greens would be great if only slowed down, but when you own a Ferarri mower I guess you just have to prove what it can do.

[Jeff Fortson]

Colt wrote "in no case should a ball roll away from the putter like a swine possessed by the devil." 

That has to be one of the all-time great quotes of GCA.


Jeff F.

[TX Golf]

It sounds like some of the thoughts regarding the Castle course could be interchangeable with those about Tetherow.

Robert

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff isn't a god part of the problem the ability of Sper's to jack the speeds up?  The old course greens are not that fast and they work fine. 

I can think of dozens of courses where the greens would be great if only slowed down, but when you own a Ferarri mower I guess you just have to prove what it can do.

I don't know the grasses or greens construction used at the Castle Course. I got to believe the sand greens are similar to sand at other local cousres. But, if they used newer bents, then they have to be cut lower to survive, and roll smooth. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Colt wrote "in no case should a ball roll away from the putter like a swine possessed by the devil." 

That has to be one of the all-time great quotes of GCA.


Jeff F.

Yeah, thats my all time fave regarding gca!  As to golf in general, the phrase "Mr. Brauer, when you swing, you move everything but your bowels" has always stuck with me......

[Bob_Huntley]

I was visiting my orthopedist yesterday who had returned from a week in Scotland playing the usual courses. The chap can play, only two over in high winds at Carnoustie and a similar score at Muirfield.

He said the greens at the Castle Course were just goofy and he would not care to play there again. Similar views are held my many locals as well. There is much muttering from the Links Trust.

Bob

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pete Dye always said that average golfers actually prefer more contour in their greens than good ones, or at least tour players.  For tour players, its a matter of learning the putting surfaces quickly for a tournament on a course they play once a year.  Average guys who play the same course daily like the variety that a little more contour gives.

Both types of players seem to yelp when contours get really excessive.  For the good player, its hitting five feet from the pin and being rejected back to 50 feet by a tier, etc.  For average players, its constant three putts.  For owners, its speed of play.

Forgetting practical issues, and staying with design ones, can anything really beat a gently rolling green for looking good and generally rewarding a shot closer to the pin with a better chance for birdie? 

How many times a round do we need severely divided greens?  Most tour pros I know would set the upper limit at 4 greens per course with wild contours, decks, tiers, etc.

In some ways, alternating a flat green with a wild one can be just as tough - golfers have to wonder if a putt really has no break in it, if the last one had a lot. 

[Mike Leveille]

Bob:

I assume there is much muttering from the Links Trust, but I cannot see how they could have been taken by surprise that these greens may be too severe.  I would have thought that at some stage of the design process they would have taken a walk around the course and realized, based on nothing more than a quick visual, that the greens were not going to work.

Jeff:

You make a great point about owners having a concern when green contours (or other factors) get so excessive to impact pace of play.  With the severity of the green contours at the Castle, I suspect the average round will end up taking over 4.5 hours and possibly around 5 hours.  That will result in a lot of lost tee times over the course of a year.

Mike

[Brian Phillips]

The course is not designed for the locals it is designed for tourists who will probably only play once a year or even once every two or three years or even less.

Apart from the "Don Kings" in the middle of the fairway the course is superb.  The greens are a bit mad but work no problem if you know how to use the slopes.  The course is being looked by a great Superintendent and he knows that speeds must not get over 8-9 feet.

It is a course that will receive a lot of critics at the start.  I know of one player at the Trust that absolutely loves the course and even plays The Castle more than TOC. 

I played the course in a 4 club wind towards the old toon and had no problems (82) with my putting. My business partner played it in a 4 club wind the other way (away from the toon and towards the 17th tee) and he absolutely loved it as well (85).

To give you an example of the wind, I hit 7 iron to the 17th and Graeme had to hit a 5 wood!

The course is not perfect, I think 20% of the "Don Kings" need to be taken out but I would not touch any of the greens whatsoever.

I agree with what Jeff says about low handicap players, they want flat greens, fast and true greens and anything over a foot in height change is classed as unfair.

The members of the Links Trust mutter about bloody everything different...

[Brian Phillips]

Jeff,

The greens are USGA build and are a basic Bent/Fescue mix, nothing fancy...

[Steve Okula]

Jeff isn't a god part of the problem the ability of Sper's to jack the speeds up?  The old course greens are not that fast and they work fine. 

I can think of dozens of courses where the greens would be great if only slowed down, but when you own a Ferarri mower I guess you just have to prove what it can do.

The tail doesn't wag the dog. If the greens speeds are excessive, it's because that's what the golfers demand. I don't know any supers who would object to a request to slow the greens down.

Today I stimped the greens at my course at 12 feet. This is actually too fast for the contours of the greens, and too fast for the majority of the members. But they have me post the Stimpmeter readings in the clubhouse and take great pride in the speed, even if it means three-putting half the greens.

The Ferrari metaphor does have its place, though. These are some of the members who drive out from Paris in Ferraris, Lambourghinis, Maseratis, and other supercars. Of course, these high-performance machines are completely useless in Parisien traffic. But that's not the point. Fast greens and fast cars are an end in themselves, regardless of whether they provide any enjoyment.

It's the same mentality that makes the French try to cheat their handicap down, rather than up. As far as I can determine, there is no French word to translate "sandbagger" or "bandit". They don't have that concept in their culture. To them the important thing is to have a low handicap on record. Whether or not you can win anything with it is incidental.

[Jeff_Mingay]

The course is not designed for the locals it is designed for tourists who will probably only play once a year or even once every two or three years or even less.

Brian,

I'm not trying to be a smart ass at all, but how do you design differently for "local golfers" versus "tourist golfers"? They're all golfers.

And, wasn't one of the reasons for building the Castle to alleviate congestion on the other Links Trust courses? If so, wouldn't it be ideal if the locals played a few rounds over the Castle, now and then, rather than just the others?

Maybe they are. I don't know... which is why I'm asking.

[Brian Phillips]

Jeff,

I understand what you are saying.  The local golfers love the New course and such more than the other courses in the area.

The Castle course is outside the box with regards the design. 

Local golfers do not want quirky greens, they want basic good old fashioned greens and holes.  In my opinion if the locals are moaning and questioning the design then Paul and David have done a good job.

I don't care what anyone says the course is perfectly playable, the greens fun without being impossible.  It is just going to take time before it is accepted and people learn how to play certain courses.

Back to my comment about tourist golfers....how do you get the tourists to play a brand new build outside of town when you have at least 3 great courses within walking distance of your hotel?  Build a great yet controversial golf course that creates discussion.

I swear, The Castle course is the most fun I have had on a golf course in Scotland and I played North Berwick often during my year in Edinburgh.

I hope they only change the "Don Kings" and nothing else....long live quirkiness, long live crazy greens....

[Brian Phillips]

Jeff,

I understand what you are saying.  The local golfers love the New course and such more than the other courses in the area.

The Castle course is outside the box with regards the design. 

Local golfers do not want quirky greens, they want basic good old fashioned greens and holes.  In my opinion if the locals are moaning and questioning the design then Paul and David have done a good job.

I don't care what anyone says the course is perfectly playable, the greens fun without being impossible.  It is just going to take time before it is accepted and people learn how to play certain courses.

Back to my comment about tourist golfers....how do you get the tourists to play a brand new build outside of town when you have at least 3 great courses within walking distance of your hotel?  Build a great yet controversial golf course that creates discussion.

I swear, The Castle course is the most fun I have had on a golf course in Scotland and I played North Berwick often during my year in Edinburgh.

I hope they only change the "Don Kings" and nothing else....long live quirkiness, long live crazy greens....

We heard the same sort of rumblings from the locals when Kingsbarns was built....it is not a true links, it is too expensive, it will not survive....all mumblings and grumblings from people who hate CHANGE...but now ask a local what they think and they love it..

[Jeff_Mingay]

Brian,

This discussion reminds of of Alister Mackenzie's concern about no one complaining about Cypress Point shortly after it opened... remember, he figured something must be wrong with the design because there were no complaints!

Most of the world's truly great courses are controversial, and polarizing. The Castle course certainly seems to be both.

Can't wait to see it/play it.

[Rob Rigg]

Based on the Tetherow and Castle threads it is apparent that Kidd is pretty good at stirring the pot with his course designs.

Mohawks and challenging greens are his new calling card (I do not recall hearing that either trait is evident at Bandon Dunes?).

The greens at Tetherow have some severe undulations but I think they are fair and actually quite tame if you are on the right level.

Can't wait to check out the greens at the Castle - sounds like they may be even more challenging.

When is Matt Ward getting over to Scotland for the side by side comparison?

[Melvyn Morrow]

I am not a local but my family comes from the old grey town, so my heart is in St Andrews.

Every few years money talks and destroys a little bit more of the quality of the town. The appalling mess they have made of the Step Rock Swimming Pool, now a shadow of its former self and turned into a Sea Life mess. The greed to create a 7th course on land that was never meant to become a golf course. Its there as I have mentioned previously to milk money out of the name of St Andrews. It’s not really part of the town but miles out passed the harbour and caravan sites. 

Play the course, enjoy if it pleases you, but don’t compare it to the real St Andrews courses. It’s modern, it’s totally artificial, it’s certainly not the type of course I would play and I certainly would not pay those high Green Fees for this young pretender which in truth has very little in common with St Andrews
Golf.

It’s there for money, to make money and to overcharge every player mad enough to play the course. But the hype will continue its momentum, more will want to see what it’s all about and will pay the Piper. St Andrews in the end may be the poorer for it construction as it’s not a true Scottish Course IMO.

The Castle Course is in Scotland, it is located outside St Andrew. Please, please is there anyone out there willing to buy it and ship it out of Fife spade by spade and erect it in another country – as someone did with old London Bridge. 

Well in truth IOMHO

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

Have any changes been made since the Castle Course opened?

[Ed Brzezowski]

Have any changes been made since the Castle Course opened?

Yes and if what I heard in July is true more changes are coming. Played the week it opened,then in 10 and last in 13. I forget the hole number but it is a par five on the front, the left side had been softened considerably. Yes the greens have some slope but our guys enjoyed them.

[MClutterbuck]

Have any changes been made since the Castle Course opened?

Yes and if what I heard in July is true more changes are coming. Played the week it opened,then in 10 and last in 13. I forget the hole number but it is a par five on the front, the left side had been softened considerably. Yes the greens have some slope but our guys enjoyed them.

I could not find a newer thread discussing changes at the Castle Course. DMK stated recently that continuos changes have made the course much better. Is there anybody here that can discuss these changes and if they believe the course is now much better?


After much consideration, I chose the Castle Course as the second mandatory course to get to book the Old Course. Hoping it is fun.

[Brad Tufts]

I took the same tact my last visit to St. Andrews in 2011.

There's a part of me that enjoys the controversial courses, so I can join in on the conversation.

I knew going in that the New would probably be the clear #2 (confirmed by my trip), but I found the Castle to be pretty enjoyable despite the wildness in spots.