[Garland Bayley]

Bayley,

Did you just call me a stereotypical Scot?  That would be upsetting.  Stereotypical I could live with but Scot?  Too much.

Mark,

No offense, but I would call you illiterate if you somehow read what I wrote to mean I was calling you a Scot.
And, I'm sure my buddy Mel is with me on this.

[DMoriarty]

Niall,  there is nothing in America that looks anything like what those photos show.  At least of what I have seen.   I can't help but wonder if the problem isn't that the designers are American, rather than their course.  If so, that'd be a shame, given that one often hears of their work here that their is little else like it in America.    I think Gil and Jim need their own island.   Too Scottish for America, to American for Scotland.
_____________________________________

All, I still fail to understand the underlying criticisms, and wonder if perhaps many are not working off of a false assumption that at one point the old great links courses were manicured with straight lines and exactly aligned ties and such, and then it was just over time that they took on a rough look.   In other words, that these old courses started off looking spanking new and then "decayed" over the decades.   Judging from the photos I have seen of the pre-1900 courses, I don't believe that to have been the case. 

Here is an interesting photo of a bunker on the old course from the early 1890's.  Notice how about 2/3 of the bunker is wild and the other 1/3 looks to be maintained. 

[TEPaul]

"Bayley, you wouldn't know a stereotypical scot from a peking duck."



Antonio:

Why in the world would you expect him to know a stereotypical Scot from a Peking Duck?

There's no difference at all between a stereotypical Scot and a Peking Duck. But don't forget the Scots invented golf, liquor, sex, the hoola hoop and everything else of any importance under the sun!

[Niall C]

hoola hoop, don't remember that one !

[Melvyn Morrow]

First of all, we get the carts, then those cart tracks because the courses require much maintenance, then we get distance aids followed by electronic aids because some are just too lazy to work it out for themselves. While all this is going on we get courses built in mad, hot, dry places, between building complexes forcing the use of more carts just to get to the next Tee, this is followed by shallow bunkers that can’t stop a ball if they tried. Is this the end, Hell no, some wise guy come up with island Greens, water all round the green or part round them.  Yet they still are not finished, the latest thing is to throw the final insult to the Home of Golf and tell us how to build fake bunkers with match sticks in place of sleepers, riveting mounted low in the bunker to make the new bunker look old by the riveting slowly appear to have been eroded.

Tell Me and with all due respect (if you feel that really applies ) what happened to all the course designers did they die out between the wars (WWI &WWII).

Or are the owners of the world’s football clubs paying off the designers to create these wonderful ideas in the hope of killing off the game of golf worldwide?       

In addition, don’t old buddy me, Mate

There are times in my life that I would have loved to travel back in time to stop this or that happening in history, guess what I would like to have done. No wrong, but hand over our colonies south of Canada to the French in 1750’s. There is a good chance that Le Americans would not be a golf nation but playing some French game, eating frog legs instead of burgers and snails in place of Hot Dogs. Boy we would have our game of golf intact and played on land ONLY fit for Purpose.

One more thing we would not be able to understand Mr Gray, Smith, Garland and many, many, many more. Oh for a F#*K Time machine –Eric where are you when needed

Melvyn

PS Just think they would all be French, there but for the Grace of……… 

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

Sorry not to have respond earlier.

Bunkers are fine if the sleeper are doing a job, but to put small rotten pieces in and have gaps between them looks cheap crap and is of no real value to the design of the course. As for the riveting/sod walls, my understanding is that they have been deliberately made and positioned to appear that the bunker is eroding and has exposed some old sod wall. Again, if the sod wall was actually doing its job then I have no problem, it is not and is only made in short lengths to fool the golfer. Its fake is not right, you are being conned. That is what I do not like about them. In addition, the tops should have been uniform not stepped, it looks unfinished and poor. As mentioned earlier its looks unloved uncared for and piss poor maintenance being undertaken.

I hope that conveys my thoughts re these fake or counterfeit bunkers. There is just no need to waste time money and for what result. What is the purpose of this rubbish? I can accept the wild to run down look but to try to fool people is in my mind just not on.

I can’t speak for others but I hope I have answered you question from yesterday

Melvyn

[DMoriarty]

http://sounds.wavcentral.com/televis/snl/scottish_crap.mp3

[Niall C]

David M

Please explain your suggestion that I have a problem with certain GCA's because they are American. It should be an interesting read, fanciful but interesting none the less.

As it happens I don't require a course to be manicured to like it, and indeed quite like links courses to be scruffy round the edges. What jumps out at me from the photos of Castle Stuart however is that the ragged look isn't because of a lower level of maintainance throughout but is obviously contrived on what is clearly a manicured course. Also, I will say it again, what about the revetting between different levels of grass, the mickey mouse sleepers that are clearly not serving any useful purpose. Not nearly as bad as flower beds on the side of tees, I'll grant you that, but it just looks twee.  

BTW thanks for posting the photo of the TOC bunker, good to see.  

Niall

[Dave Falkner]

when I saw this pic  I though this was a bit much, and although I love the general look it was some of these types of details (coke machine, etc.) that could be sen to be a bit faux

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=40698.0;attach=2071

[Anthony Gray]

 
  Castle Stuart............The Pamela Anderson of golf courses.


   Scott Land

[Norbert P]

  Very intriguing and bold!  Hats Off to Gil, the crew and, of course, Roy Harper.

[Anthony Gray]

  Can you imagine if they had a few of those Pete Dye volcano bunkers. Now that would be variety.

  Anthony

[DMoriarty]

Naill,  You and others have said a number of times that the course to you looks like American courses you have seen in photos.   At all but the most superficial level, this is crazy.    The course looks nothing like what I have seen in America.   That this is a recurring theme of the criticisms of this course makes me wonder if there isn't a larger issue here, and valid or not, that you may be barking up the wrong tree in this case.

If the purpose of the ties is to keep the sand and support the edges, I don't think it makes any difference whether they are spaced or notl, except that if they are spaced then the golf will at least have a chance to play his ball.  
-----------------------
Melvyn,

I don't know where you are getting your information on the rivetting, but that is not how I understood what Gil was doing with it.  I think it does serve a purposes, as (according to Hanse) it is placed in places where cave-ins are a high probability.

____________________________________

All,

The think is, the more I look at the pre-1900 photos, the more I am convinced that they did a very good job on the look of the bunkers.   The pre-1900 stuff was not "new looking" it was rough and inconsistent, with some edges maintained and some not.  So I fail to understand the basis for the claims.  Show me how a pre-1900 bunker is supposed to look?

More photos, the first few from the early 1890's, and then from 1906 or before.






















http://sounds.wavcentral.com/televis/snl/scottish_crap.mp3

[Anthony Gray]

  Dave ,

  Love the photos.....I think all the UK guys are asleep.

  Anthony

[DMoriarty]

  Dave ,

  Love the photos.....I think all the UK guys are asleep.

  Anthony

Thanks.  It took hours to doctor them so they looked old.

[Jim Franklin]

  Dave ,

  Love the photos.....I think all the UK guys are asleep.

  Anthony

Thanks.  It took hours to doctor them so they looked old.

That is funny. Thanks for the chuckle.

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

Sorry, but you have totally lost me. The range of photos you have shown have no incomplete or unfinished sleepers. Therefore, I do not understand why you have posted them.

What is it you don’t agree with or willing to accept for whatever reason? Is it that I feel some of the bunkers are dressed to fool the golfer. The short sleepers are doing what – just dressing the bunker, not doing any job. It’s not what we expect in our own courses, nor do your photos show that type of incomplete finish either.

I believe Gil made a statement about his unique bunkers.

As for it being like an American course, I have no idea, but being for the American and overseas market I have no doubt as this is not normal practice here.

It’s a waste of time and money, but my understanding is all we are saying is that we do not like it as it’s has a fake finish – call it dressed or whatever.

With respect to you, I live here, I know some of the history and your photos seem to back up everything we are said.

Some of CS  bunkers are there to fool the golfer, are fake in finish and does not show the bunker in a good state of repair either in the natural way or man made way, unlike the photos you posted.

Melvyn
 

[DMoriarty]

Melvyn,

The photos weren't just for you.   They are posted so we all can appreciate what bunkers looked like on links courses, pre 1900 or thereabouts.  And it seems that Castle Stewart got the look about right, wouldn't you agree?  Also, many of the features criticized -- for example, the mixing riveted edges with rough edges and creating a "decayed" look" -- also appear on the old bunkers.   So I am not so sure these criticisms are valid.

As for the RR ties, I believe in all the old photos featuring ties they are being used as actual retaining walls.  I don't recall any retaining walls in the bunkers in the Castle Stewart photos. 

I think the ties in the bunkers are there to keep in the sand and offer some support against erosion.    For these purposes, spacing them makes sense to me.    Have you ever seen any old photos of RR ties being used in this manner?   

I cannot quite figure out the short ties on the left side of one of the bunkers, but judging from the look of the turf above them, it is at least possible that they are intended to support the lip until the turf takes hold.   Sure beats the heck out of those plastic fences one sometimes sees.

In short, I don't think these bunkers look any more "fake" than any other bunker, and are a pretty cool reference to bunker styling in a time almost forgotten.   

[George Pazin]

Neither have I seen fairways shaped like that on a links course (with the possible exception of Kingsbarns), hence my earlier comments that it looks more American than Scottish.

Could you expand on this?

(Honest request, I'm not trying to trick you into anything.)

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

Just to recap the YouTube interview, it actually confirms that their intention was to show fake erosion. If you replay the video clip, watch the sections pre 2 minutes, around 2.10, 2.20, 2.40 & 3.30 will I believe confirm their intentions. I think the last one at 3.30 minutes also confirm their intention with the words “a lot older before its time”. So I feel totally justified in complaining and using the word fake.

As for the sleepers – the CS course has the tops uneven and gaps between as I have said, yet your old photos show all tops of sleepers or fences having a uniform surface, undertaken in a neat and orderly fashion unlike CS, showing yet again the faking of these sleepers. Had CS copied the images on the photos posted I would not have a problem but they did not and wanted something unique – which is a word they mentioned.

I have not had the pleasure of playing all 600 course in Scotland but the ones I have, to the best of my memory never had stepped sleeper edges, large gaps between the sleeper or the part of what appears short rotten pieces of sleepers. After a few storms, the wind and rain may well erode around these short stumps of sleeper and I expect they will slowly slide down the face of the bunkers. Whatever, my concern is to think that the old Green Keeper would allow their courses to be left in this state, is just not correct, again I refer you to your photos – all neat and tidy. They had a pride in their jobs. Use sleeper but use them properly, eroded, then replace. Not left in a bunker to try to fake age.

I also believe that this course has been set up for the overseas visitors and not the locals, yet I expect that the new Green Keep if he has any understand will soon dispose of the errant pieces of wood and reformat the bunkers back to the traditional methods with no gaps between the sleepers. However, I could be wrong.

As for those old bunkers you posted, there is just something special in their appearance, both rough and worked on bunkers. Don’t you just love them, makes me want to play them.

Melvyn   

[Mark Pearce]

David,

Melvyn is absolutely right.  All those pictures you have posted that feature sleepers show them neatly, tidily and evenly organised.  I have no idea what point you are trying to make regarding the fact that in those old pictures they have a structural function as retaining walls, but not at CS.  There, presumably, you are arguing that they are purely cosmetic.  If that's authentic, show me some pictures of old bunkers with purely cosmetic sleepers.

[Michael Dugger]

I never thought I'd see the day when someone was bitching about an architect attempting to make a feature look weathered or like it had been there for a while.

What was Mackenzie's great quote, something about making artificial features indistinguishable from nature herself.

What a bunch of poppycock! 

[DMoriarty]

Mark,

People (including you) had a number of complaints about the course, and were not just complaining about the RR ties.   I posted the photos to give us some idea of what the style was like.  I included the ones with the retaining walls simply because those are the photos I had.   

As I explained to Melvyn, the RR ties at CS do not appear to have been used as a retaining wall or to support a fence.   But I doubt they are purely cosmetic either.   I would guess their purpose is to help keep the sand in the traps and to provide some stabilization to the bunker slope and face.  You do understand how this purpose is different than using them as a retaining wall, don't you.   If you want, you could check with the architects if you like, but my quess is they had a reason for what they did and that reason was not purely cosmetic.   

Sticking to the golf course it seems the complaints come down to a bunker with a few RR ties.  If you want to condemn a course because of that feel free, but you might want to see the course or find out more about the feature first. 

I still sense that there are larger more general issues here and that some are just using this course as a springboard.    I also think it is possible that these folks might be barking up the wrong tree, but I'd have to see the course to know for sure.

[Tom_Doak]

Michael:

You had it right back on page 6 ... this is just a long argument about who likes a bunker style and who doesn't.  All of the justifications for it (on both sides) are meaningless.

Niall:

I do not see how the bunkers pictured look American.  I've not seen enough of the fairway contouring to get your drift, and would love to hear your further comments on that.  Certainly the WIDTH of the fairways is more American than Scottish, but I'm an American too, so that's no problem for me.

[Mark Pearce]

David,

Have you always been incapable of reading what people actually are saying, or is that a result of 104 pages of that stupid Merion thread?  I am not condemning the course.  I've made it very clear that it's very likely an excellent course.  Of course, as, like most of the other posters here, I haven't played it and the photos available make it very difficult to judge how it plays, and no-one has posted a detailed analysis of the way it plays I can't comment on that.  I can comment on the cosmetics, because there are plenty of photos of that.

Finally, and possibly again you're suffering from over exposure to Merion, why look for an ulterior motive in everything?  Why not assume (as happens to be the case) that we're commenting on the cosmetic look of the place and nothing more.  There have been a number of other suggestions here that the critics (if that's what we are) have some sort of seb-text we are pursuing.  Does everything need some hidden meaning?  If so, I'm sadly lacking.

Michael,

o you think these features look indistinguishable from nature itself?  Or like unantural features with age?  I don't get the relevance of the Mackenzie reference.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()