Castle Course - a non-GCA insight

[Mark Pearce]

My wife, who is a competent (low teens h'cap) woman golfer just returned from a trip to St Andrews where she and friends played the Old and Castle courses.  They played the Castle course in wet conditions but enjoyed it.  A couple of observations she made were interesting, I think.

First, she commented that the fairways played like parkland, rather than links fairways, even taking into account that they were damp.  She noted a really strong difference from the Old Course fairways. 

Secondly and perhaps more interestingly, she commented that on many holes there were areas with a very large number of divots which she felt was because this was a course that didn't offer options.  She felt as if she looked at a hole and the Strokesaver and there was only one real option off the tee, that the design effectively told her what shot to play.  She enjoyed it but said she probably wouldn't enjoy playing every day. 

Do these comments coincide with the view of those here who have played the course?

BTW, she loved the greens, but then she loves the Himalayas.  Again, though, she wouldn't want to compete on them regularly.

[John Kirk]

Great comments, Mark.  I walked around the course a bit on Sunday.  The wildly undulating fairways on some holes will also contribute to areas with high concentrations of divots.  Without playing the course, but looking at 5-6 holes and studying the yardage booklet, leads me to believe the course may look harder than it plays, at least for a reasonably straight hitter.  The greens do have some severe dropoffs from one level to the next.

[Brian Phillips]

Mark,

Those comments are spoken by a person who should write about golf.  The reason the that the course does not feel like a links course is that the subsoil is clay and more clay and then agricultural soil.  There is little if no sand on the course except in the greens and bunkers.

I agree with her about the fairway driving areas as well and that is one thing David and Paul could have or should have thought about on a resort course.

[Mark Pearce]

Great comments, Mark.  I walked around the course a bit on Sunday.  The wildly undulating fairways on some holes will also contribute to areas with high concentrations of divots.  Without playing the course, but looking at 5-6 holes and studying the yardage booklet, leads me to believe the course may look harder than it plays, at least for a reasonably straight hitter.  The greens do have some severe dropoffs from one level to the next.

John,

Lorna had a look at this thread and e-mailed me this:

I also think John Kirk's comments about the course probably playing easier
than it looks may be true (except on the greens). You have the sensation on
many holes (except as you reach the higher points of the course around the
15th) of being nestled deep in the 'Dons' without really being able to see
where the fairways lead you (not unusual for golf courses you are not
familiar with I suppose) and it is only by playing the shots that you thread
(an appropriate term I think for the design) your way through and it opens
up (a bit like space invaders). I have to say that we played with a very
tall American and he seemed to have had a clearer view of the holes...

[John Kirk]

Thanks, Mark...glad I had a chance to read Lorna's comments inbetween flights on my way home.  I believe the negative commentary is a bit overblown.  It appears to have good, wide golf holes and many spectacular views of the old town.  Without playing the course a couple times, it is difficult to assess the strategic merit of the golf.  If all holes dictate a single specific strategy, as mentioned in your original post, that would be a shame.  At a minimum, an outstanding golf course should have three or four holes whose strategy changes based upon wind and/or pin position.

[Jason Topp]

Get Lorna on the board!

[Anthony Gray]

  I think it is a course that you have to learn. Some of the lay-up areas are blind and have centerline obstacles. Lady's traditionally enjoy putting more than the driving so this course screams fun for them.

  Anthony

[Mark Pearce]

  I think it is a course that you have to learn. Some of the lay-up areas are blind and have centerline obstacles. Lady's traditionally enjoy putting more than the driving so this course screams fun for them.

  Anthony

Anthony,

You don't know my wife.  Her driving is clearly one of the strengths of her game.  Indeed, when we played the Craighead course she complained that the ladies tees on most of the holes were too far forward, thus depriving ladies of many of the challenges posed from the men's tees.  If she wants a fun time putting, she can visit the Himalays.  If she's paying to play a golf course, she wants the whole of her game to be challenged.

Mark

[Kyle Henderson]

At the start of June 2009, the fairways were in very poor shape (punched and dry, very tight lies), playing like hard pan such that they ran quickly and shortened the holes considerably. However, it was impossible to play soft pitches to the elevated greens. I quickly learned to play 5 iron for every shot within 100 yards.

The fairways do collect into various hollows (probably for drainage purposes?) which often created areas of high divot density, but I have a feeling that each hole will play differently in different winds as the wide, wandering fairways would probably allow for multiple avenues of attack.

The greens are very heavily contoured for a "resort" course. I think they probably provide the most difficulty for hackers.

[Garland Bayley]

Although I have not seen the Castle Course, I can note that the use of mohawks and eyebrows at Tetherow limited the visibility and in this case probably led to the comment about the tall American. Although, I think these features have value, I think Kidd overused them at Tetherow, and since they are eliminating some at the Castle Course, apparently there also. My suggestion would be to slightly skew them towards use on shots that will be hit from higher ground, and slightly skew them towards mohawks instead of eyebrows.

[Garland Bayley]

...
The greens are very heavily contoured for a "resort" course. I think they probably provide the most difficulty for hackers.

Disagree, but that's another discussion.

[Kyle Henderson]

...
The greens are very heavily contoured for a "resort" course. I think they probably provide the most difficulty for hackers.

Disagree, but that's another discussion.

I think I know where you're coming from and generally you'd be correct, but in the case of The Castle,I think an inordinate amount of storkes will be lost around the greens by players in the 10-25 handicap range.

[Garland Bayley]

...
The greens are very heavily contoured for a "resort" course. I think they probably provide the most difficulty for hackers.

Disagree, but that's another discussion.

I think I know where you're coming from and generally you'd be correct, but in the case of The Castle,I think an inordinate amount of storkes will be lost around the greens by players in the 10-25 handicap range.

My goodness! When did a 10 handicapper become a "hacker"? I guess I am just behind the times.

[Anthony Gray]

At the start of June 2009, the fairways were in very poor shape (punched and dry, very tight lies), playing like hard pan such that they ran quickly and shortened the holes considerably. However, it was impossible to play soft pitches to the elevated greens. I quickly learned to play 5 iron for every shot within 100 yards.

The fairways do collect into various hollows (probably for drainage purposes?) which often created areas of high divot density, but I have a feeling that each hole will play differently in different winds as the wide, wandering fairways would probably allow for multiple avenues of attack.

The greens are very heavily contoured for a "resort" course. I think they probably provide the most difficulty for hackers.

  I agree with all of this. Because of the rub of the greens it is very hard to score. The Himilayas with fairways.

   Anthony

[Bob_Huntley]

Mark,

  The reason the that the course does not feel like a links course is that the subsoil is clay and more clay and then agricultural soil.  There is little if no sand on the course except in the greens and bunkers.

When building a course for the ages on clay and more clay. why on earth not go the extra mile and provide a sand base?

Bob

[Brian Phillips]

Mark,

  The reason the that the course does not feel like a links course is that the subsoil is clay and more clay and then agricultural soil.  There is little if no sand on the course except in the greens and bunkers.

When building a course for the ages on clay and more clay. why on earth not go the extra mile and provide a sand base?

Bob

Bob,

I know, I also find it ridiculous especially now as the fairways are struggling to maintain good coverage.  I never ever understood that either.  However, it would have cost about another 1/2 - 1 million sterling to import and lay enough sand.

[Garland Bayley]

According to The Seventh at St. Andrews Kidd wanted the job very much. Therefore, he bid the job at a price that would make him no money, but not ruin him. Perhaps that is why extra expense for sand was not allowed. Or, perhaps it is just my ignorance of business.

[Anthony Gray]

  Garland,

  In that book it said they found a vein of sand on the property and placed it infront of the greens so the player could bounce the ball in and thus play links style.


  Anthony

[Garland Bayley]

Anthony,

But I believe they did not budget for sand to amend the soil throughout the course. Do you recall otherwise?

Garland

[Jim Colton]

My wife, who is a competent (low teens h'cap) woman golfer just returned from a trip to St Andrews where she and friends played the Old and Castle courses.  They played the Castle course in wet conditions but enjoyed it.  A couple of observations she made were interesting, I think.

First, she commented that the fairways played like parkland, rather than links fairways, even taking into account that they were damp.  She noted a really strong difference from the Old Course fairways. 

Secondly and perhaps more interestingly, she commented that on many holes there were areas with a very large number of divots which she felt was because this was a course that didn't offer options.  She felt as if she looked at a hole and the Strokesaver and there was only one real option off the tee, that the design effectively told her what shot to play.  She enjoyed it but said she probably wouldn't enjoy playing every day. 

Do these comments coincide with the view of those here who have played the course?

BTW, she loved the greens, but then she loves the Himalayas.  Again, though, she wouldn't want to compete on them regularly.

Mark,

  I gotta say you married well.

  Jim

[Brian Phillips]

According to The Seventh at St. Andrews Kidd wanted the job very much. Therefore, he bid the job at a price that would make him no money, but not ruin him. Perhaps that is why extra expense for sand was not allowed. Or, perhaps it is just my ignorance of business.

Bayley,

Kidd wanted the job but they did not build it.  Paul Kimber was Design Architect on site and they had some staff on site shaping and finishing.  The muck shift was done by Geddes.

The final budgets had nothing to do (or very little) with what Kidd would charge for his shapers and Associates.

It was down to The Links Trust being careful (tight) with their money.

[Anthony Gray]

Anthony,

But I believe they did not budget for sand to amend the soil throughout the course. Do you recall otherwise?

Garland

  You are correct Garland. Kyle makes an awesome point that some of the greens are elivated and and contoured to the point that it does not allow the low links shot around the green. Great observation.

  Anthony

[Rob Rigg]

Anthony,

Just like Tetherow - same situation on many holes where there is a "links style", but elevated and severely undulating greens.

Wonder which course was the "chicken" and which was the "egg".

Very interesting about the decision not to used a sand base - won't that end up costing them more in the long run due to lost grass coverage, turf replacement, etc. Seems a bit short sighted, especially as it is supposed to be a links course?

[Tom_Doak]

Putting aside for the moment that the esteemed Mr. Huntley first suggested it here, I believe it is ridiculous that people have come to expect a golf course architect should specify that an entire golf course be plated with a foot of sand to improve the drainage of soils.  It is a vastly expensive thing to do and one of the main reasons that the cost to play (or belong to) so many top-line golf courses are completely out of reason. 

It's an unsustainable idea that will have to die quickly in the new reality of golf economics.

[Melvyn Morrow]

I wonder if there is any truth in that old sage's message "LAND FIT FOR PURPOSE"

I also wonder if it is also not part of an architects duty to advise his client on the suitability of the land.

Rumours persist that one day soon more than half the course will slide into the North Sea - would not like to be on the course that day, however for some it will be the only time they will ever be able to say 'did the earth move for you?'

Melvyn