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.


Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #50 on: December 04, 2009, 06:04:55 PM »
You guys can knock on the bunkers all you want, but I happen to really like the revetted bunkers.
They look a hell of a lot better than the remaining sand expanses that are there.

I love the fact they are tight to the green, which is tough with a blow out bunker.
I love the fact they are surrounded by short grass right up to the edge.

I think they look great and remind me of the scottish courses I enjoy, is that so bad?

I love blow out bunkers too, but they don't belong everywhere.

Ian - I totally agree with you about revetted bunkers. Yes, they are artificial, especially when the edges are razor-sharp, but their level of functionality is unsurpassed for the reasons you explain above, and because they are small and low-profile their visual impact is reduced. Golf courses to me look best when landforms dominate, not bunkers, and although the blowout look is more natural it leads to a course that is, visually at least, all about sand.
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Ben Stephens

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #51 on: December 05, 2009, 04:55:34 AM »
This is why GCA gives great value to derive all the different opinions of professional and amateur wannabe golf course designers. I understand why most prefer the crisp revetted bunker look with short grass around it at NSW. Most Australian courses seem to have short grass cut to the edge of the bunkers which would be difficult to acheive on the bermuda grass courses in the USA.

Pot bunkers were partly built to retain the sand in it as well as a difficult hazard. The tall grasses in the waste bunkers are used as wind shields to prevent the sand getting blown around. It makes me wonder if NSW have used light-weight sand in the bunkers rather than a heavier grade sand. I have been to Royal Sydney and prefer the look of the bunkers - it is more of an 'Aussie style' golf course!
 
I would have thought that the winds are stronger at Barnbougle/Pacific Dunes than NSW and they still have waste like bunkers which blend in better with the natural landscape.

At Stapleford Park, a inland course on a Capability Brown landscape nr. Melton Mowbray by Donald Steel, all the bunkers are revetted which I think is the wrong style for this particular type of course but others may like this.

http://www.staplefordpark.com/golf/
http://www.pgagolfpro.co.uk/staplefordpark.htm

Cheers
Ben

Andrew Summerell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #52 on: December 05, 2009, 04:06:18 PM »
Most Australian courses seem to have short grass cut to the edge of the bunkers which would be difficult to acheive on the bermuda grass courses in the USA.

Most of the Australian courses that are famous for having short grass cut to the edge of the bunkers are what you call 'Bermuda' grass courses, so there is no reason why American courses couldn't do it.

I would have thought that the winds are stronger at Barnbougle/Pacific Dunes than NSW and they still have waste like bunkers which blend in better with the natural landscape.
The winds aren't stronger (on average) at Barnbougle Dunes or Pacific Dunes. Although all three courses can have very strong winds, I have played both Barbougle Dunes & Pacific/Bandon Dunes on totally still days, which I have never encountered at NSW. NSW has more greens that sit up high than both Barnbougle Dunes & Pacific Dunes. Days like the 2nd day at the Australian Open a couple of days ago are not uncommon at NSW, which is why I found it amazing that the organisers had not planned for this to happen.

Of course, this doesn't mean they couldn't try a different bunkering style, which they have recently tried in a few places, but some of the positioning of bunkers would need to change.


Anthony Butler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #53 on: December 05, 2009, 05:46:43 PM »
This thread and the other started by Brian read like a Cliff Notes of the last two decades of Greens Committee meetings at NSWGC.

As I mentioned on Brian's previous thread, many of the internal contours on the greens have been TAKEN OUT of the greens (7, 14, 17) to create more pin options. The course as it is currently configured means only a handful of greens (4, 8, 9, 10, 15, 18) enjoy any protection from the elements, so creating a lot of internal movement on these greens would simply make these 6 greens seem disconnected from the other 12 greens on the course.

As an example. I was playing in medal round several years ago when a ball placed on the 3rd green was blown up the hill and down the 30ft bank behind the green. Since the membership don't want to experience many days like Friday at the Australian Open, certain options that might rank the course higher in the eyes of Brian Phillips etc... are simply not practical due to the weather extremes the course experiences.
In terms of Barnbougle, I have not been to the site so I can't say weather the wind matches that at NSWGC, but some of the architectural features (Green contouring and bunkers) are possible due to the fact the site does not have the same amount of topographical variation and exposed playing areas of NSWGC.

Is NSWGC the optimal golf course for this site? Probably not. I would imagine that given a blank slate and today's construction capabilities, someone like Tom Doak or Michael Clayton could improve on the current course. That said, many courses that enjoy the same scenic advantages as NSW are ranked far below it, so there must be some redeeming features to the course....

 
Next!

Neil_Crafter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #54 on: December 05, 2009, 07:41:37 PM »
I wrote a profile of Eric Apperly with John Lovell for our 'Great Australian Golf Course Architects' series in issue 8 of our Golf Architecture magazine. Here is the text of the section on NSWGC. Hope this assists with the discussion. Neil

New South Wales Golf Club
Perhaps Eric Apperly’s greatest enduring legacy was his redesign of the New South Wales Golf Club’s course at La Perouse, located on the headlands overlooking Botany Bay. The common perception today is that the course is a purebred Alister Mackenzie design – although that may have been true at one time, the reality is that today’s course owes its stature predominantly to Eric Apperly.

A company was formed to develop this new course at La Perouse and initially commissioned Dan Soutar to provide a report and a design. In 1925 the site location moved slightly and they required another design, and as Soutar was unavailable, his old partner Carnegie Clark, assisted by James Herd Scott, prepared the layout that was included in the prospectus. Whilst clearing was being undertaken, the Club learned from Royal Melbourne that Alister Mackenzie was available for consultation and in 1926 Dr Mackenzie was engaged by the Club to review their plans for the new course. A publication prepared by the Club for their golden anniversary in 1978 quoted the recollections of Brigadier-General Sydney Herring who was involved in the Club’s formative years and acted as its Secretary for some time. These recollections are of interest:

“ …Dr. Mackenzie, a world-famed golf architect, was being brought out from Scotland to alter the layouts of several Melbourne golf clubs. As well he was to report on the Royal Sydney Golf Course. Mr. Magney suggested we get hold of him to give us a report on whether our suggested Course was as good as we thought it was. His favourable report would be a wonderful boost for the Company.

We got in touch with the doctor in Melbourne and he agreed to make the report for the sum of £250; his offer was accepted.”

“When Dr. Mackenzie came to Sydney he stayed at the Royal Sydney Golf Club, and he got the then Secretary, Colonel Bertram, interested in the new course. The Colonel used to drive the Doctor out to La Perouse and very often spent most of the day helping him decide on the best layout for one or two difficult holes. Dr. Mackenzie gave a wonderful report and a splendid layout. He also recommended that Colonel Bertram be retained at a nominal fee to keep an eye on the formation of the course; this with the consent of his committee he undertook to do. He had discussed every hole with the Doctor and his advice to the Club in its early days was most valuable. Work then started in earnest and contracts let for the clearing of the scrub.”


Mackenzie’s plans, although conceptual, showed an 18 hole championship length course, together with a nine hole Short Course. In 1928 the course was finally completed, although unbunkered, and ready for play. In the following few years the Club struggled to ride out the effects of the Depression and during the years 1929 and 1930 the committee sought any plans and sketches that Mackenzie might have left. It was resolved that his bunkering plans be tabled at a meeting in May 1931, however, as finances could not be allocated for their construction, they were not built. It is understood that Alex Russell, Mackenzie’s Australian partner, was called in by the Club in 1931 to inspect the course, still unbunkered and critique the bunkering plan and primarily dispense with the Short Course. He did this when he came to Sydney later that year to play the Australian Open and Australian Amateur Championships. Russell presented a detailed report that highlighted the fact that the golf course was too short - he also made some suggestions about remodeling some of the greens, but these were never taken up by the Club.

In November 1932 the Club felt in a position to undertake some remodeling and Eric Apperly was engaged by the Club to finally implement Mackenzie’s bunkering scheme – how much of this was to Mackenzie’s design and how much was Apperly’s own ideas will most likely never be known. Alex Russell’s suggestions from his 1931 report were also in the mix. At this time, Apperly was also asked to suggest means of toughening the layout, which he achieved by extending some holes and converting the 3rd from a par 5 back to a par 4. One of Apperly’s most significant changes came at the 5th. In April 1933 the Sydney Morning Herald advised its readers that “the crown of the hill has been cut down, and a plateau formed”, explaining that “the new tee is 40 yards further back. Previously, with a following wind, an average drive finished within 100 yards of the green, owing to the steepness of the hill. This made the par five ridiculously easy. The new tee and plateau have had the effect of making it more difficult as two exceptionally long woods are now required to reach the green.”

Eric Apperly was listed in the Club’s Annual report as its “Hon. Architect” every year from 1933 until his death in 1951. It is interesting to speculate whether the ‘Honorary’ title meant that Apperly did not charge the Club for his services. In 1933 the Club awarded him Honorary Membership as a mark of appreciation of his service to the Club and to golf in general.

By 1935 the Club’s newly modified layout was settling in well, but the Army had its sights set on some of the land that the Club leased from the Government for its fortifications. Herring recalls:

“…I heard a rumour that the Army intended to put some guns on the hill (Cape Banks) and as well, were going to run a road through a couple of the fairways. I made some enquiries but found it was a very hush hush affair; officially I was told there was nothing to it. However, I had a friend at court who told me that plans had actually been drawn up and that we had better get in early before they were finally approved….

...after a good deal of negotiation a new agreement was drawn up in which the Army moderated its demands as far as the roadway was concerned. We were given some more land and a rebate of rent to offset the cost of altering the layout. The Greens Committee was then given the job of altering the course, under the advice of the Golf Architect, Mr. E. L. Apperly….After a lot of hard work and considerable delay the new layout was finally put into play and the Club continued to increase in popularity.”

The land changes forced substantial modifications to the north-east corner of the course. The short fourth, a ‘drop down’ one shot hole playing towards the cliffs, was lost, along with the tee at the fifth. Apperly moved the tee back up and across into its current position and most inspirationally, replaced the lost par three with a new hole, the sixth, playing along the clifftops. Later in 1972 the famous island tee was added to this hole.

It is recorded that Apperly implemented some of the suggestions made in Alex Russell’s 1931 report, but mostly the ideas were his own. Apperly’s revised layout then opened for play in May 1937. From 1942 to 1946 the course was surrendered to the Army and when handed back it was completely overgrown and bore little resemblance to a golf course. Apperly advised the Club on the restoration required to bring the course back to its former condition and in the summer of 1948-49 he proposed some further modifications to lengthen some holes and reposition some of the greens and tees on the outward nine.

So what remains of Mackenzie’s routing at La Perouse, and what did Apperly remodel? Given that some land was lost and new land acquired, Apperly had to design a number of new holes as well as modify some existing ones to fit into the new layout. According to Gary Dempsey, the golf course superintendent at La Perouse, only nine holes of the current New South Wales course bear any similarity to Mackenzie’s layout. These holes are:
>   Hole 3 – tee position similar and green moved to increase dogleg
>   Hole 4 – tee position altered, otherwise hole is the same
>   Hole 7 – virtually unchanged
>   Hole 9 – tee position altered
>   Hole 10 – tee position altered
>   Hole 12 – similar to original
>   Hole 13 – virtually unchanged
>   Hole 14 – new tee, new green moved 60 metres back
>   Hole 18 – tee position altered
The remainder of the holes were new or substantially modified holes to Apperley’s design. As the course stands at present, there is not one green or tee that has not been changed.

It is interesting to note that two of the most renowned holes on the course, the tumbling par 5 fifth that runs towards the Pacific Ocean and the heroic par 3 sixth across an inlet are both Eric Apperly holes. In fact all of the par 3’s are Apperly’s and these play to all points of the compass, as do all the par fives – an important consideration given the windswept nature of La Perouse.

Kevin Pallier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #55 on: December 05, 2009, 09:25:27 PM »
Thanks for that Neil -  it provides some good background re: the layout

Neil_Crafter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #56 on: December 06, 2009, 01:26:45 AM »
Cheers Kevin, glad it was of interest.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #57 on: December 06, 2009, 04:28:39 AM »
This is an interesting question concerning the style of bunkers at NSW.  Its difficult to tell what they look like sometimes, but in general, I agree with Ben.  I prefer the look of more open, sandy hazards on sandy sites, but I also can understand the problems of containing sand. Pots are not the most beautiful of things, but as a compromise (and this is where I depart from Ben), they may be a best option on windy sites with sandy soil.  If done right, pots can blend quite well with surrounds on low lying courses and they have the added benefit of being gathering without it always being so obvious.  NSW looks to have a lot of elevation change with not oa lot of heaving, rolling land so the pots are in the full glare of the golfer and in this context they look pretty awful when viewed from a height - especially if they are clustered.  From a height, I would suggest that lone pots look better if the size is gauged correctly.  All in all, whoever said the aesthetics aren't quite right at NSW is right IMO, but that may just be the best option given the wind.  Though I would prefer to see the pots taken a to a more daring level with reduced numbers and increased size - maybe even wooden walls fore the really big ones.  For sure, the course needs something because one shouldn't ever look at it (given its position) and question the aesthetics.

Ciao  
« Last Edit: December 06, 2009, 04:31:31 AM by Sean Arble »
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Andrew Summerell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #58 on: December 06, 2009, 04:53:31 AM »
Sean, I agree with much of what you are saying, but aesthetics is a difficult topic to argue because it is based on subjective & emotive lines. The 13th at Augusta National is a wonderful hole, but to my eye the bunkers behind the green are awful. How do we argue aesthetics on a playing field where function is so important – or is it?

I would be interested in other people’s thoughts on the importance of aesthetics verses the placement of bunkers. In other words, if bunkers look beautiful, is it reasonable to suggest that it doesn’t matter whether they are in the right position or not?

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #59 on: December 06, 2009, 05:37:43 AM »
Sean, I agree with much of what you are saying, but aesthetics is a difficult topic to argue because it is based on subjective & emotive lines. The 13th at Augusta National is a wonderful hole, but to my eye the bunkers behind the green are awful. How do we argue aesthetics on a playing field where function is so important – or is it?

I would be interested in other people’s thoughts on the importance of aesthetics verses the placement of bunkers. In other words, if bunkers look beautiful, is it reasonable to suggest that it doesn’t matter whether they are in the right position or not?


Andrew

Yes, you are right.  I would say the same thing about the bunkers behind CPC's 16th.  Not that this a great example of how the bunkers have changed at CPC, but one can no easily detect the disconnect between the dunes and the man-made bunkers, where I think DR mac went through a lot of trouble to hide these seems. 

In the end, I fall with you in that function must come first, but I am not convinced that bunkers at NSW couldn't be improved aesthetically without sacrificing playabilty, strategy or function.  That said, I am no archie and it may well be the case that different bunkering might cost quite a bit more.     

Ciao
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #60 on: December 15, 2009, 10:29:29 AM »
Bump.

We ready for 7-9 now?!

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #61 on: December 15, 2009, 12:22:37 PM »
Scott,

I am soooo struggling for time at the moment but have a major goal of loading the whole trip up on separate threads this Christmas.  I am closing down the hatches from Monday next week so should be able to start finishing off this thread then.

Cheers.
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #62 on: December 15, 2009, 06:32:52 PM »
Thanks for that Brian, looking forward to seeing the rest of the courses you played, as well as the rest of NSW.

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #63 on: December 27, 2009, 09:30:42 AM »
Hole 7 - Par 4 - 376 m

A long hole back up the hill.  Although we turn back towards the ridge the climb does not feel as steep as when we played down the 5th.  This is probably because the 6th has already stolen a number of metres back by having the green slightly higher than down towards the rocks.

This hole turns back towards the ridge/Hill and the tee shot feels quite tight as the hole is placed in a small valley.  The tee shot must be precise in the middle or to the right of centre if not you will be blocked by a protruding mound with bushes and trees on top.  Here is the view from from the centre of the fairway.  A relatively nice hole but not a special hole that anyone would remember.



A view looking down the hole again with beautiful views of the sea. On the left you can see the 5th fairway and the change in height difference between 7th fairway and the extra ridge players must tackle on the 5th.  This green was the first green that I felt had some strategy within the green.  There is a step up to the back right of the green so if you play long and the flag is on the bottom tier you could be in trouble.  I am not a fan of tiered greens but this one was nicely done. A bunker short right was also nicely placed.

« Last Edit: December 27, 2009, 09:37:21 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #64 on: December 27, 2009, 10:12:38 AM »
Hole 8 - Par 5 - 505 m

The wind was with us on the day we played this hole and all the drives ended up on the slope before the ridge crossing the fairway.  I am not sure if the playing the hole further back would have made much difference on the day.  The ridge across the middle of the fairway created a blind shot on your next shot.



This next photo shows the blow out bunkers that have been shaped.  To me they look shabby and unnatural and do not add to the hole at all.  They would almost be better if they actually ate into the fairway at a diagonal angle to at least look as if they are adding to the hole.



Over the ridge a superb green site awaits, however one part of the hole that I do not like is yet another blind shot over a ridge to landing area strewn with trees and bushes waiting to severely punish a wayward shot.  There is not much width in landing area either.









Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #65 on: December 27, 2009, 10:25:53 AM »
Hole 9 - Par 4 - 340 m

After finishing with the beautifully designed 8th green you climb over a small ridge to then be presented with the ninth returning to the clubhouse.  Another blind shot is required although some would argue semi-blind.  The fairway tilts dramatically from right to left and the club have now created another blowout.  This time at the bottom of the slope near the end of the fairway.  How do women play this hole?





An open approach to the green is shown below.



Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #66 on: December 27, 2009, 10:29:06 AM »
Hole 8 - Par 5 - 505 m... Over the ridge a superb green site awaits, however one part of the hole that I do not like is yet another blind shot over a ridge to landing area strewn with trees and bushes waiting to severely punish a wayward shot.  There is not much width in landing area either.

Not much width?

This is the last 150m or so of the hole, playing from right of image, with the image cutting off pretty much at the top of the dune that makes the second shot blind (NB - dark rectangle top of pic is the nursery green, not a dam/pond).



If that is "not much width" for the landing area of a blind shot then I'm not sure I've encountered a blind shot that has enough width.

Which blind non-approach shots would you give as an example of sufficient width?

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #67 on: December 27, 2009, 10:49:30 AM »
How wide is the fairway Scott?  Is it rough outside the fairway?  Are the trees and bushes in play or not?  Can you get stuck behind the trees on the left?  

You also asked : Which blind non-approach shots would you give as an example of sufficient width?

Just because an area is wide does not mean there is playable width.  The best example of width on a blind non approach shot would be the ninth at Royal County Down.  The shot is from an elevated tee over a huge ridge down to a fairway that is so wide you could fit a few football pitches in there.
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #68 on: December 27, 2009, 11:07:26 AM »
I have just measured the fairway at the widest part and it is all of 28 metres wide.  Royal County Down is similar in width of the fairway around 35 metres but the rough is sparse and there are no trees or bushes where the ball can be lost at ground level.
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Emil Weber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #69 on: December 27, 2009, 11:20:48 AM »
I'll  have to disagree with 7 and 8.

7 is a strong hole and the drive is much more forgiving than you say, Brian. The fairway is almost bowl-shaped and gathers everything slightly offline towards the center. The corridor is pretty wide, too.
Anyways, what makes the hole is the approach to the elevated, false-fronted green which, I reckon, is the best on the course. A very demanding shot and to me it's a mystery how you can say "not a special hole that anyone would remember".


No wonder you didnt find 8 a good hole, you simply chose the wrong option. A drive to the bottom of the dune a) has to be squeezed between the 2 blowouts and b) leaves you with an almost impossible 2nd shot over the steep dune. The smart play is to lay up well short of the dune, where its much wider, and the 2nd shot a bit easier.
I agree with Scott that there is plenty of space behind the dune.

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #70 on: December 27, 2009, 11:27:14 AM »
The rough does well to get longer than 3" and it's far from thick like a lot of links rough, so you won't be losing a pill in the rough, which leaves a couple of small bushes either side where you could indeed lose your ball, but are highly unlikely to.

I realise you didn't enjoy the course playing many holes from the ladies' tees, and reading a few of Ian A's "snipes" you perhaps didn't play your best golf, but I do think you are being harsh on holes like 5 and 7 and finding major fault where IMO it doesn't exist on 8.

To each their own, of course.


Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #71 on: December 27, 2009, 06:14:04 PM »
I'll  have to disagree with 7 and 8.

7 is a strong hole and the drive is much more forgiving than you say, Brian. The fairway is almost bowl-shaped and gathers everything slightly offline towards the center. The corridor is pretty wide, too.
Anyways, what makes the hole is the approach to the elevated, false-fronted green which, I reckon, is the best on the course. A very demanding shot and to me it's a mystery how you can say "not a special hole that anyone would remember".

Emil,

Fair enough that you don't agree with me about the hole but you have not explained why you think it is a good hole.  The look of the hole off the tee is bland.  The green is nice and I have said that but what else is good about the hole.  Can you explain the strategy for me from off the tee to the green?

Thanks.
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #72 on: December 27, 2009, 06:26:59 PM »
The rough does well to get longer than 3" and it's far from thick like a lot of links rough, so you won't be losing a pill in the rough, which leaves a couple of small bushes either side where you could indeed lose your ball, but are highly unlikely to.

I realise you didn't enjoy the course playing many holes from the ladies' tees, and reading a few of Ian A's "snipes" you perhaps didn't play your best golf, but I do think you are being harsh on holes like 5 and 7 and finding major fault where IMO it doesn't exist on 8.

To each their own, of course.


Scott,

Fair comments about 8 especially if the rough does not get up much higher than 3" then I stand corrected.

When it comes to the golf I played at NSW, yes I played awful 15 stableford points off a 9 handicap.  However, I played awful all week.  The only time I played to my handicap was 4 over par on the front nine at Royal Melbourne where I had two birdies, one on hole 3 and the other on 5.  Apart from that I think I averaged about 17 points per course.

So while the guys like having a dig about how crap I played at NSW, I played crap at all the courses so feel I can judge them pretty fairly.   ;D

There were over 60 people that played the course on the day and I would hazard a guess that at least half to 2/3 would say the course is not as good as they were hoping it to be.  They would also say that the course was fun to play with beautiful views but as Tim Liddy has mentioned it just didn't look or play right.  Tim is one of the greatest architects that has been involved with design and I respect him tremendously as well as his opinion.  Let me just say, I had not discussed his opinions or mine before I saw his remarks on the other thread.
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Emil Weber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #73 on: December 27, 2009, 06:55:31 PM »
I'll  have to disagree with 7 and 8.

7 is a strong hole and the drive is much more forgiving than you say, Brian. The fairway is almost bowl-shaped and gathers everything slightly offline towards the center. The corridor is pretty wide, too.
Anyways, what makes the hole is the approach to the elevated, false-fronted green which, I reckon, is the best on the course. A very demanding shot and to me it's a mystery how you can say "not a special hole that anyone would remember".

Emil,

Fair enough that you don't agree with me about the hole but you have not explained why you think it is a good hole.  The look of the hole off the tee is bland.  The green is nice and I have said that but what else is good about the hole.  Can you explain the strategy for me from off the tee to the green?

Thanks.

There is no real strategy, but not every good hole needs to have a special "strategy". A long, straight tee shot leaves with an easier approach.
What makes the hole good is that it is fun and challenging to play. A good tee shot and an incredibly fun second shot.

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New South Wales - routing, pictures and opinion from Norvegia
« Reply #74 on: December 27, 2009, 09:49:04 PM »
Hole 9 - Par 4 - 340 m

  How do women play this hole?


Ouch,

Brian, I walked the course last June on a business trip that unfortunately did not allow a chance to play. I followed two women and although I did not see how they played their shots into this hole I did watch as the putted over the eyebwow on the left of the green for over 15 minutes; they seemed to honestly relish the challange. I chatted with them briefly and they honestly seeemed to be really enjoying their game there; I never sensed they felt unable to meet the challange. I have another trip scheduled there in Jan.; should I give the place a miss and just head to the beaches instead?
 
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter