[Anthony Gray]

  These features belong on modern courses. They add nuance and feel.


   Anthony

[Gary Slatter]

Did you mean "nuance and fuel"?   
wood faced bunkers have their place on ancient and modern designs, however partial wood faced bunkers designed to look just look old suck !   The pictures of Old Mack look authentic, the ones I saw of Castle Stuart look faux or tacky.

IMHO    It's like the homey wooden signs that you see on the east coast - in Cape Breton they are old wooden shop signs, perfect. In Maine they are new old(e) looking shoppe signs, tacky.  Prestwick, perfect. Harbourtown, perfect. OM, perfect, CS, not so.

[Tom_Doak]

Gary:

I would love to know how you would explain the difference between the two.

[Anthony Gray]

Did you mean "nuance and fuel"?   
wood faced bunkers have their place on ancient and modern designs, however partial wood faced bunkers designed to look just look old suck !   The pictures of Old Mack look authentic, the ones I saw of Castle Stuart look faux or tacky.

IMHO    It's like the homey wooden signs that you see on the east coast - in Cape Breton they are old wooden shop signs, perfect. In Maine they are new old(e) looking shoppe signs, tacky.  Prestwick, perfect. Harbourtown, perfect. OM, perfect, CS, not so.

  You can get a hot dog at Castle Stuart at the halfway house. Try doing that at Prestwick. I'm partial to faux. What in this world is real anyway. The way some of these guys talk about Castle Stuart you would thing a cosmetic sugeon designed the place.


  Anthony

[Anthony Gray]

Gary:

I would love to know how you would explain the difference between the two.

  Take that Slater. See you soon.

  Anthony

[Tom_Doak]

Anthony:

I'm not saying there is not any difference.  I haven't played Castle Stuart yet, I've only seen the pictures, and there did appear to be some differences.  But I would love for someone to explain it to me (and to everyone else) so I know what we are doing right ... or, to find out that there is no real difference and it's just bias.

[Steve Lang]

  was wondering if the wood used at Old Mac bunkers came from old Bandon area harbors or piers??

weather there certainly appears capable of ageing or adding character to wood quickly

[Tom_Doak]

Steve:

I think we re-used the same railroad ties that we used for paths when we built Pacific Dunes ... they were too slippery foot traffic and too bumpy for maintenance vehicles, and have been taken out and replaced with gravel or stone over the years.  Neither is a problem in the bunkers.

[Anthony Gray]

  Some hot dogs are all beef and some have cereal fillers but they taste the same.

  Anthony

[Niall C]

Tom

If you are asking how to tell the difference between old sleepers and sleepers made to appear old then its quite easy. The sleepers at Castle Stuart mostly have been treated with some sort of preservative (?) and also have fresh hammer marks on them where someone has tried to make them look distressed. Give it a couple of years and they might look the part but at the moment the just look new. Of course I could be talking rubbish and someone might be able to prove that they have been suitting on a railway track for the last 50 years but they certainly don't look like old sleepers that have been weathered and decayed.

How easy is it to get old sleepers in any kind of volume these days anyway ? As far as I know in the UK the railways have been using concrete sleepers for decades so suspect the used timber sleepers were discarded years ago.

Also I don't think its about how the wood looks, its about how it is used. Some of the sleepers at Castle Stuart are obviously used for effect rather than for any practical use.

Now if you could arrange to fly me over to Bandon I would be happy to give you a free assessment of the sleepers at Old MacDonald.

Niall

[Gary Slatter]

Gary:

I would love to know how you would explain the difference between the two.

one is authentic, one is made to look old

[Mike Cirba]

Wouldn't the most "authentic" sleepers on a new course be from freshly cut wood?   

[Tom_Doak]

Also I don't think its about how the wood looks, its about how it is used. Some of the sleepers at Castle Stuart are obviously used for effect rather than for any practical use.

Now if you could arrange to fly me over to Bandon I would be happy to give you a free assessment of the sleepers at Old MacDonald.

Niall

Niall:

I haven't been to Castle Stuart either, so if you want to trade airline tickets, we'll check each other's work.

I think your last observation could be correct, though.  We only used the sleepers at Old Macdonald on three large bunkers where it was not just plausible, but highly likely that we might have to deal with wind erosion.  On 17 we didn't want wind erosion that close to the green, and on 16 we didn't want the bunker to collapse from the outside ... hence the sleepers.

[Gary Slatter]

Wouldn't the most "authentic" sleepers on a new course be from freshly cut wood?   

would a new course have sleepers if it wasn't trying to reproduce something from previous era as at OM ?   

Harbourtown uses sleepers well and I'm sure when they lean too much or look old they will be straightened or repaired.

[Colin Sheehan]

The sleepers were sourced from the same estate upon which the golf course now resides. They were not additionally distressed.

They were used to add variety and accent and re-create an era prior to 100% revetting, which was prior to the 1930s.

I speak from the perspective of someone involved in the project, but not since 2007. The bunkers were an homage to a previous era. That's what's so surprising to me about the Castle Stuart bunker haters. It was done with reverence for the past.

We loved the look and style of the bunkers in Horace Hutchinson's British Golf Links. At the same time, we wanted to avoiding having every bunker revetted like the 100,000 other links bunkers in Britain. So you get a wide variety and diversity in the shapes and looks. Isn't that something we all look for in our favorite golf courses?

And by the way, the team that did the bunkers, when they turned their attention to those bunkers that were fully revetted, they did some of the most intriguing, complicated, artistic revetting varieties I had ever seen. They did wonders on bulge and roll on the faces, changing depth of the sod cuts, alternating the right-side up, right-side down pieces...each one has its own dna. That probably gets over-looked by most golfers, but those who care to really examine them will come away impressed. And you probably can't catch those nuances from a photoessay on this website. Especially if you begin with strong prejudices.  

[Gary Slatter]

The sleepers were sourced from the same estate upon which the golf course now resides. They were not additionally distressed.

They were used to add variety and accent and re-create an era prior to 100% revetting, which was prior to the 1930s.

I speak from the perspective of someone involved in the project, but not since 2007. The bunkers were an homage to a previous era. That's what's so surprising to me about the Castle Stuart bunker haters. It was done with reverence for the past.

We loved the look and style of the bunkers in Horace Hutchinson's British Golf Links. At the same time, we wanted to avoiding having every bunker revetted like the 100,000 other links bunkers in Britain. So you get a wide variety and diversity in the shapes and looks. Isn't that something we all look for in our favorite golf courses?

And by the way, the team that did the bunkers, when they turned their attention to those bunkers that were fully revetted, they did some of the most intriguing, complicated, artistic revetting varieties I had ever seen. They did wonders on bulge and roll on the faces, changing depth of the sod cuts, alternating the right-side up, right-side down pieces...each one has its own dna. That probably gets over-looked by most golfers, but those who care to really examine them will come away impressed. And you probably can't catch those nuances from a photoessay on this website. Especially if you begin with strong prejudices.  

I love the variety of bunkering styles at CS - excellent work and possible trend setting efforts ! 

[Jon Wiggett]

I have had the opportunity to see CS a couple of times this spring and have bee very impressed. I think inside the next 2 to 3 years it will look as though it has been there for 100 years. The clubhouse looks really cool too! A big well done to all invovled.

Jon

[David_Tepper]

I played Castle Stuart a little over 2 weeks ago. Aside from lining the path on the uphill walk from the 12th green to the 13th tee and the steps/surrounds on a few tee boxes, I thought the use of the sleepers elsewhere on the course was barely noticeable. The scale and grandeur of the place tends to overwhelm the detailing of the course.     

[Melvyn Morrow]

Colin

Just my opinion for what its worth but..

The source of the sleepers are of no importance but to try to dress up a new course IN SCOTLAND to make it look far older is just not acceptable in my book. Who the hell are you trying to fool or con, Christ it’s the Home of Golf and some of us know more about it and its history that some of the modern designers.

The whole point which some seem to fail to understand is that what appears to be a very interesting a new course look cheap. This crap may work in other parts of the world but its just showing contempt of the Scottish Game.

If someone had bothered to look at other old courses with sleepers they may have noticed that they are of a good real age with the tops of the sleepers more or less level and not in a crude crenellated style. As for faking the bunkers with parts of sleepers that just a bloody joke and is certainly not deserving on a course like Castle Stuart.

Let the course stand on its playability and how it blends into the local landscape. Fake in an old Country like Scotland is like asking some of us to take The Castle Course seriously, before its been partial rebuild.







A little respect for the old country if you do not mind when it comes to golf. If you can’t take criticism then don’t try and fake the age of a course design. After all the course should be judged as I said before on its quality of play and enjoyment. So why bother faking something that has no real relevance in the first place, its bound to cause some response or is it the case that local golfers these days just do not get considered when a new course is designed in Scotland? 

What’s that saying you can fool some of the people some of the time………

Melvyn

[Scott Warren]

Hi Melvyn,

Where and when did sheep learn the art of revetment to sure-up their windbreaks?

Let's be honest: 99% of bunkers are "fake". I can understand why the people behind Castle Stuart and some of those who have played it and enjoyed the course are a bit perplexed as to the strength and tone of the criticism re: the sleepers.

Did your opinion change, either for the better or the worse, when you saw Castle Stuart in person as opposed to your initial feelings from simply seeing pictures?

[Niall C]

Niall:

I haven't been to Castle Stuart either, so if you want to trade airline tickets, we'll check each other's work.


..damn, I knew there was a flaw in my cunning plan

[David_Tepper]

Melvyn -

Just how many "local golfers" have you spoken with who have played Castle Stuart?

I have spoken with a dozen or more and they all love the place!

DT

[Niall C]

The sleepers were sourced from the same estate upon which the golf course now resides. They were not additionally distressed.

They were used to add variety and accent and re-create an era prior to 100% revetting, which was prior to the 1930s.

I speak from the perspective of someone involved in the project, but not since 2007. The bunkers were an homage to a previous era. That's what's so surprising to me about the Castle Stuart bunker haters. It was done with reverence for the past.

We loved the look and style of the bunkers in Horace Hutchinson's British Golf Links. At the same time, we wanted to avoiding having every bunker revetted like the 100,000 other links bunkers in Britain. So you get a wide variety and diversity in the shapes and looks. Isn't that something we all look for in our favorite golf courses?

And by the way, the team that did the bunkers, when they turned their attention to those bunkers that were fully revetted, they did some of the most intriguing, complicated, artistic revetting varieties I had ever seen. They did wonders on bulge and roll on the faces, changing depth of the sod cuts, alternating the right-side up, right-side down pieces...each one has its own dna. That probably gets over-looked by most golfers, but those who care to really examine them will come away impressed. And you probably can't catch those nuances from a photoessay on this website. Especially if you begin with strong prejudices.  

Colin

Please don't put me in the camp of those that hate Castle Stuart if there is such a camp which I seriously doubt. I do however think the use and look of some of the sleepers, and indeed some of the bunkering, looks a bit naff, especially when you have "old" sleepers and "degraded" bunkering juxtaposed well maintained fairways, greens, paths and a top notch clubhouse. It just looks as though its there for affectation. I take your point that it was an intended nod towards days of old but in days of old the use of sleepers/revetted bunkering wasn't a style issue as you infer but was one of practicality (IMHO). Some of the reveting etc just doesn't look as though it was done for any practical reasons which puts it out of context for a traditional scottish links, again in my opinion. That for me is the issue, not how artistically or well made they are but why they are there.

That said, David Tepper made the very good point that given the scale of the course they aren't really a focal point. I say that as someone who's played the course a few times and been round it with Stuart McColm (?). I do applaud the team for there efforts overall but do wish they had toned down the Disneyland effect for the benefit of the home golfers, who seem to be forming a large portion of those playing it at the moment.

Jon W

Not sure how much more the course will mature of the next few years but even if it "fully" matures it still won't look like something out of the early 1900's given the scale of the place. Not a criticism of the course just a comment.

Niall

[Tim Gavrich]

I'm a big fan of sleepers on golf courses (by Mike Strantz, Pete Dye, anybody) and the ones at Castle Stuart look great, as do the ones at OM.  I could see how the half-sleeper/half-revetted look might be a little odd to people, but it'll do for me.

[Tom_Doak]

Can somebody please post the railroad-tie wedding-cake-feature photo from Ryan Farrow's report on the new courses at Mission Hills Haikou, so Melvyn can see it?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()