high praise from Whitten re Castle Stuart

[Peter Pallotta]

John - maybe I've had too much coffee, but I detect a very subtle architectural exploration in your questions about grammar and punctuation, as if you were analogizing Adam's use of commas (technically correct, but a bit choppy) and Dan's more flowing (and  humourous) use of identifiers/quotes so as to comment on the Castle Stuart golf course, i.e. to suggest, perhaps, that in "perfectly conceived and executed" designs, so much of the final result and finished product depends in fact not on the 'sentence' itself but on the quality and imagination in the use of the 'commas' and 'quotes'....the 'tie-ins' that go so far in separating the merely good from the very good. 

I've had too much coffee; or am giving you too much credit; or too little.

P

[John Chilver-Stainer]

It's not in the punctuation it's all to do with the pronounciation .....


Just do me one favor in the future -  don't call Mr. Whitten,  Ron and then call Brad - 

Dr. Klein in the same forum?

[JC Jones]

John - maybe I've had too much coffee, but I detect a very subtle architectural exploration in your questions about grammar and punctuation, as if you were analogizing Adam's use of commas (technically correct, but a bit choppy) and Dan's more flowing (and  humourous) use of identifiers/quotes so as to comment on the Castle Stuart golf course, i.e. to suggest, perhaps, that in "perfectly conceived and executed" designs, so much of the final result and finished product depends in fact not on the 'sentence' itself but on the quality and imagination in the use of the 'commas' and 'quotes'....the 'tie-ins' that go so far in separating the merely good from the very good. 

I've had too much coffee; or am giving you too much credit; or too little.

P

Or perhaps he is saying that in perfectly conceived and executed designs there is a tendency for them to be choppy?

Or perhaps he has no idea what he is saying and neither do we.

[Peter Pallotta]

The latter is probably the case, JC (and thanks for using "we"), but sometimes it's good to believe in something precisely BECAUSE it's absurd.

[Mitch Hantman]

Jim,

I cannot begin to know about the conception of this golf course, because I wasn't there when the project was conceived.  It is, however, extremely well executed, detail-wise, to my eye.

[David_Tepper]

From Golf World's Top 100 Courses In Britain & Ireland, re: Castle Stuart -

"The course that Parsinen came up with maximises every single natural feature in what is a masterpiece of design and execution."

"A couple of our panelists even went so far as to say it was "the best new design in the UK and Ireland since the last war."

Clearly, Ron Whitten is not the only one who likes the course!

[Richard Phinney]

I played Castle Stuart and Dornoch back to back on two supernaturally beautiful November days a couple of weeks ago.  Both courses were deserted (actually, Dornoch had two groups on it, Castle Stuart none). The ground conditions were remarkably similar (excellent for the time of year), still pretty firm.  I'm a sceptic when it comes to new links course developments, but I think one would have to be churlish not to admit that CS and Dornoch can be discussed in the same breath.   The hugely enjoyable greens are obviously inspired by Dornoch, elevated and quirky and demanding to get onto, but manageable to putt on.  And the settings – not surprisingly given their proxmimy -  are not dissimilar, a mixture of some holes hugging the water's edge and others high up overlooking the course below.

The tee-shots, with their abnormal width, are, however, more Kingsbarns. But I felt the options of where to drive it were at least more real than illusory (not sure if that is as true at KB). Despite the width there was definitely some premium on placement.  The risk reward ratios are perhaps a little too repetitive and precise (you can sort of feel the architect m saying, OK, there should be a 60% benefit for hitting it to the left side of the fairway, but it should be 45% more dangerous), and likewise, on approach shots, it seems to me there were quite a lot of holes where the safe play was more or less the same, sliding the ball off a subtle or not so subtle bank on one side of the green or the other to avoid the more severe trouble on the other side. 

I found it a more satisfying track than Kingsbarns - the holes were just a little less theatrical, more intimate, a little more traditional even.  And putting the most spectacular 3 holes along the ocean at the very beginning of the round is, suprisingly enough, fantastic. Just puts you in a great frame of mind. And I was charmed by the little par 3 8th, which requires a bouncy downhill shot through natural seeming contours to a punchbowl green (Dornoch surprises with a sunken green on the front side as well) The green proper is hidden by the slightly raised undulations just in front, so the flag looks as if it is just stuck in a field.  I'm sure there have been dozens of raw holes similar to it over time, on both links and inland courses, and it just just harkens back to golf before bulldozers, but very nicely done indeed.  A brave hole, I thought, on a course which by its nature is meant to visually spectacular. 

Ultimately, I do believe the much vaunted width on CS lets it down.  It seemed to me  that almost all tee shots were even more foregiving than they seemed visually (and few look that dangerous), with subtle raised areas on the side of fairways to help the ball bounce back into play and away from the ocean and gorse  (can a great course be so relentlessly friendly off the tee?)  It also means that unless you regularly putt for eagle, the par 5s are relatively uninteresting until you get 80 yards from the green. 

But a stirring and spectacular and hugely fun place to play.  After playing the two courses on consecutive days, I wasn't sure I could think of a course more like Dornoch than CS in Scotland, even though, paradoxically, CS is far more like Kingsbarns.

[Sean_A]

Richard

Nice blurb on CS.  You have not been the first to question the seemingly extarordinarily wide fairways.  I find this angle most interesting because I can't think of a single course of merit I would say is too wide, but there are stacks of courses which are too narrow.  Would the course seem wide in 30mph wind? In other words, are there holes/shots where a good cross wind significantly narrow the course? 

BTW I really enjoy your Links of Heaven.  It is one of the first books I read about golf in Ireland and one of the most leafed through since.  Isn't it time to hit the book trail again?

Ciao

[Terry Lavin]

 I'm a sceptic when it comes to new links course developments, but I think one would have to be churlish not to admit that CS and Dornoch can be discussed in the same breath.   


I found it a more satisfying track than Kingsbarns - the holes were just a little less theatrical, more intimate, a little more traditional even. 

But a stirring and spectacular and hugely fun place to play.  After playing the two courses on consecutive days, I wasn't sure I could think of a course more like Dornoch than CS in Scotland, even though, paradoxically, CS is far more like Kingsbarns.

Thanks for these very intriguing observations.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Castle Stuart is far better than The Castle Course IMHO, but I would be wary in overrating a course that is in essence a compromise of worldwide golf with a heavy topping of “Scottishness” in the hope of trying to sell it to both the Home and Overseas markets. Original item it is not.

It is an international course on land fit for purpose but one could be forgiven for thinking it was built over an old railway yard with its abundance of sleeper. All round an interesting course but let down by stupid attempts to fake little bits of it, yet still what I would define as a stateless international course seeking a  National identity.

For the time being Scotland is just acting as a Foster parent. But is it here for the Scots or our Overseas Visitors,  we will have to wait and see.

My opinion for what it is worth to those on this site

Melvyn

[David_Tepper]

Richard Phinney -

Thanks for your post and your observations.

FYI, I was told by a reliable source that the primary design inspirations for Castle Stuart were Royal Dornoch & Cruden Bay.

DT

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

I have heard the same but with a large dollop of Internationalism thrown in for good fiscal measure.

Melvyn

[Richard Phinney]

Richard

Nice blurb on CS.  You have not been the first to question the seemingly extarordinarily wide fairways.  I find this angle most interesting because I can't think of a single course of merit I would say is too wide, but there are stacks of courses which are too narrow.  Would the course seem wide in 30mph wind? In other words, are there holes/shots where a good cross wind significantly narrow the course? 

Its a very good question, which I found myself asking time and time again.  but you know it WAS breezy  (maybe 10-15 mph though gloriously dry and sunny) and the ground was not soft by any means.  And yet I rarely (ever?) felt I had to worry about the roll if I hit it off line.  I mean Dornoch is not the narrowest course in the world by any means but even in November the ball could race into a bunker or the rough, and there are at least a few holes where the gorse or other severe hazard prey on your mind off the tee.  At CS there are back to back holes on the front nine where there is just a crazy amount of space to hit it off the tee.  Its fine to put a premium on placement in order to set up an approach better, but i think to take the element of danger out of the equation is going too far.  And by making it so wide, you also remove the sense of swing and change of direction that virtually all great links courses have.  At CS tou are never really cutting even a tiny corner anywhere, its always fairway, fairway fairway up ahead.    Ultimately it may be get back to what this course is designed for - golfers who won't play it very often. so it can't have quirky, hidden terrors. And when there are visual terrors its often a kind of a trick - there's more room or the fairway slopes away less than you think, or the architect inserts banks to keep you in play.  So on a windy day it has to be very easy to play safe (though difficult to put it in EXACTLY the right place).  It eliminates the thrill of hitting a great drive in difficult circumstances (I played a competition in Murcar in a gale over the summer and boy, was it satisfying to hit the fairway) - And that's been an intrinsic part of great golf holes forever (the kind of shot Darwin often describes). 

And yet the greens are quite penal really, in a good, Dornoch-like way. There the architectural steps to save golfers from losing their balls (with hidden waste areas etc) are apt, since they don't give you an easy recovery shot.

This may make it sound like I didn't like CS.  Quite the opposite...just me wrestling with contradictions inherent in microdesigning a links.

[George Pazin]

And yet I rarely (ever?) felt I had to worry about the roll if I hit it off line.

The question I'd ask is, do you feel there are preferred sides of fairways? From your earlier post, it seemed yes. If so, I don't have a problem with great width. Being able to find your ball and play it quickly, but perhaps have a less favorable approach, is close to ideal in my book.

[Sean_A]

Richard

Nice blurb on CS.  You have not been the first to question the seemingly extarordinarily wide fairways.  I find this angle most interesting because I can't think of a single course of merit I would say is too wide, but there are stacks of courses which are too narrow.  Would the course seem wide in 30mph wind? In other words, are there holes/shots where a good cross wind significantly narrow the course? 

Its a very good question, which I found myself asking time and time again.  but you know it WAS breezy  (maybe 10-15 mph though gloriously dry and sunny) and the ground was not soft by any means.  And yet I rarely (ever?) felt I had to worry about the roll if I hit it off line.  I mean Dornoch is not the narrowest course in the world by any means but even in November the ball could race into a bunker or the rough, and there are at least a few holes where the gorse or other severe hazard prey on your mind off the tee.  At CS there are back to back holes on the front nine where there is just a crazy amount of space to hit it off the tee.  Its fine to put a premium on placement in order to set up an approach better, but i think to take the element of danger out of the equation is going too far.  And by making it so wide, you also remove the sense of swing and change of direction that virtually all great links courses have.  At CS tou are never really cutting even a tiny corner anywhere, its always fairway, fairway fairway up ahead.    Ultimately it may be get back to what this course is designed for - golfers who won't play it very often. so it can't have quirky, hidden terrors. And when there are visual terrors its often a kind of a trick - there's more room or the fairway slopes away less than you think, or the architect inserts banks to keep you in play.  So on a windy day it has to be very easy to play safe (though difficult to put it in EXACTLY the right place).  It eliminates the thrill of hitting a great drive in difficult circumstances (I played a competition in Murcar in a gale over the summer and boy, was it satisfying to hit the fairway) - And that's been an intrinsic part of great golf holes forever (the kind of shot Darwin often describes). 

And yet the greens are quite penal really, in a good, Dornoch-like way. There the architectural steps to save golfers from losing their balls (with hidden waste areas etc) are apt, since they don't give you an easy recovery shot.

This may make it sound like I didn't like CS.  Quite the opposite...just me wrestling with contradictions inherent in microdesigning a links.

Richard

Thanks for the response.  Of course its always hard to know what one means by wide or narrow.  For instance, I tend to think of 30 yard wide fairways as more on the narrow side and very narrow if we are talking about one or more of A) championship course and its inherent rough/bunkering, B) windy conditions (say 20+mph), C) very firm conditions and D) hilly terrain.  So from my perspective if these conditions exist it isn't unreasonable to expect 40 yard fairways with some extra leeway of light rough.  How wide are the fairways at CS?

Ciao

[Niall C]

George

To answer your question to Richard on preferred approaches, in some instances the answer is yes but very often it doesn't matter a toss which exacerbates the feeling of "it doesn't really matter" with the tee shot. If you couple that with the lack of penalty on the fairway ie scarcity of fairway bunkers, the course could do with a good bit more interest beyond its obvious aesthetics IMO.

Also as DT says the course is heavily influenced by Dornoch in terms of routing in the way it has plays on more than one level with sea views. Likewise Kingsbarns was designed in a similar fashion to maximise sea views.


Sean

The fairways at CS are the widest I've ever played. Ironically the narrowest fairways tend to be the ones that are most exposed holes.
 
Niall

[Garland Bayley]

I've got news for you folks. You need to get off of syntax and onto semantics. Dr. Klein earned his title by contributing new knowledge to the body of knowledge of the world. Ron earned his title, "Mr." by surviving past age 18. Therefore, it would be preferred that you call your equal Ron, by his first name, unless you are 18 or under in which case you should use Mr. Those of you without the Ph. D. are perfectly in the right by referring to Brad as Dr. Klein.

GB

[Dave McCollum]

But isn’t Mr. Whitten a Juris Doctor, a lawyer with a professional doctorate in law which like other professional doctorates (M.D., D.O., D.D.S., etc.) that don’t require a research dissertation?  Like others here, who cares?

[JC Jones]

Unlike the others, though (I assume), the JD is not the terminal degree in law.  A few decades ago they decided to change the previous law degree (the L.L.B.) to the JD to put it on the same level (terminology wise) as the MD.  The ABA has recently said they are ok with lawyers being called Doctor but I, for one, have never felt comfortable with that.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Gambers

That’s all well and good but what does he know about Golf and on this occasion Scottish Golf

Melvyn

[Dave McCollum]

At times I’m not uncomfortable calling lawyers any number of things.  Certainly not Dr. in most cases.

[Kris Shreiner]

There have been all types of takes on CS so far, but I've not heard much on some of the the most important information. Roughly, how many full PAYING rounds has CS done since it opened. It's won every plaudit possible. Been anointed the second coming of the The Old by some. Has a Euro event in the forecast. Most of the talk I've heard spoke of light play. I know Royal Dornoch's numbers are down somewhat the last two years.

Quite a bit went into the effort to create CS.  Of those that have played it, has anyone been out, besides a group event, where there were 50-60 players, or more on the course. Where the grill was busy, the place buzzing?

Though the vastness off the tee may take away some intrigue, how interesting and effective were the approach options and green complexs? Did windy conditions allow the ball to be held, on the back of some of those infinity greens, when hit low or run in? Are the exposed greens, most near the sea, adapting well?

Gil, Mark, Stuart and the strong supporting cast deserve high praise, for a creating a quality course that certainly presented challenges, of which the economic were unforseen. The Euro event making its way up there concerns me. I certainly don't wish to see a return to the pillage and plunder mentality that was starting to take hold up there in the Inverness region, before this latest, tempering correction. When the global garbage parade finds something special, they usually waste no time in exploiting and destroying it. Witness Mr. Trump's multilation in progress.

Many view golf as a business first. That is what has gotten the game where it is...trouble! There's a right way to do it. Take a light-footprint, long-term view. A high-dollar, whore out of the Highlands certainly isn't the answer. The locals up there want new
opportunities, but not at the expense of their wonderful way of life. I hope all those involved, with future projects there, respect the hard won, timeless charm of that tremendous part of the planet. We'll all lose if the foolish get their way.

Cheers 

[David_Tepper]

"Roughly, how many full PAYING rounds has CS done since it opened."

Kris Shreiner -

I thought this site was devoted to golf course architecture & design, not the golf course business.

I have spent a fair amount of time in the Highlands over the past 7 years. I visited CS several times while the course was under construction and have played the course twice since it opened. The vast majority of the "locals" in the area that I have encountered hold CS in high regard and are delighted it was built. They are looking forward to the full development of the project (hotel, spa, 2nd course, etc.).

I have also had the pleasure of meeting some of the people intimately involved with the project. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind they are dedicated to making the project work on all levels; for the guests who will be visiting, for the employees who will be working there and for the Inverness area as a whole.        

DT

[Kris Shreiner]

David,

Are we reading selectively?  My reflections addressed a wide spectrum of subject matter regarding the course. Where in my post did any personal questioning of those involved with the CS project arise? If you bothered to FULLY read my post, you would not make such poor comments.

Why do some on this site try to turn candid queries into personal attacks. I could easily rip you sir. You know nothing about me or my rather deep connection to the region. I don't expect you to, but your defensive remarks don't answer one question I posed, now do they. Funny, coming from someone calling me out on a non-architecture bent. I love the region. So do you, from all you state. Where should we differ from what I've written?

Cheers 



All,
Please pardon some choppy text and a typo or two, it did not tranfer to the post as it appeared on my proof-read post.

[Garland Bayley]

See below