Are Designers on GCA.com subject to a Code of Silence?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Ulrich

Askernish IMHO has been designed and built for an exceptional small about of money, it is being maintained again on a very small budget, yet the course has turned out to be – according to those who have played it more that enjoyable through to exhilarating, not to mention the wonderful routing.

This was done on land which lets just call it fit for purpose having no need for heavy earth moving equipment, no necessity to stripping back the land which attracted the designers there in the first place, then remoulding the whole surface into some fake amusement park idea of a golf course. What they originally saw, they kept – bit of a novel idea, don’t you think for the 21st Century.

Now IHMO, that is something special into day climate where we seem to have been accustom to building up a war chest of funds to pay for the whole process. First land destruction then the relaying of soil and seeding which in the end would have changed the natural nature of that original section that promised so much as a potential golf course. The guys at Askernish never needed earth movers, shaper or any expensive machinery as the design was good, built on land fit for purpose and at a cost that most clubs would give their second course for – is that’s not something special, that as a designers you would want to learn more from and to actually experience the land that accommodated this great course.

It’s not unique, it’s the way things were done but it’s there  today in our faces, so we can learn – if we are interested first hand from the guys who took it upon themselves to achieve the near impossible.

It’s a golfing wonder and I am just surprised why Designers are not flocking to see, play and investigate first-hand what Askernish seem to represent.

The feedback is only via individual GCA.com members who have ventured there to play

Its history reborn and in the making at the same time, but who is really interested.


Trust that gives you all the information you seek.

Melvyn

Mark – what can I say, call me whatever you like; it just shows you for what you are.

 
Kalen, who knows you may well be right, but it got your attention - Marketing, boy can they teach you some tricks or is it?

[Scott Warren]

Melvyn,

If Askernish is the future of golf, could you let us know where to find the available land in the ideal climate in such abundance that it is the game's future to build rustic courses there?

Could you explain how it can be done for fifty thousand quid without the crucial players donating their time and expertise?

Seems to me that Askernish is the exception, not the rule.

[Kris Shreiner]

Melvyn,

If you gauge the responses to your first post, it's obvious the tone was more instigation, than ecouraging, the sharing of thoughts. Mr. Brauer  and Mr. Andrew give the main reasons architects haven't yet offered more on Askernish regarding your questions. If they haven't actually been to the ground to see it, how could they accurately assess what's there?

You have had an affiniity for the place from the outset. I admire and respect your conviction that it is a significant course worthy of study. I totally agree! That said, Machrihansih Dunes, not far from your beloved Askernish, has equal, if not superior merit, on many of the same criteria you tout for Askernish.

It's construction operated under FAR more stringent environment constraints than Askernish's work. I spent time there at MD, walked the ground there repeatedly and followed that project closely. It got slammed by the press when it opened, primarily due to: the very rugged nature of the golf experience, blindness of some shots on holes, lack of definition in spots due to flora protection of rare, or endangered species that restricted mowing, and finally the biggest reason in my view, though you won't buy it... no quality caddie program!

The course is a bit of an untamed beast(YOU would love it!), especiallly when the wind is up and the weather is harsh. I would meld the difficulty of Carnasty (minus the on-course water hazards) and the rugged presentation of Brora, with the blindness of Prestwick. How's that sound to you for stepping up to the tee for a first go 'round, during a testing day, and heading out for what is probably the toughest walk in links golf!

To open a course of that challenge, with no quality caddie counsel to guide one around, and expect commercial success, is madness.

Back to Askernish. Give some time for archtiects to sample it. You are right to sing its praises, but others need to make the trek there to satisfy your hopes of recognition. There is no question that a more efficient, frugal way forward, when prudent, is the way to go. Askernish has many natural advantages, present in few other sites, that enabled this mantra to become a reality there. Let's also realize that the verdict on sustaining the course's economic viability is still out ... only time will confirm it, one way or the other.

Cheers,
Kris

[Melvyn Morrow]

Scott

Whatever happened to being open minded and investigating all possibilities - oh no we do not do that we just stick to spending millions we do not have on courses built in mad locations for golf or as a second thought around a housing estate to sell houses. Alternatively we can build golf courses as just big shallow bunkers with a couple of strips of green, one being the Green or perhaps a lake with just a little island with a flag.

It’s a question of looking and pushing, of seeing and understanding how others have achieved greatness. You want any more answers may I suggest a trip to South Uist and ask ralph and his great Team who have done what many a great Design House has failed to do produce a great course on such a small budget.

Melvyn

[Mark Pearce]

Melvyn,

Go on then, what am I?  In the past I have received PMs asking why I have supported you.  You may not believe it but I really do value your contribution here and that is why I hope, probably foolishly, that at some point you will start at least to try to understand others here and to put your points across better.  Perhaps I am wrong, though, and you really are a troll.   I guess I may never know.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Mark

and its goodnight from this I Can't Believe It's Not Butter Troll

[Scott Warren]

It’s a question of looking and pushing, of seeing and understanding how others have achieved greatness. You want any more answers may I suggest a trip to South Uist and ask ralph and his great Team who have done what many a great Design House has failed to do produce a great course on such a small budget.

Melvyn,

What I'd like to know is the market value of building Askernish.

If all of the experts who participated were paid their going rate for the level of involvement they had, how much would it have cost?

It's disingenuous to say the course only cost £50,000 when some of the most major budget items are more or less absent.

Whatever happened to being open minded and investigating all possibilities - oh no we do not do that we just stick to spending millions we do not have on courses built in mad locations for golf or as a second thought around a housing estate to sell houses. Alternatively we can build golf courses as just big shallow bunkers with a couple of strips of green, one being the Green or perhaps a lake with just a little island with a flag.

I asked you to direct me to all the available land where a course like Askernish could be built (and that includes getting government consent to build). Really, please do.

Not all modern courses are housing estate monstrosities, but perhaps if you played golf in the modern era or had made an effort to educate yourself about the 1995-2010 Golden Age you wouldn't make such ridiculous statements so often.

[Adam Lawrence]

I love Askernish with a passion. I was very, very lucky that, during February 2006, Martin Ebert, who I only knew vaguely at the time, called me and invited me to go up to Uist the following month with him, Gordon Irvine and Chris Haspell (now super at Castle Stuart) to investigate the possibility of reinstating the course.

In March, I took a stupidly early flight to Glasgow in order to connect with the morning plane to Benbecula. It was snowing when we boarded the plane, which didn't bode well for a trip to the islands, but as we flew across the coast, the skies cleared, and we crossed Skye and the Minch with barely a cloud below us. We descended across Uist into Benbecula airport, with the lochans glinting in the sunlight, and were met off the plane by Ralph Thompson.

Ralph drove us straight to the site. Passing Askernish House and coming onto the machair, we all wondered what exactly we had come here for: the land was links to be sure, but fairly flat, with a _very_ basic golf green (the final green of the nine hole course then in play) surrounded by barbed wire, in front of us.

We drove out towards the water's edge, and, at the place where the seventh tee now sits, we had our epiphany. And then, we spent two magical days, brilliantly sunny though brutally cold, trudging through the dunes, trying to locate evidence of old golf holes and figuring out a routing for the course. The routing that Martin produced at the end of those two days has been fairly dramatically changed, but it's still the essence of the course.

I have only been back once since, with golf architects James Edwards and Forrest Richardson in tow, but hardly a day passes when I don't think of Askernish.

BUT

The course exists because a number of talented and far-sighted people - including but not limited to Gordon, Martin, Chris, David Withers, Mike Keiser, Tom Doak, Eric Iverson and others - were prepared to invest time, skill and money in it, with no prospect of a commercial return, and a number of writers, people like John Garrity, have helped to make the place better known. I will defend the sustainability of the Askernish project to the end, because, as I said on here a couple of days ago, so long as there are a small number of people on the island sufficiently interested in golf to keep mowing it, there will be a course there; and the stark, remote beauty of the place will always attract a number of visitors.

It is hard, though, to see how a course built by volunteers with donated equipment and located in a spot that, while more accessible than most might think, is relatively speaking the end of the earth, could be held up as any kind of model for the game or the industry as a whole. The Platonic form of golf, perhaps; but Plato is no model for today's society with good reason.

[archie_struthers]

  ::)U

I'm not buying into that we should bow down to the architects that do post. This doesn't mean I don't appreciate their imput.  If they want to tLk about their work and hopefully , their passion it makes GCA more fun for us all.  One thing I do know is that the emperor sometimes has no clothes and all the opinions posted on site have some validity, irrespective of their occupation.

[Mac Plumart]

Melvyn,

If Askernish is the future of golf, could you let us know where to find the available land in the ideal climate in such abundance that it is the game's future to build rustic courses there?

What about the land in Nebraska/Colorado?  Could this type of course be built there?  Long Island?  Northern Michigan?  Oregon?

Also, David M., I played Maidstone late last year...I don't think they had fairway irrigation then...and the course played brilliantly well.

Perhaps some of the principles employed at Askernish could be spread through out a broader cross section of the golfing world.

How is Askernish different from the following courses in terms of turf, climate, maintenance requirements and the like:

The Old Course,
NGLA,
Maidstone,
Sand Hills,
Ballyneal,
Pacific  Dunes,
Kingsley

[Scott Warren]

Mac,

You've been to Askernish and you are familiar with some of America's finest clubs.

Would anyone you know tolerate - let alone want - Askernish-esque conditioning, or even anything close to it?

[Mac Plumart]

Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  The only think they'd need to do different is mow the greens more frequently.  The first round I had, the greens were rolling very, very, very slow and had these small little white flowers all over them.  It was frustrating to putt on.  But the next day, the greens had been mowed and they rolled faster than the ones at Crail Balcomie and it was great.  I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.  

The fairways were fine, in fact very cool.  The rough...great.  The routing...SPECTACULAR!!!  The greens sites...cool as hell!!

So, that is it.  Mow the greens more frequently and it would be accepted broadly.  

[Scott Warren]

Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  The only think they'd need to do different is mow the greens more frequently.  The first round I had, the greens were rolling very, very, very slow and had these small little white flowers all over them.  It was frustrating to putt on.  But the next day, the greens had been mowed and they rolled faster than the ones at Crail Balcomie and it was great.  I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.  

The fairways were fine, in fact very cool.  The rough...great.  The routing...SPECTACULAR!!!  The greens sites...cool as hell!!

So, that is it.  Mow the greens more frequently and it would be accepted broadly.

Mac,

I am seriously sceptical that the clubs we're talking about - most golfers, in fact, at any club - would tolerate, let alone want, the below style of maintenance/conditioning.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure Askernish is a hell of a lot of fun, the conditioning is part of the charm and it fills a niche - so does Brora. But I am certain that neither is a blueprint for the way forward in golf.

Can we have a show of hands from the Superintendents on here - who of you would still have a job if your course was presented like this?

[Mac Plumart]

Scott...

but isn't that the whole problem?

Would a stereotypical country club golfer embrace Askernish?  No.

But I've heard so many complaints from so many different golfers about completely and utter non-sense that it is pathetic and makes me wonder if anyone understands what golf is.

I've heard lots of complaints about Ballyneal's greens.  Not the undulations, but the fact that the greens are fescue and bumpy.

I've heard complaints about courses being to fast and "bouncy."

I've heards greens are too hard...or too soft.

Bunkers are too pristine...bunkers aren't maincured enough.

Too many blind shots are The National and/or Dismal.

I heard about "circus" putts at Pinehurst #2.

Literally, I could go on and on and on.  

But I was fortunate enough to have a 1976 version of "The World Atlas of Golf" sent to me not too long ago.  Frankly, I look at it and/or read it every night.  One of the striking things to me about the book is the look of the courses.  Like you just said, if the supers of a course today presented his courses like the in the book (by the way, the best courses in the world)...they'd be fired.

And again...that is the whole problem.  Golf is a sport, played outdoors, in the arms of nature.  We need to get away from the stereotypical country club, PGA, fair is good, golf mantra and get the sport back to its roots.

People say that if someone designed a golf course like The Old Course today, they'd be fired.  What the heck kind of statement is that?  People have been flocking to St. Andrews for, literally, centuries to play golf on that ground...but if we built it today, we'd fire the guy.  Well, that tells me that we are idiots today...and we've lost our way.

We've totally lost our way.  A course is good if it gets a lot of members and makes money.  That mentality is begining to make me sick.

I totally believe that Melvyn is right.  Askernish should be studied.  Hell, I've only been golfing for 4 years...and I've been there.  It was one of the most interesting golf courses I've ever seen.  Many of its holes have made my "favorite 18" list.  It is worthy of study.  But very few have gone...why?

Also, if people have been golfing at St. Andrews for centuries and the greatest of the great architects rave about it...shouldn't this be a course every single architect should play, study, and play again and again and again...to figure out why people like it and continue to like it.  

I'll shut up now.  And I am typing off the cuff.  I hope it comes off the right way.  I ain't mad at you, Scott, at all.  I hope it doesn't come off that way.  That is not the intent at all.  I just have this gut busting passion for golf and golf course architecture and, like I said, I think we've really lost our way.  I think Askernish has some keys to getting us back on track.  Maybe not all the answers and/or magic keys...but some of them.

EDIT...by the way, those pictures you posted are SPECTACULAR!!!  Freakin' spectacular!!!

[Eric Smith]

I can't speak to the conditions at Askernish, but when Scott asks if anyone over here would tolerate conditions close to Askernish, I default to the conditions we experienced at Pennard at last year's Buda as being somewhat similar? Pennard had spotty, rock hard dried out turf, sort of like cut down meadow grass, growing over the wild links terrain. Greens were in fairly good condition, but not nearly as good as Porthcawl. Even so, I'd take that type of golf course 10 times out of 10 over anything within 300 miles of me, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.  Mac, I know you're with me. Who else? Find that sand seam down there in Georgia and do it, Mon!

[paul cowley]

No...I'm not subjected to a code of silence. I will be silent on something I have no real knowledge about.

[Bill_McBride]

I can't speak to the conditions at Askernish, but when Scott asks if anyone over here would tolerate conditions close to Askernish, I default to the conditions we experienced at Pennard at last year's Buda as being somewhat similar? Pennard had spotty, rock hard dried out turf, sort of like cut down meadow grass, growing over the wild links terrain. Greens were in fairly good condition, but not nearly as good as Porthcawl. Even so, I'd take that type of golf course 10 times out of 10 over anything within 300 miles of me, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.  Mac, I know you're with me. Who else? Find that sand seam down there in Georgia and do it, Mon!

Pennard was great but they still kicked our asses!

[Bill_McBride]

Let me just say there is NOTHING in the USA to compare with the fun golf over shabby conditions of Pennard and Painswick, and I'll bet Ashkernish as well.

[Colin Macqueen]

Adam, Melvyn,

Forgive me my ignorance but had Askernish fallen into disuse before yourself, Adam, and other knights rode to its rescue or was it still able to be played by the locals and air force personnel with a skeleton (voluntary?) ground crew looking after its low-level maintenance.

Scott,
I would imagine people would thoroughly enjoy courses set up a la Askernish. The Aussies I've played with in the outback (relatively speaking) at Bega and Tangambalanga were having a whale of a time on courses a darn sight rougher than the pictures you show. They were ecstatic that the sand greens had been done away with.

Mac, ..."these small white flowers" are beautiful wee daisies!

Cheers Colin

Cheers Colin

[Tim_Weiman]

Melvyn,

Based on what I have learned here I hope someday my travels take me to experience Askernish.

It sounds like you are impressed both by the quality of the design and the very low cost of building the course.

I am sympathetic to your point of view. That said, what I would really like to know is the potential to replicate the good things about Askernish. If you believe it can be done and done repeatedly, by all means I would like to hear about that.

My last experience with quality affordable golf was at Common Ground, Tom Doak's course in Denver, Colorado. I thought the place was wonderful and a perfect model for what golf in America should be: fun, interesting, walkable, affordable, etc.

However, not many people here seemed to share my enthusiasm for the concept.

[Tom_Doak]

Melvyn:

Respectfully, I have to call in question the premise of your thread -- on two counts.

First of all, for most of the past three years, you have done a great job of opening our eyes to the fact that Old Tom Morris did much more construction work on his courses than most people think.  But here you seem to be saying the opposite -- that it's better to have a course where "no dirt was moved".  You seem to be undermining your own argument!

And second, if Askernish is a true restoration of the original Old Tom Morris course on the same site -- which it may or may not be, it's hard to tell without a good routing of the former course -- then the course would already have been "shaped" and it should be no surprise that it required zero earthmoving to restore its fairways and greens and get it ready for play.  In fact, if it required much earthmoving, that would be a pretty strong sign that it wasn't a true restoration.

We have moved a few spoonfuls of earth in our recent work to the course, particularly at the seventh hole where the approach was so uneven.  My take on that was that years and years of blown sand from the beach have been deposited in the end of that valley, so that the approach was much more bumpy than Old Tom would have left it -- which I guess is a matter of opinion and interpretation.   But I find it funny that you're arguing that I am not enough of a minimalist at Askernish at the same time you're arguing that Old Tom was not just a stupid minimalist.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I can't comment on the course because I haven't yet seen it... It's near the top of my list and I hope to rectify that next year on an island hopping trip to Machrie and Machrihanish...

What I can comment on is someone who's name I have yet to see mentioned... There's a young fella there called John Kemp who was recently enough appointed Director of Golf I believe... This lad (at 25ish) has a golf bvusiness degree from Dornoch, has qualified through the EIGCA education program, has worked on the ground during the construction of The Castle Course and Castle Stuart and has spent a lot of the last couple of years helping out Gil Hanse's crew in the States... An avid lover of links golf, I can't help but think that he will be a good addition to the course staff... Anyone come across him yet?

As for the original question:

"Are Designers on GCA.com subject to a Code of Silence?"... Although Tom D. is an "on-the-record" guy and I'm full of admiration for that, it's a little more difficult for some, especially those who have yet to make a name... I can't help saying what I think when it comes to GCA but I often wish I'd kept my mouth shut...

[Ulrich Mayring]

Scott,

looking at your pictures above, what exactly is wrong with the conditioning there? Looks just about perfect to me, with the possible exception of the greens having to be mowed more often.

I've also played Brora last year and still don't know what all the fuss about rustic conditioning is about. That course was in better shape than 90% of the courses I ever played. Rough was down, Fairways rolled, greens were true - pray tell, what am I missing?

Ulrich

[David_Tepper]

"I've also played Brora last year and still don't know what all the fuss about rustic conditioning is about."

Ulrich & Scott -

Aside from the electric wires surrounding the greens and the sheep & cattle grazing in the rough, I am not sure the course conditions at Brora can be considered to be "rustic" any longer. The tees, fairways, greens and bunkers have been pretty well groomed for a good number of years now. I do not think it is a stretch to say that the level of conditioning now at Brora is similar to what can be found at Golspie or Tain.

DT

 

[Scott Warren]

David,

I don't think the level of conditioning is poor, but my comment to Mac was that the members of the clubs he namechecked wouldn't want/tolerate that.

What in your opinion would be the reaction to the Olympic Club being maintained on par with Golspie?

Ulrich,

How about the many bare patches in the fairways? Do we really think members of Shinnecock Hills, to choose one example, would be down with bare patches in the fairways and greens stimping at 7?