[David_Elvins]

Mike,

I agree with what you say entirely.

The main point I was trying to make though focussed more on the dynamics of rankings and their imprefect nature.  I truly believe that some people at some clubs will sit back and think "Well, our course is ranked 11th in the country...the 5th is our weakest hole, if we can improve that hole we should rise to the top 10..." without really understanding all the factors (fair and unfair) that go into the imperfect ranking system.  My comments about NSW due to fall in the rankings were mainly about the rankings system, although I htink it is right to also be concerned about the direction the club is taking with the course.  

As I stated above, and what you followed up with should be the club's main consideration - How do we provide a great golfing experience for our members/clients?  Clubs that are comfortable in themselves without the need for need for the outside adulation of rankings generally get provide a better playing experience in the long term, IMO.  

[Anthony Butler]

Anthony,

I think David's point - and the relevant question - is that whilst 'the club are actively focused on improving the golf experience' will they actually improve the golf experience?
The golf experience at NSW has always been unsurpassed in Australia if the quality of the architecture is not seen as the sole measure. Royal Melbourne is unsurpassed if architecture is the measure.

The jury is still out on the question of whether the architecture is improved - and ultimately it is the architecture that determines where the course will sit in the rankings because the view and the wow experience is never going away.

As an architect, Mike, it makes sense you would focus on how you can take what nature has provided you to improve the golf 'experience' but you can't take it out of the equation when evaluating the course as a whole... I think it's fair to say NSW starts at least two up on just about every other course in Australia before you consider the architecture.

From the overseas visitors I have taken to both NSW and some of the sandbelt courses, NSW is the one they talk about with friends when they get home. Of course, a couple of them had a close encounter with 7' black snake by Perrie's Lake on #4, so that may have had some affect on their conversational choices..

As to New South Wales and it's future in the rankings, considering the current President at New South Wales is a born and bred Victorian, I am not yet dismissing the Manchurian Candidate that he allows Victoria to sneak by NSWGC in the rankings... I was one of many who questioned retaining Greg Norman's design company for the recent course changes done in concert with the greens resurfacing...

On the other hand he may keep kicking enough behinds to keep our team in the lead.

[Anthony Butler]

To assume that NSW's ranking will remain static is a big mistake IMO.  

Furthermore, to assume that the current work on the course will solidify  its position in the rankings is also an assumption that may be a mistake.  Most rankers that I know consider that the course has gone backwards in the last 5 years with the most recent work (completed since the rankings being compiled), being the most alarming.  

In my personal opinion, NSW is probably a world top 100 course but is far too high at the moment.  What this will likely do is create high expectations for visitors who will leave NSW disappointed that it did not meet there expectations and they will rank it too harshly, leading to a dramatic fall.    In the Australian rankings, I expect the rankers will also over-react in two years time and 'punish' the club for the quality of the ongoing changes to the course.  There will also be criticism from rankers across the board as to the lack strategy and interest in the greens.  

Of course, my other opinion is that rankings are relatively insignificant and what is most important is that NSW gets the ongoing work to the course right and considerably improves the presentation of the course and attention to detail.  It has the bones of a great course and it would be a pity to see it well below its potential.  

This is all very well and good, but what about some details?

A lot of people who are visitors at New South Wales overlook the fact that many course conditioning and design detail decisions are made to ensure the course remains playable in what is possibly the widest range of conditions you'll find at any World Top 100 course. In that respect, you could make the argument that Gary Dempsey is one of the best superintendents in the business.

[Scott Warren]

Anthony,

With the redesign of 3 and 4 now complete, do you know what the plan is for additional work at NSWGC?

[David_Elvins]

This is all very well and good, but what about some details?

A lot of people who are visitors at New South Wales overlook the fact that many course conditioning and design detail decisions are made to ensure the course remains playable in what is possibly the widest range of conditions you'll find at any World Top 100 course.

Anthony,  I don't think this is overlooked at all among the course rankers I talk to who have visited NSW.  Most of them tend to mention that the recent addtional bunkering, and sandy waste areas make the course harder in windy conditions and if this becomes a theme across more of the course, it will be no fun at all in a strong wind (which as you know is a regular occurence).  

As for details.  With the exception of NSW and Pebble Beach, the Top 100 courses that I have seen all share one thing in common - a strong thematic consistency across the 18 holes with  strong attention to detail.  NSW is, in my opinion is all over the place.  There is a mish mash of sandy waste areas and pot bunkers, neither of which has really settled in, many unbunkered fairways and then the 18th hole with 5 fairway bunkers to contend with on the drive.  I mean, you have 10 fairway pots on the 1st and 18th combined and all of about 4(?) on the 16 holes in between.   There is little attention to detail shown with the roughs.  Through the middle of the course (3rd fairway to 13th fairway) there are large areas of couch grass rough that look like they are out of a public course.  Better courses would have a vegetation plan that made these look far more attractive.  

I hope that the ongoing work to the course results in a course that is playable in all conditions, and strong thematically, from a playing point of view, and a visual point of view.

Its not hard to design, maintain a course that is playable in all conditions, you just have to know what you want your course to be.  

By the way, what do you think of the new 3rd green and 4th fairway?  

[David Kelly]

A lot of people who are visitors at New South Wales overlook the fact that many course conditioning and design detail decisions are made to ensure the course remains playable in what is possibly the widest range of conditions you'll find at any World Top 100 course. In that respect, you could make the argument that Gary Dempsey is one of the best superintendents in the business.

What are the widest range of conditions that you'll find at a World Top 100 course?  Do you mean weather conditions?  The area seems pretty temperate to me.

[Joel_Stewart]

I like the name of the course called The Cut.  Anyone play it?

[David_Elvins]

I like the name of the course called The Cut.  Anyone play it?

Yes.  Colloquially, an 'n' has been inserted in its name.  And fair enough too, it is a very difficult course in the wind.

[Anthony Butler]

A lot of people who are visitors at New South Wales overlook the fact that many course conditioning and design detail decisions are made to ensure the course remains playable in what is possibly the widest range of conditions you'll find at any World Top 100 course. In that respect, you could make the argument that Gary Dempsey is one of the best superintendents in the business.

What are the widest range of conditions that you'll find at a World Top 100 course?  Do you mean weather conditions?  The area seems pretty temperate to me.

That's probably a good distinction.... I'm only referring to courses like Ballybunion where the course and greens are theoretically open all year long. They experience a wider range of temperatures... but anything below 42 degrees with a 35 mile an hour wind is not playable in IMHO.

[David Kelly]

A lot of people who are visitors at New South Wales overlook the fact that many course conditioning and design detail decisions are made to ensure the course remains playable in what is possibly the widest range of conditions you'll find at any World Top 100 course. In that respect, you could make the argument that Gary Dempsey is one of the best superintendents in the business.

What are the widest range of conditions that you'll find at a World Top 100 course?  Do you mean weather conditions?  The area seems pretty temperate to me.

That's probably a good distinction.... I'm only referring to courses like Ballybunion where the course and greens are theoretically open all year long. They experience a wider range of temperatures... but anything below 42 degrees with a 35 mile an hour wind is not playable in IMHO.

Prairie Dunes stays open year round and the temps range from over 100 with high humidity in the summer to snow and sub zero temps in the winter.  The wind is a factor year round and can blow very hard. Obviously nobody is playing when the temp is below freezing and some years they have a few temp greens in play but the super has to be ready for anything.  For example in January the record high in Hutchinson, KS is 79 degrees and the record low is -16 F.

[Mark Chaplin]

Has anyone got any pictures of the third green to post? I loved the look of the approach from the bottom of the hill and said it would be ruined but my hosts were hopeful. Sadly sounds like I may have had a point.

[Matt Day]

I like the name of the course called The Cut.  Anyone play it?

Yes.  Colloquially, an 'n' has been inserted in its name.  And fair enough too, it is a very difficult course in the wind.

it's only windy down there about 300 days of the year 

[Matthew Mollica]

Anthony,

Your posts on NSW make for interesting discussion.

The many international judges who rank the course highly may rate the experience highly, and not pass a critical eye over the architecture. hey may be blind to the shortcomings of the course, not playing it more than once. For this reason, their view may be erroneously positive.

Don't get me wrong - NSW is a great place to play. I always eagerly anticipate a visit. But repeat visits open my eyes to facets of the course I don't like. And aspects of it's architecture which are inferior to what I see at RM, Barnbougle and KH.

I'm not sure playability is high on the list with what Mr. Dempsey is doing at NSW.

1 has encroaching vegetation on the left, and many bunkers right.
3 is a blind drive over dense vegetation
The area between 4 and 8 now features deliberate and significant plantings of ice plant (pig face).
The drive area on 9 has been tightened considerably (on the poor side miss) with more of the same sandy expanse with ice plant.
Between 10 and 18 - more grass tussocks and plantings, which serve little purpose than to further torment the errant golfer,
who is likely a short hitter.



The drive on 15 is tighter and more penal with each passing year.

The plantings on 17 between tee and green -


18 has had a sprinkling of new bunkers left and right.

NSW is a longish course, on an exposed windy site as you know. It is becomming tighter, narrower, and tougher.
Not more playable.
Which for a pro tournament venue might be ok. For members play, I'm not so sure.

MM

[Matthew Mollica]

And this from Geoff Shackelford in November 2011 -

"As far as golf course sites go, New South Wales is on par with Cypress Point and Shinnecock Hills in terms of diverse of terrain, stunning views and a fantastic routing offering interaction with the coastline on both nines. Architecturally, the course has suffered a few too many tweaks over the years, leaving a hodgepodge of ideas, looks and design philosophies throughout. The bunkering sums it all up: sod-stacked pits along with some attrative scruffy waste areas near the fairways and most unfortunate of all, some newly installed scrub to narrow a few landing areas. It's a big leap from old photos showing traces of Alister MacKenzie's influence. Throw in some unnecessary fairway contours and new changes by Greg Norman to man the place up, and it's hard to understand what the vision is for the design: more fun for hearty-but-older membership or trying for another Australian Open?

Most golfers won't notice the architectural inconsitency simply because the setting is so supreme and the club so ably operated. The facility is second to none, kicking off with one of the game's great, understated entrance drives (no road sign, just the national park sign), finished off by a beautifully divided car park which immediately lets you know you've arrived at one of golf's flagship properties.

Nonetheless, it's easy to envision a restored design and properly revitalized set of green complexes vaulting the course to top 20 world status. And as you'll see in the images below of the 15th tee view and a historic shot from the clubhouse walls, the old dunescape has badly overgrown. In some places the plant life is protected, but in others, it's nothing a little brush fire can't fix." - Geoff Shackelford

[Anthony Butler]

And this from Geoff Shackelford in November 2011 -

"As far as golf course sites go, New South Wales is on par with Cypress Point and Shinnecock Hills in terms of diverse of terrain, stunning views and a fantastic routing offering interaction with the coastline on both nines. Architecturally, the course has suffered a few too many tweaks over the years, leaving a hodgepodge of ideas, looks and design philosophies throughout. The bunkering sums it all up: sod-stacked pits along with some attrative scruffy waste areas near the fairways and most unfortunate of all, some newly installed scrub to narrow a few landing areas. It's a big leap from old photos showing traces of Alister MacKenzie's influence. Throw in some unnecessary fairway contours and new changes by Greg Norman to man the place up, and it's hard to understand what the vision is for the design: more fun for hearty-but-older membership or trying for another Australian Open?

Most golfers won't notice the architectural inconsistency simply because the setting is so supreme and the club so ably operated. The facility is second to none, kicking off with one of the game's great, understated entrance drives (no road sign, just the national park sign), finished off by a beautifully divided car park which immediately lets you know you've arrived at one of golf's flagship properties.

Nonetheless, it's easy to envision a restored design and properly revitalized set of green complexes vaulting the course to top 20 world status. And as you'll see in the images below of the 15th tee view and a historic shot from the clubhouse walls, the old dunescape has badly overgrown. In some places the plant life is protected, but in others, it's nothing a little brush fire can't fix." - Geoff Shackelford

As usual Geoff has summed it up in a nutshell... Unlike Cypress Point and Shinnecock Hills, NSWGC is not 'Master of their Domain". The land is on a perpetual lease from the NSW Parks and Wildlife, who took over management of the property from the Australian Army in the 70s when it was no longer deemed necessary to reserve it for future military use.

Basically anything introduced onto the property in terms of grass types, plantings etc. has to be run through the environmental office at NSW Parks and Wildlife. The reconstruction of the bridge out to the island tee was held up for almost two years due to the presence of an endangered lizard potentially living in an patch of wildgrass so small I have stood on private balconies in New York City three times the size. As a result, an 'accidental' fire is the only way to clear encroachment from some of playing corridors. You can't believe how much the views and playability of the course improved after the '98 fire. The club has been in discussion with Parks and Wildlife about a controlled burn, but since you can't guarantee a westerly wind, they are naturally concerned about how the fire spreads in the standard 15-20 mph winds you experience at La Perouse.

If I chose to, I could fill up three or four pages here on suggested changes to the course. I probably have a dozen emails sent to the club GM of maintenance and design suggestions in my sent box. Some have been taken up... I was a big advocate of the reveted greenside bunkers once I saw how they improved sand consistency and playability.

That said, while most of the changes that have been implemented over the last 10 years are necessary... in other words they address a situation that has been identified as a consistent problem.... placed balls rolling off the third green, shrinking amounts of pinnable areas on 7 and 17, resorting the waste bunkers on 5 to improve aesthetics and put a brake on balls running into the scrub... others have not added visual appeal and consistency to the course. e.g. There needed to be more separation between the fairways at 10 and 18, although not due to safety reasons–the landing zones for drives do not match because when one hole is downwind, the other plays into the wind. The manner in which it has been executed as Matthew's photo clearly points out, is a bit of a head-scratcher.

I have some photos of the work on 3 and 4 but not the finished article, maybe Michael Taylor, Kevin Pallier or someone else might be good enough to post on this thread.

[Mike_Clayton]

Anthony,
I agree it's 2 up on most courses in the county because of the experience and the great holes - but it's '2 down' to RM,Barnbougle and KH because of the architecture. That makes it, in my opinion, the 4th best course in the country and it is unquestionably a magnificent place to play. It is though a much different course to the one I played in the 1976 Australian Amateur.Is it a better course is the question - and we need to disregard the condition as a part of the answer.
Every course in Australia is better conditioned that it was in 1976.

[David_Elvins]

If I chose to, I could fill up three or four pages here on suggested changes to the course. I probably have a dozen emails sent to the club GM of maintenance and design suggestions in my sent box.

If you can fill up 3-4 pages with suggested changes then there are two options:
1. It is not that good a course; or
2. You are a complete nutter. 

There is just no way a world top 50 or world top 100 course can have that much wrong with it. 

Mike,
You have NSW ahead of Lost Farm at the moment? 

[Mike_Clayton]

Dave

I had Royal Melbourne at 1, Barnbougle at 2, KH 3 and Lost Farm 4.

[Anthony Butler]

If I chose to, I could fill up three or four pages here on suggested changes to the course. I probably have a dozen emails sent to the club GM of maintenance and design suggestions in my sent box.

If you can fill up 3-4 pages with suggested changes then there are two options:
1. It is not that good a course; or
2. You are a complete nutter.  

There is just no way a world top 50 or world top 100 course can have that much wrong with it.  

David, every time you post on this thread you reveal your bias a little more... Consider, if you will, the concept of conditional love...
e.g. I could give my wife 3-4 pages of ideas on how to run our house and raise our kids better, but I'm not moving out tomorrow.

Of course, If I can gave actually her the 3-4 pages, I might be moving out anyway.

[David_Elvins]

David, every time you post on this thread you reveal your bias a little more...

Anthony,

Bias?  I don't have any bias, I just have an opinion.   And I hope my opinion comes through in my posts.  otherwise they would be pretty shitty posts.  Surely you, as a member of the course (I think) who is in love with the course, is more likely to be biased than me, who has no barrow to push. 

If my opinion isn't clear, here it is:
-The Golf Australia ranking of NSW (no. 5) is pretty spot on.  (I had it pretty much equal 5 with Lake Karrinyup when I tallied the numbers.
- The course is a great place to play but over-rated on the world ranking list.
-The different dynamics of the Golf Australia list and world list has caused a slight discrepancy between the two.
- The nature of how rankings work mean that the course will slide down the list and your assertion that NSW will solidify its position on the list is wrong.
- The ongoing work on the course is a concern as it does not appear to be improving the course. 

I am really not sure how you can take offence at these relatively moderate opinions when there have been oodles of threads on this board discussing far more extreme opinions of where NSW sits on a world stage.

I was asked this question today as I defended NSWGC against a somewhat outlandish claim that it doesn't belong in the Top 20 in Australia.

I don't think there is a lot between the two courses. NSW wins out as an experience, with the Lakes having more interesting architecture for mine.

I have played NSW and that is ranked very, very high. 

I would be dissapointed if you took my opinion as biassed or a slight on the club.  I really think it is a good idea for the club (and you!) to have a more realistic view of where the course is likely to be in the world and Australian rankings over the next few years because clubs that concentrate heavily on the ranking and have unrealistic views of where they should rank generally make dumb decisions. 

[Scott Warren]

Dave,

You hit on the complete root of the discussion, for me at least.

The ongoing work on the course is a concern as it does not appear to be improving the course.

I defy anyone with more than a passing interest in golf courses to disagree with this.

Since 2008, three holes have been changed significantly (3, 4, 18) and each is -- in my opinion and those of every person I've discussed this with -- weaker as a result, and in the case of 18 especially, out of character with the golf course at large.

The concept of the waste areas, I quite like, but their placement and the use of pig's face and the other plants photographed by Matt and posted above within them is somewhat confusing.

What most surprises me is that on a golf course with numerous holes that could benefit from some slight tweaks, the club elected to change the third green so significantly. I would argue long and hard that the issue of balls oscillating on that green in high winds could have been addressed by far more subtle changes. What was one of the very best shots in Australia is now mediocre.

The 18th is a head-shaker in many ways. My fear is that the new 18th hole is an indication of what Greg Norman Golf Design and NSWGC want to do to the entire course. If that is the case, I think many of the things that make NSW a special golf course will be lost, and as a unique course among the best 70 or so in the world, that would be extremely unfortunate.

[Justin Ryan]

In that respect, you could make the argument that Gary Dempsey is one of the best superintendents in the business.

So the President and curator are both former VFL footballers. No wonder the place is such a disaster zone.

Given the bureaucracy you mentioned involved in the management of the vegetation, why have they planted so much of what Michael Taylor referred to as Pineapple grass? 17 in particularly was a simply dreadful looking hole. I can only see it tumbling down the ratings, particularly if raters are serious in their assessment of the architecture component.

[Mike_Duffy]

Ah yes, the Australian! I recall it from many years ago as a splendid layout of some 27 holes stretched out over natural links land. Then a very big man with almost uncountable money called in a world champion golfer and gave him an unlimited budget to have his first crack at golf course design. He managed to turn the 27 natural links land holes into 18 park land holes.

That was quite an incredible feat and one that I have never forgotten (or forgiven). 

[Mark_F]

I can only see it tumbling down the ratings, particularly if raters are serious in their assessment of the architecture component.

Why is the architecture of National Old better, Justin?

[Wayne Freeman]

    I was fortunate to join the GCA group last year in Australia for my first trip and played 10 of the top 11 listed here. My travel
 agent messed up so we played the other National courses instead of Moonah.  But looking at this list again impressed me that
 as a visitor from the U.S. you can play all these top courses NO PROBLEM!   That is the really amazing thing. Try arranging to
 play the top 10 courses on the U.S. list!  Anyone thinking about going there... do it.  It's a great experience, and one to
 treasure for a lifetime.  And if you are lucky enough to hook up with some of the guys on GCA like Kevin it will be even better.
 One other side note.  There was only one mention of Ellerston.  That was the one course we couldn't get on.. and I heard it
 should be very highly rated.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()