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.


JJShanley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #50 on: February 23, 2016, 06:23:31 AM »
I have returned from a brief but necessary visit to the 18th century...


I've enjoyed the several comments that folk have left, that detail how they choose new courses. 


At least one person has asked me to clarify mediocre, which I need to do.  I don't mean non-championship courses: for that reason I tell anyone visiting Edinburgh to play Braid Hills.  I try to play it whenever I go home.  At the very least I walk a few holes.  By mediocre I mean courses that may or may not receive a high ranking, but which don't have much architectural merit.  Perhaps I mean "overrated."


I suppose my question becomes: should I play courses that folk with a deep understanding of GCA wouldn't bother playing?  Do I simply accept their qualified opinion, or does one's desire to actually get to grips with GCA mean I should play the less inspiring courses?  My grad school training has included reading books (some written by big names in my field) that haven't made the most of a useful source base.  I imagine my advisor has his students read them for coursework or exams because he wants us to know what doesn't work and why.


Does that make sense?

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #51 on: February 23, 2016, 11:25:35 AM »

  By mediocre I mean courses that may or may not receive a high ranking, but which don't have much architectural merit.  Perhaps I mean "overrated."


JJ,

Other than Torrey Pines, are there any courses which BOTH receive a high ranking and don't have much architectural merit?  I've always felt those two are mutually exclusive in 99.99% of cases.

Just wondering...

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #52 on: February 23, 2016, 12:40:34 PM »


On the designs I like best the conditioning is incredibly important to the function of the design.  Its rare to see a course really humming...in my experience anyway.  Overhwelmingly, its a case of the conditioning is good or decent...acceptable, but also not allowing the design to flourish.  Give me a firm course with true greens at 9-10 and dry, patchy rough with inconsistent lies and I am happy as a pig in shit.


Ciao


+1


If I can expand on what Sean says I would add that that is often the difference between the top links courses and the so called second tier courses. Often the top courses will have double figure number of greenkeepers working there while the "lesser" ones could have less than a handful. That can make a huge difference as Sean has pointed out. Not just in aesthetics and overall appearance but in things like speed of the greens. This was brought home to me when playing Moray Old the week between when it hosted the Scottish Am and the Moray Open. It was at a level of conditioning that I'd never seen it at in the hundred odd times I'd played it before. Suddenly putts that normally would have had a 6 inch break now had a 3 foot break. A huge difference.


Niall

JJShanley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #53 on: February 23, 2016, 01:12:08 PM »

  By mediocre I mean courses that may or may not receive a high ranking, but which don't have much architectural merit.  Perhaps I mean "overrated."


JJ,

Other than Torrey Pines, are there any courses which BOTH receive a high ranking and don't have much architectural merit?  I've always felt those two are mutually exclusive in 99.99% of cases.

Just wondering...


Sorry, I didn't mean Top100 high ranking, but rather, say, top 10 public in a given state.  Tullymore and St. Ives, for example.  GCA posters have criticised both courses, but I wondered whether I should play them as part of my golf education.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #54 on: February 23, 2016, 02:00:26 PM »
JJ,

That's a good clarification.  I know I've seen a few state lists that are suspect no doubt.  Certainly in a place where I live, State lists can be all over the place with a massive variation between #1 and 10 in the state.

Agreed..

Kalen

BCowan

Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #55 on: February 23, 2016, 02:09:33 PM »

  By mediocre I mean courses that may or may not receive a high ranking, but which don't have much architectural merit.  Perhaps I mean "overrated."


JJ,

Other than Torrey Pines, are there any courses which BOTH receive a high ranking and don't have much architectural merit?  I've always felt those two are mutually exclusive in 99.99% of cases.

Just wondering...


Sorry, I didn't mean Top100 high ranking, but rather, say, top 10 public in a given state.  Tullymore and St. Ives, for example.  GCA posters have criticised both courses, but I wondered whether I should play them as part of my golf education.

JJ,

   I understand what you are saying.  Remember that the raters get free golf for their ratings at most courses.  It's the Golden ticket.  It would be nice for more to try out ma and pa tracks whether they are GCA approved or not.   Most magazine rated top courses are going to be expensive

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #56 on: February 23, 2016, 03:05:55 PM »
Ben,

While that's true, and I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to travel to Utah to play anything but the best courses...

I would expect for the local raters in Utah to try to see everything....even the 2s and 3s....
« Last Edit: February 23, 2016, 03:08:17 PM by Kalen Braley »

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #57 on: February 23, 2016, 06:15:31 PM »
If I can expand on what Sean says I would add that that is often the difference between the top links courses and the so called second tier courses. Often the top courses will have double figure number of greenkeepers working there while the "lesser" ones could have less than a handful. That can make a huge difference as Sean has pointed out. Not just in aesthetics and overall appearance but in things like speed of the greens. This was brought home to me when playing Moray Old the week between when it hosted the Scottish Am and the Moray Open. It was at a level of conditioning that I'd never seen it at in the hundred odd times I'd played it before. Suddenly putts that normally would have had a 6 inch break now had a 3 foot break. A huge difference.


Niall

Niall,

did the greens breaking 6 times more than usual improve the course for you? and if so would you pay the double or triple priced membership-fee/green-fee to play it?

Jon

Connor Dougherty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #58 on: February 23, 2016, 07:41:57 PM »
Hi JJ,
I was planning a trip of my own a couple of years ago, and ultimately spent three months on the road looking at several different golf courses. So much of this is dependent on how long your trip is. If it's short, I'd try to see as many good courses as you can. It's largely because this website has become an incredible resource for seeing some of the lesser known tracks through photographs and profiles. But ultimately much of the conversation revolves around the better golf courses, and seeing not only what works, but what works brilliantly, is incredibly insightful.


That being said, if you have a longer trip planned, I'd absolutely check out the "mediocre" courses. I found that the places I learned a lot from had a few holes which were quite good but were dominated by otherwise bland holes. The reasons for this were extensive and often varied, and while I may have picked up more smaller details at some of the great courses, it was these courses which developed the more general, big picture ideas the best (For example, the club I caddied at back in the day, Claremont CC, dealt with several issues of it being a small property through several crossing holes and a few shorter, narrow par 4's. As space becomes more scarce, it made me wonder how such problems will be addressed in the future. It's a discussion I still have with myself.)
"The website is just one great post away from changing the world of golf architecture.  Make it." --Bart Bradley

Ian Andrew

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2016, 09:01:41 AM »
I've seen almost everything in Canada ...
When asked by people on here, I steer them to what they should see.
Usually they are pleasantly surprised and appreciate the work.

For Darius Oliver it was Summit
For Tom Doak Lookout Point and Kawartha

So even well travelled golfers get surprised by off the beaten path work.

It's not high profile courses, but places off the radar that are worth seeing.
These are valuable courses to young GCA's because they are easier access, happy to host them and educational
With every golf development bubble, the end was unexpected and brutal....

Greg McMullin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Value of Mediocre Courses for the Younger GCA Student?
« Reply #60 on: March 04, 2016, 01:06:16 PM »
Peter,

Play Lakeview with nothing more than a rescue club.
I did that last time and now everything was in play and the approaches were more interesting with more club.
It allowed me to appreciate what it was like during the Canadian Open.

It is a great course worth anyone's time.


I have played Westview more than a few times, but not for at least thirty years now.
Too long to remember specific holes at this point.

The One's I remember most from those days:
 
Cherry Downs 3rd
Nobleton Lakes 7th
Don Valley's 3rd
Uplands 8th
Pickering's 7th
Georgetown's 15th
IBM's old par 4 13th
Allandale's opener
Lakeview's short 17th
Caledon's 16th
Flemington Park 2nd
Indian Wells 8th
Pheasant Run 4th
Royal Ashburn 16th

I may have  a hole number or two wrong on the last five, but you'll know the holes I mean


Ian, if I may and if by Caledon 16th. you mean the downhill par 3 that is the hole where I have my one and only Hole in One on June 26, 2011. :-)



Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back