[jeffwarne]

Stumbled across a picture on Facebook of Iona golf club located on an island off the island  of Mull in Scotland in the Inner Hebrides.


Incredible remoteness, scenery and adventure-the fairways are sheep and cattle kept and the greens look more than a bit "a la natural" i.e. first cut of rough at many places.


What's the roughest conditions that you play normally?
What would be the roughest conditions you would enjoy traveling to?
and architects-what would be the roughest you would design, knowing the limitations of a project you had been referred to?


How many would be up for pasture golf? architects designing it?

I'll go first. I regularly play Goat Hill on Shelter island-at best barren cut, burnt weeds/dirt in the fairway with occasional splotches of real turf.
At worst, especially in the fall, long crabgrass which takes the fun out of bouncing the ball into greens that generally run away.
WE play summer rules always and chopping it out of hole is part of the charm on a running shot.
Tees at their best hard packed dirt, at their worst 4 inch crabgrass.
The greens run 4-6 but tend to putt quite true, with a lot of slope-making the differences between uphill and downhill very substantial.


I've played many raw and or sheep cut fairways and roughs in the UK/ireland (Mulranny,Westward Ho, Brora, Otway) but the greens are generally pretty good if not a bit slow-which I enjoy, especially combined with slope and good pins.
Askernish looks like a blast!


I will say I really enjoy a combo(Southerndown, Brora others) with a few mowers and sheep roaming keeping the rough tight and ball finding easy.


(In the hypocritical department)
Despite this, I was a bit put off by the poor fescue greens at Cabot Links this past summer. The lack of speed was fine but they were absolutely not true with the grass growing in a variety or directions and 5 footers were a crapshoot. The newer Cabot Cliffs greens had far less grass and putted better.
The high maintenance crowd (who are the market when you charge what they do-and are inundated by the white suited caddie tax) I was with was not amused but it hurts more when they are right-and I am pretty low maintenance.
Ironically, I never see poor greens in remote courses in Ireland/UK despite far smaller fees and no chemical inputs.


I also played an old muni stomping ground a few years ago that the greens had gotten so bad that putting was plinko, with grass being the hazard in the dirt shooting the ball offline where you could miss a 10 footer by 3-4 feet. That wasn't fun and we packed it in.


So in my case, regardless of roughness, the greens have to be puttable-i.e. no plinko. Slow, grainy fine. In fact I often putt quite well on temporaries that are merely fairways with a flag so I'm not that hard to please.


What say you on your demands/wish lists?


Architects?

[Jason Topp]

My bottom line is that the game needs to play like a reasonable version of golf.  After that, conditioning is a factor to be weighed against everything else.


Aerated greens do not play like golf to me.  US Pasture golf is not a reasonable version of the game because the ball generally does not roll and the grass is generally not a reasonable version to hit from.  An extremely wet and soft course is not a reasonable version of the game unless weather conditions absolutely mandate such a condition.


If I am traveling for the purpose of golf and paying a decent amount to pay, my expectations go up significantly.  If I am paying a lot to play at a private club, my expectations are going to be pretty high. 

[Mike_Young]

Sheep Ranch is fine due to location but I would not play it if in my hometown....Does that make sense?

[Peter Pallotta]

Jeff -
not so raw I have to admit, and not so unstructured that I can't see/intuit the hand of man and the mind of the architect.
Create-your-own-tees and find-your-own-golf-course isn't for me. Part of the pleasure of being on a golf course is appreciating the skill & talents of the artists and craftsmen who design, build and maintain it.
It is satisfying and nourishing to my soul to see "good work", in whatever form it takes and regardless of who has produced it. 
A well-made chair is sturdy and comfortable to sit on, a well-made pen is durable and easy to write with -- and a golf course is thoughtfully designed and has healthy, 'golfy' turf.
Best to you and yours
Peter
   

[BHoover]

My bottom line is that the game needs to play like a reasonable version of golf.  After that, conditioning is a factor to be weighed against everything else.


Aerated greens do not play like golf to me.  US Pasture golf is not a reasonable version of the game because the ball generally does not roll and the grass is generally not a reasonable version to hit from.  An extremely wet and soft course is not a reasonable version of the game unless weather conditions absolutely mandate such a condition.


If I am traveling for the purpose of golf and paying a decent amount to pay, my expectations go up significantly.  If I am paying a lot to play at a private club, my expectations are going to be pretty high.

I agree completely with this.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:


As a player, I can put up with almost any conditions from tee to green.  In fact, places like Westward Ho! and Askernish and the Himalayan Golf Club [and The Sheep Ranch] are among my favorite courses, and also some of the roughest I've played.


What I can't put up with are greens and approaches that are awful, and by awful, I usually mean thatchy and soft and uneven.  There doesn't have to be a lot of grass on them ... the USGA has proven on several occasions that you can hold a championship on dirt greens as long as they are smooth and true.  And to be fair, even if the greens are awful, I can still enjoy going around the course, just as I do when I'm not playing at all ... I just won't enjoy the playing very much.  So that pretty much eliminates "pasture golf" for me. 




As an architect, surely we all hope for our courses to be presented in good condition on an everyday basis, even though we can sometimes sympathize with the financial plight of certain clients.  For me, the same standard applies as above:  if you've only got $x to spend, get the greens right before you worry about anything else!




Where I am an outlier, is at the other end of the scale.  I'm uncomfortable that so many clubs and courses spend what I feel is way too much on maintenance.  I try my best to encourage my home club to keep their greens slower ... but I'm up against a +1 handicap green chairman who is all tied up in the course's ranking.  And when I go to play my own courses, I'm more likely to think the greens are too fast, than too slow. 

[Thomas Dai]

Raw with decent drainage is fine. Raw in mud much less so.
Maybe that’s why numerous raw courses in GB&I are seaside or upland/moorland courses where the greens are usually naturally pretty firm if sometimes (kept) relatively slow (wind blowing balls off the greens). And sheep don’t like it wet underfoot.

That said playing manicured courses makes appreciation or dislike of raw easier and vice versa.

Next raw one needing exploration - West Mons GC, South Wales. Just off the (im)famous Heads of the Valleys road - http://www.westmongolfclub.co.uk/

Atb

[MCirba]

How raw do I dare?

Very.

I grew up on courses that were very rough, rugged, and raw, often with simply a greenside hose irrigation system.   The fact that I learned to love the game at such places keeps me grounded when I play at courses where the fairways are better and faster than the greens I grew up putting.

Here's a course I played this past year, a nine-hole executive course called Newfoundland GC in northeastern PA.   I think this is probably how most of the courses in the United States were maintained in the first decades of golf in this country until some of the efforts of the USGA Green Section in the late teens and beyond.

I find many of our courses just so incredibly and sadly over-watered, and truth be told, it takes much of the fun out of the game which is meant to be played in the air but also along the ground.

With sustainability initiatives, drought-tolerant grasses and increasing water restrictions on a rapidly shrinking globe, I suspect this issue will correct itself in the next generation.

[Rich Goodale]

My raw daredness peaked in the Spring of 1981 when I got my old Boston 4-ball to visit me for a couple of weeks of golf in Scotland.  We did plan the usual subjects, but on the long way back from Dornoch to Ayrshire, one of my posse spotted a "Golf Club" sign and we pulled over.  To add, for context, we had agreed to play strictly by the rules, and it had worked well, even though the maintenance standards of even the most posh courses were pretty raw by USA standards in those days.  Our detour (Fort William GC) was as raw as steak tartare.  The course was only several years old and the greens were fine, but the unfairways were still being plowed by local farmers.  Even the locals played "pick up, wash off the mud and place," but we stuck to our pledge and had lots of laughs, even after the heavens opened up.  The highlight of the day was going into the modest clubhouse only to find it packed with mostly fellow drowned rats.  Scotland was playing England at Wembley on the telly and the Jocks won!


A good time was had by all, but Never Again!

[Buck Wolter]

This site says Iona is free of charge -- pretty good value if only for the views, might need a yellow ball though
http://www.isle-of-mull.net/attractions/golf-courses/iona-golf-course/

[jeffwarne]

Sheep Ranch is fine due to location but I would not play it if in my hometown....Does that make sense?

No-makes no sense


In fact if Sheep Ranch was in my hometown I'd have to dump Goat Hill-or just go there for a beer after(if not before)


Tom,
One of the recent disappointments of my beloved Goat Hill is their shrinking of the green to take advantage of the irrigation and have 3 inch rough surrounding the now tiny greens, which coupled with crabgrass and tiny greens ruins the runup shots and sucks the fun out of playing there.


To be clear, not a fan of raw mud or long wet grass.
So "raw" golf is best when under irrigated or on sand surface-which may result in occasional loss of grass, a far preferable condition for a real golfer than too much grass (though many nonGCAers perfer such citing the green color)


It is ironic that the most skilled players HATE courses where cuppy thin lies or moguls create such thin lies and irregularities-despite the advantage that that should create for them.


And Peter, You need to reconsider that about not "picking your own tees"-One of the best evenings of my golf life was "finding tees" up in the dunes at Mulranny where the sheep had mown the turf super tight-during our second go round. We played 18 very unique holes despite the fact there were only 9 greens. A blast, but of course you either have to have livestock present or carry a walk mower with you. Kind've funny we had no trouble climbing to the top of dunes of our own choice but curse Rees Jones or Nicklaus when they make us do the same


I guess I mostly hate how modern teaching seems to take place on a mat in front of a computer-and I hate it worse when a modern course and its entrappments emulates that.

[Thomas Dai]

One of the best evenings of my golf life was "finding tees" up in the dunes at Mulranny where the sheep had mown the turf super tight-during our second go round. We played 18 very unique holes despite the fact there were only 9 greens.

Ah Mulranny.
Somewhere that should be a compulsory stop for all GCA posters, architects, shapers etc etc.
Somewhere that also needs one of Rans profiles.
https://mulrannygolfclub.com/
and
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,63585.msg1529366.html#msg1529366


Atb

[jeffwarne]

Golf porn Thomas-especially when I'm out of commission with a bum hip.

[Peter Pallotta]

Jeff - when it comes to creating my own set of tees, I must be part of the boring middle: an Obama Democrat. It's only the elites on the one hand and the anarchists on the other who have the luxury & desire to do that -- the former because they have more than enough game, the latter because they don't play that game at all! 

[Ian Andrew]

I love little nine hole muni's that only are there to serve the local community
They are raw and they are fun - its a return to where it all began for me.
I'm nostalgic by nature, so I love the experiences.


p.s. if the greens are really long, I take three clubs and putt with a rescue

[Peter Pallotta]

Ian - you reminded me of the rarely mentioned Toronto municipal, Scarlett Woods. I played my first rounds there, and years later quite often after that. Par 62, about 4500 yards. If you like short/driveable Par 4s, this is your place: it has about 6-8 of them, averaging about 270 yards. And that I don't think many of them were actually designed/intended to be "short Par 4s" make them quirky and/or challenging and/or fun -- ie fairways bend in the oddest places, trees pop up where you least expect them, the hazards seem mostly random, and the almost always flat greens are chock full of 'micro contours'!
Best
Peter

[MCirba]

Sheep Ranch is fine due to location but I would not play it if in my hometown....Does that make sense?

No-makes no sense


In fact if Sheep Ranch was in my hometown I'd have to dump Goat Hill-or just go there for a beer after(if not before)


Tom,
One of the recent disappointments of my beloved Goat Hill is their shrinking of the green to take advantage of the irrigation and have 3 inch rough surrounding the now tiny greens, which coupled with crabgrass and tiny greens ruins the runup shots and sucks the fun out of playing there.


To be clear, not a fan of raw mud or long wet grass.
So "raw" golf is best when under irrigated or on sand surface-which may result in occasional loss of grass, a far preferable condition for a real golfer than too much grass (though many nonGCAers perfer such citing the green color)


It is ironic that the most skilled players HATE courses where cuppy thin lies or moguls create such thin lies and irregularities-despite the advantage that that should create for them.


And Peter, You need to reconsider that about not "picking your own tees"-One of the best evenings of my golf life was "finding tees" up in the dunes at Mulranny where the sheep had mown the turf super tight-during our second go round. We played 18 very unique holes despite the fact there were only 9 greens. A blast, but of course you either have to have livestock present or carry a walk mower with you. Kind've funny we had no trouble climbing to the top of dunes of our own choice but curse Rees Jones or Nicklaus when they make us do the same


I guess I mostly hate how modern teaching seems to take place on a mat in front of a computer-and I hate it worse when a modern course and its entrappments emulates that.

Great thread, Jeff.  Well stated.

[jeffwarne]

Great thread, Jeff.  Well stated.

Thanks Mike-all I need

[Ronald Montesano]

Why do people insist on quoting entire freaking posts? Stop! Hit "quote" and delete what you don't reference. It's not an email thread that needs to keep everyone abreast; we can always scroll back up.


OK, emotions laid raw. Here goes the golf.


About 15 years ago, one of my HS golfers and I were demonstrating the 150-yard putt on baked fairways in western New York, to the kids in the MS golf camp. They were blown away. The HS golfer had never hit the shot before, but had unbelievable touch, so he was blown away.


I concur about Sheep Ranch. Since I live near Mike Keiser's (semi-original) hometown, I'd love to have an SR in Buffalove. I love inventing holes, inventing shots.


If a course's reputation is predicated on conditioning, I'd like to see those conditions.


I love bounce-it-up, so I'll take raw. In the other direction, if the course is soaked and I have to pick the ball to avoid taking a rib-eye divot with every swing, I'm not a fan. I'd like to see Goat Hill...maybe this June, when I intend to be at Shinny?

[Charles Lund]

Having played Brora, Cruit Island, and Westward Ho in a 12 month period,  I'd say I have  ventured into the raw dimension.  I found myself amused in these playing environments. 


Brora was the first in the series and provided a good contrast to my Royal Dornoch experiences that week.  I'd say that it provided the incentive to explore other courses more off the beaten path in areas where I travel.  Cruit Island was hard to find.  I had gone looking for it in Donegal a few years ago and gave up. 


I mentioned Westward Ho as part of a trip to the Devon Cornwall Coast that included St. Enodoc, Saunton, and Burnham and Berrow.


There are quality golf experiences and there are quality courses, often coinciding in the same location.  Occasionally opting for a quality golf experience on a course that might be characterized as raw makes for good contrast.  That would seem to apply more to Cruit Island than the other two courses, which are rated highly enough that it would be important not to overlook them.


Doak Ratings:


Brora 7776
Cruit Island 4....
Westward Ho 6876


Charles Lund

[jeffwarne]

Charles,
a shame you didn't find Cruit

To make the assumption that Cruit is merely one notch above the average courses (a "3") and rate it a 4, would be a large mistake.
There are real holes there. 1,2,3,4 are good-with 3,4, being great ,5 (super quirk) 6 (top 20 in world) 7 really , 8 good, 9 good.
and the scenery/closeness/intensity of it all are unreal.
I'd give it a 7.


a perfect mix with Narin and Portnoo so you'll get there.

[Charles Lund]

I did find Cruit last year.  Back in 2009 or 2011, I was unable to find it.    I immediately thought of Brora as I drove in last summer. 


The Doak ratings were posted from the Confidential Guide.  Cruit had only one rating. 


I liked Brora so much I bought a set of headcivers.  Paid 32 pounds to play Westward Ho on the after 4:00 P.M. rate.  Pro shop was closed when I finished there, so no physical mementos, just good memories.  I found the flatter areas of Westward Ho to be quite playable, due to being well marked and having a yardage guide. 


Charles Lund

[Thomas Dai]

The DS has as I understand it an element of tongue in cheek about it but the definitions do mention to what extent a course is worth travelling to visit......and Cruit is very much worth travelling a long way to visit so it’s rating should perhaps be reviewed particularly in light of the fact that several scores higher than 4 have descriptions that could be easily applied to Cruit. But it’s TD’s scale......


Irrespective of what rating it’s given though, just go play it. It ain’t just scenery, for as Jeff intimates, it’s damn good golf as well with a whole bunch of terrific holes - once played, never forgotten - see http://www.cruitislandgolfclub.com/



Atb

[Charles Lund]

Perhaps it is the raw character and quality of the Donegal courses in general that suppresses the overall ratings. I took a quick look across ratings of courses in that area.  Sandy Hills had one rating of 7, there were a couple of courses with a couple of 6 ratings, lots of 5s, and so forth.


What characterizes many of the courses is that they were community projects, with some guidance from as far away as Dublin with donated time by Eddie Hackett.  Ballyliffin originally started as a nine hole course in 1947.  The course was expanded and rerouted in the early 70s.  Links of Heaven describes the renovation and expansion and cites a cost of about 5800 pounds, with a budget of about 300 pounds per hole ( 33 pounds for each tee, 192 pounds for each green, and smaller amounts for resodding and leveling). They didn't level fairways.  The course became The Old Links. 


I did a five week trip to Ireland in 2009, starting in the SW  and traveling clockwise.  There was a lot about playing golf in Donegal that was endearing.  Perhaps it was the raw quality of the playing environments.  So I have been back to the area on 10 different occasions.  I like value and consider it an important consideration in decisions about golf travel.  The area as a whole offers great value.


But I started out in Ireland with the goal of playing in the SW and then working my way up to Royal Portrush and Royal County Down and back to Dublin., a good plan for a first trip.


A few Donegal courses provided some of the linkage between areas.  They changed my perspective on travel and golf in Ireland.


Charles Lund

[Sean_A]

I agree with Jason.  That said, it is a sliding scale for me. There is a certain charm in playing a place like Cleeve Cloud (much rougher than Brora, S'down and the Donegal courses...its a muni) on a somewhat regular basis as I do.  The greens tend to be slow and a bit bumpy.  In the setting it works well.  I am not sure I would be as enthusiastic about the same sort of conditions for a lesser course in an average setting. I wouldn't have any issue traveling to play a Cleeve Cloudish type course, but I would be quite picky about the course selection. 

Minch Old too is a bit rough, but like CC, not too bad, certainly playable...I like it.  Though I caution that in my experience these rough n' ready courses which impress are far and few between. On the flip side, some of these wee courses are in too good of nick to even qualify.  Kington and Welshpool are good examples...a lot of inland courses should be drooling over how these clubs present their courses on so little money. 

BTW...I only walked Cruit and yet I can confidently say a Doak 4 is a very harsh score.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()