[jeffwarne]

Dunfanagy 4 sounds right to me.
However, it seems too high given some of the other links courses he has rated 3. To me a true links is always better than an "average" course.

Not a fan of the Bann course. With lack of width, and penal rough, I'm surprised Jeff hasn't given them a talking to like he did at North West.

Northwest is special IMHO a 6-Definitely a notch above Dunfanaghy(IMHO a 5), and last trip around there rough was very manageable.


Interestingly, many avoid the course due to its yardage (6300 from back tees that anyone is allowed to play), yet Bandon was packed last week with EVERY group I saw in 4 days playing the "one set from the back" tees which read at 6100 yards roughly at all courses yet nearly every tee was waaaay up making all of them play 5700-5800 at most-which was not a problem as it 50 degrees and windy  and the architecure is compelling

[Garland Bayley]

...
Interestingly, many avoid the course due to its yardage (6300 from back tees that anyone is allowed to play), yet Bandon was packed last week with EVERY group I saw in 4 days playing the "one set from the back" tees which read at 6100 yards roughly at all courses yet nearly every tee was waaaay up making all of them play 5700-5800 at most.

Playing Bandon in January is different that playing Northwest in July.

[Garland Bayley]

I have long believed that most any links is at least a 4, probably 5.

I lost a few balls around Bann my first go before I realized laying up was a proper option.

Ciao

Which architect had the build them so they lay up principle?

I don't understand the question.

Ciao

There are architects that have a design principle that the necessity of searching for and losing balls is to be avoided.
Since at Bann there is deep rough endangering making full shots and causing one to lay up, I have to wonder if you can tell me of architects for which this was a design principle. Tongue in cheek of course.

[Sean_A]

I have long believed that most any links is at least a 4, probably 5.

I lost a few balls around Bann my first go before I realized laying up was a proper option.

Ciao

Which architect had the build them so they lay up principle?

I don't understand the question.

Ciao

There are architects that have a design principle that the necessity of searching for and losing balls is to be avoided.
Since at Bann there is deep rough endangering making full shots and causing one to lay up, I have to wonder if you can tell me of architects for which this was a design principle. Tongue in cheek of course.

I suspect the course was built on the concept of cheap and cheerful. I dislike narrow fairways and harsh rough more than most. However, from memory 6 thru 8 were the danger holes with fairway turns leading to blind driving areas. In each case there is a clear option to lay up to a visible playing area which still left the greens within reach with an iron. This seems a reasonable design concept given the terrain. Still, there are a few areas which could be cleared. On the right side of #6 just past the turn on the downhill comes to mind.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Not much wrong with cheap and cheerful, rural and rustic etc as long as the terrain drains well and the greens are firm and roll true.
Atb

[Garland Bayley]

Not much wrong with cheap and cheerful, rural and rustic etc as long as the terrain drains well and the greens are firm and roll true.
Atb

Except of course, it is a 27 hole complex throughout which ball hunting is an issue.

[Sean_A]

Not much wrong with cheap and cheerful, rural and rustic etc as long as the terrain drains well and the greens are firm and roll true.
Atb

Except of course, it is a 27 hole complex throughout which ball hunting is an issue.

That's a shame Garland. I never played the big course, it does look interesting.

Ciao

[Ian Andrew]

Ballyliffin Old
Ballyliffin Glashedy
Portsalon
Rosapenna Old
Rosapenna Sandy Hills

Maybe it is the raw quality of the courses that suppresses the ratings and paradoxically contributes to endearing experiences many of us have visiting the area.  In any event, they have not been adversely impacted by excessive overseas tourism from North America.

I played these five a few years ago and I wouldn't describe any as raw. The conditions were terrific and I would recommend all of them as excellent courses to play.

I don't think any of them are hurt in the ratings by location or conditions. They remind me a lot of Carne, where the setting is better than the architecture.

[Tom_Doak]

Mulranny was a total surprise.

It was for me, too.  My friend was at the wheel driving from Carne to Galway, and as we came over the pass to the north of town, I spied the linksland and said, "Now there is the kind of land they ought to have a golf course on," contrasting it with all the big-dune courses we had just played.  I really didn't know there WAS a golf course on it.  But when we got to the turn and saw the sign, I made him turn off so we could go and look.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Have to say I veer more to Garland’s view on the Bann than I do to Sean or David’s: I just think the scale is too small, despite there being some excellent land, great ideas for holes and good variety. It would just be better if everything (dune height aside) was 25% bigger.


Mulranny, on the other hand, is an absolute beauty. A true superstar.

[Sean_A]

Have to say I veer more to Garland’s view on the Bann than I do to Sean or David’s: I just think the scale is too small, despite there being some excellent land, great ideas for holes and good variety. It would just be better if everything (dune height aside) was 25% bigger.

Mulranny, on the other hand, is an absolute beauty. A true superstar.

I find real value in the small footprint course. It's not ideal, but the site is maximised unlike many well known places with far more land which choose to play small. For the most part, length without accuracy at the Bann is not grossly rewarded as it is at many places. This is a refreshing take on the game while still offering the awkward lies running play of traditional links.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Have to say I veer more to Garland’s view on the Bann than I do to Sean or David’s: I just think the scale is too small, despite there being some excellent land, great ideas for holes and good variety. It would just be better if everything (dune height aside) was 25% bigger.

Mulranny, on the other hand, is an absolute beauty. A true superstar.

I find real value in the small footprint course. It's not ideal, but the site is maximised unlike many well known places with far more land which choose to play small. For the most part, length without accuracy at the Bann is not grossly rewarded as it is at many places. This is a refreshing take on the game while still offering the awkward lies running play of traditional links.

Ciao

I don’t disagree with you about small footprint courses. I have a love of them also. However, the Bann has 3 or 4 holes that are a little awkward for the majority who play the modern game due to short but sharp turning points over rises etc... if the ball went 25% less distance, we’d be on to a winner.


Don’t want to overplay it though. It’s still a great fun, wee course with some wonderful land and shots.


Mulranny has a few holes that are not far from perfect though. Superb golf.

[Tom_Doak]

I don’t disagree with you about small footprint courses. I have a love of them also. However, the Bann has 3 or 4 holes that are a little awkward for the majority who play the modern game due to short but sharp turning points over rises etc... if the ball went 25% less distance, we’d be on to a winner.

I have not seen the course you're discussing, but I tend to agree with Sean based on his description of it.  If there are a few holes where it's UNCOMFORTABLE and DANGEROUS for the long hitter to hit driver, but he has the option of laying back to a place he can see and going from there, that's a good solution.  Lofoten Links has quite a bit of that, too.


Your 25% quote sounds like Mark Fine wanting a tee for every player, which I know you don't believe.  I guess it's just harder to accept when they are talking about taking YOUR perfect tee away. 

[Sean_A]

Have to say I veer more to Garland’s view on the Bann than I do to Sean or David’s: I just think the scale is too small, despite there being some excellent land, great ideas for holes and good variety. It would just be better if everything (dune height aside) was 25% bigger.

Mulranny, on the other hand, is an absolute beauty. A true superstar.

I find real value in the small footprint course. It's not ideal, but the site is maximised unlike many well known places with far more land which choose to play small. For the most part, length without accuracy at the Bann is not grossly rewarded as it is at many places. This is a refreshing take on the game while still offering the awkward lies running play of traditional links.

Ciao

I don’t disagree with you about small footprint courses. I have a love of them also. However, the Bann has 3 or 4 holes that are a little awkward for the majority who play the modern game due to short but sharp turning points over rises etc... if the ball went 25% less distance, we’d be on to a winner.

Ally

I agree 6 thru 8 are a bit awkward because many golfers, including myself, can't easily do what they want to. I am forced to pay attention to choices. While this card is overplayed a bit at Bann because there is no more available land, I do think all courses need holes which agitate golfers. All that said, the beauty of Bann is that very good golfers can take on the risky shots while I can layup and still reach greens. In this way the course provides a good balance of options between length and accuracy. An accurate player can compete very well with a guy who can hit the ball 50 yards further. The property dictated this type of course, but the execution of the design is superb.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

I don’t disagree with you about small footprint courses. I have a love of them also. However, the Bann has 3 or 4 holes that are a little awkward for the majority who play the modern game due to short but sharp turning points over rises etc... if the ball went 25% less distance, we’d be on to a winner.

I have not seen the course you're discussing, but I tend to agree with Sean based on his description of it.  If there are a few holes where it's UNCOMFORTABLE and DANGEROUS for the long hitter to hit driver, but he has the option of laying back to a place he can see and going from there, that's a good solution.  Lofoten Links has quite a bit of that, too.


Your 25% quote sounds like Mark Fine wanting a tee for every player, which I know you don't believe.  I guess it's just harder to accept when they are talking about taking YOUR perfect tee away. 

It’s not really as simple as that though, Tom.

In this case, the turning points are just a little too early and the following doglegs are just a little too sharp. In tandem, this doesn’t make for great golf.

It’s a matter of degrees.

[Sean_A]

Nobody is claiming Bann is a great course, but I think it is a very good course and well worth playing.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Nobody is claiming Bann is a great course, but I think it is a very good course and well worth playing.

Ciao

It is that.

Point was not that anyone is claiming it is a great golf course. More that I don't think it provides great golf which is different.

The 2nd, 6th, 7th & 8th all have quite sharp sweeping doglegs to narrow fairways where they start turning significantly between 130 and 180m. Best play is sometimes a 6 or 7 iron off the tee. Trying to cut the dogleg is not worth it when the landing zone is an 18m wide fairway at an offset angle.

It's not impossible either and these are really cool holes. But I walked off the course with a strong feeling that everything could do with being scaled up just a little to make it far more enjoyable. That is a different observation to many other links courses I love that are on small parcels of land and are quite tight.

I may be overplaying it. And as I said before, this was the only thing that let the course down for me. There was a huge amount of fun out there as well.

[jeffwarne]

Nobody is claiming Bann is a great course, but I think it is a very good course and well worth playing.

Ciao

While I'm a far bigger fan of Mulranny (different experience) I though the Bann was a small scale version of Big Dunes golf which was perfect for straighter hitting seniors, women and juniors,  a strategic exercize for a lower-mid handicap athletic player or an absolute blast for someone throwing caution to the wind in a match play situation-especially as a 19-27th holes of the day.
It was tight and could make a long nine holes for a wild hitter.
I enjoyed it immensely and thinks there room in the world for such a course-especially as a compliment to the lager scaled 18 hole Castlerock course next door.

[Thomas Dai]

While I'm a far bigger fan of Mulranny (different experience) I though the Bann was a small scale version of Big Dunes golf which was perfect for straighter hitting seniors, women and juniors,  a strategic exercize for a lower-mid handicap athletic player or an absolute blast for someone throwing caoution to the wind in a match play situation-especially as a 19-27th holes of the day.
It was tight and could make a long nine holes for a wild hitter.
I enjoyed it immensely and thinks there room in the world for such a course-especially as a compliment to the lager scaled 18 hole Castlerock course next door.

+1
When the regular ‘one course for the rest of your life’ type threads arise it’s course like The Bann and Mulranny along with the St Olaf at Cruden Bay that come to my mind first.
And as to distance, turning points, rough etc, whilst I appreciate the points made no one ever forces a player to hit Driver or even 3-metal from the tee. And longer hitters can always play with a short distance ball if the wish.
Atb

[David Harshbarger]

And longer hitters can always play with a short distance ball if the wish.

If enough was on the line they would figure that out on their own.

[Thomas Dai]

And longer hitters can always play with a short distance ball if the wish.

If enough was on the line they would figure that out on their own.

If enough was on the line they would ought to be able to figure that out on their own. Not sure some would however
Atb

[Tom_Doak]

 I walked off the course with a strong feeling that everything could do with being scaled up just a little to make it far more enjoyable.

When you say "scaled up" do you mean that it's built more at the scale of women's golf?


Was that part of its purpose to begin with?

[Garland Bayley]

I doubt it was built as a women's course. Rather, it is shoehorned into a small property. My most memorable aspect is that greens are shoehorned into small punchbowls where missing means searching for the the ball on slopes too steep to mow. I don't think laying up short of the green when you have wedge in should be repeatedly demanded.

[Ally Mcintosh]

 I walked off the course with a strong feeling that everything could do with being scaled up just a little to make it far more enjoyable.

When you say "scaled up" do you mean that it's built more at the scale of women's golf?


Was that part of its purpose to begin with?

I think Garland is probably right that it’s just the way the land fell. But it would make perfect sense if it was initially conceived as a Ladies / Junior / Relief course. It works better if considered in that light.


Not sure the design history (who and when) but perhaps you can relate to this, Tom: When I used to dream of working as a GCA, I’d look at all these natural fields as I was walking or driving and imagine greens and holes on them. Whilst they looked right to the eye in virgin state, they were invariably too small. When I actually started designing, I’d realise that all these landforms I’d dreamt about as a kid just didn’t work in the way I had envisioned them. They needed to be bigger / wider / longer. Even now, I occasionally have to remind myself when looking at a site / location.


The Bann course reminds me of that a little bit. As I said before though, just a little and it is one criticism among so many positives.

[Thomas Dai]

When I used to dream of working as a GCA, I’d look at all these natural fields as I was walking or driving and imagine greens and holes on them. Whilst they looked right to the eye in virgin state, they were invariably too small. When I actually started designing, I’d realise that all these landforms I’d dreamt about as a kid just didn’t work in the way I had envisioned them. They needed to be bigger / wider / longer. Even now, I occasionally have to remind myself when looking at a site / location.

Not something I reckon that’s understood by many amateur archies.
As to The Bann my suspicion is that it was created as a relief course with beginners and juniors and certain elements within ladies and seniors golf in mind. And it’s not ‘raw’ in maintenance terms either, in fact it’s pretty much perfect.
Atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()