[Jim Hoak]

Now that we're underway, anyone have any comments on the two new holes at Royal Portrush?  Look good to me.  And, maybe best, it changes the old #16 into the new #18--a big improvement.
I'm not overwhelmed by the two new holes, but overall--it's a good change.

[Tom_Doak]

Tge new par-5 is fine (though not as good as the long par-3 on the Valley course that was destroyed to build it).


The 8th hole seemed very modern and out of place to me, with a steep fall-off to the left of the fairway (up to a point) and then a shaped approach.

[Ian Andrew]

They are a lot better than the two holes that were removed.
 I've played all four and I'll take the two new ones over the two old ones.
Bertha was cool, but the homage to it was a nice thought.


I found the shaping a little too much in places, but the setting is great.
I liked the changes. 7th more so than 8th.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Other changes made (from R&A Programme)


2 New tee and bunker added on left. New green 40 yards bac k takes old one as "inspiration" .
5 two new bunkers 
7 aa
8 aa
9 new bunker on right fairway
10 new contours added to the green "to improve its definition and character"
12 new tee to get of 11 adds 50 yards
13 front left of green altered
14 new tee adds 60 new bunker left fairway
15 new bunker right fairway
17 new tee
18 new tee


All successfully grown in and work looks seamless from the sidelines.

[Adrian_Stiff]

They are a lot better than the two holes that were removed.
 I've played all four and I'll take the two new ones over the two old ones.
Bertha was cool, but the homage to it was a nice thought.


I found the shaping a little too much in places, but the setting is great.
I liked the changes. 7th more so than 8th.

+1

[Neil Regan]

From a recent article in Today’s Golfer


https://tourinsider.todaysgolfer.co.uk/july//the-open-how-portrush-has-changed

[Ally Mcintosh]

They are a lot better than the two holes that were removed.
 I've played all four and I'll take the two new ones over the two old ones.
Bertha was cool, but the homage to it was a nice thought.


I found the shaping a little too much in places, but the setting is great.
I liked the changes. 7th more so than 8th.

+1

+2


Nelly not Bertha

[Sean_A]

Other than messing with at least one virtually untouched original Colt links.....

The two new holes certainly look better than the old 17 & 18, but the course now finishes in no man's land....that is bad news.   

I guess my final judgement would be more about the Valley Links than the Dunluce.  If the VL links is no worse off then the changes may be OK...but this is a big if because 5 and 6 were two wonderful holes that were good enough to be on the Dunluce.  To me, this situation could easily be a prime example of what T Gallant wtote in the other thread...chasing championship wonder at what expense?  Has championship "ideals" been the biggest culprit when it comes to altering courses?

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Except the 5th & 6th on the Valley weren’t Colt holes.


They were great though.


I agree with the premise of Tim Gallant’s thread. However, this change at Portrush I think was the right choice, at least as a plan. I can always argue about the detailing not being to my taste but that is a small issue.

[Peter Pallotta]

Or to flip Sean's question on its head:
if the new holes are better and more interesting for the pros during a championship, aren't they also better and more interesting for amateur golfers during a recreational round -- IF they are playing the correct set of tees?

[V. Kmetz]

This has an interesting run down


https://www.faraway-fairways.com/2016/04/open-championship-returns-royal-portrush-2019/


cheers  vk

[Sean_A]

Or to flip Sean's question on its head:
if the new holes are better and more interesting for the pros during a championship, aren't they also better and more interesting for amateur golfers during a recreational round -- IF they are playing the correct set of tees?

The PoV I am taking is the flip of the flip side.  The Dunluce was already a world class course regardless if the Open ever returned.  What Portrush has (had?) is the seriously under-valued Valley Links.  Adding two better holes to the Dunluce at the possible expense of the weaker, but very under-valued Valley Links is not something I would have done to increase the quality of the courses.  The money and effort, imo, should be spent on the lesser known course, not the already universally acclaimed great Dunluce.  As I stated previously, I have yet to see the new work on the Valley...and I do like the idea of finishing at the house whereas previously this wasn't the case.  BUT...I do wonder if the sacrifice of two great holes on the Valley is great idea in the long run.  Its not like Portrush needs a sudden influx of Open cash.  They get plenty of visitor money as is.  Is hosting an Open really going to improve the bottom line of the club that much where it will get much needed projects completed? 

Ciao

[Mike Sweeney]

  Its not like Portrush needs a sudden influx of Open cash.  They get plenty of visitor money as is.  Is hosting an Open really going to improve the bottom line of the club that much where it will get much needed projects completed? 

I was commenting today to a GCA former poster about how much I appreciate the "Arble Tours" - https://golfclubatlas.com/best-of-golf/sean-arbles-united-kingdom-course-tours-2/


So here it comes. You are 100% wrong. Yes, this Open Championship is that important.


1) When "The Troubles" were going on, golf was still one entity on Ireland. It still is, at least on this electronic forum -https://www.golfnet.ie/ilgu-ulster


2) When I was hiking in Austria last summer, we had lunch with a Royal Portrush member at a rest stop (total coincidence) and he was worried about tickets. 250,000 people on a couple of hundred acres over 4 days is a war in most places. This reminds me of Apollo 11 - https://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/apollo-11/?fbclid=IwAR1fKpZnzu7IvjXOaYzdNpKTpwrtTxAX-Mhm3dB-o_lgruRZ8Y9uB1zhbDI


3) Ignore the name "Sweeney". I have no bias in this conversation and no real family in Ireland. This is a huge opportunity for golf, and there are 10 countries that could fit this model. Why not Oz or Canada? India?? Seriously...


4) Will Princess Kate show on Sunday?

[Sean_A]

  Its not like Portrush needs a sudden influx of Open cash.  They get plenty of visitor money as is.  Is hosting an Open really going to improve the bottom line of the club that much where it will get much needed projects completed? 

I was commenting today to a GCA former poster about how much I appreciate the "Arble Tours" - https://golfclubatlas.com/best-of-golf/sean-arbles-united-kingdom-course-tours-2/

So here it comes. You are 100% wrong. Yes, this Open Championship is that important.

1) When "The Troubles" were going on, golf was still one entity on Ireland. It still is, at least on this electronic forum -https://www.golfnet.ie/ilgu-ulster

2) When I was hiking in Austria last summer, we had lunch with a Royal Portrush member at a rest stop (total coincidence) and he was worried about tickets. 250,000 people on a couple of hundred acres over 4 days is a war in most places. This reminds me of Apollo 11 - https://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/apollo-11/?fbclid=IwAR1fKpZnzu7IvjXOaYzdNpKTpwrtTxAX-Mhm3dB-o_lgruRZ8Y9uB1zhbDI

3) Ignore the name "Sweeney". I have no bias in this conversation and no real family in Ireland. This is a huge opportunity for golf, and there are 10 countries that could fit this model. Why not Oz or Canada? India?? Seriously...

4) Will Princess Kate show on Sunday?

Thanks for the kind words.

I was wondering how long it would take before politics was inserted into the conversation.  The scuttlebutt is golf can save the world.  Golf is a game and politics is politics.  If the world is ready to be saved, golf won't make a bit of difference.  So, maybe lets stick to architecture.

Ciao

[Michael Wolf]

I agree mostly with SeanA and especially with Tim's recent thread topic.


Who cares if the new holes are "better"? I'm sure Tom Doak could design a better 18th hole at Cypress Point, or Ben Crenshaw could design a better 10th hole for the Old Course. "Better" is where we got into trouble in the United States starting 60 years ago, and "better" is just as dangerous in the UK right now.


The old 17th and 18th at Portrush were 565 and 485 yards. The Open didn't sell a single extra ticket because of the appeal new holes.


In 72 hours the Open will be over. But the Colt holes are gone forever. The clubhouse will now float in no mans land forever. The Valley course is changed forever -not just the sacrificed holes but also dunes flattened for a 1 week driving range and an abandoned 17th that couldn't be placed in the reworked course.


I understand Portrush has been promised two more Opens - I wonder what notes are being typed right now on ways to make the course even "better" for the next go rounds.


Shame


Michael

[Mike Sweeney]

I was wondering how long it would take before politics was inserted into the conversation.  The scuttlebutt is golf can save the world.  Golf is a game and politics is politics.  If the world is ready to be saved, golf won't make a bit of difference.  So, maybe lets stick to architecture.

Ciao

Princess Kate is cultural, not political in my view. "The Troubles" are over, but it is nice to see a collective effort by the GUI.


The Olympics is the original "peace movement", and golf and soccer settle in behind as "international games" - again in my view - http://thesportjournal.org/article/the-idea-of-peace-as-coubertins-vision-for-the-modern-olympic-movement-development-and-pedagogic-consequences/


From an architecture viewpoint, I have not seen Royal Portrush but I saw Martin Hawtree's work at Lahinch. He has been picked on a bunch as the "Rees Jones of the UK" from what I have seen here on GCA. I never saw the before at Lahinch, but I have Lahinch as Top 3 on my list. While I may not be as well traveled Overseas, I am pretty top heavy here in the States. That means Hawtree did great work, as every great "Open Course" (USA and UK) has changed over the years.

[Sean_A]

I was wondering how long it would take before politics was inserted into the conversation.  The scuttlebutt is golf can save the world.  Golf is a game and politics is politics.  If the world is ready to be saved, golf won't make a bit of difference.  So, maybe lets stick to architecture.

Ciao

Princess Kate is cultural, not political in my view. "The Troubles" are over, but it is nice to see a collective effort by the GUI.

The Olympics is the original "peace movement", and golf and soccer settle in behind as "international games" - again in my view - http://thesportjournal.org/article/the-idea-of-peace-as-coubertins-vision-for-the-modern-olympic-movement-development-and-pedagogic-consequences/

From an architecture viewpoint, I have not seen Royal Portrush but I saw Martin Hawtree's work at Lahinch. He has been picked on a bunch as the "Rees Jones of the UK" from what I have seen here on GCA. I never saw the before at Lahinch, but I have Lahinch as Top 3 on my list. While I may not be as well traveled Overseas, I am pretty top heavy here in the States. That means Hawtree did great work, as every great "Open Course" (USA and UK) has changed over the years.

Don't kid yourself, Kate turning up in Portrush would be a well orchestrated political statement.  If you don't believe that you don't understand the function of the Royal family. 

Don't kid yourself dos, "The Troubles" may be over, but trouble isn't over.  Quite a bit simmers just under the surface.

Hawtree gets it in the neck, perhaps unfairly.  The more observational gca enthusiasts more often point out the sameness of Hawtree's work across different courses.  On that score, they probably have a valid point.  Regardless, Lahinch would make my top 15 or so best courses, but I am guessing Dr Mac has a lot to do with my high opinion of the course.

Ciao   

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think that you are wrong here, Sean.


You are placing too much stock in The Valley which has not as much untouched Colt as you are making out.


In this case, it was the right decision because it was the only decision available to bring The Open back to Portrush. And bringing The Open to Portrush was an incredibly important statement in golf, in sport and for the country as a whole.


I agree with Tim’s statement for two reasons:


1. A lot of the work is unnecessary.
2. A lot of the work is homogenising our links, eradicating individuality and quirk.


In this case, the work was an improvement AND necessary. The two holes replaced were not particularly individual and let us not forget that two Colt holes have previously been replaced on the Dunluce, The now 10th and 11th replacing two closer to town.


The Valley is as good if not better than before.


As for Lahinch, do you know what was Dr.Mack’s work there? He only did so much, much of which was removed within 7 years of his visit. A lot of those holes are Charles Gibson from 1907.

[Thomas Dai]

Political remarks need care - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jul/17/portrush-march-open-championship-martin-slumbers-golf


As to the new routing, around the 1st tee, chipping green, putting green, driving range etc does seem rather congested. I wonder if modifications will be made for the next visit of The Open to RPGC?


atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

Political remarks need care - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jul/17/portrush-march-open-championship-martin-slumbers-golf


As to the new routing, around the 1st tee, chipping green, putting green, driving range etc does seem rather congested. I wonder if modifications will be made for the next visit of The Open to RPGC?


atb

In theory, if they decide to permanently eradicate the old 18th hole, they could place the 1st tees where that green is and push the current 18th green back towards the current 1st tees / chipping green.


But I’ve no idea if that is a good plan or whether it would completely ruin the current 18th for not much gain.

[Tim Gallant]

They are a lot better than the two holes that were removed.
 I've played all four and I'll take the two new ones over the two old ones.
Bertha was cool, but the homage to it was a nice thought.


I found the shaping a little too much in places, but the setting is great.
I liked the changes. 7th more so than 8th.

Ian,


Interesting that both you and Tom had almost the exact same take. Would you mind explaining what you mean by over-shaping? I think I understand what you mean in theory, but I'm not sure I could pick out specific examples unless it was painfully obvious that the work didn't tie in with the surroundings. Is that what you mean?

[Sean_A]

I think that you are wrong here, Sean.

Ally

I may very well be wrong, but I think you are missing my points.

You assume the Open in Ireland is good for golf and the country.  Maybe you are right, maybe you aren't.  Time will tell.  I am still waiting to hear about the great things that happened for Wales after hosting what was meant to be a game changer Ryder Cup.  Put it this way, I believe the hype when I see it...too often it never materializes.   

The other point I wish to make is that generally, golf needs to be more about supporting smaller courses/clubs.  Its not a glamorous position to take, but I see little future in piling money into already famous, wealthy clubs/courses who don't need the cash.  Generally, I think money and resources are better spent making sure the good second and third tier courses prosper.  That said, I can understand if you disagree...that is a common approach...trickle down theory if you will. Its just that I don't buy that it works better than working from the ground up.

Ciao

[Adam Lawrence]

Sean -- you are entirely wrong about the impact of the Celtic Manor Ryder Cup. The Welsh authorities used the Ryder Cup as the basis of a marketing campaign over the best part of a decade that created a significant golf tourism industry in Wales where it didn't really exist. Over the eight years of the 'Wales: Golf as it should be' campaign, golf tourist visits to Wales grew from 30,000 to 150,000. See
https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/wales/68804-golf-tourism-67-cent-2004 and https://golfbusinessnews.com/news/travel/building-golf-tourism-in-wales/


Additionally, the event itself brought over £80 million into the Welsh economy. See [size=78%]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-12834078[/size]

[Sean_A]

Adam

I am talking about what has the Ryder Cup done for 2nd/3rd tier courses... the backbone of golf. Its obvious big events bring money to the economy in general and that big clubs who do alright anyway benefit. As I said above, I am not convinced trickle down works for golf, but I am willing to be convinced. It is my feeling that down membership numbers and course closures have eased in the past few years. But that might simply be a natural leveling point. That said, I also think many clubs are on a knife edge right now.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

You’re clutching at straws, Sean.


Your initial point was worrying more about The Valley course, a second course at an already large established club (well if you don’t split hairs and say it is actually Rathmore GC).


The club decided they wanted The Open. They got it. It’s an important decision to take The Open back there. The plan to add new holes was necessary and an improvement at that.


The plan to alter other parts of The Dunluce I’m less sure about. That may fall in to the “unnecessary” bracket but who knows. As you say yourself, small beer.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()