The truly unique golf courses

[Ally Mcintosh]

The splitting hairs thread on the 5 courses at Bandon Dunes has me thinking that while one may be clearly better than another (in most peoples’ opinion), all 5 are of a certain type and in many ways could be grouped with quite a few other great courses built in the last 20 years.... If you lost one, or two, or three, would you have lost something truly unique to the golf world? Haven’t been there, don’t know, but perception is perhaps not?


Not arguing that they aren’t all great or nearly great... or that they don’t deserve their positions on World Top-100 lists, just that they may not be the most individual designs out there (they may be so feel free to correct me).


Which courses (either great or at least very good) are truly different to any others? Where if they were to close, something undeniably would be lost?


I will start by giving you what I consider the three most individual great or nearly great courses in Ireland. They are not necessarily the best or my favourites:


- Royal County Down
- The European Club
- Lahinch (primarily for Dell and Klondyke)

[Tim Martin]

Yale for it’s scale and bold design

[Thomas Dai]

Which courses (either great or at least very good) are truly different to any others? Where if they were to close, something undeniably would be lost?

It might be a marmite course but my nomination is .....
RND at Westward Ho!
Atb

[Ira Fishman]

Ally,


Interesting exercise. And I agree re Lahinch.


Tim,


I agree re Yale. I would add:


PH2
Primland (only course I have played where holes run on top of the mountain).


North Berwick is a tough call for me. I love the course and 13-18 are distinctive, but if I am understanding Ally’s question correctly, is it so different from RD for example that if it were to close, we could not find similar greatness elsewhere?


Ira

[Tim Martin]

Tobacco Road

[Ronald Montesano]

Thomas...despite having never played RND or Brancaster, they were the first courses that popped into my head. The other that I haven't played, that I would nominate, is Pennard.




From the ones that I have seen, National Golf Links of America, more than any other course in that neighborhood. Next would be Pinehurst #2 and Pasatiempo. Courses where the architects lovingly took up residence, speaks to something.


Off the ranked path, I would nominate Astoria in Oregon, Green Lake in NY, Cape Arundel in ME ...


I'll stop. This is difficult.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ira,


I had a similar dilemma with North Berwick.... only clear ones in Scotland for me are The Old Course and Prestwick.


Trying to think of inland courses in the UK... Walton Heath might win the battle of the heathlands (perhaps Woking for the greens)... I’m sure there might be an argument for a Painswick or similar?...

[Tim Martin]

Thomas...despite having never played RND or Brancaster, they were the first courses that popped into my head. The other that I haven't played, that I would nominate, is Pennard.




From the ones that I have seen, National Golf Links of America, more than any other course in that neighborhood. Next would be Pinehurst #2 and Pasatiempo. Courses where the architects lovingly took up residence, speaks to something.


Off the ranked path, I would nominate Astoria in Oregon, Green Lake in NY, Cape Arundel in ME ...


I'll stop. This is difficult.

I agree with NGLA but wonder what makes Cape Arundel unique? It’s great fun to play at 6000 yards with a wild set of greens but there is no lack of shortish Golden Age courses with interesting greens.

[Tom_Doak]

"Truly unique" is a very high standard, and beyond St. Andrews and maybe Oakmont and Pine Valley, I am not sure there are any courses that could pass a thorough interrogation.  Maybe Cape Breton Highlands [golf as a trek]. 


Some might even insist that Pine Valley is no longer unique because it's been imitated by World Woods et al.


Great courses establish a character of their own:  Yale and NGLA feel very different, even though most of the holes are quite similar.  Ruling out everything built by most architects, because they built other courses in a similar style, leaves only architects who never built anything else and who no one wanted to imitate.  At the same time, singling out NGLA or Yale [or one of mine over another] seems entirely subjective to me.

[Ally Mcintosh]

"Truly unique" is a very high standard, and beyond St. Andrews and maybe Oakmont and Pine Valley, I am not sure there are any courses that could pass a thorough interrogation.  Maybe Cape Breton Highlands [golf as a trek]. 


Some might even insist that Pine Valley is no longer unique because it's been imitated by World Woods et al.


Great courses establish a character of their own:  Yale and NGLA feel very different, even though most of the holes are quite similar.  Ruling out everything built by most architects, because they built other courses in a similar style, leaves only architects who never built anything else and who no one wanted to imitate.  At the same time, singling out NGLA or Yale [or one of mine over another] seems entirely subjective to me.

Yes my main dilemma in starting this thread was that architects who built a number of great but even somewhat similar style courses might start ruling themselves out.


But lowering the standard a little, would we not include a Cypress Point for instance? It uses some unique landforms to establish a lot of its individuality.


Every great course does have a character all of its own. However, some can be bracketed together whilst others defy being grouped. The latter are the ones I’m looking for.

[Tom_Doak]

Yes my main dilemma in starting this thread was that architects who built a number of great but even somewhat similar style courses might start ruling themselves out.

But lowering the standard a little, would we not include a Cypress Point for instance? It uses some unique landforms to establish a lot of its individuality.

Well, once you start lowering the standard, where do you stop?


Royal Melbourne is usually the course I cite as the third pillar of "different" designs, to go alongside St Andrews and Pine Valley, but it's been so heavily imitated that one cannot call it unique.  Cypress Point is built in similar style, but are you elevating it because you hit three shots over the ocean?  I think it was the first course where that was true, but it is not the only one anymore, though it is still the most dramatic.




Part of the point of The Gourmet's Choice in The Confidential Guide is to identify courses of unique character, but even few of those pass this test.  Of the courses in Volume 1, I think I would say that next to St. Andrews, Brancaster might be highest on this scale, and then Painswick.  But calling them the "most unique" is a misuse of the word.

[Ira Fishman]

I would make the case that if the only reason that a course is not highly differentiated is that it is been imitated speaks to its differentiation.


Ira

[Jeff Schley]

The Sacred Nine
Cape Wickham
Kapalua Plantation

[Adam Lawrence]

Yes my main dilemma in starting this thread was that architects who built a number of great but even somewhat similar style courses might start ruling themselves out.

But lowering the standard a little, would we not include a Cypress Point for instance? It uses some unique landforms to establish a lot of its individuality.

Well, once you start lowering the standard, where do you stop?


Royal Melbourne is usually the course I cite as the third pillar of "different" designs, to go alongside St Andrews and Pine Valley, but it's been so heavily imitated that one cannot call it unique.  Cypress Point is built in similar style, but are you elevating it because you hit three shots over the ocean?  I think it was the first course where that was true, but it is not the only one anymore, though it is still the most dramatic.




Part of the point of The Gourmet's Choice in The Confidential Guide is to identify courses of unique character, but even few of those pass this test.  Of the courses in Volume 1, I think I would say that next to St. Andrews, Brancaster might be highest on this scale, and then Painswick.  But calling them the "most unique" is a misuse of the word.

"Most unique" is by definition a misuse of the word!

[jeffwarne]

Yes my main dilemma in starting this thread was that architects who built a number of great but even somewhat similar style courses might start ruling themselves out.

But lowering the standard a little, would we not include a Cypress Point for instance? It uses some unique landforms to establish a lot of its individuality.

Part of the point of The Gourmet's Choice in The Confidential Guide is to identify courses of unique character, but even few of those pass this test.  Of the courses in Volume 1, I think I would say that next to St. Andrews, Brancaster might be highest on this scale, and then Painswick.  But calling them the "most unique" is a misuse of the word.

This would seem fertile ground for such courses.
Pennard a good example.


Arrowtown, which I also played on his recommendation is quite unique.
Durness is another and the aforementioned Westward Ho

[Tony_Muldoon]

"Truly unique" is a very high standard, and beyond St. Andrews and maybe Oakmont and Pine Valley, I am not sure there are any courses that could pass a thorough interrogation.  Maybe Cape Breton Highlands [golf as a trek]. 


Some might even insist that Pine Valley is no longer unique because it's been imitated by World Woods et al.


Great courses establish a character of their own:  Yale and NGLA feel very different, even though most of the holes are quite similar.  Ruling out everything built by most architects, because they built other courses in a similar style, leaves only architects who never built anything else and who no one wanted to imitate.  At the same time, singling out NGLA or Yale [or one of mine over another] seems entirely subjective to me.

Yes my main dilemma in starting this thread was that architects who built a number of great but even somewhat similar style courses might start ruling themselves out.


But lowering the standard a little, would we not include a Cypress Point for instance? It uses some unique landforms to establish a lot of its individuality.


Every great course does have a character all of its own. However, some can be bracketed together whilst others defy being grouped. The latter are the ones I’m looking for.

I've spent a lot of time this Autumn thinking about Kington.  To get that good a golf course, out of that site is unique.


Hats off to Major Cecil Key Hutchison, who rarely seems to be mentioned.

[Sean_A]

The only two I can think of that I have played are Kington and TOC. The qualifier of great or nearly great excludes Painswick imo.

Ciao

[David_Tepper]

At the risk of being a homer, Golspie is unique in having the course comprised of 3 different terrains (linksland, heathland & meadowland).

Fortrose & Rosemarkie is certainly one of the most unique settings for a course that I have ever seen.


 

[Peter Pallotta]

It’s interesting that, for all the importance of the ‘site’ as a key influencer on the final design, many of the golf courses mentioned here are unique because of the ‘people’: Oakmont is unique not because of the land it sits on but because of what Fownes ‘intended’ it to be; Pine Valley is unique because of what Crump first  ‘envisioned’ as a field of play. An architect has to be able to ‘see’ something remarkable and have the willingness & commitment to realize that vision for a unique golf course to be made real. As always, TOC stands alone: it is what it is because of the people + ‘time’ + the ‘underlying spirit and ethos of the game’ + the site. That this combination is so rare explains why there’s still only one Old Course.

[Marty Bonnar]

I remember being truly gob-smacked the first time I saw photos of Desmond’s Stone Harbor. As a big fan of symbolism in landscape design, it spoke to me in ways that no other golf course has ever done.
Similarly, Mike Stranz’s work at MPCC seemed so original and artistic, that I couldn’t help but admire it hugely when I saw it.
F.

[Andrew Harvie]

Truly unique courses are hard to come by, but I'd mention Kenora, a Stanley Thompson/Robert Moote in Ontario. It is genuinely unique and I've yet to find anything remotely similar from Stan.


You could argue Apache Stronghold is unique for the area its in. Other than maybe WeKoPa, no other desert course interacts with the landscape as effortlessly as Apache Stronghold, and the actual site is pretty intense.


Dinosaur Trail in Alberta is absolutely unique, but perhaps not in a good way.


I haven't travelled around the US enough to find unique gems, but Canada there's a few quirks. I imagine Quebec is full of them, but I'll wait until next year to see.

[Tom_Doak]

"Most unique" is by definition a misuse of the word!

That was what I was trying to say, gently.  You're either unique, or just rare.

[archie_struthers]

 


Two of the most unique golf courses to me would be National Golf Links and Indian Creek.


Indian Creek is a totally manufactured golf course that looks like it has always been there. Very creative work by the "Nature Faker"!


National, well, you have to experience it ....way cool!

[Tom_Doak]

Truly unique courses are hard to come by, but I'd mention Kenora, a Stanley Thompson/Robert Moote in Ontario. It is genuinely unique and I've yet to find anything remotely similar from Stan.

Dinosaur Trail in Alberta is absolutely unique, but perhaps not in a good way.

I had never heard of either of these.  Had I known about Dinosaur Trail, I surely would have visited when I was in Alberta a few years ago for The Confidential Guide.  What's unique about Kenora though?  Their web site doesn't make it obvious.

[Adam Lawrence]

"Most unique" is by definition a misuse of the word!

That was what I was trying to say, gently.  You're either unique, or just rare.

Thanks Tom. Of all the modern manglings of English I think this is the one that drives me maddest.


Please, everyone, while we are on this topic, try to remember:


Unique is not comparable. Something is either unique or it is not. 'Most unique' or 'more unique' or any such construction is a usage error. Something can be 'more unusual' or 'more special' or whatever. But it cannot be 'more unique'.


'Truly unique' I think we can allow, because it is perfectly possible that something might be claimed to be unique that was not.