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.


Matt MacIver

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2021, 06:19:02 PM »
How can you not consider TOC-Kiawah a links?


That paspalum grass can be watered by seawater which is great but plays like Velcro and isn’t conducive for the ground game…so: not a links.

Anthony Gray

Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #26 on: November 26, 2021, 08:02:59 PM »
 When I think of links golf I think about fast and firm and  inconsistent weather mainly wind. So the ocean is not as important when it comes to visuals. Tom Doak makes a great point with the Sand hill courses that don’t have bodies of water.
  If you can put from 100 yards in its links. I witnessed a two putt birdie from the tee box on the par 3 8th at kingsbarns. Putter of the tee than a one putt green. I would assume the ocean a sea contributes more to weather but I’m going to use the putting from 100 yards out criteria. Fescue is hidden in that criteria someplace.

John Emerson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #27 on: November 26, 2021, 08:40:47 PM »
Every single golf course I’ve ever visited in Scotland has been a links and they are also loaded with bentgrass, several poa species, and various other turfgrasses. Hell, they even purposely  seed non fescue species into the greens at TOC!  This assumption that that links courses only have fescue is asinine and simply not true. I think the fescue determination is insane and just simply is not a worthy criteria of the “links” label.  If course in question fits all the criteria except the “fescue” part….guess what, that’s a links.
“There’s links golf, then everything else.”

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #28 on: November 26, 2021, 08:49:00 PM »
I always sort of figured Cypress Point was a links course, but I guess not....  :-[ :-[

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2021, 10:16:46 PM »
Two things.

Peper's book definitely lists courses that are borderline. As much as 1/2 not links land.

My winter experience at Gearhart had drives landing in the fairway taking as large or larger pitch marks as I get in a clay based, sand top dressed course inland by Portland. I doubt it qualifies as a links. It had a fast and firm reputation when people played on its unirrigated surface in the summer.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #30 on: November 26, 2021, 10:20:21 PM »
When I think of links golf I think about fast and firm and  inconsistent weather mainly wind. So the ocean is not as important when it comes to visuals. Tom Doak makes a great point with the Sand hill courses that don’t have bodies of water.
  If you can put from 100 yards in its links. I witnessed a two putt birdie from the tee box on the par 3 8th at kingsbarns. Putter of the tee than a one putt green. I would assume the ocean a sea contributes more to weather but I’m going to use the putting from 100 yards out criteria. Fescue is hidden in that criteria someplace.

Who is this imposter? Most of the spelling is correct, so it can't really be Anthony Gray.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #31 on: November 26, 2021, 11:37:26 PM »
I always feel I am in a parkland setting when you get to the tree holes at Carnoustie . And the houses around Lythum and St Annes confuse me.

John Emerson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2021, 12:04:47 AM »
I always feel I am in a parkland setting when you get to the tree holes at Carnoustie . And the houses around Lythum and St Annes confuse me.
There are a bunch of houses at north Berwick
“There’s links golf, then everything else.”

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2021, 03:04:40 AM »
Every single golf course I’ve ever visited in Scotland has been a links and they are also loaded with bentgrass, several poa species, and various other turfgrasses. Hell, they even purposely  seed non fescue species into the greens at TOC!  This assumption that that links courses only have fescue is asinine and simply not true. I think the fescue determination is insane and just simply is not a worthy criteria of the “links” label.  If course in question fits all the criteria except the “fescue” part….guess what, that’s a links.


You’re the grass man but links environments always have fescue. It is the dominant plant as mobile dunes start to succeed to fixed dunes. In essence, embryo dunes form with deep rooting plants like sea couch. As these succeed to mobile dunes, clumps of marram start to take over and as these succeed to fixed dunes, festuca rubra is the most prevalent grass…. That’s a rather simplistic view because fixed sand dunes can be very species rich between dune slacks and a variety of grasses… but fescue will always be present.


Also you will rarely ever find playing surfaces with 100% fescue as far as I understand? There are always a small mix of other grasses which help from a maintenance perspective.


I have a very GB&I / Cool Season view on what a links is. But it is purely based on how sand dunes form. That is the only way to consider it. The other stuff is completely peripheral and temporary.

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #34 on: November 27, 2021, 08:05:48 AM »
Ballyneal plays just like a links course. Perhaps the definition needs to evolve just as most definitions do. And if you want a good read, pick up the Professor and the Madman about the making of the OED.


Ira

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #35 on: November 27, 2021, 10:07:28 AM »
Every single golf course I’ve ever visited in Scotland has been a links and they are also loaded with bentgrass, several poa species, and various other turfgrasses. Hell, they even purposely  seed non fescue species into the greens at TOC!  This assumption that that links courses only have fescue is asinine and simply not true. I think the fescue determination is insane and just simply is not a worthy criteria of the “links” label.  If course in question fits all the criteria except the “fescue” part….guess what, that’s a links.


John:


The fairways are predominantly fescue, and they manage for the fescue.  Only Americans and Asians are stupid enough to demand 100% purity of grass species.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #36 on: November 27, 2021, 10:11:55 AM »

The status was defined many moons ago. It it is only in the past 30 years that folks want to somehow redefine what a links is. Not surprising.



You have not actually written your definition of links in this thread, just denigrated everyone else's.  What is your definition?  I have never seen one I was totally happy with.  The idea that the land "receded from the sea" does not conform to my understanding of the geology at all.  Dunes are formed by wind.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #37 on: November 27, 2021, 01:45:15 PM »
Every single golf course I’ve ever visited in Scotland has been a links and they are also loaded with bentgrass, several poa species, and various other turfgrasses. Hell, they even purposely  seed non fescue species into the greens at TOC!  This assumption that that links courses only have fescue is asinine and simply not true. I think the fescue determination is insane and just simply is not a worthy criteria of the “links” label.  If course in question fits all the criteria except the “fescue” part….guess what, that’s a links.


John:


The fairways are predominantly fescue, and they manage for the fescue.  Only Americans and Asians are stupid enough to demand 100% purity of grass species.

You meant ignorant enough, didn't you?
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #38 on: November 27, 2021, 11:33:38 PM »
Why wouldn't Spanish Bay, Spyglass Hill or Pacific Grove not be considered links courses or partial links courses? ???
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2021, 04:02:46 AM »

The status was defined many moons ago. It it is only in the past 30 years that folks want to somehow redefine what a links is. Not surprising.



You have not actually written your definition of links in this thread, just denigrated everyone else's.  What is your definition?  I have never seen one I was totally happy with.  The idea that the land "receded from the sea" does not conform to my understanding of the geology at all.  Dunes are formed by wind.

I didn't denigrate anybody. I said people try to take marketing/pr advantage of the links concept for obvious reasons.

I believe and I believe this has always been the case until recent history, that true links are built on links land. Links link the sea to arable land. The soil is mainly sandy which supports fescues and bents, but other varieties exist. Its pretty straight forward imo. There may be some debate about the course being cut off from the sea because part of the links land has been developed. But I can't see how a course 1000 miles from the sea can claim to be links land. You might say its links like or but yet, create a good definition for these courses. But to call the courses links when these courses quite clearly are not on land which links to the sea is not accurate.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

John Emerson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2021, 12:19:34 PM »
Every single golf course I’ve ever visited in Scotland has been a links and they are also loaded with bentgrass, several poa species, and various other turfgrasses. Hell, they even purposely  seed non fescue species into the greens at TOC!  This assumption that that links courses only have fescue is asinine and simply not true. I think the fescue determination is insane and just simply is not a worthy criteria of the “links” label.  If course in question fits all the criteria except the “fescue” part….guess what, that’s a links.


John:


The fairways are predominantly fescue, and they manage for the fescue.  Only Americans and Asians are stupid enough to demand 100% purity of grass species.


Yes, they manage for the fescues and it is the dominant grass, I agree.  But, to say not being “100% fescue” is a disqualification factor is silly. 
“There’s links golf, then everything else.”

Dónal Ó Ceallaigh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #41 on: November 29, 2021, 03:20:56 AM »
When I think of links golf I think about fast and firm and  inconsistent weather mainly wind. So the ocean is not as important when it comes to visuals. Tom Doak makes a great point with the Sand hill courses that don’t have bodies of water.
  If you can put from 100 yards in its links. I witnessed a two putt birdie from the tee box on the par 3 8th at kingsbarns. Putter of the tee than a one putt green. I would assume the ocean a sea contributes more to weather but I’m going to use the putting from 100 yards out criteria. Fescue is hidden in that criteria someplace.

Who is this imposter? Most of the spelling is correct, so it can't really be Anthony Gray.


I think it's him; there are enough spelling errors but I'm just surprised he didn't mention Cruden Bay.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #42 on: November 29, 2021, 09:46:45 AM »
How is it that Long Island, NY and the coast of Massachusetts are not considered links land?

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #43 on: November 29, 2021, 11:18:43 AM »
I was reading Sean's definition and a couple of thoughts popped to mind.


First, why should "links" be limited to land adjacent to the sea?  Couldn't the same conditions be found adjacent to other bodies of water?


Second, many of the sand based inland areas around the world were formed eons ago when the geography of the world looked much different.  If a "dunes" area was formed by a sea (or other body of water) that no longer exists, how is the land itself different from from the land we most commonly think of as comprising seaside links.


Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #44 on: November 29, 2021, 12:27:16 PM »
Sven,


On point 2, I seem to remember a thread that showed a map of the NC Sandhills being adjacent to water back in history.


Ira

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #45 on: November 29, 2021, 12:44:57 PM »
Sven,

On point 2, I seem to remember a thread that showed a map of the NC Sandhills being adjacent to water back in history.

Ira
As well as the Nebraska Sandhills...

Even here in Utah, when the Great Salt Lake used to actually be "great-sized" it was known as Lake Bonneville, and left several massive sand deposits including a recreation area now called Little Sahara. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Sahara_Recreation_Area

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2021, 12:50:38 PM »

First, why should "links" be limited to land adjacent to the sea?  Couldn't the same conditions be found adjacent to other bodies of water?

Second, many of the sand based inland areas around the world were formed eons ago when the geography of the world looked much different.  If a "dunes" area was formed by a sea (or other body of water) that no longer exists, how is the land itself different from from the land we most commonly think of as comprising seaside links.

Sven


Yep. Sand Hills was built on land/dunes exposed by a receding sea. It so happens that the sea has now receded a couple of thousand miles away.


Bob 

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #47 on: November 29, 2021, 04:07:06 PM »
...  If a "dunes" area was formed by a sea (or other body of water) that no longer exists, how is the land itself different from from the land we most commonly think of as comprising seaside links.


Sven

Climate
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #48 on: November 29, 2021, 04:17:49 PM »
I was reading Sean's definition and a couple of thoughts popped to mind.

First, why should "links" be limited to land adjacent to the sea?  Couldn't the same conditions be found adjacent to other bodies of water?

Second, many of the sand based inland areas around the world were formed eons ago when the geography of the world looked much different.  If a "dunes" area was formed by a sea (or other body of water) that no longer exists, how is the land itself different from from the land we most commonly think of as comprising seaside links.

Sven

I think my post summed it up. Links courses were and are built on links land. Links connects the sea to arable land. It's one of the essential features of the definition. It's difficult to say courses separated from the sea by x100 miles meets that very basic premise. Hell, Ganton isn't called a links...

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: True Links courses in the USA - can we agree?
« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2021, 04:18:01 PM »
Sorry, mishap. Deleted.


Ciao
« Last Edit: November 29, 2021, 04:20:21 PM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing