[John Nixon]

from pgatour.com:

ST. ANDREWS, Scotland -- The British Open is returning to Carnoustie in 2007.

   
The Open was last played on the Scottish links course in 1999, and is remembered as the championship in which Frenchman Jean Van de Velde blew a three-stroke lead on the 72nd hole and then lost a three-way playoff to Scotsman Paul Lawrie.

"Carnoustie has always been acknowledged as an outstanding test of links golf with one of the most exacting finishes of any championship course," Peter Dawson, secretary of the Royal & Ancient Golf Club, said Thursday.

Before 1999, the Open was last played at Carnoustie in 1975.

Carnoustie was a punishing test in '99 when its hip-high rough, wind and wet weather sent scores soaring. The three playoff contenders finished regulation play with 6-over-par scores of 290.

Carnoustie first hosted the British Open in 1931, which was won by Tommy Armour.

[ForkaB]

Great news.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that, overall, Carnoustie is the best course on the British Isles, and perhaps in the world.....

....and yet, like Rodney Dangerfield, it don't get no respect.  Why, prithee?

[Matt_Ward]

One can only hope that the powers-that-be prepare the course responsibly because the existing layout does not need to set up as it was in 1999.

*****

For Immediate Publication – Issued Thursday 22nd January 2004 from the Royal & Ancient ...

CARNOUSTIE TO HOST 2007 OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP


Carnoustie has been chosen to host the Open Championship from 19th to 22nd July 2007.

The Open returned to Carnoustie in 1999 after a break of 24 years. The success of the infrastructure, access arrangements and accommodation put in place to handle the needs of a modern Championship has resulted in the R&A awarding the venue the Open for a seventh time according to David Hill, Championship Secretary of the R&A.

Carnoustie, playing to 7361 yards, has traditionally been regarded as the most difficult of Open venues, a fact that was underlined in 1999 when Paul Lawrie won in testing conditions with a 6 over par score of 290.

In announcing the 2007 venue, Peter Dawson, Secretary of the R&A said: "Carnoustie has always been acknowledged as an outstanding test of links golf with one of the most exacting finishes of any Championship course."

"We are therefore delighted to be returning only eight years after the previous Open when Carnoustie was rightly reinstated to the rota of Open venues."

Angus Council leader Rob Murray said he was delighted that the Open was returning to Carnoustie in 2007. "The 1999 championship surpassed the expectations of all involved and secured Carnoustie's reputation as one of the best links courses in the world. We are delighted to see the championship's return to the county and I thank the R&A for their confidence in the venue."

"The creation of a new dual carriageway between Dundee and Arbroath will improve the journey and reduce traffic congestion – which is good news for visiting spectators and the home crowd alike."

"We look forward to working with the R&A in the lead up to 2007 and give them our fullest support for what is certain to be another successful and exciting championship."

The return of the Open to Carnoustie by the R&A will ensure positive worldwide television coverage for the area and Scotland at large. It will also give a multimillion-pound boost to the local and general economy.

There is reference to golf being played at Carnoustie as early as 1527. The first known course at Carnoustie was laid out in the first half of the 19th century and consisted of only 10 holes. Old Tom Morris expanded the course to 18 holes in 1873 and in 1926 James Braid made far-reaching alterations which were the basis for today’s championship layout.

Carnoustie first hosted the Open in 1931 and the list of Champions is:

1931 - Tommy Armour 73, 75, 77, 71 296

1937 - Henry Cotton 74, 73, 72, 71 290

1953 - Ben Hogan 73, 71, 70, 68 282

1968 - Gary Player 74, 71, 71, 73 289

1975 - Tom Watson 71, 67, 69, 72 279

1999 - Paul Lawrie 73, 74, 76, 67 290

[THuckaby2]

Why?

Perhaps because too many people think of it as a bitchly hard course and not a just plain great course?  People get swayed by the uninspiring look of the surroundings?

I do think it qualifies as just plain great.  Best in the British Isles?  That's a stretch - there are quite a few contenders for that honor.  But anyone who calls it that isn't INSANE, anyway...

 

Great news it will get another Open.  Here's hoping sanity prevails in the setup.

TH

[Mike Hendren]

Rich,

Your post got me thinking (no small task).  I was bludgeoned by  Carnoustie's back nine to the point of disorientation.  The hail, sleet, rain wind and cold all added to the toughest stretch of holes I've ever played (using that term loosely).  12 - 18 are brutal.  I loved it.

What stands out after more thought is just how good the front is.  I absolutely loved nos. 1 (what a pleasant surprise to discover the green sited in the dell after reaching your drive the first time) ,2,3,5,6, 8 & 9.  Visually, no. 2 is one of my favorite holes anywhere, and I cannot begin to fathon trying access a back left hole location at the 5th.  The three-shot 6th is highly underrated - I can sit on the 7th tee and stare the the 6th green for hours.  

Regards,

Mike

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

I concur with every word of your assessment.

But here's the $128K question:

Is it the best course in the British Isles?

I figure we'd start there before we have it conquer the world.

TH

[ForkaB]

Tom

To me the only legitimate contenders for the "honor" of "best" in GBI are, in alphabetical order (and one of those is put on there only out of deference to Ran and the Emperor....):

Ballybunion
Birkdale
Carnoustie
County Down
Dornoch
Muirfield
Portmarnock
St. Andrews (Old)
Sandwich
Turnberry

I "like" more than one of the above better than Carnoustie, but I can't think of one that I would consider to be "better"--in all the golfing senses of the word.

[George Pazin]

I "like" more than one of the above better than Carnoustie, but I can't think of one that I would consider to be "better"--in all the golfing senses of the word.

Can you think of reasons why you would consider Carnoustie to be "better" than the others?

That's why I like the Michelin system best (whose idea was that? ) - give 'em all 3 stars!

[THuckaby2]

Rich:

Thank God you changed this to "GBI" and didn't include my beloved homeland courses like Ballybuniion in "British Isles".  Wars have been started for less.  

In any case, that seems to be a fine list of candidates to me (though there sure are additions that could be made... Troon, Hoylake, Rye, the list goes on and on...).  Whether Carnoustie is "better" than any of them, let alone all of them, depends on how you define "better".  That is, what criteria do you use...

As I say, if you want to make it #1, then you are not insane - hell it is a fine nominee.  You will likely get little agreement, but that's got to be par for the course for you!  

Hell there are a whole bunch that I "like" more than those on the list, also... add Cruden Bay and North Berwick, for starters... but I do understand that's not the point.  We want some form of objective greatness here.

So what the hell, I'll take a stab, cuz this is fun.  Here's how I'd rank them just trying for that:

Dornoch
St. Andrews (Old)
County Down
Ballybunion
Carnoustie
Muirfield
Turnberry
Birkdale
Portmarnock
Sandwich

No great thought in that, btw - just off the top of my head.  So you see Carnoustie is way up there - man it hurt me to put it above Muirfield, but for today I think it belongs - I just can't get it above any of the others.

One way or the other, it remains damn cool it gets another Open... I was unsure if that would occur, given all the controversy over the 1999 setup.

TH

ps to George - this highlights with great clarity why the Michelin system is boring.  Hell yes they're all three stars, but that kinda ends the conversation, doesn't it?  

[Matt_Ward]

Rich:

Quick question -- did you forget Royal Portrush (Dunluce) or did it not merit your favor as being among the elite best?

Inquiring minds would like to know from the courses you mentioned in alpha order -- what are your personal top five? Thanks ...

P.S. I'm assuming Dornoch is one of them.

[THuckaby2]

Yikes - great point by Matt... add Portrush Dunluce and make my list:

Dornoch
St. Andrews (Old)
County Down
Ballybunion
Carnoustie
Muirfield
Portrush
Turnberry
Birkdale
Portmarnock
Sandwich

[ForkaB]

You're right, George.  All but one of those have 3***, but........

....boys being boys, somebody's gotta be #1, non?  And, if we're going to spend huge amounts of bandwidth splitting hairs as to whether or not Pebble Beach is better or worse than Oakmont or Cypress or Pine Valley or Shinneocock or wherever, why not just complicate things a little bit more?

....and, more seriously, if you are going to do any sort of rating--even at "Michelin" levels of granularity--you need to give a lot of attention to the margin, i.e. does course X really "deserve" to be in the same category as course Y?  Taking that to the ultimate extreme, is Cypress Point really "better" than Carnoustie?  I can argue that one both ways, but come down clearly on one side, for example.......

[THuckaby2]

You're right, George.  All but one of those have 3***, but........

....boys being boys, somebody's gotta be #1, non?  And, if we're going to spend huge amounts of bandwidth splitting hairs as to whether or not Pebble Beach is better or worse than Oakmont or Cypress or Pine Valley or Shinneocock or wherever, why not just complicate things a little bit more?

....and, more seriously, if you are going to do any sort of rating--even at "Michelin" levels of granularity--you need to give a lot of attention to the margin, i.e. does course X really "deserve" to be in the same category as course Y?  Taking that to the ultimate extreme, is Cypress Point really "better" than Carnoustie?  I can argue that one both ways, but come down clearly on one side, for example.......

And they call me a waffler.  Serve up the syrup for the former greatest proponent of "ratings suck, who cares which is better, they're all great, let's use 0-3 stars as the only classification."  It is a sad day, notwithstanding the fact that Rich has finally come to his senses.

 

TH

[George Pazin]

Rich hasn't come to his senses, he just doesn't like having me on his side.

Seems like of the courses listed, Turnberry has received the widest range of opinion, other than maybe TOC.

[THuckaby2]

George - of course I'm also conveniently leaving out which side he'd come out on in a Cypress v. Carnoustie comparison.  Only one with very limited grasp of reality would call the latter "better" in any definition other than "more likely to cause you fits."

And I am having a lot of fun with this.

 

[ForkaB]

Matt

I excluded Portrush only because I have never played it , and also, because from what others tell me, it would probably be at the middle of that "top 10" list, at best--great, but not Carnoustie calibre.

Dornoch is certainly in my top 1 for courses I would like to play for the rest of my life, and BINGO!, I won!  But.......

...as I said in my original post it just ain't as "good" as Carnoustie, all things being considered.  Particularly (you might like this one!) length.  In this day and age, Dornoch has to go into that small group of courses like Cypress, Merion, Pine Valley, NGLA, Rye, who offer everything but "brute force" challenges.  I happen to believe that golf is (should be?) an athletic endeavor, so courses that allow aging endomorphs like me to score on them without practicing or exercising are just lacking a little bit when one picks nits on issues such as this.

All that being said, much better golfers than you or I have shot 85 at Dornoch, in benign conditions, so it (and all the other "too small" contenders) can't be all that bad......

[THuckaby2]

AHA!  So now it's all about difficulty?  Why didn't you say so in the first place?  The greatest course in the world for you is Koolau then, Rich.  Time to move to Hawaii.

I am gonna keep prodding until I get the rip back that I so "Rich"ly deserve.

Of course what you say does make a certain sense.  The standard for "best" maybe ought to include "long enough to be a true test for the best players" (though it sure as hell doesn't for me - I'm not convinced that that matters) and that does eliminate a lot of the pretenders.  So perhaps Carnoustie does make the best combination of length and greatness?  You could make a decent argument there... but it won't last... just wait until some of these others create new tees, as they surely will at some point... and some already are....

TH

[Mike Hendren]

Whatever happened to Ran's golf course match-play methodology?  Perhaps a match-play bracket should be established and played out over the next few days.  Start w/ eight or more, give The Old Course a bye or have a play-in match.  Anyone game?

Mike

[THuckaby2]

Mike - heck of an idea - the match play methodology does have it's limitations, and seeing how Ran evaluated Kapalua recently, even he has seemed to come up with a different model... either way would make for an interesting battle.  Just for the sake of argument you could use the top 8 in my list.. I don't think any course ought to get a free pass, btw... First round matches would be

1. Dornoch v. Turnberry
2. Ballybunion v. Carnoustie
3. RCD v. Muirfield
4. TOC v. Portrush

Then 1 plays 2, 3 plays 4, winners settle the score and move on to play the best of the rest of the world.

All to prove or disprove an off the cuff statement by Rich.  

[Matt_Ward]

Rich:

Makes me wonder since you're an advocate of the Michelin system. I sometimes views golf courses in terms of boxing and wrestling classifications -- you know, using someone's weight as a particular level of classification.

When I see courses of say 6,500 yards and under I may lump them into "middleweight" status and those capable in hosting major events in conjunction with architectural heft to be "light heavyweights." The truly great -- those with the max in terms of architectural heft and the twin capabilities of hosting everyday and from time to time meaningful championships quality I would put in the rarified category of "super heavyweight."

Since boxing has from time to time featured individuals who have put on "weight" to go into different divisions I wonder how many "middleweight" courses really have the wherewithal to compete against the "heavyweights?" I see very, very few simply because the element of length becomes an issue of contention.

To use your list as an example -- can Ballybunion really compare to Carnoustie? Do the courses you list need some sort of validation (e.g. championships) at the highest end to be included?

Many thanks ...

[ForkaB]

Matt

I don't think the distinction is so great as Middleweight----->Heavweight.  More like Evander Holyfield------->George Foreman.  The latter can whip all ass at Cruiserweight level, and even some ass at the higher weight--if he beefs himself up--but is never going to beat the really good "Big man."

Cypress, Dornoch, Ballybunion, Merion, etc.are great Cruiserweights who can beat the best Heavyweights on their day, but not over time.

However, as to your questoin, yes, you can compare them all, jsut as Michelin can compare the best French restaurants to the best Italian , Fusion or whatever.  When they give 3*** to a restaurant, you can be assured that it is "great" regardless of the national cuisine or even the ambience or even the price.

Maybe the best take on your analogy is the British phrase of "punching above your own weight."  In this sense, Holyfield is the classic boxing example, and maybe Pine Valley is the classic golf course example.  Either can be "beaten" over time, by the bigger hitters (Shinnecock, Carnoustie, etc. or Ali, Foreman, etc.), but each can beat anybody on their day, and virtually everybody (i.e. golfers/boxers who are not of +5 or better skill) everyday.

To put it is an historical perpsective, Rocky Marciano was arguably the best Heavyweight boxer of all time, against the people of his time, but who here thinks that he would last more than a few rounds with Lennox Lewis, today (assuming that the Rock was alive....)?  Lewis "is" better (of course that depends on what you think the word "is" means......).  But, who cares, and why?

Ballybunion and Carnoustie are both great.  For different reasons and in different contexts.  But, if you have to vote, go with the Heavyweight, everytime.

[THuckaby2]

That's all great if all that matters is "who can kick your ass" and you have no value for "greatest pound for pound/yard for yard fighter/course".

I tend to value the latter more than the former.  So give me Sugar Ray Robinson and Ballybunion, thank you.  I know Lennox Lewis could kick Sugar Ray's ass, and I know I'd shoot a worse score at Carnoustie than Ballybunion, but in each case that is too narrow for what this is all about.

[Mike Hendren]

Matt,

Glad to see you getting comfortable with your role as the Randall Tex Cobb of GCA by invoking the pugilistic lexicon.  

By chance, is your real name John Kavanaugh?

Mike

[ForkaB]

Tom

The Cruiserweight/Heavyweight distinction is not what this is "all about."  But it is what it is all about, all other things being equal.

[THuckaby2]

Tom

The Cruiserweight/Heavyweight distinction is not what this is "all about."  But it is what it is all about, all other things being equal.

Yahoooo!  Now that's what I was looking for.  This isn't, and is, what this is all about.

I still rate fighters and courses "pound for pound", and that is what this is all about.  If you prefer just the big monsters, than so be it.  I could be wrong, but you are.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()