[TEPaul]

"The question is would St.Andrews have been better off with an addtional world class design by C & H along with a revised Old/Jubilee beginners course, than they would be with the current New and Jubliee?"

Tom MacW:

Never having been to that area it's really hard to follow all  that's been discussed here about all the courses in St. Andrews, their evolutions, and definitely what this proposed "modern" design you spoke of was meant to accomplish.

But from your question above I can't make out if you're saying that part of the question is---should TOC itself have ever been redesigned in anyway in this evolutionary process.

The reason I ask is part of Darwin's remarks appear to be that altering TOC for any reason (even obsolescence) was "unthinkable".

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

TE
I'm with Darwin, the Old course should not be touched. That was one of the stated reasons for the Modern course, a future championship alternative for St.Andrews that would protect the Old course from the Rich Goodales of the world.  

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

TE
In the quote you put up I made an error, it sould read 'revised New/Jubilee beginners course, not 'Old/Jubilee.'

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rich, One of the problems I have with all of this, is the need to always want to change something that is so perfect to begin with. Yes, This is undoubtedly where we part--the need for change. In my stubborn ways, and lack of length, I don't feel there are weaknesses on a course that is and always should be kept in a vaccuum.

I guess this is just another reason why I don't care one bit about professional golf and its circus-like atmosphere that is tearing the game apart because of the need to reach out to the consumer/viewer. The Old Course isn't perfect, that is what makes it perfect. Its funny that this stretch of linksland seems to ward off all technologies and still get used, even though they seem to find another tee a few yards back again and again. There must be some reason why they keep wanting to use it for the Open Championship!

And then there is the fact that you have the Links Trust that is constantly screwing with the course which in the past ten-15 years has accellerated its manicured, "Americanization" of features. (Spoken perfectly by you, in an almost American Kitsch Pop Culture-tone that has given me a vision of a staring into the lense with no smile, Andy Warhol--garbed in a hot pink-hued cardigan w/ matching Tam standing in front of the Road Hole Bunker. Its getting that ridiculous looking.)

Still, the Old Course seems to ride the tide, and hopefully will continue to do so for many centuries to come. Remember, we are talking of a course that the game has been played on since 1426, maybe even earlier. (personally, I think so. I think this is where it all began.)

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

You wrote:

"That was one of the stated reasons for the Modern course, a future championship alternative for St.Andrews that would protect the Old course from the Rich Goodales of the world."

I certainly endorse that!

Rich Goodale said previously:

"If they really believed that TOC was that obsolete and the New that bad, why not just extend TOC out to incorporate the dunesland holes of the New (8-12) and solve for once and for all the "problem" of the "Shepherd's Crook" part of TOC's routing?"

I definitely did not miss that remark by Rich Goodale. It shows his complete lack of understanding for architecture generally and complete disdain for even the most sacred of sacred architecture to mention such a thought.

Imagine someone professing to know anything about classic architecture saying such a thing as tampering with anything to do with the design of TOC should even be a thought. It's outrageous!

Frankly, I think this website should assess Rich Goodale about 137 demerits, place him in solitary confinement for at least six months and I think I should email CONGU (who Rich Goodale claims is so effective) and tell them to withdraw Rich Goodale's playing privileges on any golf course within 25 miles of St. Andrews, or maybe all of Scotland, for at least a year!

[TEPaul]

Frankly, here is a man--Rich Goodale--who has already professed to think that Darwin was the last word ever in golf architectural writing!

And here's a man--Rich Goodale--who failed to see on this very thread that Darwin himself mentioned touching TOC in any way was 'unthinkable'.

How then could Rich Goodale fail to heed such cogent advice and make such callous remarks?

The best thing I can think of is either Rich Goodale didn't read, or can't read or read and failed to understand Darwin himself, the golf architecture writer Rich Goodale claims was the best ever!

This makes it completely clear to me why Rich Goodale is compeletly unable to understand the first thing about a couple of other golf architecture writers who are even more brilliant and more depthy and incisive than even Darwin himself-- one Max Behr and one Geoff Shackelford!

No wonder Rich rarely reads them and when he tries never  understands them. He's just not capable of it!  So never ask me to explain Behr and Shackelford to you again, Rich.

And furthermore, even if Tommy Nacarrato is on the other side of the world from you I wouldn't feel safe from him if I were you with that kind of remark you made about even the thought of redesigning TOC. Golf architectural terrorists, even in thought, will not be safe anywhere anymore!

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

TE
I agree with your senticing, I would also recommend that he go to Convention. At that stage it may be determined if an Exorcism may be in line.

[ForkaB]

Tommy N

We diverge less than you think.  I was only trying to say that IF one wanted to create a "Modern" course at St. Andrews, utilising the best of what was already there (i.e. most of TOC, some of TNC) would be the way to go.  Thinking speculatively just doesn't bother me as much as it does you.  Vive la difference.  And, I love the way you say that TOC is perfect and then a few sentences later imperfect.  That's what this website's all about, isn't it?  "Perfection" in the face of infinite possibilities to "improve" upon perfection?

Tommy MacW

You and I differ in our interpretation of what Darwin seemd to say.  I can't simultaneoulsy keep in my head the thoughts that one needed to create a "better" championship course in St. Andrews and yet TOC was not somehow "obsolete."

Tommy P

Thankfully I live 35 miles from St. Andrews and Dornoch is 180 miles away, so your fatwa will have little effect on my golfing this season.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Rich
That makes perfect sense, Darwin often has difficulty expressing himself clearly.

Perhaps Darwin was fibbing when he said "It is still a supremely great course" and he actually meant to say it supremely obsolete course.

[ForkaB]

Tom M

Apologies for the hyperbolic "obsolete."  I inferred that from your inferrence that in the minds of the dead guys TOC was getting too short.

The New isn't any more "superb" than is the Old (particularly when the latter is played off the tees that all but the pros and scratch amateurs play).  It is, nevertheless one of the better courses in Britain and the world.  A solid 1* by my classification.  Per your last questions, as I posted above it is being changed as we speak.

[Paul Turner]

Colt and Alison also completed some plans for St Andrews which were never implemented because of the war.  These were recently sold at auction.  Don't know the details, perhaps they were a competitive bid to the Campbell/Huchison plan?

Colt did some work on the New and actually wanted to extend the course to take in the Ladie's putting green (Himalayas)!

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rich, For me to speculate anything about the Old Course would be blasphemous. I can't afford to be that way, especially in this day and age!:)

How's Pitreavie looking anyway?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Paul
I'm not sure if it was competitive bid or not. The guy pushing the idea of a new St.Andrews course by the sea was Sir Nairne Stewart-Sandeman, and evidently it had been a 15 year effort by him in 1938.

I would love to see Colt & Alison's plan, I wonder if the R&A has them socked away somewhere.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

If they did, more then likely it would have been either sent out to the "house" which is the estate house that serves as part clubhouse/part office for the Links Trust @ the Eden Course or in the archives of the Museum, which sits behind the R&A. I'm told all of the pertinent information regarding the courses is kept out there.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()