[Mark Pearce]

Ally,

Thanks.  I understand where you are coming from now.  I'm always puzzled by those who find Muirfield boring.  It may not have dramatic terrain like some but there's not a shot where you don't have to think about how to play it.  That might be different for the best elite golfers but then it seems to be one of the pros favourite Open venues (presumably because of the fairness).  I can see how golfers used to eye candy and soft conditioning might not get it and I think I understand why someone like Sean doesn't love it because it just doesn't have enough of the quirk that he does love.

I don't really think I've played many at the more dramatic end of your spectrum that are controversial, though I absolutely love Dornoch (it is Muirfield's equal in my book).  Interestingly, though I love North Berwick I don't quite have it in the same exalted company many here do.  I imagine that that just reflects the fact that different golfers have different preferences on the scale.  I do look forward to the opportunity to see Carne.

[Mark Chaplin]

IMHO the best 3 hole stretch at Sunningdale (4-6) isn't even on the Old course.

The 4th at Hankley has had a complete redesign.

[Cristian]

Cristian,

As an observation the majority of play at Muirfield (loved by especially better players, players who enjoy strokeplay) is without a card and pencil.  I'm not sure I have ever seen a member with a scorecard and the vast majority play matchplay.  There aren't a lot of low handicap members, either!  Visitors probably do carry and keep a scorecard but isn't that true of visitors everywhere?

To be honest I have not played Muirfield, yet I took it as an example because so many speak of the course in this way. Perhaps the members look at the course differently than the raters, rankers and writers, I am not sure. Either way I still think course preferences tend to be biased one way or the other in most golfers.

[Mark Pearce]

Cristian,

Muirfield is exactly the sort of course that one might think suits the scorecard and pencil type of golfer.  The fact is that it is also loved by plenty that rarely if ever keep a score.  I suspect plenty of scorecard and pencil golfers used to immaculately manicured, dramatic, soft, green courses don't like it at all.

[Phil McDade]

My point / question was that golf courses that are considered great by all tend to be those that do not reside at extremes (or as Mark recognises, old courses that have become accepted either way).

Ally:

I wonder if Oakmont might be considered a course "great by all" and yet one that arguably resides at the extremes. At its inception, almost unique at the time, and still today (although some might be considered its equal, i.e., Pine Valley), Oakmont epitomized penal golf, with extreme bunkering (both in number and difficulty), exceptionally fast greens, unconventional features not often found on championship courses (notably fallaway greens), and thick, one-stroke-penalty rough in many locations. By almost everyone's measure, it's one of the top 10 courses in the U.S. (probably top 5 for many), arguably our top U.S. Open rota course, and certainly among the top 12-15 in the world.

[Mark Pearce]

Phil,

I suspect that Oakmont, like Muirfield fits that description.  Perhaps Carnoustie does as well, though it is less clear that it is generally accepted as great.  Is there an example of a course generally accepted as great at the other end of Ally's scale.  North Berwick, perhaps, though again I wonder if (outside of the GCA fraternity) that is generally accepted as great.

[Charlie Ray]

Phil, Oakmont is a great example.  On the other end, although greatness would not fit it,  Culver Academies.  Ran's profile of this course has interested me for awhile. 

[Phil McDade]

Mark:

This may be my U.S.-based bias, but I've read and heard far more criticism of Carnoustie than Oakmont, as you suggest. James Finegan, among other notable golf writers, really did not find Carnoustie all that remarkable -- difficult, yes, but architecturally it left him cold. (The one time I walked Carnoustie, two days prior to the '99 Open Championship ((Van de Velde's Waterloo)), I had similar thoughts -- a very good championship test of golf, and penal in many respects, but other than Spectacles and the brilliant use of the burn on 17 and 18, I found little of note there in terms of interesting or compelling architecture.)

There was an interesting thread on Blue Mound G&CC here in Wisconsin from a few months ago that touches on your latter point re. North Berwick:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,59477.0.html

[Niall C]

Mark:

This may be my U.S.-based bias, but I've read and heard far more criticism of Carnoustie than Oakmont, as you suggest. James Finegan, among other notable golf writers, really did not find Carnoustie all that remarkable -- difficult, yes, but architecturally it left him cold. (The one time I walked Carnoustie, two days prior to the '99 Open Championship ((Van de Velde's Waterloo)), I had similar thoughts -- a very good championship test of golf, and penal in many respects, but other than Spectacles and the brilliant use of the burn on 17 and 18, I found little of note there in terms of interesting or compelling architecture.)

There was an interesting thread on Blue Mound G&CC here in Wisconsin from a few months ago that touches on your latter point re. North Berwick:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,59477.0.html

Phil

Perhaps I'm showing bias as well but if Finegan can't spot the greatness in Carnoustie then he's just living up to the stereotype of what I think of many overseas visitors. If it hasn't got the dunes and the Brigadoon factor then it can't be great. Carnoustie could be the poster child for having flat holes that are great.

Niall 

[Mike Hendren]

IMHO the best 3 hole stretch at Sunningdale (4-6) isn't even on the Old course.

Mark, I might add the 3rd to that stretch.  Your thoughts?

Mike

[Phil McDade]

Phil

Perhaps I'm showing bias as well but if Finegan can't spot the greatness in Carnoustie then he's just living up to the stereotype of what I think of many overseas visitors. If it hasn't got the dunes and the Brigadoon factor then it can't be great. Carnoustie could be the poster child for having flat holes that are great.

Niall 

Niall:

I think that's a bit unfair to Mr. Finegan. He admires The Honourable Company greatly, thinks highly of the Golf House Club (Elie), and rates Sunningdale Old as one of England's finest -- all courses where one can hardly argue "the dunes and the Brigadoon factor" are at work.

I walked Carnoustie extensively, and it was exceedingly difficult for me to spot its greatness. Some here and there, as I pointed out, but I didn't find its flat holes all that remarkable. A stern test, no doubt, but a hard course doesn't necessarily mean it's a great course.

[Mark Chaplin]

Michael I'm a big fan of the 3rd although I nearly always end up in the left rough off the tee! Whilst 3 and 7 are not quite of the world class standard of 4-6 it's a brilliant run of holes testing every club. 3 is a 7 iron home, 4 a long iron or rescue, 5 a middlish iron depending on the breeze, 6 is two solid biffs with all you've got and 7 requires accuracy off the tee and a short iron home. I must study Theology now I'v lost the police discount!!

[Mike Hendren]

Mark, pass yourself off as a Lay Minister!  I totally misjudged the correct line off the tee at 3 - twice

Bogey

[DMoriarty]

I wonder if Oakmont might be considered a course "great by all" and yet one that arguably resides at the extremes. At its inception, almost unique at the time, and still today (although some might be considered its equal, i.e., Pine Valley), Oakmont epitomized penal golf, with extreme bunkering (both in number and difficulty), exceptionally fast greens, unconventional features not often found on championship courses (notably fallaway greens), and thick, one-stroke-penalty rough in many locations. By almost everyone's measure, it's one of the top 10 courses in the U.S. (probably top 5 for many), arguably our top U.S. Open rota course, and certainly among the top 12-15 in the world.

Not that it necessarily takes away from your point, but I don't think Oakmont was considered a difficult course "at its inception."   It was made increasingly difficult over time, but initially?  I don't think so.

[Phil McDade]

I wonder if Oakmont might be considered a course "great by all" and yet one that arguably resides at the extremes. At its inception, almost unique at the time, and still today (although some might be considered its equal, i.e., Pine Valley), Oakmont epitomized penal golf, with extreme bunkering (both in number and difficulty), exceptionally fast greens, unconventional features not often found on championship courses (notably fallaway greens), and thick, one-stroke-penalty rough in many locations. By almost everyone's measure, it's one of the top 10 courses in the U.S. (probably top 5 for many), arguably our top U.S. Open rota course, and certainly among the top 12-15 in the world.

Not that it necessarily takes away from your point, but I don't think Oakmont was considered a difficult course "at its inception."   It was made increasingly difficult over time, but initially?  I don't think so.

David: Ran's profile -- http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/oakmont/ -- along with various other essays about the course I've read (e.g., The World Atlas of Golf, 3rd edition) suggest to me the course was meant to be a very difficult test from its first incarnation.

[V. Kmetz]

Hi,


Fenway
Hudson National
Stanwich
Bayonne
Apawamis
Richter Park
(all) Trump efforts

cheers

vk

                               

[DMoriarty]

David: Ran's profile -- http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/oakmont/ -- along with various other essays about the course I've read (e.g., The World Atlas of Golf, 3rd edition) suggest to me the course was meant to be a very difficult test from its first incarnation.

If you read what was written about about course back when it was first created and in the years following, you might find that your contemporary essays don't have it quite right.  Oakmont was stiffened through an extensive bunkering scheme around 1910 and in the immediate years after. Before then, I don't think anything indicates that the course was all that difficult or penal.   I recall one account where a top Oakmont player was said to suffer against other Eastern competition because his home course was not challenging enough.  

But perhaps this is too tangential to the topic at hand.

[Phil McDade]

David: This essay suggests there is room for both our views -- a course intended by H.C. to be a tough test of golf, and made all the more demanding by W.C.: http://www.oakmont-countryclub.org/Default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=346458&ssid=249230&vnf=1

[Thomas Dai]

Cruden Bay could be deemed to be at one end of the scale due it's quirkiness yet it seems to be a course that doesn't divide the opinion of those  participating herein.
Atb

[Phil McDade]

Cruden Bay could be deemed to be at one end of the scale due it's quirkiness yet it seems to be a course that doesn't divide the opinion of those  participating herein.
Atb

Here on GCA..... but it's plenty divisive among "regular" folks. Take 10 randomly selected golfers from my local 9-hole muni, and put them on that course, and 9+ of them will say: "What the ......?" and think it's awful.

[Mark Pearce]

Is Cruden Bay a great course or a course with several great holes (and a great stretch of holes)?

[Adam Lawrence]

Phil

Perhaps I'm showing bias as well but if Finegan can't spot the greatness in Carnoustie then he's just living up to the stereotype of what I think of many overseas visitors. If it hasn't got the dunes and the Brigadoon factor then it can't be great. Carnoustie could be the poster child for having flat holes that are great.

Niall 

Niall:

I think that's a bit unfair to Mr. Finegan. He admires The Honourable Company greatly, thinks highly of the Golf House Club (Elie), and rates Sunningdale Old as one of England's finest -- all courses where one can hardly argue "the dunes and the Brigadoon factor" are at work.

I walked Carnoustie extensively, and it was exceedingly difficult for me to spot its greatness. Some here and there, as I pointed out, but I didn't find its flat holes all that remarkable. A stern test, no doubt, but a hard course doesn't necessarily mean it's a great course.

Phil - I wonder if the condition of Carnoustie in 99 had an influence on your view. There are some fantastic holes on that course. Hogan's Alley, imo, is one of the world's best par fives.

[Thomas Dai]

Here on GCA..... but it's plenty divisive among "regular" folks. Take 10 randomly selected golfers from my local 9-hole muni, and put them on that course, and 9+ of them will say: "What the ......?" and think it's awful.

Ally's original query ".....what are examples of great courses that divide opinion amongst those on this website? And why do they divide opinion? Do the only courses that seriously divide opinion fit at either end of the scale? ......Are the only courses that are loved by us all the ones that sit somewhere in the middle?"

Which is why I suggested Cruden Bay as an example, appreciated by all herein, well except maybe Mark in Devil's Advocate mode!

atb

[Phil McDade]

Phil - I wonder if the condition of Carnoustie in 99 had an influence on your view. There are some fantastic holes on that course. Hogan's Alley, imo, is one of the world's best par fives.

Adam:

Carnoustie in 1999 was -- to this day -- the most penal course set-up I've ever seen. Fairways narrowed to extremely tight corridors, severely penal hay quite close to the normal line of play, on linksland subject to high winds (and the wind if I recall that year wasn't too bad...).

Still, I found little there that was outstanding -- 17 and 18 for sure, as I mentioned, Hogan's Alley is a great par 5, #14 with the Spectacles lending uncertainty to the shot into the green. But this isn't Pebble Beach -- a course with several world-class holes and a small handful of indifferent ones. Carnoustie to me is a course with about 4 really good-to-outstanding holes (the ones mentioned), and a bunch of bland-to-indifferent ones. (For instance, I don't view 16 as a great hole -- a tough one, yes, but not great; I've seen a bunch of better long par 3s).

Carnoustie is a hard course, but not a great one.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()