Talk about any course thats not in WA!!

[petethepilot]

Enough of slapping it around in the West. Lets talk about something in the East!

Why is NSW not the best in Australia?

In my opinion, it is because you are not asked enough questions off the tee. Most of the holes don't set up better from one side of the fairway to the other. ie Hit the fairway (admittedly not always easy!) is generally enough. Probably because the greens basically face the golfer generally sloping front to back! There are exceptions, ie 8 and 9 (great green) but mostly the challenge on the approach shot is not related to the angle of the approach. There still is plenty of challenge but mostly to do with trajectory and wind. A truely great course will subtlely challenge or reward the golfer by placing his tee shot in the optimum position. I don't believe NSW does this consistently. RM certainly does this regularly (although more so when everybody wasn't hitting the ball 300m)

I know Pup won't like this but I hope it might stimulate some discussion other than this sh*t sandgroper public course is better than another!:razz:

Regards,

Pete

(p.s. I've played many WA courses!)
(p.p.s. but not Ellerston!!!)

[BrettM]

Why isn't Sea Temple in the AGD Top 100?

What a crap list that is.

[Daves]

I note Club Pelican is ranked slightly above Pacific Harbour, I would have thought it was at least the other way around. Maybe a condition issue with Pac Harbour?

RQ got a rocket up to No1 Qld Course.

[Scottt]

Pete,

Which greens at NSW don't set up better from one side?

What NSW offers much more than most other courses is many options that buy the golfer much more distance than simply the difference between a driver and 3 iron, for example.

3, 5, 9, 12, 14 and 15 all provide a tremendous boost to the player brave enough to carry the significant ridges. That is choice and shot interest as worthy of praise as a boring FW bunker left/green bunker right architecture, IMO. Perhaps even moreso because McKenzie/Apperley used natural landforms to provide the strategy.

Further to that, the routing is absolute genius.

I'm not going to argue it is #1 in Oz, but it cops a lot more crap than it ought to because too many people look at the concepts of strategy, penality and heroism too one-dimensionally.

Just my two cents.

[Webster]

Pete,
boring FW bunker left/green bunker right architecture, IMO.

why is it boring scottt?

[PerryGroves]

Not that I have a problem with it however NSW does set up off the tee to favour someone who hits it right to left off the tee. 1st, 3rd, 5th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 16th.

That being the case, whilst not making you go left/right because of fairway bunkers I still think you need to place your tee shots in different spots rather than just whaling away. On 3, 13, 15 and 16 the penalty for poor placement is extra distance to the greens rather than a "sand" penalty.

I love how all the Par 3's face a different direction so the holes play substantively different dpending on where the breeze is quartering from. My point would be that the wind is the factor that alters the decision making off the tee, rarely is there a day when it's not involved

I love NSW it will always be the No. 1 course in Australia for me. I have played RM, perhaps when I get on Ellerston I may change.

PTP : you should have said no WA and no more QLD

[MegaWatty]

Sorry, but why wouldn't we have a thread for courses in each state?

A thread for every course other than WA is going to be a clusterf*ck!

[petethepilot]

Good point scott,
its stategy is based somewhat on a decision of distance v accuracy. The wind strength/direction will dictate your club selection but to some degree the stategy does not matter (due wind strength). Generally, into the wind, driver is the only choice due trajectory. ie. Do I try and carry on to/over the hill on 5? Into the wind, often it does not matter because you can't hit it far enough and downwind 3 wood is enough!

Don't get me wrong, I think it is a hell of a course that uses the wind better than any other course in Oz. Wind is still the ultimate hazard for the Pro's. I just feel holes like 4,7,8,10,13,16 and 18 could have asked more questions off the tee. Saying that, I love the par 3's.

Pete

[petethepilot]

Fair enough MW, I guess it means you can read about them if you wish. I think I was more about stimulating talk about other places. The WA boys are very keen to talk about their courses!

Perry, fair points that scottt also pointed out.

BTW I live in Brisbane but tend not to talk too much about the courses there!:oops:

Pete

[petethepilot]

My general assertion is more about the greens. Although they have many subtle undulations (and some less subtle ie 7) there has been very little use of angling the green complex to the fairway or angling the internal green contours instead (as done masterfully on 6). I really like it on 2, 8, 9 & 14 but it is a feature not overly used there. I don't say you need to do it all the time but I feel it may have been underused at NSW.

just my 2 cents worth

[ParMaster]

Enough of slapping it around in the West. Lets talk about something in the East!

Why is NSW not the best in Australia?

In my opinion, it is because you are not asked enough questions off the tee. Most of the holes don't set up better from one side of the fairway to the other. ie Hit the fairway (admittedly not always easy!) is generally enough. Probably because the greens basically face the golfer generally sloping front to back! There are exceptions, ie 8 and 9 (great green) but mostly the challenge on the approach shot is not related to the angle of the approach. There still is plenty of challenge but mostly to do with trajectory and wind. A truely great course will subtlely challenge or reward the golfer by placing his tee shot in the optimum position. I don't believe NSW does this consistently. RM certainly does this regularly (although more so when everybody wasn't hitting the ball 300m)

Most greens don't slope front to back. The only ones that do would be 3 (I think, it might be very minor though), the front portion of 4 slopes towards the back and maybe the 5th hole very slightly. That's all.

On 8 if you are not coming down from the LHS side of the fairway (near the bushes) then you are going to be effectively bringing 3 bunkers into play. On 9, you play down the RHS and are left with a better angle into the green, albeit with a blind/semi blind shot. Stay down the left and have a worse angle from a tougher lie, but you can see everything.

I know Pup won't like this but I hope it might stimulate some discussion other than this sh*t sandgroper public course is better than another!:razz:

All the rankings are only opinion. To some people NSW might be the best in Australia (in their opinion), however to others it could be right down the list. It is only personal opinion..

Regards,

Pete




Not that I have a problem with it however NSW does set up off the tee to favour someone who hits it right to left off the tee. 1st, 3rd, 5th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 16th.

Perry, 1st hole doesn't really favour any kind of ball flight. Neither does the 5th, 12th rewards a faded drive, 13 you can easily hit a fade and be fine and 15 doesn't reward anything in particular except a straight drive.

That being the case, whilst not making you go left/right because of fairway bunkers I still think you need to place your tee shots in different spots rather than just whaling away. On 3, 13, 15 and 16 the penalty for poor placement is extra distance to the greens rather than a "sand" penalty.

I love how all the Par 3's face a different direction so the holes play substantively different dpending on where the breeze is quartering from. My point would be that the wind is the factor that alters the decision making off the tee, rarely is there a day when it's not involved

That is a great feature of NSW because no matter what way the wind is going, it isn't really 'going against' you. Because there will always be one par 5 downwind, one into, and it's the same for the par 3's.

I love NSW it will always be the No. 1 course in Australia for me. I have played RM, perhaps when I get on Ellerston I may change.

I love NSW as well, but I'm not really in a position to make an unbiased comment about it.






Don't get me wrong, I think it is a hell of a course that uses the wind better than any other course in Oz. Wind is still the ultimate hazard for the Pro's. I just feel holes like 4,7,8,10,13,16 and 18 could have asked more questions off the tee. Saying that, I love the par 3's.

Those holes do ask questions, maybe not for someone of your ability, but for long hitters and professional alike, there are decisions to be made..

On the 4th hole you can keep your ball short of the bunker on the right (250m), however that bring the tree into play (220m out), or you can try and bomb one up onto the top of the ridge. By trying to get it up on the ridge your bringing the bushes on left into play, and also the waste bunker on the right into play. However you won't have a completely blind shot which is what you will have if you play safe.

7 there isn't a big decision off the tee. You can take driver and try and get it up far enough to have a short iron into the green (which is a big advantage), however it narrows to about 40m wide up there. Or you lay back off the tee with an iron or hybrid taking out all of the trouble hitting to the fattest part of the fairway, while still being able to reach the green in 2.

For the 8th hole you can take a driver bring all the wastelands into play (250m out), or lay right back with a 3 wood which makes it a full 3 shot par 5.

10 there is no decision. Just take driver and try and get it down THE RIGHT HAND SIDE (for you Scott). :mrgreen:

I can't believe you think there is no decision to be made on 13... You can take driver and bomb it over the corner, take a 3 wood and try and hit a running draw to take advantage of the R-L slope of the fairway, play straight down the fairway to the right taking all bushes out of play etc.. So many ways to play the shot PTP.

16 there isn't a big decision either, however there is still one to be made. You can take driver and hit it at the top of the dune, leaving yourself 170m to the green, or try and curve it around the corner leaving yourself about 140-150m. And into the breeze you can take a long iron off the tee (taking out all the trouble), and then playing another mid iron over the bushes to a collection area.

On 18 you choose how you want to get your ball down the fairway, avoiding all the bunkers. You can take on the bunkers on the left (225m carry 1st, 250 last), play a running draw around them like 13 by taking advantage of the big R-L kick on the RHS or just lay up short of them all, still giving yourself a good birdie chance.

No decision? Um ok.

:)


Pete

A. (I have to do this to enter message. :razz:)

[adlo]

Racist.

[Scottt]

why is it boring scottt?

It's boring when it's not done in tandem with the land. Too many modern courses are so mathematical and formulaic with hazard placement, likewise many modern day facelifts of classic courses.

The subtlety is lost when you're asked the same question on every tee - simply a lateral choice. After a while there is no decision to be made.

The greatest hazard to a golfer is the unknown. When it's "all there in front of you". Formula of any kind removes the unknown.

Good golf holes ask golfers to make decisions. Lateral placement is just one way to do that.

The best courses combine decision making in all dimensions, which NSW does.

The greens may not obviously point to the side of a fairway, but most holes have a side that is preferable to approach from. If the greens were too aggressively defended to favour an approach from one side, the course would become borderline unplayable in high wind - the same goes for the lack of massive internal movement in most of the greens.

So many people identify those two factors as weaknesses of NSW, when I see them as major reasons it is such a brilliant course in any wind.


Those holes do ask questions, maybe not for someone of your ability, but for long hitters and professional alike, there are decisions to be made..

From memory Pete has a lower handicap than you - perhaps a long-term scratch to 1 or 2 marker.

[sms316]

Pete's a chopper Scottt. :lol:

(About 4).

[Scottt]

Cool, thanks for the clear-up, SMS. Still lower than Pup, who it would seem has allowed assumption to get the better of him again.

Anyone who has shot 71 at Muirfield (in Scotland, not North Rocks in Sydney :lol:) is a player.

[ParMaster]

Hahahahahaha. Epic Fail. :lol:

Pardon my ignorance PTP. :?

[Andrew]

Talk about any course thats not in WA!!

O.K.

Would The Australian, Royal Sydney, Concord & even St Michaels rate so high on the Top 100 list if they were in Melbourne where it would be obvious that there was 20 courses within an hours drive that were better?

[petethepilot]

A 'never was been' chopper SMS!

Interesting question Andrew. Depends on the impartiality and breadth of traveling of the selectors.
To add another question,, where would Newcastle rate if it was in Sydney or Melbourne? ......I myself think it is second only to NSW in NSW! I found the Aussie the least enjoyable of the 'Big name' courses to play. It is hard yes but not enjoyable. Too many elevated thin flat greens!

IMHO

Pete the Hacker

p.s. I did get it to scratch in Canberra scottt, but realistically about a 2 for most of the last 15 years!

[Webster]

It's boring when it's not done in tandem with the land. Too many modern courses are so mathematical and formulaic with hazard placement, likewise many modern day facelifts of classic courses.

The subtlety is lost when you're asked the same question on every tee - simply a lateral choice. After a while there is no decision to be made.


Scottt, I wasn't asking just in the context of NSW. I believe the principle works extrememly well provided the choices of playing close, to, short of, and over still remain for the player. That way it isnt just a lateral choice.

Which courses are you refering to where it has been done poorly?


Talk about any course thats not in WA!!

O.K.

Would The Australian, Royal Sydney, Concord & even St Michaels rate so high on the Top 100 list if they were in Melbourne where it would be obvious that there was 20 courses within an hours drive that were better?

Andrew, which of the Victorian courses do you feel are a touch "unloved" in comparison to the NSW courses you mention?

[zigwah]

I personally think that Barnbougle dunes is a better presented course than NSW sorry Pup :) it's just the vibe of the place it rocks.

Can't wait to get back and play the new course.

[Scottt]

Scottt, I wasn't asking just in the context of NSW. I believe the principle works extrememly well provided the choices of playing close, to, short of, and over still remain for the player. That way it isnt just a lateral choice.

Which courses are you refering to where it has been done poorly?

I didn't say it was done "poorly" I said it was done formulaicly.

When you have played NSW, it will be interesting to hear your opinion.

[Webster]

As will your opinion once you have sampled some of the sandbelt.

[ParMaster]

I personally think that Barnbougle dunes is a better presented course than NSW sorry Pup :) it's just the vibe of the place it rocks.

Can't wait to get back and play the new course.

Nothing wrong with that.

I will be heading down to BD and LF in March 2011, and I can't wait!!

:D

[Scottt]

As will your opinion once you have sampled some of the sandbelt.

My exposure to the Sandbelt has nothing to do with this discussion, Jack.

Are you suggesting I haven't seen enough good golf to have a worthwhile opinion?

[Andrew]

Andrew, which of the Victorian courses do you feel are a touch "unloved" in comparison to the NSW courses you mention?

I’m not sure if any Victorian courses are ‘unloved’, although I do believe Commonwealth & Woodlands are misunderstood & suffer accordingly.

The Australian as it is now is just a tougher version of Kew & of course, if it had of been in Melbourne for its entire life it wouldn’t have the money or exclusivity because it would have had too much competition for membership from better courses.

[petethepilot]

I can't believe Woodlands continues to rank as low as it is. Bits might be classed as quirky, but I think it has more great holes than all but the very best. 3, 4, 9, 13 and 15 are just great holes. 4 is a all time classic that just don't get made these days. It is so short (250m) it is virtually impossible to not to go for the green. Hit it through a 3 metre gap at the front of the green and you can make eagle but miss it slightly left or right and you are in deep sh*t. It is so frustrating to be that close and have no shot whilst not even being in a bunker. Even using a putter can be the hardest shot you play all day. You then know that you should have hit 4 iron/sw but next time you tee it up you pull out driver/3 wood/ hybrid whatever and go for it again.

Just a great design that makes you want to play it again.

Pete

[petethepilot]

Check it out at www.woodlandsgolf.com.au

Pete

If I knew how to do it I would post a layout of hole 4!

[Scottt]

Woodlands... 4 is a all time classic that just don't get made these days.

Is that the hole that is often mentioned as Clayton's inspiration for holes like the new #13 at The Lakes?

[petethepilot]

Yep. I haven't seen the lakes #13 but the woodlands version is just brilliant. Mind you all up it has 4 great short par 4's, 3, 4, 12 and 13. All are hugely interesting and tempting. Just depends on your ego and your skill level. Have a look at their website and take a course tour.

Pete

[Webster]

My exposure to the Sandbelt has nothing to do with this discussion, Jack.

Are you suggesting I haven't seen enough good golf to have a worthwhile opinion?

Scottt, I am not suggesting that at all - I have no idea what "good golf" you have seen or otherwise. I will be interested to see in time what you make of the sandbelt courses though.

The concept of fw bunker left, greenside bunker right (or the other way around) is a strong theme on the sandbelt, and therefore your opinion may change once you have seen some more of it done well.

Yep. I haven't seen the lakes #13 but the woodlands version is just brilliant. Mind you all up it has 4 great short par 4's, 3, 4, 12 and 13. All are hugely interesting and tempting. Just depends on your ego and your skill level. Have a look at their website and take a course tour.

Pete

Pete, 3 and 12 at Woodlands are just average holes. 3 especially is is just a layup away from the fairway bunkers and then a pitch to a small green. No temptation at all. 4 and 13 very good holes though.

[Scottt]

Jack, I have little doubt I will love the Sandbelt courses when I play them.

Lateral decision-making can be a great way of creating choices, I just think many people get a bit one-dimensional in their thinking and appreciation of "strategy" and as a result, they fail to see the myriad of choices NSWGC offers from the tee and the way most holes favour an approach from one side of the fairway, as well as dismissing the greens as not dramatic enough, ignorant of the result you'd get with Woking-esque greens on that site.

[Webster]

Scott, clearly NSW is a course that polarises views from those who have played there. This in my experience is usually a good thing. I will let you know my thoughts when I play there.

[Bruce]

I hope they like it Dicky - there should be more of that sort of thing around.

[petethepilot]

I had wanted Newcastle G.C. to turn the 3rd (currently 225m Par 3) into a short strategic Par 4 (or a 3 1/2 if you like) as it originally had been but the ones that counted were deaf to the suggestion. The key is the green shape of course. A hole like that needs to repel anything but the best tee shots but reward often enough to make it irresistable to go for it!

Even the Pros find holes like 10th at Riviera CC stimulating/frustrating/appealing. Every good course needs a potentially driveable Par 4 that gives options to the player. IMHO

Pete

[henno]

Like the Blue 1st at Indooroopilly. I both love and hate that hole.

[Bruce]

The 4th at Woodlands (http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=woodlands+golf+club&sll=-25.335448,135.745076&sspn=54.324934,89.560547&ie=UTF8&hq=woodlands+golf+club&hnear=&ll=-37.998847,145.104284&spn=0.00298,0.005466&t=h&z=18)

There's a mound front left and a hollow front right. The triangle green slopes back to front and raises about 2.5 feet at the front and 6 feet at the back. The site of my only eagle.

[petethepilot]

And so you don't get to play safe with immunity there is a bunker on the right (the preferred side) at 155 to 170m. You must flirt close to that to be in optimum position for a full sand iron/ lob wedge!

Brilliant hole

Pete