Porstea - the best course I have ever played...

[shavey]

Ventured down to the Mornington Peninsula with 7 guys from work a few days ago and was determined to play a few new courses.

Played Moonah Links Legends again and Portsea and The Dunes for the first time.

Moonah was enjoyable as always, The Dunes was fantastic and Portsea simply amazing!

Can I just say, we were so impressed, we played it twice.

Course condition was superb, greens rolled beautifully, undulations aplenty, just an absolute priviledge to play..

If your ever heading down this way, do yourself a favour and pop in for a game...

You won't be disappointed...

[Moe Norman]

it's a beauty and very reasonably priced too.

I was a little concerned a few years back when I heard CLayton was doing some work there, but he made a very good course something special and for only $40 a game!

[shavey]

4 for $99.00 during winter.. It doesn't get any better...

[Jono]

Shavey,

Are you talking about The Dunes or Portsea? I've played the former, but not the latter. I thought The Dunes was great ... possibly with the exception of that 200 meter downhill par 3 ... 5th, I think? Very good price too ... 8)

[Andrew]

Shavey,

I'm so glad you loved Portsea. It's an absolute gem that people miss due to some 'flashier' courses on the Peninsula. So many good holes with such variety. The 13th would probably make my top 5 short par 4 throughtout the world list. I love that hole & what Clayts has done with it.

[Jarro]

sounds like a nice course ...

.. pity it's in Victoria :roll: :p

[BrisVegas]

Played Dunes in the morning and Portsea in the afternoon on the same day. I thought Portsea was pretty good. I enjoyed Dunes more though. Portsea seemed a bit too hilly and contrived in places. Dunes seemed more flowing and open and more of a challenge, but that's just me. For $40 though, Portsea is definitely the bargain course in the area. The location is pretty special too. I would like to play it again actually, as plenty of people rave about it, so want to see if I "get it" second time around.

shavey - have you played Barnbougle yet?

[dc68]

I played the Dunes,Cape Schank and Portsea over 3 days,loved the Dunes (74) and Cape (75) thought Portsea (89)was sh!t,but in saying that it was blowing 80kph, rain was coming in sideways and I was playing like crap.That probably had something to do with my dislike of the course.
Plenty of people told me before I went that it was a great track,sure it had some great holes,but it left me cold.Wish I had better weather for it.:(
Dunes and Cape were windy but no rain,I hate wet weather golf.:evil:

[AndyP]

I've had Portsea on my list to play a couple of times that I have been down now, but I've ended up playing elsewhere each time. Maybe next time..

[Moe Norman]

Portsea Sh!ts on the Dunes, but both are excellent courses. Dunes is perhaps cashmores finest work behind 13th beach, Beach course. But you can't help but think he didn't get the best out of a very good plot of land, and some of the bunker styles don't really fir the layout and landscape of the course.

Dunes collectively has 18 good holes, but there are 3 or 4 holes at Portsea that are simply superb whereas Dunes lacks anything truely outstanding.

[Bruce]

We might have to find a weekday that suits us Melbournites and get down there of an OzGolf day at $99 for 4.

[miro]

You see I just can't buy the Portsea is a great course call. It maybe was a great course many years ago. However, technology and agronomy (i.e. the fairways roll like tarmac) has made many of its holes simply too short. As I recall the par 5's are simply long par 4's for any decent golfer and the par 4's are too often 3 wood sand wedge. As I recall the 3's were nice.

I honestly don't remember too much detail as i played it 4 years ago but the above are my recolllections of the time.

[Andrew]

Miro, we differ greatly. I have always thought the par 3's were the weakest part of the layout, although not bad holes in themselves, they are all similar length. This may change if the 3rd is replaced for a new uphill par 3 near the clubhouse.

I don't really have a problem with the length of the course, as I have played many 'shorter' courses that were quite difficult & many 'longer' courses that were much easier. There are three par 4's over 400m, & if the 3rd is removed & the 4th tee is moved back to play as a long par 4 from the 3rd tee, there will be four par 4's over 400m.

The par 5's aren't long, but the 18th (481m) is a good hole, the 6th & 14th (446m & 445m) both have enough trouble to allow scores to range from 3 to 7, no matter what length you hit the ball. The 8th is short (437m), but the temtation on the drive to cut of too much of the bush from that elevated tee is too good to get rid of. It could possibly be shortened slightly & made into a par 4, with the course becoming a par 71.

I believe this style of course is relevant today because of the variety it brings to the game. You hit up over dunes & down into valleys, with approaches to greens above & below you. Very few holes run in the same direction & in most cases, the drive that is closest to the hazard gains the best approach. For me, the last point is the most important.

Portsea follows some of the simplest rules of golf architecture that, unfortunately, many of our newer courses do not.

[Moe Norman]

It would appear that Miro is from the "Moonah Links Open is a good course" school of architecture, so is never likely to like a place like Portsea. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and this should be respected.

Some people think long and difficult = good, I prefer a course to be interesting and exciting. Neither length nor difficulty come into the equation.

[marcel]

So many good holes with such variety. The 13th would probably make my top 5 short par 4 throughtout the world list. I love that hole & what Clayts has done with it.

My most recent game there was with a member of The Grange (S.A.) where Clayts is doing work. When we got to #13 I spoke of its strategic merit and how it tempts etc. As I drove it to the fringe on the RHS I mentioned how at least this time I'd 'beaten' the designer...........walked off with a 6!!

Foe me #2 at portsea is the only disappointing hole. As for the short par 5's, I believe only #8 gives the big hitter a great advantage, the others are difficult to place/hold with a long club second.

[Andrew]

For me #2 at portsea is the only disappointing hole. As for the short par 5's, I believe only #8 gives the big hitter a great advantage, the others are difficult to place/hold with a long club second.

You are correct, but I'm not sure what they could do with that hole. You have to get to the 3rd tee some how.

[miro]

Andrew,

As mentioned I couldn't recall exactly the course so my par 3 comment I accept as being off base.

I feel that many of the mornington style courses are compromised by fairways that play like concrete paths. I go from a 250 metre driver in Sydney to a 275 metre driver. Then your 400 metre par 4 is driver 9 iron. I also note that whilst Portsea has 4 x 400 metre par 4's it also has 4 par 4's that averge 290 yards between them. Add that to the Par 5's three of which average 440 metres and it starts looking like half the course has been over run by the modern game.

Marcel and Moe -my issue with length is simply this. Portsea was completed in 1965. In 1980 the 50th longest tour driver was 260 yards which has climbed to 295 yards this year -roughly 15% longer. Put the game back to 1980 or earlier and many of Portsea's holes were more relevant. Today unfortunately they play on average 3-5 clubs shorter than their design intent. Whilst I understand that Portsea has many great design features you simply cannot ignore that the course has been outdated.

[Andrew]

Miro,

What do you consider a greater indicator of relevancy ? Length or score.

The top amateur events that are played at Portsea return similar winning scores as the amateur events at many of the longer courses in Victoria.

[Moe Norman]

Miro,

I suggest you have a game at St. Andrew's Beach, Gunnamatta - which was built only a couple of years ago, but is very short at just a tick over the 6000m mark from the tips. If you feel it's no good, then obviously you appreciate different things in a golf course than myself, and perhaps Andrew and Marcel as well.

What do you think of Royal Melbourne West?

[gazgolf1]

Feels like Iseek...oh the wankery.

[Jarro]

Feels like Iseek...oh the wankery.

:smt082 :smt005 :mrgreen:

[Moe Norman]

i mean who would have thought, talking about golf courses in the golf courses forum!?!

[BrisVegas]

**** it, I was going to take some time and write a decent post here, but I don't want or care enough to get into an argument with the architecture "gurus". It's just not that important to me.

Go nuts guys! This is your area to spew forth...

[gazgolf1]

Yeah Miro....never challenge the views lest you will be smacked on the head by a Pete Dye railroad tie.

[Moe Norman]

Played Dunes in the morning and Portsea in the afternoon on the same day. I thought Portsea was pretty good. I enjoyed Dunes more though. Portsea seemed a bit too hilly and contrived in places. Dunes seemed more flowing and open and more of a challenge, but that's just me. For $40 though, Portsea is definitely the bargain course in the area. The location is pretty special too. I would like to play it again actually, as plenty of people rave about it, so want to see if I "get it" second time around.

shavey - have you played Barnbougle yet? you already did mate, and it made perfect sense. So whats the fuss?

I don't complain when you guys start talking about shaft tipping, lie angles etc because I generally have no clue what you're talking about.

Everyone here loves golf, some love golf equipment and some are more interested in golf courses - each to their own and I don't see a problem with either side of the fence.

Miro challenged the view and quite rightly so, now the topic is being discussed, I though that was what a forum is for?

I might have it completely wrong though :(

[BrisVegas]

Miro challenged the view and quite rightly so, now the topic is being discussed, I though that was what a forum is for?

I might have it completely wrong though :(
Mope, you are right, this is a discussion forum. I just found myself in the wrong one and started to care for a moment. I'll leave now. Enjoy your discussion.

In case I miss it, PM me next time you review another "dog turd" so I can have a chuckle. :-D

[gazgolf1]

Mope, you are right, this is a discussion forum. I just found myself in the wrong one and started to care for a moment. I'll leave now. Enjoy your discussion.

In case I miss it, PM me next time you review another "dog turd" so I can have a chuckle. :-D

Go Briz. :)

[AndyP]

Sound like a good time to go make some narky comments in a toss-fest equipment thread.....

If you don't like it, you don't have to read it, and you definitely don't have to post.

[Moe Norman]

http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3790

I guess it's only relevant if Vegas reviews a course he likes, I won't be sh#tting in any equipment threads as I tend to find them quite informative as I don't know a great deal about the more intricate details.

Am I still allowed to barrack for Collingwood?

[BrisWesty]

http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3790

Am I still allowed to barrack for Collingwood?

Is that what you call it, Moe?
We beat Essendon tonight, can I have my bandwagon back? ;-) Kidding. Still supporting, but a few more wins required before I'll get my hopes up to finish in the 8.

[goughy]

Am I still allowed to barrack for Collingwood?

Sorry mate, that might be pushing the boundary's of good taste here. Unless of course eddie resigns. Then it'll be ok ;)

[AndyP]

Unless of course eddie resigns.
Umm, goughy, that's already happened.....

http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2608
Now that I got the Open course off my list, I wonder if Portsea or Legends would get the nod in a new poll.

[BrisVegas]

Now that I got the Open course off my list, I wonder if Portsea or Legends would get the nod in a new poll.

Absolutely! Legends & Portsea are both worth playing. Legends is in many ways a better layout than the Open course! (I qualify this by saying I shot 10 better on the Legends!!) :smt002

I'd love to get down there again and play St Andrews Beach. I've heard nothing but good things.....

[Moe Norman]

i'd play Portsea before Legends, but there isn't anything inherently offensive at Legends.

they should charge $80 to play the legends and chuck in a game on the open course for free.

[BrisVegas]

i'd play Portsea before Legends, but there isn't anything inherently offensive at Legends.

they should charge $80 to play the legends and chuck in a game on the open course for free.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: I think we paid $100 for both in carts. Super spot. Spent an hour between rounds on the driving range. Great food, trendy clubhouse and Peppers resort.

[AndyP]

What I meant was Legends or Portsea? There were three votes for Portsea and 5 for the Open previously.

The only thing the Open course had going for it was the experience of playing the course where the tournament was to be played later in the year.

I'd quite happily play either, or any of the many other options down there. So many good courses.

[Jarro]

anybody played Amsted ????

Eags and I played with the Club Captain and Chairman yesterday at Nudgee ...... they were talking their course up a fair bit :roll:

[Moe Norman]

Amstel?

If so thats the other 18 at Ranfurlie, where Judgesmails hails from.

I wonder which 18 they were talking up, Ranfurlie or Amstel?

My apologies if you meant Amsted, I've never heard of it.

[Jarro]

could've been Amstel.

the guy had a speech impediment.

[3oneday]

could've been Amstel.

the guy had a speech impediment.:lol: you get that playing with you, he probably didn't want to really to tell where he was from... :p

[Andrew]

Jarro,

Now, this is not meant to offend anybody, but if you are into Golf Course Architecture, you will love Ranfurlie. If you are not into GCA, you may not enjoy it as much as someone who is into GCA.

Amstel has 2 courses. The Park & Ranfurlie. If they were talking it up, they were talking about Ranfurlie.

Andy P,

I’d play Portsea before The Legends, but would suggest you play both. If you had an early start at Portsea, you’d be hitting off at Legends by midday. I played Portsea by myself once (walking) in 2hrs 50mins.

[Jarro]

Andrew,

you're right, GCA is probably wasted on me. I actually admit to liking Northlakes, which is a big no no on this forum.

I would however like to get down to Victoria one day and play some of these courses you guys keep talking about.

[Moe Norman]

Jarro,

I think you'll find some people who are into GCA don't mind North Lakes, everyone has different taste mate.

I'm certainly not one of them though, I feel like every time I play there I'm doing my brain a little bit of damage each time!

If given the choice I'd rather play Nudgee than North Lakes.

[Jarro]

If given the choice I'd rather play Nudgee than North Lakes.

:lol:

still waiting on my course review too you know ;)

[Moe Norman]

nudgee plate mate.

[BrisVegas]

If given the choice I'd rather play Nudgee than North Lakes.

Crikey! I'm with Thommo on this one. :-o But then I've always had a soft spot for good old Nudgee... :)

[miro]

Now I know its been a couple of days since I challenged the Archie buffs on their little pet project but having re read the thread no one has addressed the issue of

- at what stage does a course, despite strong design characteristics, become compromised by the increasing average distance of shots.

The answers to date have been:
- you're an idiot
- you're and idiot have you played all these other courses
- you're and idiot average scores haven't changed over time (hard to prove)

Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with the common theme (I actually maybe an idiot) I don't believe any of these answers address my comments in regard to Portsea which is that well designed though it may be it has been overtaken in many respects by the distance of the modern game.

Please discuss further.

[3oneday]

- you're an idiot;)

:lol:

[Andrew]

Firstly, I never called you an idiot, & if I had, I would have called you an idiot, not and idiot. ;)

Secondly, your question :
Q: At what stage does a course, despite strong design characteristics, become compromised by the increasing average distance of shots ?

A: At no stage. In fact, it is more of a graduation & it happens with all courses. The 1st hole at St. Andrews Old course was originally played as a 3 shot hole with the feathery ball. With the Gutta Percha ball it became a 2 shot hole for the very best players, but still a 3 shot hole for everyone else. With the Haskell ball it became a 2 shot hole for all reasonable players, with the equivalent of a 5 iron for their 2nd shot. Now the 2nd shot is a short iron, mostly a wedge. At what point did the 1st at TOC become compromised ?

The answer, of course, is that it hasn’t become compromised, we merely have changed the way we play it. The word compromise suggests settling for something less or allowing concessions that lessen quality. Compromise can even suggest making something obsolete.

Portsea is definitely not obsolete, but it has made concessions, although no more than every course. Wingfoot will, most likely, see a sub-par winner this year & had a sub-par winner in 1984 with 4 under, yet a score of 7 over (1974) was good enough to win in the not so distant past. Wingfoot will not be considered to be compromised because the course still looks & plays difficult, yet the stoke difference is far greater than anything we would see at Portsea.

I played the first course that I was a member of today. It is a typical tree lined, Kikuyu Sydney course. Drivers & ball technology allow me to fly the ball farther than I ever have. Lob wedges & high spinning golf balls allow me to stop the ball quicker than ever. The advantage at one course is in no way disproportionate to any other course.

The changes we have seen in the history of golf, as exampled by the 1st at TOC, suggest that golf will continue to change & that is something we need to accept. I don’t believe that compromises any course, because in competition we are playing against other golfers & it is the same for everyone. I do believe ‘Par’ is compromised, but the relevance of ‘Par’ is another argument altogether.

Thirdly, I’m not an Archie buff. I was always a bigger fan of Veronica.

[Webster]

Miro,

Portsea is a terrific little course. Sure its not long, but the subtlety around the greens means that you burn shots very easily. Is length all that matters to you?

[Moe Norman]

- at what stage does a course, despite strong design characteristics, become compromised by the increasing average distance of shots. Never, only those without strong design characteristics are compromised, and thats from the word go, not due to technology.

[markTHEblake]

- at what stage does a course, despite strong design characteristics, become compromised by the increasing average distance of shots.
are we talking about the Pro's that hit the ball 300m or happy 5 hackers can only hit it 250m with a wind up their bum or the typical average 16 handicap that barely get it past 210 on a good day.

If i was a Surfer I'd be happy paddling out to an average old beach break, leave Pipeline to the Pro's. As a tennis player Wimbledon would be something i would only watch on TV, if a cricketer, Lords would be nice, but astroturf at Fred Smith reserve will do me.

I wont ever be playing Whistling Straights from the back tees, so i dont really care how long it is.

Its all about perspective If you ask Bubba he will probably say anything over 7000m, Loren Roberts 6500, me 6200, Mandy 5000 and so on...

[miro]

Jack and Moe,

The tedium of hitting wedges at greens matters to me which is related to course length and recent changes in equipment. Yep I love interesting green complexes so clearly that is a positive for Portsea but it doesnt change the tedium of constantly hitting wedges.

[miro]

MTB,

Good point -for most players Portsea is still relevant -I concede on that one.

[miro]

Andrew,

Whilst I broadly hear what you are saying I believe you conveniently ignore the fact that many of the worlds great courses have seen very significant increases in course length to maintain their relevance. Most "normal" courses have not had this ability to increase length i.e. Portsea for one, and hence have to some extent become compromised.

Oh and I note that Winged Foot has been increased in length by 300 yards since 1997 -has Portsea?

[Moe Norman]

those courses have only been lengthened for Pro's playing in Majors, and revert back to normal of members play.

Augusta members don't play from the masters tees.

Not to mention, that alot of these changes have been poorly received and haven't affected scoring.

The truely great courses of the world haven't been lengthened like TOC, Cypress, Pine valley, Royal Melbourne. Not to mention the great modern courses being built are not long like Barnbougle, St. Andrew's Beach, CK, Pacific Dunes etc.

I don't find hitting wedges into greens tedious, I'd be interested to know what you shot at Porstea given you had easy wedges into most of the greens?

[miro]

76

[Moe Norman]

you are off 4 - correct?

So you shot your HCP around a course less than 6000m where you hit wedge all day - to me that speaks volumes about the quality of the course.

[markTHEblake]

The truely great courses of the world haven't been lengthened like TOC,

The Old course at St andrews has been lengthened heaps for both recent opens. I think somewhere around 4-500m longer than it was 10 odd years ago. eg the 2nd tee was bought way back and I think sits somewhere amongst the Himalayas and up against the burn.

Doubt it will ever normally in play though, as that tee is right in line with shanks from the first fairway.

[miro]

Moe,

1. First time around the track so not a bad effort site unseen.
2. You are only supposed to play to handicap once every 5 or 10 rounds (this is a fundamental of our handicap system).

I don't suspect my score is particularly supportive of either of our discussions.

[Moe Norman]

thats fair enough, but you are still basing your argument around length.

not to mention, I question how often you would hit wedge into greens at Portsea.

I'm reasonably long and if I played the course 5 times I doubt I would hit wedge into any of the following holes more than twice (unless its my third)

1,3,5,6,7,8,9, 12,14,15,16,18

Thats quite a few holes. Perhaps 2 or 3 of them you may hit wedge more often than not, but it is often still a demanding shot

[miro]

Moe,

No problemo. I am getting old after all and maybe my memory was failing me. Could be that Barwon Heads was mistakenly called Portsea for a day.

Next time I am in Melbourne I am going to revisit Portsea as I have expressed my view a number of times and been staunchly howled time on each occasion. I can only assume I am horribly mistaken but I do intend to find out.

[Moe Norman]

heh, Barwon Heads is across a largish body of water mate ;)
Not a bad course, but not in Portsea's league

[Andrew]

Andrew,

Whilst I broadly hear what you are saying I believe you conveniently ignore the fact that many of the worlds great courses have seen very significant increases in course length to maintain their relevance. Most "normal" courses have not had this ability to increase length i.e. Portsea for one, and hence have to some extent become compromised.

Oh and I note that Winged Foot has been increased in length by 300 yards since 1997 -has Portsea?

Miro,

I’m sorry it has taken a few days to answer your post. I normally try to get back to my fans as soon as possible.

My point is that our measure of relevancy is incorrect. If Portsea had 4 inch rough & only 20 yard wide fairways, you wouldn’t have broken 80. You would have been hitting 3 iron off the tee most of the time, therefore leaving you with 7 or 8 irons instead of wedges to the greens.

Winged Foot has been lengthen & is set up in typical USGA style. It is obvious they are trying to protect a score instead of setting up the course as the designer intended. Ask anyone who has played a Tillinghast course in normal set up & no one will say it was easy. I know Bethpage Black definitely wasn’t easy.

But what happens when someone wins the US Open with a score of 10 under. (And it will happen one day) Does the USGA then only mow 10 yard wide fairways & find courses they can lengthen to 9000 yards ?

We are chasing our tails when we base relevancy on matters.

[macleod]

well i loved portsea so much that time i played down there i went back again. ;)

dunes rocked, and in the 40 knot-bag-blowing-over-driver-on-par-3's-gale was darn special.

was just a lovely course with great holes and plenty of challenge with wind up.

[Moe Norman]

Dunes perhaps gets a bit underrated simply due to who is credited with the design....

few people are impartial.

[miro]

Miro,

I’m sorry it has taken a few days to answer your post. I normally try to get back to my fans as soon as possible.

My point is that our measure of relevancy is incorrect. If Portsea had 4 inch rough & only 20 yard wide fairways, you wouldn’t have broken 80. You would have been hitting 3 iron off the tee most of the time, therefore leaving you with 7 or 8 irons instead of wedges to the greens.

Winged Foot has been lengthen & is set up in typical USGA style. It is obvious they are trying to protect a score instead of setting up the course as the designer intended. Ask anyone who has played a Tillinghast course in normal set up & no one will say it was easy. I know Bethpage Black definitely wasn’t easy.

But what happens when someone wins the US Open with a score of 10 under. (And it will happen one day) Does the USGA then only mow 10 yard wide fairways & find courses they can lengthen to 9000 yards ?

We are chasing our tails when we base relevancy on matters.

Andrew,

My apologies on the same basis as yours -i had forgotten about this little intellectual enterprise.

In many ways Winged Foot has taken us off course on this discussion. The USGA setup is not what we are talking about.

May I say I hate the internet as it is genuinely difficult to actually accurately reflect views in writing over the period of a month -when is that game at Newcastle?

Now back on point. My issue remains to quote you, its about

"setting up the course as the designer intended."

I really doubt Portsea was designed for better players hitting driver 270 metres regularly. I believe, and you do not agree, that this comprises Portsea's relevance today. Portsea does however remain a great example of course design from a bygone era -which we unfortunately do not live in.

[Jim]

But what happens when someone wins the US Open with a score of 10 under.
Its already happened.

Portsea is fun.