Australian Open at The Lakes

[thecollective]

I ended up watching the 1980 Aussie Open last night. The course looked old, even then. Amazed at how little development was in the back of the long lens shots though - these days its tower blocks as far as the eye can see.

What amazed me was the ball performance though - a miss went 30/40/50m off line, something the modern ball doesn't do. Approach shots unless struck perfectly regularly went long - they didn't stop on a dime. And ball flight - Norman could hit a 30m draw off the tee!

So good watching the old opens, I can't believe a stab out of a bunker to 5 feet was considered 'shot of the day'. These days a bunker shot like that is considered mandatory

Gotta love how blunt Thommo's commentary was; 'he could of had two putts in that time'. Norman did take a long time over some of those putts!

[virge666]

Mike Clayton here. Do you guys want to have a reasoned discussion about the Lakes - or just rant?

Cant we do both ?

For the record - I grew up on the Lakes, my family was on the committee, one side of the family were life members when it was offered in the 80's, you get my point... I love the place, have always loved the place if only for sentimental reasons. The flying saucer clubhouse was my favorite as a kid, but i hate the bus station they built.

But the main problem i have is that the course now requires a tonne of local knowledge, and some of the green complexes are nuts. The difference between shooting even par and 80 is so small due to the small landing zones, tiers in the green as well as the direction of the greens and the mechanical nature of playing golf there.

1 is a great opening hole - 2 and 3 a lot harder early in the round, but if you get through there alive, you are faced with the 4th which is a means to an end due to the housing on the right. But the green has a spine through it and depending where the pin is - you can miss your landing point by a smallish margin say 4-5m and end up miles from the pin and dont get me started on that stupid bunker. Up next 5 and 6 have their nuances and 7 has always been a brutal par 3 and you can only play it to the front of the green anyway.

The 8th tee has the best view and is visually a stunning hole that is pretty easy to get your bird with a couple of decent shots. 9 is pretty short and if you miss the green, Seve wouldnt get it within 6 feet.

and this is the bit that i struggle with - the greens are so big and undulating, the margin for error is so small, I have played off plus numbers and it isnt too bad for me most of the time, but i just watch other players on the course bounce it all over the place so they can get somewhere close enough for a two putt.

On the back nine, i dont get the shape of 11, i see why - but there is very little reward in going for the green in two and there is maybe three places you can put the pin on there. 12 is a strong hole though it shits me that the big lads can hit iron off the tee. I had my rant on 13, my amateur design would be to build up the left side of the green down to the fairway so you had a bail out for the members so they arent playing ping pong with an 8 iron or chunking sand wedges. Pro's will always find a way to nullify the danger, that is what they do for a living. (for the record, the old 13th was a nothing hole)

I dont understand 14's green, i sort of get the idea that the size defends what is essentially a short par 5, but it isnt fun especially when the wind kicks up and the cost in time and resources required to keep it in good condition.... I enjoy the final stretch of holes and unlike most, i LOVE a par 3 finish in front of the clubhouse.

So that is my rant - I find the course a bit of a grind when not on my game, i see lots of the older locals just struggle and i dont see the fun side of playing there. It just doesnt have that playability that the Aussie has or the rewards for when you get out of position and might have a chance to save par with a cool shot. it is all just so mechanical, you hit it here, then here, rinse and repeat.

And to be honest - it was a dated golf course before the redesign, like Royal Sydney is now, it was a course from a different era with different equipment. But the redesign IMO did not give me that fizz that it use to have - where you would take a client to the course point them down many of the fairways and just say, "there you go buddy, lick that stamp and send it !". I would challenge anyone to go to the course on a Saturday medal and look at the players, their demeanor, they all just have that look of acceptance that this is what golf is now... a grind.

[Mike Clayton]

It requires a 'tonne of local knowledge'
Given I think The Old Course is the best course in the world and no other course requires as much study, play and local knowledge is that a bad thing? Especially given its a members course. Any course that doesn't require thought and learning - a course 'where it's right there in front of you' - is pretty boring.
'The mechanical nature of the play' For me 'mechanical' has connotations of narrow fairways where the play and the shots are dictated to the player. You execute the shots the course is demanding you play or you are penalised.
Given how wide the fairways are and how much choice there is at The Lakes I'd have thought it was the opposite of a purely mechanical course. It's not obvious where to drive on so many holes and there is miles of space. You have to work it out for yourself and as Cam Percy said after The Open (5th place) 'off every tee there are 3 options' That's the opposite of one dimensional mechanical golf.
Nor is it a long course - by modern championship standards it's short at under 7000 yards. Given that, having to hit precise short irons into holes like 4,5,6,13 and 17 shouldn't be a problem?
Obviously how 8 plays depends on the wind - with none it's a relatively easy 4 if you hit two great shots.
I don't agree of your assessment of the chips and pitch shots at 9. There are plenty you can get to 6 feet and either way the green is so big you ought to have a tough up and down surely?
The reward for going for 11 is you knock it on - but it's really risky shot with plenty of room to bail out left. I've seen a bunch of guys hit long woods and irons onto that green over the years but if you miss it's a tough pitch - tougher often than if you lay up into a better place with a better angle.
13 is a demanding hole of a good player as every sub- 300m hole with a 70 meter wide fairway should be. You have to hit a competent pitch and if you don't you need to get the chip/pitch back on the green. It's no different from the 4th at Woodlands - aside from the couch v kikuyu surrounds. You could argue the couch is easier but it's debatable.
14 is a green on a short 5 that you are supposed to have a brutal time 2 putting if you hit it miles away - but it's also a size no good player wants to lay-up. It aims at shaming good players into going for it but it demands a good shot. And I'd have though any green you could spend half an hour fooling around just trying putts was fun. But like 13 at Barnbougle you are either going to think it great or stupid. But if you think it's stupid you are going to think the 16th green at Nth Berwick is stupid too. That's fine - I am on the other side though.
And given how much maintenance time and money we saved by getting rid of the silly grassing lines (kikuyu,couch,rye and bent) within 20 meters of the green they can afford to maintain one green as big as 14.

And when 'you're not on your game' aren't most courses as grind if you are scoring or playing seriously? The ones that weren't are not too interesting in my experience.
And we are always going to fundamentally disagree on the 'grind' 'no fun view of the course. Personally I'd have thought it the exact opposite. Nor am I sure what you mean by 'dated' It had been hacked at by a few architects since Devlin and Von Hagge left plus member had way over-planted it with trees.

[Rodent]

Am I right that the Victorian Open (Feb 7th-10th) to be held in a couple of months has a 20% larger prize money pool than the Australian Open? That is pathetic. The Mauritius Open held last week had a bigger prize pool than our Open. What a joke when our GDP is 1000x that of Mauritius. The Kenya Open will have a bigger prize pool than any event in Australia this season! Seriously?

[BUSHY]

Am I right that the Victorian Open (Feb 7th-10th) to be held in a couple of months has a 20% larger prize money pool than the Australian Open? That is pathetic. The Mauritius Open held last week had a bigger prize pool than our Open. What a joke when our GDP is 1000x that of Mauritius. The Kenya Open will have a bigger prize pool than any event in Australia this season! Seriously?

$1.5m for the Men
$1.5m for the Women

$1.25m Aus Open

Mauritius Open Heavily backed by the Euro tour though whereas Golf Aus spent a shitload on Speith and Mcilroy over several years.

[wazandnic]

Maybe a discussion for another thread, but can someone explain to me why a state tournament like the Vic Open can suddenly gain so much press and $$$ when such an historical tournament such as the Open or moreso the Masters fell over?

Is it purely the Women carrying the tournament along like is happening with several Aussie sports these days (cricket, football)

[Grumpy8]

Maybe a discussion for another thread, but can someone explain to me why a state tournament like the Vic Open can suddenly gain so much press and $$$ when such an historical tournament such as the Open or moreso the Masters fell over?Is it purely the Women carrying the tournament along like is happening with several Aussie sports these days (cricket, football)

State premier is a golfer and was first tournament to have ladies and men playing same course at same time are main reasons imho

[wazandnic]

State premier is a golfer and was first tournament to have ladies and men playing same course at same time are main reasons imho

Fair enough being a golfer... but if a golfer would you not try and rebuild what was once a great tourney in the Masters?
Or is/was the governing body that controlled the Masters to archaic in their thinking to try and work on change?

Nothing against Vic, but having the "Australian Masters" doing the same thing as the Vic Open, but the added esteem of the "Masters title" would surely have more sway on a global scale, sponsors, interest from Pros, etc... no??

Again the Australian Womens Masters is strong, wonder if this could pull the Mens Masters back if it was combined?? Just seems such a shame to loose such great tournaments with their history.

[BUSHY]

It’s all down to money and image.

Having a combined men’s and women’s event is better visually to political types and those cashing cheque’s. I like the Vic Open and find it a positive in its growth compared to other events around Australia.

I’m sure there’s more reasons but I thought the Masters was owned by IMG, they should still have the pull to reignite the event.

With regard to Golf Australia I have little trust in much of what they’re doing.

[wazandnic]

Yep probably agree. Thanks for your thoughts.

[Grumpy8]

A combined masters might work but it would probably have to be in other states , just for balance . Maybe IMG still hold some sort of trade mark over the Australian masters name , ideally ; pga in qld aus open in nsw , Vic open in Melbourne, aus masters in Adelaide, and that Sixers tournament in WA would make for a good little tour and use the other state opens as qualifiers. Wonder what a masters on barnbougle or king island would look like

[Mike Clayton]

Out of interest Tom Doak's take on The Lakes from the just released Volume 5 of the Confidential Guide.

"It's often said in the golf development business that "the third time is the charm" but The Lakes is the only modern course I can think of where that's true of redesign efforts (Muirfield is an older example) The original course was substantially re-routed in 1970 when the major connector highway from the airport to downtown split the property in two. Michael Clayton's newer version keeps the water-laden Devlin/Von Hagge routing but totally reimagines the strategy with some of the boldest greens contouring I've seen on a modern design. The multi-terraced greens of the par 5 11th and 14th have to be seen to be believed. It won't suit everyone's tastes, but the new version of The Lakes is a compelling test, and a must-see in a city desperately short on compelling golf"

[petethepilot]

The vic open is way older tournament (1957)than the Aus Masters (1979). The masters was a blatant ripoff of the US Masters played every year on a shit course that had probably the worst Reno ever done on a major Australian site! Jack Newton’s 15th is more suited to Palm Meadows than the Melb sand belt. It’s success in Australia was mostly due to Norman’s play on a course that very much suited his long straight driving game. Unless corporate Australiagets behind Aus golf, purses will always be low and name players will choose to play elsewhere. Don’t lament the passing of the Masters, celebrate the return of the Vic open. It is without doubt the best supported tournament in Australia at the moment...by genuine golf fans!

[thecollective]

The vic open is way older tournament (1957)than the Aus Masters (1979). The masters was a blatant ripoff of the US Masters played every year on a shit course that had probably the worst Reno ever done on a major Australian site! Jack Newton’s 15th is more suited to Palm Meadows than the Melb sand belt. It’s success in Australia was mostly due to Norman’s play on a course that very much suited his long straight driving game. Unless corporate Australiagets behind Aus golf, purses will always be low and name players will choose to play elsewhere. Don’t lament the passing of the Masters, celebrate the return of the Vic open. It is without doubt the best supported tournament in Australia at the moment...by genuine golf fans!

+1, time to move forward not backwards bringing back old dated tournaments with mustard coloured jackets


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[damoocow]

Out of interest Tom Doak's take on The Lakes from the just released Volume 5 of the Confidential Guide.

"It's often said in the golf development business that "the third time is the charm" but The Lakes is the only modern course I can think of where that's true of redesign efforts (Muirfield is an older example) The original course was substantially re-routed in 1970 when the major connector highway from the airport to downtown split the property in two. Michael Clayton's newer version keeps the water-laden Devlin/Von Hagge routing but totally reimagines the strategy with some of the boldest greens contouring I've seen on a modern design. The multi-terraced greens of the par 5 11th and 14th have to be seen to be believed. It won't suit everyone's tastes, but the new version of The Lakes is a compelling test, and a must-see in a city desperately short on compelling golf"

Must have missed this the first time. Quite self indulgent.

[petethepilot]

Why self indulgent?

[thecollective]

Call a spade a spade, nothing self indulgent in posting what someone else said verbatim


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PerryGroves]

Call a spade a spade, nothing self indulgent in posting what someone else said verbatim

Thanks Israel

[damoocow]

Why self indulgent?

It's a vanity post.
Clayton has a predilection for talking himself up. That's a trait I find quite abhorrent. It's my opinion and I'm not interested in any protracted discussion about it.

[Mike Clayton]

damoocow.

You obviously know me well?
And for what it's worth I posted Doak from the Confidential Guide because he is one of the best and most articulate critics of golf courses - and one of the greatest designers ever.
There were opinions offered here earlier critical of both the course and me and his words perhaps put that criticism in some context.
You can think what you like of me - perhaps you know me and perhaps not - but I hardly think posting Doak was 'self-indulgent'.
It might have some of the critics rethink their opinions - or perhaps they think they know as much about golf course design as he does.
Or me even.
There - that was self-indulgent.