GM Top 100 courses

[Deleted member 1147]

I can only speak on a personal level but my preference is links, heathland then parkland in that order, probably based on what I said earlier about the level of test that each type of course presents. I'm lucky enough to be a member of a links and a heathland course and the links starts with a par 3. I have hit everything from 2 iron to 7 iron on that hole. Some days it is an easy 3 others it is a tough bogey 4.

Having said that, I always enjoy a game at Bognor Regis which is a very ordinary parkland course that is well looked after and has a great variation of holes.

So to answer your original question, I would guess the majority of reviewers prefer links because they present a better test of golf :thup:

I've only played a few links tracks (Hillside, Seacroft, Formby Ladies) so can't comment about the variety of test, except to say that Parklands can be very different tests in different conditions.

Think I'll have to give myself more excuses to travel to the coast and try out more Links courses, not too many to choose from in Derbyshire!

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Think I'll have to give myself more excuses to travel to the coast and try out more Links courses, not too many to choose from in Derbyshire!

You're a fair trek from the south coast but I put out an open invite earlier this year for any forummers to come down to Hayling :thup:

 

[Deleted member 1147]

You're a fair trek from the south coast but I put out an open invite earlier this year for any forummers to come down to Hayling :thup:

I'll have to take you up on that sometime, cheers

I did play Broadstone a couple of years back and that is a favourite among my 10 top 100 courses played so far. Lovely variety of holes,.

 

[patricks148]

I've only played a few links tracks (Hillside, Seacroft, Formby Ladies) so can't comment about the variety of test, except to say that Parklands can be very different tests in different conditions.

Think I'll have to give myself more excuses to travel to the coast and try out more Links courses, not too many to choose from in Derbyshire!

must only be 80 /90 miles to Englands Golf Coast, loads of links there

 

[Deleted member 1147]

must only be 80 /90 miles to Englands Golf Coast, loads of links there

Like I say I'm going to have to get out to some more of these areas.
My usual playing partners aren't keen on Links golf which I think has held the rest of us back a bit. One of them lost a dozen Pro V's at S&A once and won't go back. I believe they'd recently held Open quali' so it was playing particularly tough that weekend

 

[Paperboy]

Some major changes being done at the moment, it will be interesting to see them in action.

Due to play there next September

Hopefully in the flat dull, pal land bit in the middle to end of the round!

 

[patricks148]

Like I say I'm going to have to get out to some more of these areas.
My usual playing partners aren't keen on Links golf which I think has held the rest of us back a bit. One of them lost a dozen Pro V's at S&A once and won't go back. I believe they'd recently held Open quali' so it was playing particularly tough that weekend

its well worth the effort to Travel.

I reg head down to Western Gailes for a game, 200 miles each way and when i get the offer to play Muirfield I never turn it down despite 185 miles each way.

 

[NWJocko]

Like I say I'm going to have to get out to some more of these areas.
My usual playing partners aren't keen on Links golf which I think has held the rest of us back a bit. One of them lost a dozen Pro V's at S&A once and won't go back. I believe they'd recently held Open quali' so it was playing particularly tough that weekend

If you fancy a trip to the North West fire a post up in the arrange a game section, couple of links members up here but we also play a few others on reciprocals etc :thup:

My place isn't a links although it's on the coast and links turf (in the main) and welcome anytime :thup:

 

[huds1475]

I've only played a few links tracks (Hillside, Seacroft, Formby Ladies) so can't comment about the variety of test, except to say that Parklands can be very different tests in different conditions.

Think I'll have to give myself more excuses to travel to the coast and try out more Links courses, not too many to choose from in Derbyshire!

James.

I can sign you in @ Conwy if you ever fancy it. Have some decent reciprocals at Wallasey, West Lancs and St Annes Old Links that would spread the cost.

Anything to convert a doubter :thup:

 

[huds1475]

Utterly ridiculous the prices these "top" courses charge, and Golf Monthly suck up to them all by rating them in a top 100. Where is GM comittment to golf being more open to the average golfer, on a basic salary? Golf will NEVER be able to appeal to the masses whilst golf magazines promote courses with ridiculous green fees to keep the oiks out. So, why don't you at GM get off your high horses and get down with the local club players and present a Top 50 courses to play for under £40 (summer rates)? Now that would be a list I would REALLY be interested in. I won't hold my breath on this.

Don't see the logic here to be honest. Sounds more like a chip on your shoulder.

You can pay, say, £200 to play an Open Venue - even get a meal thrown in at some. Spend the day there, soak up the history.

If you shop around you can play there for much lower prices in winter.

How much would it cost to have a game of football at Wembley, tennis on Centre Court @ Wimbledon and so on?

 

[huds1475]

I always like the debates the top 100 throw's up.

For me, it is interesting that the 'manufactured' type links courses, Castle Stuart, Trump Aberdeen, Castle Course at St Andrews and say Kingsbarns have all risen in the rankings whereas (in my mind) some of the more classic traditional links / heathland type courses Royal Lytham, Hoylake, Birkdale, Portrush, Woodhall etc have fallen. I know that they are rated higher than the 'newer' ones I mention, but its just an observation. I prefer the traditional courses to the modern ones. To me they are a more of a subtle test than a shell ally type 420 yard par 4 between two huge sand dunes.......that said, I need to go and play Turnberry to see what the fuss is all about

Prefer traditional myself. Turnberry didn't feel remotely manufactured when I played it last...

I'll drive :thup:

 

[HomerJSimpson]

So to answer your original question, I would guess the majority of reviewers prefer links because they present a better test of golf :thup:

Define a test of golf. It seems a hugely subjective notion. I've played links, heathland and parkland and can say that each variety depending on the course in question can throw up their own challenges and test golfers in many different ways. I'm not entirely sure you can simply links is best because of the conditions. I've played parkland courses in howling winds where a 140 yard par 3 required a 5 iron one day and was an 8 iron after lunch as the wind subsided. Heathland presents its own unique challenges with the heather and gorse not normally found on parkland courses and which puts a premium on driving to avoid the penalties for going in there.

I also wonder, given the make up of the panel, if there's a sub-conscious thought that links being the original form of golf should always be represented at the very top of the list and that should a world class (and not exclusive) parkland or heathland course be created, it would still get overlooked because it wasn't links.

As I say, all subjective

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Thanks for all offers chaps.
I shall be in touch once January is over, work is mad until then & hopefully the weather may be improved come the spring.

 

[KenL]

Just been looking at the list. Sadly I haven't played very many of them. Of the ones I have some of the ones high up the list are overrated and some too far down.

For me Carnoustie is overrated as a golf course.
North Berwick is also a course with an overrated reputation. Again some great holes and I know it is a great club. The narrative talks about a great finish but for me the finishing holes (18 excepted) are not the best.

Muirfield also. I haven't played it but spent a week there as a marshal and I did not think it was so special. Also heard horror stories about the way they can treat visitors.

Royal Troon, although quite far up it deserves to be a lot higher up.

 

[Imurg]

You're a fair trek from the south coast but I put out an open invite earlier this year for any forummers to come down to Hayling :thup:

Will take you up on this next year Gordon - that's a promise!

 

[Liverbirdie]

I always like the debates the top 100 throw's up.

For me, it is interesting that the 'manufactured' type links courses, Castle Stuart, Trump Aberdeen, Castle Course at St Andrews and say Kingsbarns have all risen in the rankings whereas (in my mind) some of the more classic traditional links / heathland type courses Royal Lytham, Hoylake, Birkdale, Portrush, Woodhall etc have fallen. I know that they are rated higher than the 'newer' ones I mention, but its just an observation. I prefer the traditional courses to the modern ones. To me they are a more of a subtle test than a shell ally type 420 yard par 4 between two huge sand dunes.......that said, I need to go and play Turnberry to see what the fuss is all about

I love walking around the clubhouses of the old courses, especially the Open courses and taking in the history - Prestwick is one of the best for that, of the ones I've played.

However, once out on the course I can separate the "club" and the course, in terms of preference.

Royal Dornoch/Castle Stuart being a prime example. I loved Dornoch but still think CS is one of the top 1/2/3 courses I've played. Probably the same situation for Cruden/Trump Aberdeen,although probably like them in equal measure.

The conundrum must come when you have a 1/2/300 year old golf club, that has a modern clubhouse, like Cruden. Due to it being a traditional, old course do you mark it up based on that, despite it having a new clubhouse? What do you think?

 

[huds1475]

I love walking around the clubhouses of the old courses, especially the Open courses and taking in the history - Prestwick is one of the best for that, of the ones I've played.

However, once out on the course I can separate the "club" and the course, in terms of preference.

Royal Dornoch/Castle Stuart being a prime example. I loved Dornoch but still think CS is one of the top 1/2/3 courses I've played. Probably the same situation for Cruden/Trump Aberdeen,although probably like them in equal measure.

The conundrum must come when you have a 1/2/300 year old golf club, that has a modern clubhouse, like Cruden. Due to it being a traditional, old course do you mark it up based on that, despite it having a new clubhouse? What do you think?

Can't see the conundrum to be honest. Think Andrew was talking about courses.

You can have a traditional links course that has a new clubhouse (West Lancs). Doesn't make it a non-traditional course.

Or are you after being the reviewer in chief for GM Top 100 Clubhouses? With a round thrown in of course :thup:

 

[Blue in Munich]

Will take you up on this next year Gordon - that's a promise!

Sounds more like a threat………

 

[Liverbirdie]

Can't see the conundrum to be honest. Think Andrew was talking about courses.

You can have a traditional links course that has a new clubhouse (West Lancs). Doesn't make it a non-traditional course.

Or are you after being the reviewer in chief for GM Top 100 Clubhouses? With a round thrown in of course :thup:

He may have said courses, but we all know that the marks are given for the whole experience at the club in question, not just for the course.

The point being that an old traditional course can have a new clubhouse, so the "feeling" isnt necessarily the same as walking into a clubhouse such as Alwoodley, Royal Liverpool, Formby, Lytham etc.

West Lancs is one of the oldest courses in England, but no great traditional feel to their clubhouse.

 

[NWJocko]

I love walking around the clubhouses of the old courses, especially the Open courses and taking in the history - Prestwick is one of the best for that, of the ones I've played.

However, once out on the course I can separate the "club" and the course, in terms of preference.

Royal Dornoch/Castle Stuart being a prime example. I loved Dornoch but still think CS is one of the top 1/2/3 courses I've played. Probably the same situation for Cruden/Trump Aberdeen,although probably like them in equal measure.

The conundrum must come when you have a 1/2/300 year old golf club, that has a modern clubhouse, like Cruden. Due to it being a traditional, old course do you mark it up based on that, despite it having a new clubhouse? What do you think?

I love Castle Stuart and the Castle Course (very similar imo, bit weird how there's such a big difference in rankings as an aside), but......

With both I feel you can tell they're new as everything is too well worked out. I.e. The 4th at Castle Stuart where the hole is set up so you see the Castle through the dunes, the 17th at the Castle Course across the bay and the par 4 there with the infinity green with views across to St Andrews etc etc.

You can tell these were designed with exactly that in mind. They are still 2 of my favourite courses but for some reason the fact they are almost too perfect gives them a touch of the "manufactured" that perhaps isn't there with the 1/2/300 year old courses.

Why I would prefer Dornoch over Castle Stuart, New Course over the Castle etc.

Edit: why one of my biggest annoyances is not having played Turnberry before the recent changes as they are being done, partly, to draw attention to the landmarks to look more spectacular.