D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Finally found time to buy the mag and went straight to the top 100. I dont play many away course i could count this years on my middle finger. I understand the process set out by the mag but theres defo a flaw somewhere. I cant quite put my finger on it but here goes. Ive not got mag to hand so bare with me. I joined Machrihanish Dunes this season after a lot of tooing and swaying. Old mach or dunes mmmm. Finally decided on dunes . Ive played both many times and enjoyed both equally.
But come on The Dunes only mentioned in next 100. Ure having a laugh.
My review is based on condition and maintenance of course as both course are very similar.
The condition of old mach and its lack of control or possible apathy over the last two three years made my choice very easy. I know a new person was brought in and have heard bits here n there. BUT yes a big BUT Machrihanish Dunes is miles ahead in condition by a country mile. Ive played it the last few sundays and unwould never know it was winter. ( well apart from the wind) ok there are other factors for making the top 100. But im just amazed it never made the top 100.
Holes 15 and 16 are brilliant holes in run up to the last two card wreckers of 17 and 18.
How did u play 17 and 18 Jezz cos ive no clue. 17 i play like a drive a wee wedge to edge of hill then wedge again. 18 if u dont make the cliff uve no chance of getting over them. I wud happily take a 5 all day.
My wee rant isnt biased as i carefully picked which of the two to join.
Anyway Jezz if u say u got 5 and 5 at 17 and 18i believe u.
When a course is reviewed, it is awarded a mark out of 100. This consists of 35 marks for strategy and design and 30 marks for condition and presentation. I've not played the Dunes before but the 2 bits I've highlighted above are relevant. Firstly, no course is going to make the top 100 just by being in good condition as it is only 30% of the available marks. Secondly, based on your comments about the closing holes (like I say, never played the course) it doesn't sound to me like they are particularly well designed holes?
Having played both courses I do find it bizarre to say the least that GM seem to see over 50 places between the two courses. Machrihanish Dunes has improved every time I've returned to play it.
Machrihanish on the other hand has stagnated over the last few years. Hopefully now it's on the right track but it'll take time to get it back to where it once was.
I'd be interested to know what the review/report was on Machrihanish Dunes and why it failed to get into the top 100 when (my opinion) there are a good few lesser courses in that list.
Also when you hear others rating it so highly it's a strange omission.
http://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/2016/12/07/played-ncg/
As always, these lists are very subjective. A personal favourite of mine (and also one of the other reviewers) has only just got into the top 100 in this latest ranking.