St Andrews every 5 years?

[Carpfather1]

First bagsies on your spare room 😆

😂😂😂😂

 

[User62651]

I don't see this as the right standard to hold an Open to. A major championship should be about finding the best golfers. I cringe when I see tour events with winning scores at -25 for 72 holes. This is finding the guy who is best at making birdies and eagles, but clearly there isn't a lot in the way of bogey avoidance around some of the 'resort' courses the PGA and European Tour use from time to time.

It's why Francesco Molinari won at Carnoustie and Spieth and Tiger didn't.
It's why Shane Lowry won at Portrush and JB Holmes shot an 87!

Obviously weather comes into it and it is tricky to protect most Links courses without some wind, or firm and fast conditions.

It will be interesting to see what happens at St. Andrews but if conditions are benign, we could see a bit of a 'meh' winner.

We have a US Open which is set up so hard so that breaking par is seen as a failure of the USGA to make it hard enough. One of those types of tournaments is enough of the 4 majors as it's often a drudge to watch hacking and scrambling over quality approach shots.
The Open is reliant on weather and silly pin spots to protect against low scoring, doesn't matter which of the venues. Lowry got a 63 round Portrush which was supposed to be tough, Watson finished 65/65 way back in 1977 at Turnberry with the old gear, also seen as a tough test.
St Andrews is just fine as a venue, the Home of Golf and it gets the best crowds and has the most prestige. The one dull Open there when Oosthuizen won was a freak result of weather and tee time luck......as well as some decent LO play of course. Rest have been pretty amazing.

 

[Jacko_G]

I find it strange some think that certain courses won't get the open because they don't have the infrastructure, road network etc, I'm guessing these are the same people who have never been down Carnoustie's main street.

Idiotic comment.

Infrastructure isn't about the width of a main Street.

Infrastructure, access from major roads, rail access, bus access, ability to facilitate park and ride, spectator parking, beds available, landing for helicopters, tented villages, hospitality, impact on local communities, policing, ambulance, fire service availability.

Part of the reason Portrush changed two holes to accommodate grand stands and spectator access.

All that is even before you go into the finer details.

But hey you crack on with width of a street.

🤣

 

[Grant85]

We have a US Open which is set up so hard so that breaking par is seen as a failure of the test. One of those types of tournaments is enough of the 4 majors as it's often a drudge to watch hacking and scrambling over quality approach shots.
The Open is reliant on weather and silly pin spots to protect against low scoring, doesn't matter which of the venues. Lowry got a 63 round Portrush which was supposed to be tough, Watson finished 65/65 way back in 1977 at Turnberry with the old gear, also seen as a tough test.
St Andrews is just fine as a venue, the Home of Golf and it gets the best crowds and has the most prestige. The one dull Open there when Oosthuizen won was a freak result of weather and tee time luck......as well as some decent play of course. Rest have been pretty amazing.

The USGA have certainly got things wrong with regards to US Opens in the past. It's one thing trying to protect par, it's another to do it mainly with fast greens and slopey pin positions. They need to test all aspects from driving accuracy, long irons, short irons, bogey avoidance, as well as on the greens.

But the R&A have certainly got the set up far better in the past, and as we've said - if conditions are good at almost any venue - the winner will get to the mid teens under par. However Molinari at Carnoustie was -7 I think, and there wasn't a lot of weather about and the rough was fairly benign.

As for St. Andrews - we had a 3 way tie at -15 in 2015. And there was certainly Spieth and one other player (I think Day) who should have gotten into the playoff as well.
Personally feel that not having huge separation of the field is an indicator that a course isn't providing the stiffest test.
Ultimately St. Andrews is pretty forgiving off the tee (certainly with a shot up the left) and not that long.

And of course we had the problem with the Saturday play being completely binned due to the wind. I actually played links Golf in Fife that day and it was entirely playable. But they clearly wanted to have the Greens at a certain speed - that it wasn't playable at the Old Course. If it had been tourists playing, the greens would have been at the correct speed and balls would not have been oscillating.

I'd also suggest that even since 2015 - technology has improved to a degree that the course will be even more defenceless.

I'd be hugely surprised if 2021 scoring wasn't a record low and possibly we might have a single day, or even all 4 days, where records are beaten and people are recording 61, 60 and even in the 50s.

If they don't change the layout then I'd be happy for them to have some internal OB, at least on the shorter holes. And to move in the OB down the right a bit.

 

[Jacko_G]

Aberdeen? No need for another remote venue hundreds of miles from population centres. At least Porthcawl is reachable from several population centres.

I've been told that RSG would always be the best attended - but there are limitations due to the road network, Sandwich can't handle it. Princes and Deal would have the same problem. I think there is demand for another venue in the south.

A remote venue with easier access than Fife or Tayside?

Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Idiotic comment.

Infrastructure isn't about the width of a main Street.

Infrastructure, access from major roads, rail access, bus access, ability to facilitate park and ride, spectator parking, beds available, landing for helicopters, tented villages, hospitality, impact on local communities, policing, ambulance, fire service availability.

Part of the reason Portrush changed two holes to accommodate grand stands and spectator access.

All that is even before you go into the finer details.

But hey you crack on with width of a street.

🤣

He's right, the infrastructure in Carnoustie is pants. There isn't a single decent Indian restaurant FFS!!!

 

[patricks148]

A remote venue with easier access than Fife or Tayside?

Ignorance is bliss.

i wouldn't call scotlands 3rd largest city "a remote location"

a major new bypass, airport and lots of accomodation not to mention room for stands, village etc.

Though saying that not sure how keen the members would be

 

[KenL]

Agreed, Royal Aberdeen would be worth a shot at the Open.

Not Trump though.

 

[Italian outcast]

He's right, the infrastructure in Carnoustie is pants. There isn't a single decent Indian restaurant FFS!!!

but a great barbers

 

[larmen]

Nobody could have imagined football without the old Wembley Stadium. Is anyone really missing it, or are people still excited going to the (new) Wembley Stadium?

 

[KenL]

Nobody could have imagined football without the old Wembley Stadium. Is anyone really missing it, or are people still excited going to the (new) Wembley Stadium?

Pardon?

 

[sunshine]

A remote venue with easier access than Fife or Tayside?

Ignorance is bliss.

Yes you are blissfully ignorant

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Aberdeen? No need for another remote venue hundreds of miles from population centres. At least Porthcawl is reachable from several population centres.

I've been told that RSG would always be the best attended - but there are limitations due to the road network, Sandwich can't handle it. Princes and Deal would have the same problem. I think there is demand for another venue in the south.

Aberdeen’s infrastructure is more than fine , in fact prob better than most to host an Open and very easy to access.

Why must it? Genuine question, I'm curious. And don't just say because it always has.

Because it’s the Open and was created by the players playing the Links courses and it’s the one true test of golf from its origins and will always be there as the way the Open is played , there are countless courses on dull parklands around the World - Links is the origins of golf and one major must stay true to its origins

 

[sunshine]

i wouldn't call scotlands 3rd largest city "a remote location"

a major new bypass, airport and lots of accomodation not to mention room for stands, village etc.

Though saying that not sure how keen the members would be

This is all about perspective. If you live in a village in the highlands, Aberdeen probably seems like a bustling metropolis. But it is only the 39th most populous built up area in the UK (thank you Wikipedia). And it is remote (like a lot of other courses on the rota). What would happen if Aberdeen bid to host the olympics, or even a champions league final?

 

[Jacko_G]

This is all about perspective. If you live in a village in the highlands, Aberdeen probably seems like a bustling metropolis. But it is only the 39th most populous built up area in the UK (thank you Wikipedia). And it is remote (like a lot of other courses on the rota). What would happen if Aberdeen bid to host the olympics, or even a champions league final?

And????

The ignorance keeps coming.

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

 

[patricks148]

This is all about perspective. If you live in a village in the highlands, Aberdeen probably seems like a bustling metropolis. But it is only the 39th most populous built up area in the UK (thank you Wikipedia). And it is remote (like a lot of other courses on the rota). What would happen if Aberdeen bid to host the olympics, or even a champions league final?

LOL that' hilarious , you obv don't know what remote is if you think Aberdeen is

 

[sunshine]

And????

The ignorance keeps coming.

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

Yep - that's you
At least you are self aware

 

[GB72]

I think that there needs to be a shake up of the Open roster, though that does not mean removing St Andrews.

I am no expert on these things but what is there, about 10 courses on the current roster. You have a success like this year and people are seeing that and thinking, I would happily go there next time. But wait, that may be in a decade's time. How can you capitalise on the success of a new course on the roster if it may only see an Open once a decade.

You also see the success of a new course being added in a new venue and maybe that needs to continue with more additions. I would like to see the list reviewed every few years with one new course being added for that period and one being removed. That would give the chance to trial new venues whilst ensuring that all of the existing ones pull out all of the stops to be still on the next Open list.

In an ideal world (which would never happen) I would like to see the Open alternate between venues in England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales so as everyone gets a good opportunity to host the event..