Royal Melbourne = goofy golf

[dpb5031]

I dont know how anyone could disparage Royal Melbourne after watching this week. I thought it was some of the most compelling and entertaining golf I've ever watched on a TV broadcast, and the course was the star. I'd love to play there one day...

[raynorfan1]

I have no doubt that the greens at RM are among the most difficult in the world. I also don't doubt that when the PGA came to look at the course. Presumably, the super put them in "tournament" condition when the PGA came to take a look, and they decided that it was pushed too far. It's not like the day the PGA comes out to test things out is just another day for member play.

Even Weiskopf, in the article posted, pegs the number that it "must" be faster than as 13.

It's important to note that "hard" and "fast" are related, but not directly correlated. Our greens feel like concrete underfoot, and result in bounces like you describe, but they rarely roll much faster than 10. Classic links greens tend to be "hard" but not that fast.

[tiderider]

burgerIcon“Hard, fast, difficult, but extremely fair, and that’s what the Aussie sandbelt golf courses have historically done,” Woods said.“I think what Royal Melbourne has displayed this entire week is beyond a dream.“This is how I think golf should be played. It doesn’t have to be – you don’t have to have a par 3 240 yards for it to be difficult. That 5th hole is all you want in a par 3.“And all the shots, the guys have from our side and from watching their side, have thoroughly enjoyed the course set up and how it’s played. We wish there were more events on venues like this.”

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

So the guy lives right there, has experience and knowledge with the course and its conditions and you are compelled to tell him he doesn't know what he is talking about because you are Googling other info and making assumptions?

 

Really people .......

[Irishman1979]

What?!!! No forced carries, no water! Greens are firm undulated and fast which is the courses defense. Far from goofy!

[raynorfan1]

I'm making assumptions based on my own experience putting on greens that are rolling ~13, and playing a course that often hosts 'significant' events. I didn't "google" anything.

15 does not happen as an "everyday" speed for member play anywhere in the world. There are courses that can get that fast - if they're pushed for a few days a year - but nowhere operates at those speeds day in and out. These ridiculous numbers are just a **** measuring contest and aren't based in reality.

[Hawkeye77]

Well, he's there and it seems kind of cheesy to go on and on about how he is wrong when you aren't there and don't have experience with Royal Melbourne the past week or two.

But have at it - just seems odd, IMO.

Still recovering from overnight PC watching the other night so I'm a little testy I guess. I'll let you guys wrangle.

[raynorfan1]

Yeah, sorry. IMHO one of the really unfortunate things in golf over the past 30 years has been this false escalation of "stimp" speeds, and I'm pushing it too hard here.

By the time my club next hosts a USGA event, stimp inflation will probably have the greens rolling at 20.

[Hawkeye77]

Whatever they are I am positive a report on them and all the goes into setting it up would make a great thread - would love to see a lot more of that here. Off to some Hallmark so I can lighten up a little, lol.

[Malvern]

Not sure where we are with the discussion but given I'm here...……. I took the goofy clickbait.

I've played RM a fair bit, predominately the west, given how windy Melbourne is, its doubtful they run the greens anywhere near 15 on a regular basis. I played Oakmont 2 months ago, they are the fastest I've been on.

However at the end of it, I have not enjoyed a tournament/event this much in years and am regretting my decision not to attend (I went in 98 and 11)

 

[Simp]

Oh my.

[mallrat]

I’m sorry, I like to mind my own business and hate getting involved in these p!55ing contests.

 

You are incredibly annoying and ignoring everything he says. Stop moving the goalposts and answer his questions. The “I know you are but what am I” defense is not a good look for a grown adult.

[LICC]

Do you just sit at your screen waiting for comments you disagree with to attack with utter nonsense? @raynorfan1 diesnt have to be a member at RM to know what greens at 13 speeds roll like. If you have ever played a course with greens that fast you know how that plays and how greens that are faster with significant slopes and undulations would be ridiculous for everyday play.
I also directly quoted the consulting architect of the course. By your rationale you should be appalled at yourself for questioning someone with such direct knowledge of the RM greens setup.

[Pykie]

 

Yep, kind of like horseshoing putts rolling back past players etc?

 

During drought and hot summers the greens definitely get that quick, like I said, the Australian Open was reduced to 54 holes in 2002 because the greens were too fast at Victoria Golf Club, which is across the road and essentially on the same turf.

 

-------------------------

 

 

"Frantic efforts were being made last night to restore Victoria Golf Club to playable condition - and simultaneously repair some of the tarnished reputation of Australian golf - after the Australian Open descended into the greatest farce in its history yesterday.

Australian Golf Union executive director Colin Phillips accepted the blame after the first round of the $1.5 million tournament was abandoned midway through the day because of the state of the outlandishly fast greens.

Advertisement

The tournament will now be played over 54 holes after organisers last night reversed a decision to play two rounds on Sunday after pressure from Channel Seven.

A group of players on the third green had found the task of putting virtually impossible, and Victorian professional Mark Allen complained to rules officials just after noon.

At that point, putts on the third were "horse-shoeing" around the cup and running back at players, and rules committee members were receiving feedback from all over the course that there were problems with the greens.

Play was suspended and four greens were watered by ground staff while tournament management held an urgent meeting.

But with some players already complaining about the unfairness of changing the conditions midstream - Aaron Baddeley said he believed some would withdraw from the tournament if the event restarted with softer and more manageable greens - the round was abandoned in what must amount to one of the blackest days in Australian golf history.

Phillips, as head of the organisation that runs the Open, was accepting the barbs.

"I'm not apportioning any blame to anyone. The buck stops with me, so I accept full responsibility for it," he said.

While course superintendent Ian Todd and his staff will water the greens heavily and not cut them overnight, they will have to deal with hotter weather over the weekend, leaving at least some doubt that the tournament can be completed. Several players said they did not expect the conditions to improve dramatically.The situation revived memories of the 1987 Open at Royal Melbourne, when the final round was abandoned because players could not putt on the glassy greens.

The recriminations were already being felt last night, with the AGU, the Victoria club which is hosting the Open for the first time in more than 20 years, Todd and the course management consultants headed by semi-retired professional Mike Clayton all under the blowtorch of public scrutiny.

Phillips admitted he felt embarrassed. "Of course we do," he said. "It's the last thing we wanted."

He said the drought in Melbourne had contributed to the condition of the course, but added that not enough water had been put into the greens to compensate.

Asked whether he felt yesterday's abandonment had been caused by bad luck or bad management, Phillips said: "It's probably a bit of both."

Of the 27 players who completed all 18 holes, none was under par, and this on a benign day with light winds and warm sunshine.Craig Parry said the players had been made to look "like 15-handicappers", while Kiwi Greg Turner, who shot 80, said: "It's not the incompetence that astounds me, just the extent of it."

Veteran Wayne Grady described the greens as "outrageous". The situation was at its worst on the third hole, a par-four.

"If they (putts) weren't going in the hole, they were horseshoeing and running back quite some distance," said John Hopkins, the rules committee chairman.

All yesterday's scores have been cancelled, a disappointment for first-year Victorian professional Andrew Webster and New South Wales professional Steven Conran, who had played brilliantly to shoot 71, but a godsend for NSW amateur Kurt Barnes, who shot 91, and for visiting American Charles Howell, who was 10-over when officials stepped in.

The tournament will now revert to a 54-hole event, after the AGU initially announced that the final two rounds would be played on Sunday. But Phillips admitted he could not guarantee there would not be another blow-up like yesterday.

With temperatures expected to top 30 degrees on Sunday, his pessimism appears well-founded.

Patrons had their ticket-money refunded and Channel Seven, whose live broadcast was only an hour old when the drama unfolded, had to fill the rest of the day with replays of last year's Open."

[mallrat]

A) so, so true

 

b) links courses or sand based courses are just different in the way the ball reacts, IMO. I remember the 1st time I played a true links/ sand based course and the ball would land and run I thought the greens were an 11-12. I asked the Super and he said 9.5-10. Just that the ball reacts a little differently which makes it seem faster. Then factor in the type of grass and it’s a different game.

[mallrat]

Why would you trust Doak? He didn’t design the course, has never worked on a crew and is not a Superintendent.

 

 

[mallrat]

And there it is.

 

You just exposed yourself for how little you know. A course architect designer has absolutely nothing to do with set up or maintenance practices. Superintendent’s are there for a reason, they are on site every day. A consulting architect, even one making changes to a course has no say so in day to day practices or decisions. In fact they are generally on site for 1 or 2 days at a time, that’s it. They have no say so in the moisture content of the greens or fairways. They don’t set or partake in the irrigation schedule. No word in the spraying or products or timing.

 

Do i I trust Doak, in certain areas, very much so, But Richard Forsyth is a VERY highly respected Superintendent and I will bet money he never consults Doak in that maintenance of HIS course, in fact I would say Doak consults him instead of him consulting Doak.

[Chanceman]

Mate, where do I start? You are the laughing stock of the forum.

btw fyi the OP said it was goofy and BB28* ** said it was a dump. Your own bizarre comments are too numerous to itemize so why dont you go back and take a look at what others have been saying. But as you will probably respond in typical fashion you did say that if it was strokeplay scores would be 15 under or something which took no account of it being matchplay where shotmaking is more adventurous.

Finally, just read what Tiger said and that should end the discussion. I think he knows more than most of us.

[tiderider]

lol ... "It's not the incompetence that astounds me, just the extent of it." ...

 

savage ...

[LICC]

Do you think Tom Doak can consult as an architect without knowing the course conditions and how it sets up? Do you know that Tom Doak designed significant changes to several greens at RM? Do you think he can do that without knowing how the course sets up it’s greens for everyday play and tournament play? Maybe you should look in the mirror regarding knowing little while commenting.

[GoGoErky]

And that is where he says more thank likely Doak consults with the super and not the other way around.

[BNGL]

I’m not sure why it’s quoting raynorfan on this but responding to hawkeye77 what do you wanna know about getting greens fast? I’ve worked US Opens, hosted PGA Tour Invitationals, worked elite high level Jupiter area privates fast firm greens are basically all I know how to produce

[RyanBarathWRX]

 

I will fully admit to being in the "woke" golf crowd, I like fun, fast, open ( little rough) golf courses that present the opportunity to get completely rejected on a shot hit poorly why rewarding well planned shots.

What many misunderstand is the idea of "target golf" actually applies to both tree lined and fast rolling open courses like RM, its just that you have to understand what your target is!

It's not "right at the flag" or "middle of the fairway" - its chess vs checkers, its about planning ahead. Angles matters and it's why a course that is shorter can defend against the bomb and gouge crowd since you can bomb it to the wrong place and not be rewarded.

 

Does this help the average player who will potentially play the course once in their life - maybe not and I fully understand that side of the argument, but from a total piece of work its impossible to argue that this is not the way golf was initially intended to be played - with decision making and having the "ground game" be a huge part of the equation.

[Hawkeye77]

I’ll get a post in the “super” forum (it is super, actually) - thanks!

I’m going to stay away from this one and feel bad raynor kind of got caught in the crossfire, lol!

[Pepperturbo]

Though I haven't played that course, I've played many tournament venues prior and soon after an event. Those of us that have know every course chosen as a tournament venue is taken over by tournmanemt powers to be months prior to the event and slowly made more difficult, as opposed to before when members and guests were allowed play. I don't have to play a venue to know that fact, nor does it mean it's too difficult, least by my standards.

If I can't over come the challenges I face on a course, its MY fault for not measuring up. I am not one to blame the course or others.

[teejaywhy]

Not understanding the link to woke culture in this context. And sorry, not familiar with the Fried Egg. Twitter? No, I've been out of high school for some time now.

I'm not telling anyone how they should think, I just wanted to say what I think, the course looks cool on TV and I would like to play it. Just think it fits my eye as some would say. Looks like a golf course built and maintained for playing golf. Fairway bunkers adjacent to the fairways, greenside bunkers that are greenside, weird stuff like that. Not goofy.

 

 

[CDM]

110% agree on the level / caliber of the courses. Have been planning a trip to see family and researching all the courses in the area. Hoping to play some of the ones you noted. I honestly find the post related to RM and other top courses in that area ludicrous.

Pretty sure there is only a hand full of people in this thread who have played RM that can truly speak to the quality of the course. Yet in today's world the old saying is true "Opinions and A-Holes....everyone has them, but only one should be used for taking a sh*t"

[platgof]

Now have them mention their scores?? And also if the playing conditions were the same? The course was tricked up(dried out) so the International Team would have an advantage. It worked for awhile till the "boys" figured it out and took home the trophy. The European Tour plays on courses like this all the time, so the drier the better for them.

[mallrat]

Do you know how sand based courses play? You can play a true links course in the rain and get similar results just not as extreme. How do you know the course was tricked up? From my understanding Australia does not spray as much as the US and maybe they don’t spray any color.

 

There is a course in Tacoma, WA which averages 41” of rain a year. In the middle of winter they have no problem averaging 12 - 13. What i’m saying is speed and firmness are as much about cultural practices and soil conditions as they are about moisture content.

[mallrat]

Yes I do, 100%. Having been a part of 2 recent renovations, 1 by a very big name designer and 1 by a big name in my region. The architect did not take into account the course conditions at all. They factored in desired result; more difficult/easier bunker, pace of play, etc but it is the Supers job to prepare the course as he sees fit. GM’s and greens committees have more input on course conditions than the designer does

 

How many days do you think he was on site for making the changes? How much work do you think he did? Once the changes are made who do you think makes the decisions on how to take care of the changes (where the collar becomes collection height, how to mow & maintain the bunker edges, what should be rough, step cut (1st cut) & fairway.

 

A little story about designers. The renovation we finished 2 weeks ago saw a big change to a hillside. It is steep and sloped sideways. The designer intended for it to be mowed at fairway height but he didn’t know that fairway mowers would not be able to handle the hill.