Turf wars: Passion versus protection

Kevin Markham
|
|

Royal Dublin - Image: Paul O'Byrne

Kevin Markham

Feature Interviews

Latest Stories

We are – I think it’s fair to say – very protective of our home courses. No one likes to hear them criticised by a visitor, even if we might agree with those criticisms during the post-round drink.

When I first wrote Hooked, I was highly opinionated. I hammered some courses so badly that members from my home club were verbally abused when visiting said clubs. No, I’m not kidding. That’s how protective people can be.

But what happens when your home course, or one you love, decides it’s time for change? What if the words “golf course architect” are mentioned in the same conversation? Listen for the sharp intakes of breath, because this takes things to a whole different level, far beyond complaining about uneven tee boxes or slow green speeds.

We can all agree that courses do, on occasion, require important work by an architect. An obvious example is a re-bunkering programme to improve strategic qualities and/or drainage (e.g., Monkstown, Royal Dublin, Blainroe), and few would vote against such change.

But what about redesigning or constructing new holes, changing the layout, or overhauling green complexes? In recent years, there have been large projects at The Island, County Sligo, Portstewart, Druids Glen, Dromoland Castle, and Jameson Links – not to mention the major changes to Royal Portrush ahead of the 2019 Open. As a member, I suspect you’ll quibble over certain details or be dead set against a particular element. Perhaps this is when your protective instincts truly kick in.

I hear you… because, as someone who writes a lot about golf courses, I’m passionate about many of these places, and not every change is for the better. The rationale might be sound, the work could be exceptional, but the end result may not be as desirable as you – or the club – would like.

Using the examples listed above – and this is me back to my opinionated self – I didn’t like the changes made to County Sligo in recent years. I know what the changes were intended to achieve, but they didn’t fit with what was already there. From being one of my favourite courses, it took a backwards step. I stress that this is my opinion, because I know some will be unhappy with me saying this – but County Sligo is a Harry Colt course, and that’s its own reward. Martin Ebert is now working with the club and making changes that will unfold over the next few years.

And since Ebert is mentioned, The Island is another intriguing quandary. He rerouted the front nine and added two new holes (8 and 9) in 2020. Did these changes make it a better course? Yes, probably. Did they make it a more interesting course? In my opinion, absolutely not. The eight-hole par-4 start was remarkable and unique in Irish golf, emphasising how varied and entertaining par-4s could be. The quirk of the old 7th and 8th has vanished, replaced by the muscular swagger of the two new holes.

When I told an American writer friend that the old 8th was to go, we agreed we’d lie in front of the diggers to stop it happening. That’s my protective streak, and I was genuinely disappointed that it was removed. There’s no question that The Island is now better balanced and has more championship intent, but sometimes the heart and soul of a course can too easily be lost in a quest to meet modern demands.

Still, with the way clubs and committees are evolving, at least we don’t have to contend with the rogue captain who insists that a tree or bunker is removed because he’s fed up with his weekly encounter. That generates a whole different level of fury.

Stay ahead of the game. Subscribe to our newsletter to get the latest Irish Golfer news straight to your inbox!

More News

Leave a comment


The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy & Terms of Service apply.