A few months back I played a round in Tasmania, Australia at Barnbougle Dunes. The course is so aesthetically captivating but yet very unforgiving. I'm not a top golfer by any means and do swing a few balls wide now and again... so as you can imaging my score was a little higher than I am normally used to. So in one hand the course was so nice but the other hand it was not a course I could shoot my best score on.
After getting back home to the Gold Coast and having a few rounds on my usual courses I felt quite the reverse of the experience in Tasmania. I was shooting much better scores but the courses that I was playing were no where near as 'nice'.
The other feature that always comes to mind is the green fee's. I think Barnbougle Dunes was like 3 times the costs of the courses I play at home...!
Now if I eliminated the green fees from the equation I think I would sacrifice the good scores and in turn lose a few more balls to regularly play at Barnbougle but if I incorporate the x3 green fees, I would definitely be more inclined to stay at home.
I guess what I'm trying to get at by the above is how would you rate a course? As in what aspects would you use to give it an overall ranking or define the appropriate course for 1) the social golfer 2) the seasoned golfer and 3) the pro... or something similar.
Here is a few that I have mentioned above that we should be able to add onto:
1) Green Fees
2) Aesthetics (aww factor)
3) Difficulty, which could probably be broken down further like:
- Layout, length, water
- Undulation / Flatness of greens and fairways
P.S. This is what we were doing for ‘some’ of the day at Barnbougle haha…