Links vs. Standard courses.

[brj872]

Hi all, just wondering the opinion of this site on whether you think a links style course, or a more traditional narrow, tree lined course is more of a challenge? Personally, my home course is one of the oldest links style courses in Australia. While it does increase in difficulty with strong winds, I find it far too forgiving of errant drives/shots and am often able to save par without playing from that particular holes fairway. When there is no wind the course is made to score and I find myself missing the course I grew up playing, an 18 hole championship course that was once in the top 100 in Australia and hosted numerous Aus/NZ womens PGA events. It had lots of trees.

[geauxforbroke]

I don't think you can say that one is categorically more difficult.

[phan52]

The definition of a "links style" course is not necessarily one without trees. A "links style" course is one that follows a general path, like 9 outward and 9 back (National Golf Links of America in Southampton, Long Island is a perfect example of a "links style" course).

As far as trees are concerned, I can attest that trees are not necessary to define a good gold course. Oakmont is a perfect example. There is not a single tree in play on that golf course anymore and it still stands as one of the best championship courses in the world. My home course, while still having a decent amount of trees, has cut down over 1,200 trees (mostly pines) over the last six years and the scores have not reflected it as easier. In fact, the course is playing more difficult because getting rid of all the trees has significantly improved turf conditions and our rough is more difficult than anytime in my memory. We have a championship golf course today pretty much as it was originally intended in 1908.

[geauxforbroke]

  phan52 said:

Originally Posted by phan52

The definition of a "links style" course is not necessarily one without trees. A "links style" course is one that follows a general path, like 9 outward and 9 back (National Golf Links of America in Southampton, Long Island is a perfect example of a "links style" course).

Even more precisely, a links course is one in which the outward holes run in a (nearly) straight line away from the clubhouse, and the back nine runs parallel back to the starting point.

I think what the OP is referencing is traditional Scottish/ocean-side "links" course a la St. Andrew, Carnoustie, Prestwick etc.

[iacas]

I vote neither.

[David in FL]

I vote both.

A well designed course is challenging, period.

[MS256]

I voted both even though I haven't played what would probably be considered a true links style course. I've played a few that had links style charateristics (at least for part of the course) and another that required links style play into the greens.

I enjoy almost any course if I'm playing OK and I hate almost any course if I'm not.

[brj872]

Yeah I guess you could move the focus from the correct definition of course types to:

• A coastal course that is open, and often prone to 30 km/h + winds.

• A course that is a lot more enclosed, narrow and shielded by trees, and more punishing of (overly) wayward shots.

The thought just occurred to me today, as I am playing a Melbourne sandbelt course on the weekend, which will be quite different to the coastal links style of my home course.