ARE ENGLAND’S INLAND COURSES BETTER THAN ITS LINKS?
Sounds sacrilegious, but with 70 inland courses in the 100 and 31 in the top 50, it might be time to give credit to the staggering depth and variety of England’s inland golf
There is little doubt course rankings favour links courses over any other form of the game, and we are no different.
Links have such an allure – with golfers, with architects, with photographers and with the industry as a whole – that clubs even try to suggest their course is a links when it clearly isn’t. In Scotland, Ireland and Wales, links dominate rankings both in terms of quality and quantity, and no-one would argue that seaside courses don’t form the best collection in those countries.
Many might assume it’s the same in England, with links of the quality of Birkdale, Lytham, Silloth, Rye, St Enodoc and Sandwich to name but just six. But compiling this Top 100 has made us wonder whether the bewildering depth and variety of inland golf in England makes it even better.
The great heathlands of Surrey, Berkshire and West Yorkshire will naturally spring to mind when we suggest this – but it’s not just those pine and heather utopias. It is also the woodlands, the moorlands, the downlands, the ingenious parklands and the eccentric courses that are frankly impossible to characterise.
We asked three students of golf in England to assess the links vs inland debate: Mike Clayton, partner at Clayton, Devries & Pont; Robin Hiseman of European Golf Design; and Clyde Johnson of Cunnin’ Golf and a long-time Golf World T100 panellist. The results are fascinating and insightful...
Would you agree England’s inland courses are the equal of, or in fact better than, its links?
Robin Hiseman Yes, I would. I don’t think it’s even close. The inland courses are collectively MUCH better. Not to take anything away from the fine links England has, but proportionately, England doesn’t have anything like as many links per mile of coastline as either Scotland or Ireland and those which we do have are generally not as dramatic.
Clyde Johnson The strength in English golf really lies in the diversity of its courses, especially among those found away from the coast. Out of necessity, but also with the aim of recreating the adventure of seaside golf, many of our inland courses were laid over idiosyncratic tracts of land. That these courses embrace and tackle their landscapes leaves us with an eclectic body of playing experiences – features, holes and layouts that exhibit a sense of place and are very much their own.
Mike Clayton I think it’s pointless to really argue which is best – the links or the ‘inland’ courses – because in their own way they all contribute to English golf being, in my opinion, the best in the world for its mix, variety and quality.
Can you think of a country with a better variety to its inland courses, given the range of heathlands, moorlands and parklands?
MC America is pretty good – Sand Hills and Chicago are wildly contrasting courses. Oakmont is great. They don’t have heathland courses in the fashion of Sunningdale, but they do have courses – The Valley Club of Montecito would be one– most would consider ‘cousins’, just as the Sandbelt courses in Melbourne are cousins of the heathlands. Many think American golf is what they see on TV every week courtesy of the PGA Tour, but that’s not really
American golf any more than Donald Trump is a politician.
RH I think the USA could make a good case for being as diverse, but given it is 76 times larger than England you’d have to travel a lot further to see all the variety it has to offer. I can’t think of a country so small with such variety. Even within the parkland tag, there are the subgenre of courses developed from former farmland and those within old country estates. Then you’ve got downland, common land and forest courses.
CJ It’s not just heathland, moorland and parklands. A fair chunk of England’s courses are near-impossible to characterise, and for the better.
Do you think there is a natural tendency for everyone to favour links over inland courses?
MC Probably – in part because The Open is always played on links and the best ones are amazing places to play and it’s the ideal ground. But for playing every day, it’s probably nicer to get out of the wind and the tough weather. There are few nicer days spent golfing than one at Swinley Forest.
RH Yes, and I favour them too, but I know enough people who just don’t get the appeal of links.
CJ Golf was borne out of the linksland, and with good reason. Firm and fast conditions, the challenge of the wind, an almost infinite array of lies aren’t always replicated inland... not to mention, the sea views. Inland golf does bring added textural interest and the opportunity to take on broader topography and greater elevation change.
Can you give an appreciation of the architectural and playing merits of heathlands?
MC One perhaps undervalued piece of the heathlands is the quality of the roughs – the off-fairway areas including the heather. Do the playing merits surpass the links? Not much surpasses the playing merits of the Old Course from the 11th hole to the end – there might be no better run of holes in the game. The links have their own unique beauty – but the serenity of the heathlands is remarkable. It’s classic, classy golf. The turf on both is beautiful to play from.
RH The gently undulating terrain of heathlands compared to the rugged and random links means that the architect is better able to explore a heathland site in the way they want, rather than being constrained and directed by severe topography or flood plains. They can set up longer sight lines and dramatic vistas. There’s often plenty of undulation to make the fairways interesting and to give variety for the greens and hazards.
CJ Heather can create the perfect strategic hazard over less rumpled ground, jutting into and/or angling across playing lines in place of more formalised features. Because of the era of their creation, heathlands often exhibit a more polished ‘architecture’ – less random, but more controlled, strategically sound design – and more artistry.
Do the likes of Royal Worlington, Newmarket and Little Aston show that parklands needn’t be the unfashionable type of course they probably now are?
MC Of the three, I’ve only played Worlington and I love it. Maybe it’s unfashionable to some, but to many it’s one of the ‘coolest’ places in golf. Simple. No pretension. Fun holes and an easy walk. No one blinks at 4, 5 and 6 – the crossover holes – because they work and make for much better golf than if a committee had rejected the idea and forced the architect to do something else. Play it in an hour and a bit. Amazing clubhouse. What’s not to like?
RH Parkland courses don’t get a lot of love in the rankings, which is hardly surprising given how many outstanding links and heathland courses the UK has, but I think they’re unfairly maligned by a lot of critics. There are some truly excellent parkland courses in England. Places like Knole Park, Tandridge, Effingham and Cowdray Park for instance, or any number of the modern designs from the ’80s onwards, which I think give an exciting contrast to the traditional parkland courses. This is the genre where you’re most likely to uncover something unheralded that is worthy of attention.
CJ I’m not sure parkland golf is particularly unfashionable. Parkland courses have suffered most from uniform tree planting and homogenised bunker schemes, to the detriment of their playing and visual interest. The fact is, compelling golf can be found on almost any landscape.
In Kington, Cleeve Hill, Huntercombe and Painswick, does England have courses of unique architectural appeal and character, and should they be more appreciated?
RH Yes. There are a bunch of courses that are true originals and I love them all. You can add the likes of Minchinhampton, Church Stretton, Bramshaw, Halifax and Cavendish to that list and there are plenty more besides. Yes, they should be more appreciated, but I can understand why ‘rustic’ golf among the cattle and sheep doesn’t appeal to everyone. I’d encourage everybody to make a point of playing all these courses. They’ve given me several of my most memorable golfing days, easily up there with the most-acclaimed courses in England and at a fraction of the cost.
CJ They are sometimes overlooked because of their more naturalised maintenance regimes, but more often because they lack convention. Some like their golf straightaway, which is fine, but I will always be drawn to holes or courses that are out of the ordinary. And you can add Yelverton to that list.
MC To my shame, I’ve never seen any of them but they are top of my list to visit once the pandemic allows.
How many inland courses feature in your personal England Top 10?
MC Tricky question. Probably six or seven. Alwoodley, Ganton, Notts, Sunningdale New and Old, Swinley Forest. I’ve never seen Woodhall Spa. And, once properly restored, The Addington will be right up there. Hoylake, Royal St George’s, Royal Lytham and Birkdale would be my pretty predictable pick of the links. But it’s an embarrassment of riches.
RH It’s not a list I’ve given that much thought to, but maybe more than half of my England Top 10 are inland. I’ve not yet played Royal St George’s, so I’d expect that to take a spot one day, but I reckon courses like Beau Desert, Cavendish and Cleeve Hill would be staking a claim. Not necessarily the best, but they’re the places I most like to go back to. I really rate the classic heathland tracks, but I don’t have a craving to play them. I’m happier at Cleeve Hill than St George’s Hill!
CJ In an England top 10? The top end is really difficult to separate, but the answer is five or six, or maybe even seven.