|
 |
 |
St Andrews (New), Scotland |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
St Andrews Links
St Andrews
Fife
KY16 9SF
Scotland |  | Old Tom Morris, B Hall Blyth |
|
 | +44 (0) 1334 466666 |  | Follow signs to West Sands |
 |
Golf Club Website
|
 | Book at least one month in advance |  | A.J.R.McGregor |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
| |
 |
|
In the late 1800s, the Old Course was getting too popular, largely due to the extra visitors flocking to St Andrews on the trains. The R&A decided to pay for the New course to be built in return for allocated tee times on the Old. These rights are still enclosed in an Act of Parliament passed in 1894, the precursor to the current Act of 1974, which specifies how the public St Andrews links courses are managed.
The New course was designed by Old Tom Morris and B Hall Blyth and opened for play in 1895. This makes it one of the oldest “new” courses in the world!
Situated adjacent to the Old course, the New is often referred to as the local’s favourite because it is tighter and more defined than the Old. It possesses some similarities to the Old, shared fairways, a double green at the 3rd and 15th and the traditional out and back layout. In many ways it plays and feels better than the Old – it’s certainly less quirky and prettier too, with swathes of dense gorse providing brilliance of seasonal colour.
The fairways are undulating, but they don’t have the same slopes and curves as the Old. Consequently, there are fewer hanging lies. There are some great holes on the New, especially in the dunes around the turn for home. The 10th hole, a tough 464-yard par 4, has been singled out and is featured in the book, the 500 World’s Greatest Golf Holes. Bernard Darwin also liked the 10th, but thought that it was not in the Old course mould. In his 1910 book, The Golf Courses of the British Isles, he wrote: “This is nevertheless a really fine one, running down a narrow gorge between two ranges of hills, with a fine, slashing second shot with the brassey, albeit more or less a blind one”.
 We think that if the New Course could be transported to virtually any other coastal stretch of the British Isles, away from the shadow of its auld mater, it would surely have a higher reputation and be recognised as the excellent links course it is. Who knows? If the course had not been in the shadows for so long and perhaps updated to a similar extent as many other links courses, it might well have played host to an Open Championship.
In 1910, Darwin wrote: “Still there occasionally comes a time when we grow sick to death of the crowding and waiting on the old course, and then we are glad enough to steal away on to the new course and have a round, which will probably be at anyrate a comparatively quick one.” Could this really be the answer as to why the locals prefer the New course?
| |
|
| |
If the above course review article is not accurate, let us know by clicking here |
|
|
|
In the section below, headed “Your Reviews”, are golf course reviews posted by visitors to the Top 100 website. There are no specific rules for reviewing a golf course except you MUST have played the golf course first. Merits of each course are left entirely to your discretion. Important factors, such as course location, condition (or presentation), course difficulty and historical importance are all left for you to judge and we have developed a simple rating system where you can allocate one score to each course. | |
|
|
|
|
 |  | | Average Reviewers Score: |  | | The New Course is a fantastic and fun track. Not near as hard as Jubilee but not as many quirks as the Old. It was the morning round and the Old was the afternoon. Sitting side by side, they are different experiences but the New must be played when in St Andrews.  | | 09 July 2010
| Reply
| | Played the New Course with 3 friends on 05/04/2010 having been unsuccessful in the Old course ballot. several people had said to us that they considered the New better than the old, some of these poeple are members at St Andrews as well. We paid £46 and I feel that this is good value and we were allowed to play off the white tees, although the welcome could have been a bit better rather than just be given a card, pencil and pin positions sheet, whereas playing at Kingsbarns the day before the welcome was totally opposite. The course was in good condition for the time of year and the greens were excellent, probably better than Kingsbarns for condition of surface and pace. We had a greenkeeper in our group and he said they were in good condition given the winter we have had. This was my first time round the New course and enjoyed it, the last few holes played into wind for us, 17th for example was a driver and also hitting a 3 iron from 130yds was a new experience!! All in a good test of golf at a reasonable price, but you can see it is focused completely on the tourists and trying to get as many round as possible in as short a time as possible with guide times for each hole. I am there to enjoy myself having parted with my cash, not to be hassled most of the way round.  | | 07 April 2010
| Reply
| | | played this course a year or two ago and cant quite believe my eyes when i see it being rated within the top 20 courses in scotland! dont get me wrong ts a good course in good condition but it has to be one of the most simple standard courses going. I can not remember any 'great' holes just 18 'nice' ones. good course and worth playing but should NEVER be top 20. | | 09 March 2010
| Reply
| | | This may be a better course than the Old, and it may take several rounds to appreciate it properly, but I just played it last month and have a hard time remembering many holes. I thought the Jubilee was by far the better course. ANDYMAC | | 24 July 2009
| Reply
| | | A great course and one I enjoy more every time I play it. The course was in superb condition and rewarded good shot making. Comfortably mid table in my personal top 100. | | 04 June 2009
| Reply
| | | The New is much tougher than the Old - having more bushes, heather and single, rather than double fairways. It is extremely enjoyable and a great test of golf without a single weak hole. A pleasure. | | 28 April 2009
| Reply
| | | Played in Aug. 2008. Very enjoyable and overall relaxing walk, even though this is a reall good test of golf, especially after first several holes. Highly recommend including this on a St. Andrews itinerary. Wonderful and difficult set of par threes. | | 05 December 2008
| Reply
| | | A good course, but the holes are all very similar...which is one reason why it is not a patch on the Old Course. I would vbe very happy to play it again but I am more likly to try the Jubilee Course (or the new Castle Course) next time. | | 16 April 2008
| Reply
| | Played this course Dec 5th 2007 for £32 (winter rate). Played Muirfield the week before and to be fair although Muirfield does have some excellent holes I think it is overated. I prefered the New Course at St Andrews to Muirfield.
If the Old Course was not next to the New I thnk the New Course would be rated higher. The Greens were in great condition a great suprise considering it was December. The course is a tough course to play (it was blowing a gale when I played it). I can understand some reviews saying that they played to their hadicap because although it is a tough test of golf, if you miss the fairways in the right places it does not punish you too much, miss the fairways in the wrong place and it will tear year heart out!.
Great par threes, good bunkering, a dream to play! | | 06 December 2007
| Reply
| | | Similar to Troon.... starts blah, great holes in the middle, ends with a wimper. | | 05 September 2007
| Reply
| | | Although the New Course is a revered course and thought by some to be tougher than the Old Course I was not 'wowed' as I thought I might be. I found it actually pretty easy and played to my handicap even though I played particularly badly! Driving is not difficult as the fairways aren't severely protected. The par 3's however are all very good and really do offer a stern test with accuracy, length and imagination required. | | 05 June 2007
| Reply
| | | The locals seem to think this is the harder of the St.Andrews courses and a lot prefer it to the Old but I honestly cannot see how. Maybe the New wasn't looking it's best as there were obvious signs of it being overplayed but to me there is a mile of difference between this and the Old (even forgetting the history of the Old). Great to have played it but not one to go back to for me I'm afraid. | | 08 May 2007
| Reply
| | Played in late April for the first time an a little disappointed really. Some have said they prefer the New to the Old course – not even close for me. I have had the pleasure of playing 50+ links courses and the New is good but that is about it. Just cant really put my finger on it but something was missing – played to handicap, so it’s not that. Favourite hole was the long par-3 9th but overall the challenge the course put up was lacking – seemed to get my 36 points without too much problem… | | 04 May 2007
| Reply
| | | Played the New in June 2006- found it to be a relatively stress-free round of golf with some character and a few excellent holes(6,9,several in the middle of the second nine). | | 21 February 2007
| Reply
| | | I played the New Course at the end of a golfing tour to St Andrews and had played the Jubilee a few days before. In terms of experience the Links trust run a very efficient and friendly set up. The new club house is a fantastic facility considering there are no members. One amusing thing about this welcome is the amount of paperwork you get when you tee off:
1. Green fee voucher
2. Souvenir Scorecard
3. Scorecard
4. Pin position card
5. Course planner
6. Pencil
The courses though fail to live up to the St Andrews hype, the Jubilee is a good course with some fine finishing holes but the New just isn’t up there. Even if you appreciate the history and that it is an old fashioned venue, the first few holes have little to commend them. It is only when you reach the estuary that the holes become interesting. The ninth, a long par three, is a beautiful hole. However with the return towards home the interest peters out and it returns to a flat field with bunkers. Having said that the last hole finishes with a grand stand style finish with one of the clubhouse balconies overlooking the green.
In terms of conditioning the course was a mess. Apparently there had been a large competition the previous week and the fairways were an absolute mess. The greens though were very good and could not be faulted with some really tough pin options. One strange event though was that the New was closed on the Friday that we played the Jubilee, this was for the R&A members to practice before their medal ……. Only 6 tee times were used all day ……….. that is disgraceful as a lot of potential golfers were turned away!
The real disappointment for the whole tour though was the way the courses had been set up. They were not set up as true links courses and I think if they had been our whole view of them would be different. When the dunes are as small as they are on the New the defence and the definition of a links course is the wind, the bunkering and the rough for when you stray off line. However right across this links land you were better off in the rough than on the fairway and as a tour we introduced preferred lies on the fairways because they were so bad.
I realise this is a pay and play and there are a lot of tourists that want to get around without to horrific an experience, but when the rough is as benign as this the whole golfing experience is turned into a farce. If I was to return I’d play the Old for history and then disappear to other courses in Fife.
Having said all that if I was on my first visit I would still play it, the history, the atmosphere, the welcome and the paperwork make it all a worth while experience for £55.
| | 21 September 2006
| Reply
| | | played the new on 7th july part of a jolly boys road trip to the home of golf. Found the course to be good if not exceptional personaly prefered the jubilee course!!!!!!!! comparing new course to the old is not unreasonable but for the famous holes on the old you won't know what course you were playing!!!! also try the strathtyrum for some welcomed relief from the tougher tracks!!!!!!! | | 13 July 2006
| Reply
| | | Let's get the record straight. This is a very good golf course. Nearly every hole requires good shot making, if not great. I do believe that it is more difficult than the Old (your poor shots will be dealt with more harshly than on the Old) and is a pleasure to play. Anyone who says that the New is not at least good probably can't appreciate the shot making and good hitting reqiured to get around it. This is links golf at near the highest level and a natural, well though out design by Old Tom. Do not miss this course if you are in St. Andrews. Playing the Old & the New will be a links golf experience you will enjoy and won't forget. | | 04 July 2006
| Reply
| | | I would think this course is overrated. I've played the New Course several times, and none of the holes seem particularly memorable. The course is quite challenging, and the ever present gorse bushes give the course a great deal of definition. The last time I played the course there was a 50 mph wind and it was essentially unplayable. In fact on the par 3 ninth no one could finish because the balls kept getting blown off the greens by the wind. The wind even knocked over my trolley while I was pulling it down the fairway. I love the Old Course, but the New proves to be a disappointment every time I play it.
Richard Smith
Knoxville, Tennessee | | 10 May 2006
| Reply
| | | Surprised at those who rate the New so highly. It does not come close to the Old. Very few memorable holes and many that are humdrum. If this wasn't at St Andrews would it figure high in the list? I think not. | | 04 February 2006
| Reply
| | | Played on a sunny day in late october as part of the 2 courses policy booking that included the Old Course on the next day...
I wasn't fussed at all by the New on the day of play and my opinion got even worse after I played the Old.Divots all over the place!!!A few good holes,but not enough for that course to be rated so highly.And I repeat,pretty poor condition.Very average course..... | | 30 December 2005
| Reply
| | | Played on a sunny morning with a light breeze in February 2005. Unlike the Old course, you are allowed to play in the winter on the New without using a mat on the fairways. It is, in my humble opinion, nothing like its illustrious next door neighbour - no rippling fairways, deep hollows in front of greens, huge undulating double greens, hidden fairway bunkers and tee shots where landing areas are unseen. No, the New is far fairer with wide fairways and flatter greens (though greenside bunkers are just as fierce).There is plenty of gorse around but you have to be pretty errant to get penalised here. Three points of note - First, if nearby Leuchars airfield is having a busy day, earplugs would be advised to minimise the noise of low flying jet aircraft. Second, there is no real view of the town (due to sand dunes and maintenance sheds) to provide a backdrop over the last few holes home which is a real pity as that adds to the atmosphere when playing the Old course. Three, I noted the suppliers of equipment on tees and greens were Canadian - shome mishtake shurely - are there no UK companies who could provide for the home of golf? Finally, the clubhouse facilities are first class and becoming of a world sporting venue - the Links Trust have spent very well here so you can see where the above average green fees are going (though, these fees are very cheap for our American visitors, believe me). If you cannot get on the Old course or cringe at the cost of paying over a hundred quid then the New may be for you at half the price but half (or less) the experience. You get what you pay for... James McCann | | 02 February 2005
| Reply
| | | Better layout than the Old Course but pretty average. Other than the Old Course the St. Andrews courses are a let down for this mecca. Kingsbarns is the highlight of the St. Andrews area by far. St. Andrews needs more high quality golf courses to supplement the Old Course. | | 01 January 2005
| Reply
| | | Whilst it does not have the aura and famous landmarks of the old course , the new is a fantastic course in its own right. It is probably more difficult than the old with defined fairways and as tough a collection of Par 3's as you will find. The Par 3 9th is 225 yards uphill , out of bounds left , gorse right and the day I played it against the breeze. Even if you can not get on to the old you will not be disappointed if you come and play here. | | 06 August 2004
| Reply
| | | For me, like many others, probably better than the Old course. The design feels as though more effort, thought, and most importantly, imagination has been put into this neighbour of nostalgia. The 10th is fantastic, a golfer and designer's hole. Rather put this top of your list of the St Andrews trio, you'll get the same challenge without the hole in your wallet. If you're a historian golfer, cough up and go next door. | | 01 June 2004
| Reply
| | | In my experience, a harder challenge than its illustrious neighbour.
One of the Par 3s is either hit the green, or finish in gorse. Well worth a visit, even if the Old Course is not available. | | 27 May 2004
| Reply
| | | St.Andrews. Just the mention of the name fills you with a mix of excitement and apprehension of treading the hallowed turf. The New course for me was a wonderful example of how golf was played. Definition supplied by nature and the finishing touches added by man. It is a while since I played and I must admit to not having the best of days. For me there were not enough memorable holes but just the experience of being out on the links land of St.Andrews is a privilege. If this were not the so called home of golf, I do not believe it would rank so highly, but that said, what are we without tradition and history. Worth a visit, but not one of my favourite links courses of the British Isles. | | 19 May 2004
| Reply
| | | Fantastic underated links. Better value than the Old and just as good if not better. Seems more like a golf course to me. | | 01 April 2004
| Reply
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
