Gleneagles questions

[Bbo569]

I after a great trip to Scotland earlier this year, my crew is headed back in 2023. We are staying in the Fife area the whole time, but are going to trek out for one day.  We are planning to do 36 one day as well, so my thoughts were to take a day trip to Gleneagles and potentially play 36 there to get the most out of making the drive. We are going to play the Kings as option 1. However a couple of questions for those who have played these courses. 
 

1. Are the elevation changes at these courses too dramatic that walking 36 would wipe you out?

2. With it being a resort, is the buggy policy different than other Scotland courses to save legs?

3. If doing 36 with Kings being a given, do you play Queens or PGA Centenary?

 

Our last trip we played 10 rounds over 8 days and had no issues, but if we played a hilly course like Castle we stayed away from doing 36 on that day. Thanks in advance for any advice!

[hammergolf]

Gleneagles is a tough walk. It is even more hilly than The Castle Course. Walking 36 there would require some endurance for sure. I believe they do have carts there, but it’s been a few years since I played there. I would recommend the King and Queen courses personally. The Centenary is more of a modern style that doesn’t have the feel of the other two. 

[Bogeydram]

Local speaking here (member @ Auchterarder which adjoins the nearby PGA Cenetenary Course) but have played all the Gleneagles courses multiple times. Personally, I would play the Queens in the morning to get you familiarised with the conditions / speed of greens etc. and play the Kings (hosted last year's Seniors Open won by Darren Clarke plus previous Scottish Opens and LPGA events which are also played on this course) in the afternoon. Enjoy a long lunch in the Dormy House. Excellent practice facilities and range across the road at the PGA Centre. Both the Queens and Kings are relatively easy walking courses but take a pull trolley if you have a heavy bag. Kings and Queens have very short walks between tee and green as well. Kings is a bit undulating over first 4 and last 4 but once you are out on the plateau it is a very pleasant walk with some great views. The PGA Centenary Course (formerly the Monarchs Course which hosted the Ryder Cup and previous European Tour events including the Johnnie Walker classic) is very much a cart course and has been designed as such with long tracks between tee and green - the caddies hate walking this course for that reason. From a personal perspective, Gleneagles is the best inland course in Scotland by a distance IMO - only Blairgowrie comes close. Enjoy your trip.

 

[El Gringo]

What he said 👆. I would only add that Kings is one of the best inland courses in GB&I. A delightful course.

[sabram]

Don't even consider the Centenary. It's not in the same league as the Kings and Queens. Walking 36, consider taking a caddy for your second round.

[scott_Donald]

I like gleneagles; personally I would do 18 there and enjoy what the place has to offer, great food and about 40 activities. Kings is a great course, pre CO vid I went there yearly as my dad stayed there each year, would take kings 4 times out of 5 over the centenary, queens has character but nothing to write home about. 

Do 36 in fife if you really want to do that much. Personally if you are worried about walking 36 then you really are not that fit and just stick to 18. 

[Bbo569]

On 1/12/2023 at 4:43 PM, scott_Donald said:

I like gleneagles; personally I would do 18 there and enjoy what the place has to offer, great food and about 40 activities. Kings is a great course, pre CO vid I went there yearly as my dad stayed there each year, would take kings 4 times out of 5 over the centenary, queens has character but nothing to write home about. 

Do 36 in fife if you really want to do that much. Personally if you are worried about walking 36 then you really are not that fit and just stick to 18. 

You obviously read my OP carefully.  Not worried about playing 36.  However if I am going to do 36, from an enjoyment standpoint of not running ourselves ragged,  I would still prefer to not hit hills all day long when there are other easy courses to walk.

[scott_Donald]

28 minutes ago, Bbo569 said:

You obviously read my OP carefully.  Not worried about playing 36.  However if I am going to do 36, from an enjoyment standpoint of not running ourselves ragged,  I would still prefer to not hit hills all day long when there are other easy courses to walk.

 

Of course I read it or I would not have given my opinion.

 

I would never advise running whilst golfing......

[hammergolf]

4 hours ago, Bbo569 said:

You obviously read my OP carefully.  Not worried about playing 36.  However if I am going to do 36, from an enjoyment standpoint of not running ourselves ragged,  I would still prefer to not hit hills all day long when there are other easy courses to walk.

You literally said “ We are planning to do 36 one day as well, so my thoughts were to take a day trip to Gleneagles and potentially play 36 there to get the most out of making the drive.” So its pretty easy to see why @scott_Donaldand myself advised against it. We’re both just giving you our opinion on a question that you asked for, not sure why you give a response like that…..

[Bbo569]

19 hours ago, hammergolf said:

You literally said “ We are planning to do 36 one day as well, so my thoughts were to take a day trip to Gleneagles and potentially play 36 there to get the most out of making the drive.” So its pretty easy to see why @scott_Donaldand myself advised against it. We’re both just giving you our opinion on a question that you asked for, not sure why you give a response like that…..

Response wasn't to you.  It was to Donald.  I literally stated we are capable of walking multiple rounds in a short period and time including 36.  The intent of this thread was to determine the elevations at Gleneagles because we would still prefer to do 36 on courses that aren't constantly up and down hills.  Donald then went with we were worried about 36 somehow

[scott_Donald]

5 minutes ago, Bbo569 said:

Response wasn't to you.  It was to Donald.  I literally stated we are capable of walking multiple rounds in a short period and time including 36.  The intent of this thread was to determine the elevations at Gleneagles because we would still prefer to do 36 on courses that aren't constantly up and down hills.  Donald then went with we were worried about 36 somehow

 

You don't want to walk hilly 36 holes. 

 

https://en-ie.topographic-map.com/map-f7783l/Gleneagles/

 

I have never used a buggy at Gleneagles, I would happily walk 36 holes there carrying my Vessel Players 3 bag with 14 clubs in it. I think even my 71 year old father would walk 36 there with his electric push cart. They have a great half way house at the turn for the Kings. 

 

I said that if you are really worried about it then don't play 36, play 18. 

 

36 holes in a day is better spent imo at another part of your trip.

 

Gleneagles as a resort has far more than just golf. Their Michelin 2 star restaurant just got voted best restaurant in the UK this week. I personally am not a fan(too fancy for me) of it and prefer the conservatory area. 

[hammergolf]

5 hours ago, scott_Donald said:

 

You don't want to walk hilly 36 holes. 

 

https://en-ie.topographic-map.com/map-f7783l/Gleneagles/

 

I have never used a buggy at Gleneagles, I would happily walk 36 holes there carrying my Vessel Players 3 bag with 14 clubs in it. I think even my 71 year old father would walk 36 there with his electric push cart. They have a great half way house at the turn for the Kings. 

 

I said that if you are really worried about it then don't play 36, play 18. 

 

36 holes in a day is better spent imo at another part of your trip.

 

Gleneagles as a resort has far more than just golf. Their Michelin 2 star restaurant just got voted best restaurant in the UK this week. I personally am not a fan(too fancy for me) of it and prefer the conservatory area. 

SMH, guy literally asks about the possibility of walking 36 at Gleneagles. You advise him it’s a tough walk and you’re given a snarky comment about reading… 

[scott_Donald]

14 hours ago, hammergolf said:

SMH, guy literally asks about the possibility of walking 36 at Gleneagles. You advise him it’s a tough walk and you’re given a snarky comment about reading… 

 

In all honesty it isn't a tough walk. Its a pleasant walk.

 

Gullaine 1 is a harder walk than the Kings course. My dad at 70 managed Gullaine 1, lunch, Muirfield in August last year fine; yes he was tired but he managed it. 

 

One thing Scotland has over US is the lack of heat. Some courses I see in Texas(having lived there) I would not walk at all - La Cantera Palmer Course in San Antonio for example I have never walked it as that is on a hill. I walked all my rounds in Houston though unless I wasn't allowed(too wet to walk some times!!!! - Bizarre) I would walk in the middle of Summer on Memorial every Wednesday and I would get told by so many folk I was mad but I was fine, lots of water and an umbrella. I golf much better, enjoy it more and feels natural to walk. 

 

Just thinking there when we play inter club formal fixtures its 36 holes in a day normally. There is a match against Royal St Ports in May(still bitter in how the team happens to be two groups of friends but that is another story) and they are doing practice round day 1, day 2 36 holes, day 3 18 holes. Some of the members of the team are certainly not the fittest!

 

Just think walking is golf here and in the USA its a rarity.

[Bbo569]

On 1/18/2023 at 1:55 PM, hammergolf said:

SMH, guy literally asks about the possibility of walking 36 at Gleneagles. You advise him it’s a tough walk and you’re given a snarky comment about reading… 

Never asked about the possibility of it.  We are more than capable as mentioned in the OP.  The question was about how severe the terrain was at those courses as we would prefer to save 36 for easier to walk courses if so.  Then the comment was made that we if had thoughts we weren't fit enough which again isn't an issue.  It is a matter of preference as we are only going to do 36 holes a few days and would prefer it to be on flatter courses since we will be playing alot of golf.  It isn't that hard to see the difference in those two concepts, but I guess I was wrong.

[El Gringo]

8 minutes ago, Bbo569 said:

Never asked about the possibility of it.  We are more than capable as mentioned in the OP.  The question was about how severe the terrain was at those courses as we would prefer to save 36 for easier to walk courses if so.  Then the comment was made that we if had thoughts we weren't fit enough which again isn't an issue.  It is a matter of preference as we are only going to do 36 holes a few days and would prefer it to be on flatter courses since we will be playing alot of golf.  It isn't that hard to see the difference in those two concepts, but I guess I was wrong.

If you have flatter 36 hole a day options than Gleneagles than do it. Gleneagles is not that far from Fife to worry about maximising the windshield time. The only reason I can see for 36 at Gleneagles is the possibility of a good 36 hole deal. I don't know if they have one, but it's worth checking into given the stiff greenfee. 

[FifeRiviera]

I wouldnt include the PGA in a 36 but otherwise it is probably the best ides for 36.

[hammergolf]

5 hours ago, Bbo569 said:

Never asked about the possibility of it.  We are more than capable as mentioned in the OP.  The question was about how severe the terrain was at those courses as we would prefer to save 36 for easier to walk courses if so.  Then the comment was made that we if had thoughts we weren't fit enough which again isn't an issue.  It is a matter of preference as we are only going to do 36 holes a few days and would prefer it to be on flatter courses since we will be playing alot of golf.  It isn't that hard to see the difference in those two concepts, but I guess I was wrong.

The response wasn’t to you…