News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2004, 08:52:07 PM »
Brian Gracely,

Then you were paying attention to the female form and her response and not golf course architecture and the bounce of the ball.

Mike Benham,

No, I've never played those courses, I've never been outside of Hoboken, that's why I started this thread, to discuss courses that I've never seen.  But, I pledge to discuss them in depth, especially their penal or punitive nature.

Could you answer my question ?

What penal courses do golfers flock to in the U.S. ?
And, how are those courses penal ?

Matt Ward,

I'll accept your amendment to my original post.

You get the drift of what I'm posing.

The conditions and architecture are unique enough to make people travel thousands of miles to play, but, the same people don't want to play those conditions or confront that architecture at their home course, WHY ?

TEPaul

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #26 on: October 20, 2004, 09:36:33 PM »
"The conditions and architecture are unique enough to make people travel thousands of miles to play, but, the same people don't want to play those conditions or confront that architecture at their home course, WHY?"

Pat:

Probably because they like the variety. I do. It's the "Big World" theory of golf architecture. The deal is in the differences---there's lots of things out there for everyone---as it should be in golf!  ;)

A_Clay_Man

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #27 on: October 20, 2004, 09:39:13 PM »
How does quirk fit into the subtext of this thread?

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #28 on: October 20, 2004, 09:57:47 PM »
I love going there and playing most of their courses.

I never cared for their food, lodging or weather, so I always promise myself I'll never go back, and then I do, so something must be very special there.
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #29 on: October 20, 2004, 10:16:17 PM »
Mr. Mucci-

It would appear that the questions you have raised have been "asked and answered' multiples times already.

It is obvious from the success of Bandon/Pacific Dunes, Sand Hills (and its offspring under construction/planning in Nebraska, Colorado, South Dakota), Rustic Canyon, and the many "faux links" recently built that there is a substantial market/appetite here in the US for courses that offer a similar golf experience/playing style to many of the courses in GB&I. Whether they are penal or not depends on how one defines penal. My definition of the nature of those courses is described in my prior post. What is your definition of penal?

If one defines penal as forced carries over, OB/hazard stakes, losing a couple of sleeves of golf balls per round, etc., there are many courses in the U.S. that are also wildly successful -
PGA West Stadium Course, TPC Sawgrass, and the majority of courses in Scottsdale/Las Vegas being the most obvious suspects.

DT
     

Lloyd_Cole

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #30 on: October 20, 2004, 10:33:06 PM »
The term 'penal' becomes quite interesting in this context. Fun topic. If you can hit it straight mostly, play from the right tees, and have any brain at all, almost none of the the classic links are penal. However if you can't hit it straight, or refuse to accept your limitations, then any course at all is penal, dunes, heather or lakes, it's a lost ball.
Why we want to go over there is another question. As an ex-pat, maybe I'm biased. Unless you have access to the Merions and Seminoles, I think the golf is just better over there. And I'd guess 95% of the tourists don't have that access.

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #31 on: October 20, 2004, 11:11:14 PM »
Tom Huckaby, Brian and Scott,

Romance my ass.

Let's see, when was the last time a guy or group of guys told you that they were going to Scotland to play those courses for the romantic interlude they hoped to have ??

When has anyone returned from a golfing trip to Scotland and informed you that they had one of the great romantic experiences of their life ??

Get with the program, you know what the question's about.

Patrick,

Go back and read my original (only) post.  Nowhere did I mention the word romance.  How did I get lumped in there?  Even if you made the (very) broad leap and considered my phrase "appreciation of the game's origins" to be "romance", I prefaced it with "regardless of their appreciaton of the game's origins."

And what's with referring to "romance" in the female version of the word?  Obviously they weren't talking about female romance.  Every single person (except you, apparently) who read their posts knew they weren't talking about female romance.  To quote you: "Get with the program, you know what the question's about."

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2004, 01:12:46 AM »
Great thread!

For me, the penal nature of the courses in the UK are vastly different than that of most US courses.  Here penal is typified by having water come into play on nearly every hole, or steep ravines filled with trees lining one or both sides of the fairway of every hole, or OB stakes "protecting" housing.  In the worst examples, you get a nice mix of all three.  A lot of it seems almost gratuitous -- it may be environmental regulations that keep a lot of wetlands on the property, but when you play through the wetlands on hole after hole and have to keep the ball on the straight and narrow lest it cost you a stroke, it just gets aggravating to those of us who have trouble keeping to the straight and narrow for 18 consecutive holes!

Contrast that with the UK courses, where the water hazards are usually a sea, OB stakes are only on the boundaries of the property that may only come into play on a small number of holes, and steep ravines are rarely include thick impenetrable forests!  You don't hit a lot of shots where you know you screwed, though you may strongly suspect it.  There is always a chance you may stumble upon your ball in the waist high grass if you give a quick look, or find your ball that goes into the thick of the gorse in a lucky Ernie "Christmas Tree" lie.

The courses that do have some more US style penal elements often do them better than most US courses.  Who can really complain about the most intimidating tee shot in golf, Old Head's 12th from the back, given the setting?  If you took that 200+ foot drop into the ocean and replaced it with a slightly stinky swamp at 3' below tee level, that blind uphill tee shot over the ocean and above the cliffs would lose all its charm and suddenly become "ridiculous" and "unfair".
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #33 on: October 21, 2004, 09:53:12 AM »
Scott Burroughs,

I got engaged on the steps of the Turnberry hotel with the sun setting over Ailsa Craig.  My wife would probably tell you it was pretty romantic.

Scott, perhaps this quote from Brian will assists you in honing your reading comprehension skills, or jogging your memory about females and romance.

TEPaul,

Most like variety, but if you had your druthers, would you not prefer to have TOC as your home course ?  Would not Troon, Turnberry, Carnoustie and others have that same appeal.

You're fortunate, you belong to a classic course with several pedegrees, namely, Ross and Maxwell.  But, most of us don't enjoy the architecture of those two men as the foundation of our home courses.

I don't think the answer lies in the quest for variety.

I could play NGLA or TOC every day of my life and not be bored, nor would I have the need to seek more variety.

Golfers travel thousands of miles, encounter hostile weather, and golf courses with unique, often penal features, yet those same golfers don't want their home courses to replicate those features, architecture and playing conditions.

As an example, in the U.S. I noticed a trend at a number of courses to create a buffer of rough in front of crossing water hazards.  In the UK it seems they mow these as fairway right up to the hazard.

In addition, I see more and more bunkers with that same buffer of rough in front of the bunkers, where in the UK I noticed the fairways mowed right up to those bunkers.

There seems to be a greater desire to insert safety nets within the architecture, whether it be benign bunkers, buffers of rough in front of hazards, or, at the extreme, the removal of hazards, especially bunkers.

Bunker removal seems to be the most prevalent architectural change that appears at most courses.  And, when asked why the bunker was removed, fairness or excessive difficulty (not defined) are the reasons offered most.

David  Tepper,

You're not telling me that you find the features and conditions at Bandon Dunes and Pacific Dunes as penal, are you ?

Have you played both courses ?

Have you ever sliced a ball off the 1st tee at Prestwick, or off of the 1st, 5th, 6th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th or 18th at TOC ?
How about a few slices at Troon, especially on the first few holes or 15 and 16, or a ball hit just over # 18 ?
A few hooks at Turnberry and Carnoustie will have the same results, OUT OF PLAY.

There's as much OB, beach and water at these courses and others, as any in America.

How many golfers flock to TPC Sawgrass, PGA West Stadium and  Scottsdale/Las Vegas in the summer, or when the weather is bad ?  Those places are winter get a ways for northerners who prefer warmer climates, and not even remotely close to Scotland's golf destinations in appeal, despite the difficulty in getting there, currency exchange and travel costs.

You state that going to Rustic Canyon, Pacific Dunes, Bandon Dunes, Sand Hills and courses not even built in Nebraska, offers a similar golfing experience to going to the UK, well, I have to ask, how many of the above courses, not including the ones not yet built, have you played ?

And, which course in the UK have you played ?

Could you tell me how a round at Pacific Dunes presents a similar golfing challenge, experience and feel as a round at TOC ?

It's obvious that you don't understand the issue.

Adam Clayman,

I think quirk is a factor.  But what seems to be quirk to tourists is standard fare to the locals.

Quirk may be an unfamiliar feature, a feature that baffles or frustrates the golfer, and I can see that golfer not wanting to encounter that feature on a daily basis...... because they are spoiled, or deprived, whatever you prefer.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2004, 10:20:13 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

TEPaul

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #34 on: October 21, 2004, 10:13:03 AM »
"TEPaul,
Most like variety, but if you had your druthers, would you not prefer to have TOC as your home course ?  Would not Troon, Turnberry, Carnoustie and others not have that same appeal."

No, I would not prefer TOC as my home course in this country. I'd prefer TOC, if I belonged to it, right where it is---in Scotland!

"You're fortunate, you belong to a classic course with several pedegrees, namely, Ross and Maxwell.  But, most of us don't enjoy the architecture of those two men as the foundation of our home courses."

Ross and Maxwell were both excellent architects and we're lucky we have their pedigrees but neither one of them built golf courses in this country in the style of TOC. A good example of the proper way to bring TOC to this country is what Mackenzie and Jones did at ANGC. Utilize many of the very same and unique "principles" as TOC (as they dedicatedly did) but it does not have to look anything like TOC--as it never did---on purpose! It's not in the linksland, it's in an old fruit orchard in Georgia that inherently looks nothing at all like TOC.

"I don't think the answer lies in the quest for variety."

I think the answer does lie in a quest for variety and it should lie in a quest for variety. In my mind the inherent strength of the entire art of golf architecture lies in the wide spectrum of the differences in the art which of course is basically the definition of variety!


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #35 on: October 21, 2004, 10:29:55 AM »
TEPaul,

I have to tell you that I don't see TOC or it's architectural principles imbued within the architecture at ANGC, and I've played both courses.

But, I will take another look at ANGC in that context, upon my next visit.

If a duplicate TOC existed on the Jersey shore, I'd almost guarantee that you'd be a member, that your dad and grand dad would have been members, and that you'd invite me to play with you on a regular basis.  In fact, that's where we'd hold my winter GCA.com get togethers.  And, if you'd prefer that it be on Long Island, that's okay with me too.

With respect to your quest for, or championing of, VARIETY.

Your course doesn't alter its architecture daily, it's permanent.
The conditions and set up may vary, but day in and day out it's architecture is static.  And as such, no variety exists within the landform or footpad of your golf course.

I for one, would be perfectly content to have TOC, NGLA or many other courses as the course I play, to the exclusion of others, for the rest of my life.

But, I like the punitive nature of bunkers and their placement.

I like the idea of having to navigate a golf course in a more dramatic or exaggerated form of play, and I find that penal hazards, penal architecture provides that incentive.

I don't want bunkers I can putt out of, or grass buffers stopping my ball just short of a hazard.  I want my mis-hit to come back off the green into a bunker, or down to the bottom of a hill.

I don't prefer the sanitized version, but I will play it
« Last Edit: October 21, 2004, 10:37:52 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

Matt_Ward

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #36 on: October 21, 2004, 10:37:19 AM »
Pat said:

"The conditions and architecture are unique enough to make people travel thousands of miles to play, but, the same people don't want to play those conditions or confront that architecture at their home course, WHY ?"

I can't really answer that Pat.

The only thing I can fathom is that many people (not the die-hard architectural types here on GCA) who do travel want to experience the other side of the pond style of golf -- more as a once-in-a-lifetime deal, but really prefer the over-watered style we have here in the States.

I would think that people when exposed to what golf was originally suppose to be would see the error in their ways of thinking. That hasn't happened yet or may never take place.

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #37 on: October 21, 2004, 11:00:14 AM »
Scott Burroughs,

I got engaged on the steps of the Turnberry hotel with the sun setting over Ailsa Craig.  My wife would probably tell you it was pretty romantic.

Scott, perhaps this quote from Brian will assists you in honing your reading comprehension skills, or jogging your memory about females and romance.

Yes, I know that Patrick, but Brian was just playing along with you, as he NEVER mentioned romance in any previous post, as you indicated he did.  It was SPDB and Matthew Schulte who mentioned romance (not the female kind), not Brian, Tom H, and myself, as you indicated.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2004, 11:00:51 AM by Scott_Burroughs »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #38 on: October 21, 2004, 11:09:31 AM »
Scott Burroughs

I tend to agree with Brian and Scott.

My sense is that many travel to Scotland motivated by a romantic idealism,

NOT OUT OF ANY DESIRE TO PLAY PENAL GOLF COURSES.


Not one person I know traveled to play the great courses of Scotland due to romanatic idealism.

They had heard stories of the WIND, the bunkers, the heather and gorse, the bunkers, AND, many had seen these great courses when viewing the British Open on TV.

That was the basis of their desire, their motivation, not romantic idealism, or proposing on a famous golfing site.
[/color]
« Last Edit: October 21, 2004, 11:10:06 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #39 on: October 21, 2004, 11:14:23 AM »
Scott Burroughs

I tend to agree with Brian and Scott.

My sense is that many travel to Scotland motivated by a romantic idealism,

NOT OUT OF ANY DESIRE TO PLAY PENAL GOLF COURSES.


Not one person I know traveled to play the great courses of Scotland due to romanatic idealism.

They had heard stories of the WIND, the bunkers, the heather and gorse, the bunkers, AND, many had seen these great courses when viewing the British Open on TV.

That was the basis of their desire, their motivation, not romantic idealism, or proposing on a famous golfing site.
[/color]

I don't disagree with all of that.

Just wanted to point out who said what and used what terms.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #40 on: October 21, 2004, 11:24:48 AM »
Scott,

I was aware of who said what, and when, and when others chose to lump several of you into the same group.

Now can you get back on topic ?  ;D

ForkaB

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #41 on: October 21, 2004, 11:32:50 AM »
This is one of the better muccithreads, although typically flawed through lack of attention to detail in the initial post. ;)

The "penality" of GBI courses is different from those in the US iin that you can (in the great majority of cases) extract your ball from the penalty, at the cost of no more than one stroke, and without the loss of the pelota.  Compare the 1st at Machrihanish with the 18th at TPC Sawgrass.  Hook the drive on the latter and your ball sleeps with the fishes (or alligators).  Hook the drive on the former and you have a thrilling mid-iron shot off and over the beach to a hidden green.  If that ain't romance, I don't know what is!

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #42 on: October 21, 2004, 02:19:49 PM »
Scott Burroughs

I tend to agree with Brian and Scott.

My sense is that many travel to Scotland motivated by a romantic idealism,

NOT OUT OF ANY DESIRE TO PLAY PENAL GOLF COURSES.


Not one person I know traveled to play the great courses of Scotland due to romanatic idealism.

They had heard stories of the WIND, the bunkers, the heather and gorse, the bunkers, AND, many had seen these great courses when viewing the British Open on TV.

That was the basis of their desire, their motivation, not romantic idealism, or proposing on a famous golfing site.
[/color]

Pat - You should have some idea of what it is you so strongly disagree with. Romantic idealism isn't limited to interludes which take place in the mixed grill or veranda at any of your country clubs.

Don't you think many golfers are motivated by a desire to get to the birthplace of the game? I've never heard somebody say "I can't wait to get over to Scotland to get my ass kicked."

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #43 on: October 21, 2004, 02:46:12 PM »
No, I've never played those courses, I've never been outside of Hoboken, that's why I started this thread, to discuss courses that I've never seen.  But, I pledge to discuss them in depth, especially their penal or punitive nature.

The thought of you pounding the keys for this reply make me smile ... ;)

Could you answer my question ?

What penal courses do golfers flock to in the U.S. ?
And, how are those courses penal ?

The 17th at TPC Sawgrass is penal and because of the water surrounding the entire green save a little pathway ...

The desert courses that feature target golf are penal when you miss the target fairway, have an unplayable lie, or a lie in a waster area, with shrub, cactus or rocks obstructing your swing and shot.

TPC Stadium has bunkers that are extremely difficult to extract yourself from.

I don't agree that the bunkers at TOC, Troon or Carnoustie are extremely penal.  They are more penal than the standard flat US bunker but water hazard or OB is far more penal than these famed bunkers (See Rhic's post with the same concerns ...)

"... and I liked the guy ..."

TEPaul

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #44 on: October 21, 2004, 08:49:02 PM »
"TEPaul,
I have to tell you that I don't see TOC or it's architectural principles imbued within the architecture at ANGC, and I've played both courses."

I wonder why?  ;)

We're both old guys but not old enough to have seen it the way it was built!

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2004, 11:35:47 PM »
Mr. Mucci-

As I mentioned in my first post, I have played 40+ courses in GB&I. At the risk of boring everyone with a "courses I have played list," the courses I have played include Royal County Down, Royal Portrush (both), Portstewart, Rosses Point, Lahinch, Ballybunion, Portmarnock, Royal Dublin, Royal Birkdale, Hillside, Royal Liverpool, Royal Lytham St. Annes, St. Endoc, Trevose, Wentworth (both), Sunningdale (both), Berkshire (both), Little Aston, Royal Dornoch, Brora and Nairn.

I trust you agree that is a representative sample of golf in GB&I. On the vast majority of those courses there are very, very few OB/hazard stakes or forced carries.

I have not played any of the courses at Bandon or Sand Hills. I have seen pictures and read about those courses. I have spoken to people who have played those courses and played in GB&I as well. They have told me that it is a similar experience.    

I have not played Turnberry or TOC. My understanding regarding TOC is that, despite the OB and hazards down the right side of many of the holes, one can essentially bail left on almost every hole and be pretty sure of keeping the ball in play. As Alistair Mackeinzie said, "one can play TOC with a putter."  

This characteristic epitomizes the difference between penal golf in GB&I vs. the US. In GB&I there is usually always a safe place available to bail or lay-up. That is not always the case on penal courses in the US, such as TPC Sawgrass or PGA West Stadium.

Does that make sense to you?  

I must say, with all due respect, that I would very much appreciate it if you would not insult my intelligence by saying that "It's obvious that you don't understand the issue."

Having read, spoken and written the English language for 50+ years, I answered the question your question as written in a thorough manner, based on a reasonable amount of both personal experience and observations.  It would appear that Rich Goodale, Scott Burroughs, Doug Siebert and others have answered the question you asked in a manner similar to mine. Did we all not "understand the issue?"

If all of us did not give you the answers you wanted to read, perhaps the fault lies in how you posed the question or your misunderstanding of the nature of golf courses in GB&I.

Finally, regarding the "romance" of golf in GB&I, read M. Bamberger's 'To The Linksland' and L. Rubenstein's 'A Season In Dornoch.' If you don't get a sense of what it is all about, shame on you.

DT  

DMoriarty

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #46 on: October 22, 2004, 12:47:35 AM »
Patrick,  I havent yet played a single course overseas, but when I finally do, it wont be going because I want to play "penal" courses.   It will be because I want to play courses which flow with the land, courses where the ball still bounces and rolls, and courses which spark the imagination.  In my many fantasies about such trip, 'penal' has never even crossed my mind.  

Would I go for the romance?  Well, that is probably not how I would put it, but that is a much better description of my mindset than the masochist motivation you suggest.  

It could be because of my lack of experience, but I too have trouble understanding why you assume GB&I is penal.   If there is ample room to go around a bunker, I dont consider it penal even if it is very nasty.   Now a lake or a canyon from which recovery is impossible is penal, unless there are other reasonable ways around it.  

Quote
PGA West Stadium and  Scottsdale/Las Vegas in the summer, or when the weather is bad ?  Those places are winter get a ways for northerners who prefer warmer climates, and not even remotely close to Scotland's golf destinations in appeal, despite the difficulty in getting there, currency exchange and travel costs.
Quote

Well of these the only one I've "flocked" to in the off season is PGA West.   Most golfers do not flock to the desert in the summer because it is miserably hot and more than a little dangerous, with temperatures reaching 110+.  Not sure this is comparable to GB&I in the off season.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2004, 12:48:03 AM by DMoriarty »

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #47 on: October 22, 2004, 01:16:41 PM »
I msut not get it, for I never thought of the courses in Scotland or Ireland as "penal". I think they are fun to play with the exception of just a few that I've played.

You get different lies, have to hit more creative shots, but more penal? I don't think so.
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

THuckaby2

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #48 on: October 22, 2004, 01:31:16 PM »
No Cary, you get it.  I don't know anyone who's gone to the UK who thinks of those courses as necessarily "penal".  Oh, they sure aren't easy - the great championship links anyway - but penal?  I think US golfers tend to think of OB and water and automatic lost ball kinda stuff when they think of penal.  As many have said, that doesn't happen as much on these great links.

So like just about everyone else in this thread, I remain confused about what Patrick is after here.  Maybe he will explain it better.

But maybe not.

 ;D

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Love & Hate
« Reply #49 on: October 22, 2004, 10:59:12 PM »
Tom Huckaby,

Not   ;D

David Tepper,

Have you played TPC at Sawgrass and PGA West Stadium ?

Where is the bail out area off the tee on # 1 at Prestwick ?

You are correct, you all didn't understand the issue.

Explain to me how romantic idealism exists in the mind, body and soul of a golfer who hasn't been to Scotland ?
A golfer who has never seen a single golf course.

With respect to lines of play, perceived margins are considerably different from the actual margins.

Mike Benham,

Your logic escapes me.
You admit that the bunkers in the UK are more penal, then get confused by saying that water and OB are more penal then those bunkers.

Tell me, is the OB in the UK less penal then the OB in the US ?

Are the water hazards less penal in the UK then the ones in the US.

When asked to cite examples, you cite one hole in all of golf in the US, the 17th at TPC, and offer that as the sole support for your position ? ?

You overlook heather and gorse yet cite cactus and shrubs ?

TEPaul,

I evaluated ANGC in the context of your post, and studied a neat 1932 schematic that hangs in the locker room, and, again, I don't see it.  And, it's not because of the wild difference in the topography at the two courses.
I just don't see the playing and architectural similarities.

Remember, a golf course in Georgia has playing conditions that are completely opposite those found at TOC, unless you reference one week a year, if the weather co-operates.
The elevation changes and hazards tend to eliminate the ground game on some, if not many of the holes.

Perhaps the concept exists in a more general form, or, was nothing more then romantic idealism  ;D