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.


A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
For the architects in the audience...
« on: November 29, 2004, 12:25:49 PM »
When a new course is going to be constructed in the early part of the 21st Century, what are the expectations from owners and/or developers as to the yardage of the course?  More importantly, why?  How much input does the architect have in choosing the final yardage number within the obvious limitations of the property?  

Are there "magic numbers" currently for yardage in the same way that 72 is a magic number for par?  If so, is that yardage seen by owner/developers as a means of guaranteeing
    a. a "legitimate" test of golf
    b. a venue for tournament play
    c. a marketable product to the membership and/or real estate
        buying public

In other words, could a GCA choose to build a 6500 yd. course on a property that would be able to hold a 7500 yd. course, IF the GCA thought that the 6500 course would be superior?
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2004, 01:18:07 PM »
AG,

I have heard other GCA types say none to 8,000 yards.  I still see several routing proposals from architects, including Tom Fazio, who favors playability over tournament tough under 7000 yards.  

As to architect input in total length, my experience varies from having no input - the Owner says he wants X yardage to having total control.  Personally,  Most owners still are asking for a minimum of 7000, and I have only had one call to design something over 7,500 yards. Left to my own devices, anything over 7000 yards from the tips still works for me.

I sense that the "new" benchmark for a "championship course" is at least 7200 yards, since my last four courses have each, by some miracle of chance, or creative measuring, have come out to 7,201 yards.  I suspect the courses are really 71something yards, and the DOG thinks 7200 is the magic number, so they measure from the very back of the tee, instead of two paces off.  

That is certainly plenty to convey the image of a "modern" challenge, while not being so long as to be unplayable back there for the good players.  Even the pro tour guys complain when courses get much over 7300 yards, as being too long for some of them.

Although some architects disagree, I don't see the real rush for length that others do.  While I do see the need to lengthen courses, since even average players are driving past fw bunkers of just a few years ago, very few can play the back tee yardage anyway.  Those that do still like a reasonable challenge, which 7500 yards and up doesn't provide.

In short, unless I know that there WILL be some kind of tournament, I don't see why we have to build really long golf courses.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2004, 01:33:46 PM »
I sense that the "new" benchmark for a "championship course" is at least 7200 yards, since my last four courses have each, by some miracle of chance, or creative measuring, have come out to 7,201 yards.

That might well be the most ridiculous fact I've ever seen.

Maybe you should pick up Benson & Hedges' old slogan: "Jeff Brauer's courses -- a silly yard longer."
« Last Edit: November 29, 2004, 01:36:13 PM by Dan Kelly »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2004, 01:45:05 PM »
AG:  It all depends on the client.

We've had a couple of clients who want the yardage wherever they can get it ... Julian Robertson was that way [even though he may be wishing he hadn't wanted the yardage after this weekend], and Michael Pascucci at Sebonack also keeps pushing for a bit more, because he plays quite a bit of golf with Tour pros who hit it off the charts.  They think it's making their courses better; and I'll oblige as long as I don't think it's making the course worse.

However, I've also designed three courses recently with total yardages well under 7000.  You may have heard of them:  Pacific Dunes, Stonewall 2, and Barnbougle Dunes.  So it can happen, and despite what clients have said, those have proven that a "short" course can get its fair share of design accolades.

Gary_Nelson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2004, 01:56:43 PM »
Another (cheaper) way to do it is to lie on the scorecard and tee box yardage signs.  An "Arnold Palmer Signature" course near me has several holes in which the distances posted are questionable.  Many holes list a 60 yard difference from the black tees (tips) to the blue tees... when the reality is more like 15 yards.

Here is what they claim:

Black tees = 7003 yards
Blue tees = 6193 yards

tonyt

Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2004, 02:09:17 PM »
However, I've also designed three courses recently with total yardages well under 7000.  You may have heard of them:  Pacific Dunes, Stonewall 2, and Barnbougle Dunes.  So it can happen, and despite what clients have said, those have proven that a "short" course can get its fair share of design accolades.

Isn't Gunnamatta at St Andrews Beach also around 6700-6800 yards?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2004, 02:10:47 PM »
Gary,

I have measured courses on occaison, back when I worked in the Chicago District.  I can tell you that back then, most courses I saw had exaggerated yardage of at least 10%.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2004, 02:17:18 PM »
Tony - indeed, the Gunnamatta course is only about 6700 yards also.  [I always get confused when we've switched over to metres.]  It's par 70 so it plays longer than it sounds; Stonewall is also a 70, and the others I mentioned are par 71.

We solved the need for length in a different way there, by designing a composite course with holes from the future Fingal course, so that there is a 7000 yard alternative.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2004, 02:18:07 PM by Tom_Doak »

Gary_Nelson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2004, 02:18:52 PM »
Jeff,

Exaggerating 10% on all the distances is one thing.  The course I mentioned in my post only exaggerates the black tee distances.  It seems to be a clear example of the developer getting his "7000 yard" course where the land didn't allow it.

It would be interesting to know of a course that did the reverse... claiming a lower figure when the hole was actually longer.  Any examples come to mind?

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:For the architects in the audience...
« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2004, 03:55:59 PM »
AG:  It all depends on the client.

We've had a couple of clients who want the yardage wherever they can get it ... Julian Robertson was that way [even though he may be wishing he hadn't wanted the yardage after this weekend], and Michael Pascucci at Sebonack also keeps pushing for a bit more, because he plays quite a bit of golf with Tour pros who hit it off the charts.  They think it's making their courses better; and I'll oblige as long as I don't think it's making the course worse.

However, I've also designed three courses recently with total yardages well under 7000.  You may have heard of them:  Pacific Dunes, Stonewall 2, and Barnbougle Dunes.  So it can happen, and despite what clients have said, those have proven that a "short" course can get its fair share of design accolades.
Tom,
You may not be able or willing to answer this, but was that entirely your call?  In other words, did you have to justify the course being less than 7000 before construction?  Were you simply blessed by working with owners who knew enough to not be interested in an arbitrary number?
If the yardage was YOUR call, how many GCA's out there would have that same freedom?
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back