Design vs. Course condition

[Jason Tetterton]

I struggled with this decision when selecting my "home" course.  I use to be a member at an Ellis Maples design, beautiful course, but no greens.  During the summer, we were putting on some grass or no grass.  I decided to leave the club and join across town at a Lafoy redesign / design.  I've never been a big fan, but I can't put any blame on him.  He had little to no room for expansion and the property was a former field...flat with very few trees.  The course has some of the best greens condition wise in our part of the state.  And, strategy wise...I'll be honest it's not that challenging, but I use this course as practice and working on a game that I'm trying to get ready for competitive golf.  Has anyone run into anything similar?  Which one matters?  I think I can appreciate both and know their limitations.  For working on the game, I chose a place where the greens would enhance my game and not hender it, when playing elsewhere.

[TEPaul]

Jason:

In my opinion, if anyone talks only about the importance of architecture with no real concern for conditioning they are discussing the overall subject of golf and golf courses in a pretty large vacuum!  

[Jari Rasinkangas]

Jason,

For an average player the greens condition is the most important thing.  They do not understand the architectual finesses.  The other important issues are: the speed of play, low costs etc.  

If the greens are in good shape the player doesn't even remember the rest of the course after play.  I have discussed with many players who have visited other courses and they can rank some very poor courses high only because the greens were so nice to putt.  

There are very few golfers who really understand anything about golf architecture.  My home course has e.g. one longish par 4 where the second shot plays slightly downhill to a redan type green with a bunker partly in front of it.  Usually the players complain that the green is terrible because it doesn't hold the balls on it so easily.

The best course for the average player is with flat and wide fairways and greens should always stop even the ball with no spin at all.  And yes, no hazards at all.  

[Brent Hutto]

The answer for me is that architecture is really important but only after the basics are covered:

1) Good grass on the greens a majority of the time.
2) Decent drainage where you can play the ball down the day after an inch or two of rain
3) Walkable course (and, surprisingly, being allowed to walk)
4) I can afford it without having to eliminate road trips or occasional rounds elsewhere in town
5) Members who are fun to play with and not ridiculously tight-assed

Given that my golf budget is apparantly somwhat constrained relative to the typical GCA participant it is somewhat of a challenge to meet these five basics. Also, my starting the game fairly late in life has resulted in a golf game that doesn't demand highly strategic or heroic shot values in order to experience an exciting round. So I end up compromising on the architecture end and settling for a pretty good solution to the basics.

That said, I'm fortunate in that a course was available that does a good job on everything on my list except for somewhat of a compromise on #2. Recent upgrades to the drainage keep it playable in most weather conditions but it's a clay-based course with a "lush" rather than "firm and fast" maintenance profile so it's always going to reward the aerial game more than I would prefer. Some people find the walkability to be less than perfect although after a while I've stopped noticing the hills and the handful of longish walks to the next hole.

In the final analysis, there is also some strategy to be found at our University Club. For a bogey golfer like myself there are certainly holes where one side or the other of the fairway is the desirable driving target. In some cases that requires at least slightly bringing water hazards into play and the fairway bunkering, while not extensive, is effective at complicating at least some of the strategic play. There are uphill Par 3 holes to complement the inevitable drop-shot ones. Almost as many uphill driving holes as downhill. There are even greens with enough contours (and multiple tiers) to make tee-to-green  strategy differ slightly depending on the day's hole location. Unlike some very good courses (Cuscowilla comes to mind) there is a balanced number of dogleg-left and dogleg-right holes.

I'm not really sure where in my area (central South Carolina) there are courses to join which are seriously more strategic. Quite likely I'd have to go a hour or two from home to find a club with both a big-name architect and genuine strategic play of the kind favored on this site. I know I wouldn't like playing in a flat cow pasture every day now that I've been exposed to some more interesting courses. But there is a lot of room for sound designs between the great courses on one end of the scale and the sub-Rees-Jones Myrtle Beach or Florida cookie-cutters.

[Tags:]

Tags: