a fine line between quirky and stupid!?!?

[PThomas]

someone posted today on some thread -- which I can't find -- about using unusual design features

coincidentally, while flipping thru Vol I of P Daley's Golf Architecture series this morning,  I noticed Gil Hanse's piece "stop Making Sense"...Gil talks about blind par 3 holes, double fairways and greens, etc., which "certainly push the envelope of design"

are there are new par 3's that are totally blind?  would this be accepted?  what about stone walls?  if I recall correctly I believe Mike Hurdzan used one at the Golf CLub of Dublin in Ohio...

the Cops at Hoylake is one of that courses charms, but it seems to me that interior out of bounds are no longer in fashion..

would be interesting if the architects would tell us what they feel was the "quirkiest" feature they have ever put in, what they would like to do some day but haven't yet, etc....

[Donnie Beck]

I can't remember if it is completely blind, but I know the 10th at Friar's Head is at least partially blind.

[Craig Van Egmond]

The uphill 8th hole on the Coal Creek course at the Newcastle Golf Club outside Seattle is a mostly blind par 3. You can see the front left portion of the green, but the rest is hidden. I liked the hole, I thought it worked well, it certainly played tough.

[Wayne Freeman]

I don't know for sure, but couldn't one of the par 3's at Prestwick, over the mountain and completely blind be the first of it's kind?  You have to ring the bell when you leave the green ( that part is pretty cool). There's a totally blind par 4 there also. Yale and Fishers have super par 4's with totally blind second shots and they are really fun.      

[PThomas]

I wonder if I made my point clear:  is what passed as quirky before -- i.e., a stone wall -- considered stupid if built today?

[PThomas]

and don't get me wrong:  I think, and would guess most on this site, love quirky

but I'd bet an architect would do very little if any quirky stuff on a muny or resort course

[Bill Gayne]

and don't get me wrong:  I think, and would guess most on this site, love quirky

but I'd bet an architect would do very little if any quirky stuff on a muny or resort course

Paul,

Mike Strantz did his share of quirky at Royal New Kent and Stonehouse.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul,

Legal issues, motorized maintainance vehicles and carts have muted or eliminated many extreme features.

As to blind shots.

The first five holes at NGLA could be exhibit A.

Followed by # 7, # 8, # 11, # 14, # 16, # 17 and # 18

[Donnie Beck]

If I had any knock on NGLA it would be the number of blind shots. Even after touring the course several times with Carl Olsen my 1st round without a caddy was adventurous to say the least. It took about 5 rounds of playing to get familiar with the holes.  Now that I have a several rounds under my belt I don't notice the blindness nearly as much.

[JESII]

If I had any knock on NGLA it would be the number of blind shots. Even after touring the course several times with Carl Olsen my 1st round without a caddy was adventurous to say the least. It took about 5 rounds of playing to get familiar with the holes.  Now that I have a several rounds under my belt I don't notice the blindness nearly as much.

Donnie,

Wouldn't you appreciate that knowledge gained if your opponent is someone like me who would be on their first round on the course?

I think there is something to be said for learning a course over time, whether it is actually knowing where a green is when it's not visible from the fairway or understanding some of the subtleties of a course due to time spent. The blind shot certainly hits you in the face more directly than misreading a putt, but the result is similar.

[Kirk Gill]

"I'd bet an architect would do very little if any quirky stuff on a muny or resort course."

There is a muni located in Evergreen, Colorado, (but operated by the City of  Denver) that is big on quirk (and perhaps better listed on pasturegolf.com than on this site). A super-short "mountain" course (>5000 yds.), there is a par three there that is totally blind, over a rocky hill to a small, unbunkered green. There is an arrow painted on the rocks to give you an idea of where to go, and when groups are finished on the green they ring an old iron triangle to let the next group know they're done, ala the hole at Prestwick mentioned earlier. The architect of record is a fellow named Babe Lind, known around here as the first Coloradoan to play in the Masters.

Of course, this course was originally laid out in 1923 (with sand greens), and has too little length and too much quirk to be built today. It's refreshing, though, to have to wait to tee off until the elk leave the fairway.

[McCloskey]

Paul Thomas

To say most on this board love quirky is an understatement.
This board should be named
GolfClubAtlas QuirkyGolfLoversDiscussionGroup

If it ain't quirky, it ain't no good!

[Doug Siebert]

I wonder if I made my point clear:  is what passed as quirky before -- i.e., a stone wall -- considered stupid if built today?

IMHO...

A course built in 2005 that uses a stone wall as a strategic element is quirky if it uses a pre-existing stone wall.  This is doubly true if the architect could have demolished the wall without any outcry from locals or preservationists but chose to keep it as an element in the design anyway.

A course built in 2005 that uses a stone wall as a strategic element is stupid if a stone wall was built by the architect to be a strategic part of the design.  (As an aside, does anyone know of any courses where a stone wall was built from scratch by the archie to be used in the design, and if so, does it play more towards the quirk or stupid side of the spectrum?)