Rees Jones article in Cigar Aficionado

[CHrisB]

Don't you think that determining the water needs and budgetary limitations at Sandpines might be a factor in evaluating the lake, its location, size, etc., etc. ?

If you and others feel that permiting and eco-enviro constraints aren't a factor, and don't influence the ability to route and produce a good golf course, why did C & C accept the previously approved routing they inherited at Easthampton, rather than create their own ?

Patrick,
Are you saying that if you found out that a feature that you don't like (let's just use the lake as an example) existed in its present form and location because of very good eco-enviro or budgetary reasons, that you would give it a free pass?  Or would you still not like it?

After playing the 18th at our beloved Doak's High Pointe GC, I said to myself, "Now there's a letdown; he completely ran out of room for the last hole; nice course but I don't like the 18th hole (especially the tee shot) at all".  After I found out why the 18th hole turned out like it did (enviro-related), my opinion of the hole didn't change at all--I found myself saying "Well, there's a reason for it and it's a shame, but I still don't like it."  Perhaps some would overlook a flaw if there was good reason for it, but I wonder.

If I understand you correctly, you may be saying that while it is appropriate to express dislike of a feature, it is too much of a stretch to say that the architect is incapable of building such a feature well, because there may be reasons the feature turned out so poorly that are out of his control.  Is that right?

In the end, I think the designer's name is on the course like a signature on a painting, and it is up to him to decide which projects to take and to know the risks and hurdles involved.  If the finished product turns out to be disappointing, then it's his name that's on it and he needs to take the criticism, just like he gets to take the praise when everything turns out well.  It's only fair.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

Any thoughts on my questions to you ? (post 395, page 16)  I'm amazed that this thread needs it's own index!  

Why do I sense you'll pick answer "D"?  

[Almond Joy's got nuts]

Does anyone know what sort of water needs, permitting issues, environmental issues, budget limitations, oblique dunes soil composition issues, designer travel issues, turf seed availability issues, manure availability issues, draintile clearance sale issues, voodoo magic issues or computer malfunction issues, etc., necessitate the building of regularly shaped containment mounding?

[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

FYI, I have never met Tom MacWood or even spoken on the phone. I'd like to, but it hasn't happened yet.

I think the golf architecture part of our discussion on this thread has run its course, but I will tell you this:

I have sat in a restaurant having cocktails, watched the waiter bring an attractive looking meal to an adjacent table,  later asked the waiter what it was and if he would recommend it.

If you have never done that, maybe we'll never agree on any golf architecture matters!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chris B,

Your conclusion preceeds the order of facts in the design and building of a golf course.

When an architect is retained at the begining of a project, the problems associated with the project are not itemized on a pre-project punch list.  Most are yet to be discovered.
They occur subsequently, sequentially, as the project develops.

When an architect signs on he accepts the box of chocolates.

Costs, timetables, weather, unforseen mandated mid-stream changes  and deadlines aren't associated with paintings, and the artist has the luxury of either signing a finished work, starting over for the price of a canvas and fresh paint, or abandoning the effort.  As an owner, would you retain an architect with that latitude ?

I would suggest that you, and everyone interested in the various facets associated with the creation of a golf course
read, "Miracle on Breeze Hill".  
I think you will find it interesting and informative.

With respect to your lake example,
You might continue not to like it, but at least you would know that there were valid reasons for its creation and configuration.  You might come to accept, that if you didn't have to conform to agency mandates, the hole could have been much better, but, in the process of compliance, or to serve the needs of the course, the outcome is a reasonable compromise, and not a design flaw.

I object to the pond by the 16th green at GCGC.
I think it's out of character, artificial, and blind, but I accept that it was put there for perhaps a drainage reason.
Would I like to see it removed and restored, Yes.
Will it be a high priority, NO will it be a priority, NO.
It is an acceptable deviation.  Is it still a good golf hole, YES.

Mike Cirba,

How do I post a response, and view other pages ?
In other words, I posted this reply from page 18.
How would I retain my post and be able to view page 16 ?

Peter Paul,

I've seen some huge containment mounds that have had practical and necessary reasons for their existance.
The discovery process can establish motive and justification.

Tim Weiman,

I'm not the experimental type when it comes to food.

While we may disagree on a specific topic, I think you'd be surpised at the level of general agreement on architectural issues.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

"Now here is an architect who just studies the land, finds natural golf holes, and lets the natural attributes of the site dictate his architecture"   

Mike, this is not what Rees was quoted as saying in Jeff William's original post.

You can't change the quote to suit your own objective or agenda.  That wouldn't be fair now, would it ?  

To answer you flawed question, either D or E.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

Rees Jones said, "'I love to build golf courses that are suggested by the land.  I love to walk the site and look for holes, look for natural sites for tees and greens, fairways that flow. You have to make golf holes work with a bulldozer, but for the most part you want to discover as many holes as you can rather than create them.'"

In asking your thoughts, I paraphrased his comments as follows; "Now here is an architect who just studies the land, finds natural golf holes, and lets the natural attributes of the site dictate his architecture."

Did I misrepresent his stated philosophy in any way?

I'm not understanding why you're ducking my questions.    

[Almond Joy's got nuts]

Pat,

You wrote, "I have seen some huge containment mounds that have had practical and necessary reasons for their existence."

A few questions,

1. Can you provide some of those reasons?

2. Do any of the reasons tend to exist across most golf course sites?

3. Can you relate them, even speculatively for the sake of argument, in any way to most of the golf holes pictured on this thread?

4. Do you find the golf holes pictured on this thread to be visually appealing to your eye as golf holes?

5. Are the mounds on Sandpines a visual reflection of oblique dunes?

6. Did Rees find regularly shaped containment mounding existing naturally on any of the sites that he has worked on and is that an explanation for his use of regularly shaped containment mounding on so many sites, in your opinion?

Thanks

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Finding golf holes and constructing them in your style are two distinct functions

Mounds, etc,

Often, trees have to be cleared.  Sometimes the cost of removal is exhorbitant.  Piling the mulched timber and covering it with dirt is a practice that has been employed by designers dating back to the golden age.

Another example is the creation of lakes for design or water management needs.  The cost to remove the dirt can be prohibitive, and piling it in the form of containment mounds can provide an excellent, low cost solution.

In some cases plastic is used to cover an entire golf course for fumigation purposes with methyl Bromide, Roundup ect.,etc.  Certain jurisdictions do not permit the burying of the discarded, contaminated plastic below ground level.
Piling it and covering it with dirt in the form of containment mounds is often a practical solution.

Tillinghast built deep trenches to dispose of huge bolders and rocks when building Aldercress.  An alternate solution is to pile and cover them with dirt as containment mounds.

Another practical application is to create containment mounds to hide unsightly buildings or views within or adjacent to the golf course.

With respect to your other questions, each is site specific, and I can't comment on sites I haven't seen.

If crump wanted to seperate and isolate the golfer on each hole at Pine Valley, is the golf course any different if he used trees versus containment mounds ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Finding golf holes and constructing them in your style are two distinct functions

Mounds, etc,

Often, trees have to be cleared.  Sometimes the cost of removal is exhorbitant.  Piling the mulched timber and covering it with dirt is a practice that has been employed by designers dating back to the golden age.

Another example is the creation of lakes for design or water management needs.  The cost to remove the dirt can be prohibitive, and piling it in the form of containment mounds can provide an excellent, low cost solution.

In some cases plastic is used to cover an entire golf course for fumigation purposes with methyl Bromide, Roundup ect.,etc.  Certain jurisdictions do not permit the burying of the discarded, contaminated plastic below ground level.
Piling it and covering it with dirt in the form of containment mounds is often a practical solution.

Tillinghast built deep trenches to dispose of huge bolders and rocks when building Aldercress.  An alternate solution is to pile and cover them with dirt as containment mounds.

Another practical application is to create containment mounds to hide unsightly buildings or views within or adjacent to the golf course.

With respect to your other questions, each is site specific, and I can't comment on sites I haven't seen.

If crump wanted to seperate and isolate the golfer on each hole at Pine Valley, is the golf course any different if he used trees versus containment mounds ?

Crump had time on his side.
What about developers who want instant gratification ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

You wrote;

"Finding golf holes and constructing them in your style are two distinct functions."

Do you have a preference?  My bias is that almost without exception, the natural land just has infinitely better complexities, subtleties, grace, and distinction than some of the man-made, imposed architectural "styles" we've seen in the many pictures on this thread.

Especially in the case of an architect who is blessed with the opportunity to work on so many great sites, in so many varied regions of the country and world, I wonder why the somewhat Baroque style we've seen exhibited here is even necessary at all?

Shouldn't the style be dictated by the unique elements of each individual site, or do you favor man's hand just making it's own mark over and over as the showcase feature irrespective of natural attributes?

[The Space-Time Continuum]

Would it be OK in three months' time if, rather than have another 400+ posts of the same repetitive drivel on this subject, we just changed the dates of everyone's postings in this thread and insert the name of a different Rees Jones course everywhere the word "Sandpines" appears?

[Michael Dugger]

Pat....
I wasn't talking to you with regards to my comment about the pond at Sandpines.  I'd think that by now you'd understand that you need to phrase things in a different manner if you wish to have discussion with me.  

Why bring up Pine Valley?  Am I a big Pine Valley guy all of a sudden?  Even if I was, wouldn't I have to see what pond you are talking about before I could comment on it?  How do I know the pond in question didn't always look like that?



  

[Ethyl Chromehide]

In some cases plastic is used to cover an entire golf course for fumigation purposes with methyl Bromide, Roundup ect.,etc.  Certain jurisdictions do not permit the burying of the discarded, contaminated plastic below ground level.
Piling it and covering it with dirt in the form of containment mounds is often a practical solution.

Above is evidence that Mucci is grasping for straws and making it up as he goes along.  

[Colonel Sanders]

Something is rapidly piling up on this thread, but I'm quite sure it's not mulched timber.  

Mr. Space-Time,

You are an individual of uncommon good sense.

[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

Most people are probably aware that creating ponds for water management purposes is quite common. I'll bet most people also know that the dirt removed is placed as close as possible to the created pond for economic reasons. Nobody wants to haul dirt off site.

None of that justifies artifical looking mounds. The architect still has the responsibility to shape and present the dirt removed in the most natural looking manner possible.

Based on the pictures presented here, it does not appear this was done at Sandpines.

[Carl Ingram]

Tim Weiman,

Almond Joys got nuts asked for some examples or reasons where mounds were practical and necessary.

Mr Mucci provided five examples.

Did he provide reasonable answers as requested by AJGN ?
I think you could say so.

The man was asked a general question, provided several  legitimate examples and now you want to argue with him by taking the general examples he provided and applying them to the particular circumstances at Sandpines, when he's already stated that he has never been to Sandpines.  How can you ask him to make that judgement ?

Some individuals feel that the containment mounds at Shadow Creek were created and perform exactly as they were intended to.

Mounds, even artificial mounds can serve a purpose, but I think we need to find out if there was a purpose, and what that purpose was before painting mounds with the broad brush of condemnation.

MDugger,

The pond at PV is man made.

[Tim Weiman]

Carl Ingram:

You will note that I didn't question Pat Mucci on the reasons for creating artifical ponds. Obviously, it has been done on many golf course projects.

I simply referred to Sandpines as an apparent example of where it wasn't done with the most artistic skill. As a consumer, I'd prefer to see the functionality achieved without creating an artifical appearance.

Is making that statement being argumentative?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ethyl Chromehide,

Are you confident enough in your opinion to wager on it ?
How much are you willing to wager  ?

We'll let Ran hold the money and be the judge.

Just let me know how much you want to put at risk and I'll send Ran my check and you can send him yours.  Mark the check as a gift to Ran.  He can then cash both checks, allowing plenty of time for clearance, and then pay the winner off in cash.  What do you say ?

Ran,

My neighbor is Tony Soprano, and if he can find TEPaul, he can find you, so don't get any ideas on spending that money.

MDugger,

90 years sure does have a way of aging things.

Tim Weiman,

I don't think either of us are qualified to evaluate Sandpines.
I know I'm not, but I will be heading there, amongst other destinations.

[Paul Turner]

The mounds at Atlantic were the creative choice of the architect, nothing more.  

The mounds at The Oxfordshire were also the creative choice of the architect, although there might be some case for them being spectator viewing mounds on the hideous 9th and 18th holes.

[Mike_Cirba]

Paul;

Why yes, of course...

The containment mounds at Wild Wing, Falcon's Fire, LPGA International, Poppy Ridge, Haig Point, Huntsville, Tattersall, and Belle Terre in the pics I posted were all put there for creativity purposes, as well.  

Ditto for the small, circular pots and flashy amoebas.  

They are all clearly there in an attempt to highlight the natural, singular attributes of each unique site.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Turner,

Are you absolutely positive that the mounds on the western side of the property, running along the left side of the 5th and 14th holes weren't intended to screen off the property immediately adjacent to them ?

Are you also absolutely positive that some of the mounding wasn't for the purpose of isolating holes from one another ?

[Paul_Turner]

Well the isolation philosophy ain't mentioned in "Miracle on Breeze Hill" and anyway that's still just a creative choice: choosing isolataion.  Not the technical stuff, forced upon a project that you've been mentioning.

Don't know about the 5th and 14th.  There are some trees  on the 14th by the tee which screen.  And why an earth would you want to screen the crop fields and the fine vistas at the 5th?

Still, even if the screening was demanded by the adjacent property owner (not mentioned in the book from what I remember) at the 5th and 14th; that's still only 2 holes.  

Rees takes his mounding to the nth degree.

Mike

The only way I could "discover" those holes would be to pop a tab of acid.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Paul,
Don't forget to put on some Moody Blues.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Turner,

Sadly, what was once a golf course surrounded by farmland and no homes with the exception of a few hidden in the wooded hills to the north, is now begining to feel the effects of urban sprawl.

Monstrous homes have and continue to be built on the adjacent property to the east.
It's only a matter of time before the property to the west meets the same fate.