We hear all the time referrences to maintaining the integrity of a design when talking of course renovation and/or restoration work.
What does this mean?
When proposing plans for an existing golf course when do you cross the unseen line of the architects intent? At Augusta, is it the sacrificing of width or the addition of length that most upsets those of you who are so unhappy with all that's been done there?
At a resort course, even a "Golden Age" original, is there a comprimise between the architects design integrity and what might make the most sense for the facility?
When I read what William Flynn wrote about the holes on a golf course, it doesn't seem like a course many 'part-timers' these days would enjoy because of the sheer length required. Do you add tee boxes? Or at least make sure there are several options on each hole?