Lloyd Cole,
When a new course is designed and built, and seeking members, do you feel that a minimal or modest facility will help attract them ?
Or, do prospective members want nice men's and women's locker rooms, eating areas, etc., etc.. ?
If a facility is built that can't adequately service the membership, why join ?
New clubs don't skimp on maintainance facilities for equipment and staff, why should they skimp on facilities for their members ?
I wonder if the clubhouses to the courses you mention were modern facilities fully able to serve their members when they first opened up.
I've always viewed Atlantic's clubhouse as very low key.
SPDB,
You know the answer.
And, if you really don't, I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain it to you, because, you should know the answer after tuning into GCA.com for more than a few years.
"Monkey see, Monkey do" is more apt than you realize.
Certain clubs are "role models' and copycatted by many other clubs. ANGC, PV, NGLA, SH, Oakmont and others fall into the "role model" category.
Ed Getka,
The greens all have some good tilt to them with the added feature of internal contouring and tiers.
# 1 for example has a subtle ridge running through it.
When the greens are at "pace" the internal features combined with the slope can play havoc on approaches, recovery and putting.
Likewise # 17 has a mound or ridge runing through the green, in addition to the tilt, that places a huge premium on the approach shot into this relatively short hole.
# 6 has an incredible bowl at the right midpoint of the green that can reward or severely punish a careless or misplayed approach, recovery or putt.
The only green without internal contouring would probably be
#'s 4, 10 and 11, but they still have varying amounts of pitch, and # 11 might qualify for the most subtle of contours.
When the greens are firm and fast, which is often, and the breeze is up, which is often, it's a highly challenging test, where being below the hole is paramount.