News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Brian Gracely

Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« on: December 31, 2005, 02:30:58 PM »
Quirky and really unique features seem to be some of the things that enamour people to classical designs.  Unfortunately, too many modern designers avoid these features because of fear of satisfying the "fair" crowd or fear of legal action.  So will we ever see a course that incorporates these quirks ever again?

1) Tee shot played over an access road - The Old Course (#1, #18)

2) An extremely narrow green - Myopia Hunt (#9)

3) Multiple blind tee shots - Royal County Down (#2, #11, #17)

4) Tee shots that need to carry 220+yds over a quarry - Merion East (#18)

5) Opening tee-shot that could cause multiple re-loads due to limited/no practice grounds - Prestwick (#1)

6) Greens set behind a hill/dune - Prestwick (#5), Lahinch (Dell Hole)

7) Greens sloping front to back - Oakmont (#1, #10)

8] Greens with 5-10' of slope - Sidwell Park (#18)

9) Biarritz green - any CBM/Raynor course

10) 40' deep bunkers - Royal Portrush (#17)
« Last Edit: December 31, 2005, 05:17:44 PM by Brian Gracely »

Kyle Harris

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2005, 02:33:03 PM »
Brian,

Welcome newbie  :P hehe

Rees Jones had planned to built the ninth tee at Lookaway on the other side of the public road that divides 3-8 of the front nine from the rest of the course.

The township shut that down.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2005, 02:33:41 PM by Kyle Harris »

Mike Boehm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2005, 02:59:32 PM »
The par 3 12th at Tullymore is a par 3 with a large portion of the green set behind a hill.  In the course notes, Jim Engh states that he used the Dell Hole at Lahinch as a model.

I am not sure how narrow the 9th at Myopia is, but the par 4 11th at Tullymore has a green that is shaped like a diagonal figure 8 moving from front left to back right.  It is very narrow in the middle of the figure 8, and not terribly wide in the other two sections, but since I am not familiar with the 9th green Myopia, I am not sure if it is comparable.  

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2005, 03:04:43 PM »
Brian, as you note, most of your list seems like a full employment act for lawyers... ;D

I reckon the most of the other stuff can't really be done on a daily fee or CCFAD course interested in making a profit, due to inducing really slow play.  Perhaps only the most private, low number of rounds played courses can even ask a designer to consider most elements of quirk in this day and age...
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Mark_F

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2005, 07:04:27 PM »
Brian,

Of course we will.

Why, only recently, the great Peter Thomson, devoid of natural quirk on a flat clay-based site, imported some in the form of a stone wall around a par-three green, completly ignoring the ramifications of a high handicapper's skulled chip rocketing off the back and straight into said player's goolies.

More power to the great man for such a brave move.


However, do you really think a lot of today's golfers like or want quirk?  They may enjoy it on on overseas sojourn, but I am surprised at how many players at my course dislike a lot of the unorthodox stuff there.  

For them, failure to have yardage markers on every sprinkler head is quirky enough.

Wayne Freeman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2005, 08:16:26 PM »
Brian- many of the designers of the day, perhaps out of respect to the great designers of yesterday, or the great courses, or for whatever reason often incorporate these types of elements into newer courses.  Jim Engh built several amphitheater type greens at Pradera in Colo. reminiscent of places like Muirfield, Gil Hanse built a great par 4 at Boston GC with the meanest, skinniest green around, Brian Silva built spectacle bunkers and an awesome punchbowl green on a great par 5 at Black Rock in Hingham, Mass., and C anC often bury elephants under some of their greens like one at Friar's.  Heck we even have a great Redan green on one of our par 3's at the local muni which was recently built.
     

Tim Gavrich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2005, 09:08:39 PM »
At Rocky Gap Resort out in western Maryland (Jack Nicklaus course), the green of the 7th hole is 12 yards wide.
Senior Writer, GolfPass

Andrew Summerell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2005, 09:39:29 PM »
I don't see why #2, #4, #5, #7 or #8 are quirky or unique.

In fact the 8th at Ranfurlie (designed by GCA's own Mike Clayton) has a green sloping from front to back. It's a short par 5 & the green works perfectly offering multiple options of approach.

Brian Gracely

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2006, 08:51:50 PM »
I reckon the most of the other stuff can't really be done on a daily fee or CCFAD course interested in making a profit, due to inducing really slow play.  Perhaps only the most private, low number of rounds played courses can even ask a designer to consider most elements of quirk in this day and age...

Quote
1) Tee shot played over an access road - Tobacco Road #18[/i]
2) An extremely narrow green - Tobacco Road #9, 13, 15[/i]
3) Multiple blind tee shots - Tobacco Road #7, 15, 16 [/i]
4) Tee shots that need to carry 220+yds over a quarry - Tobacco Road #18[/i]
5) Opening tee-shot that could cause multiple re-loads due to limited/no practice grounds - Tobacco Road #1[/i]
6) Greens set behind a hill/dune - Tobacco Road #13[/i]
7) Greens sloping front to back - Tobacco Road #1, 4[/i]
8] Greens with 5-10' of slope - Tobacco Road #7, 8[/i]
9) Biarritz green - Tobacco Road #3[/i]
10) 40' deep bunker - Tobacco Road #11 [/i]

 ;D

Andy Hughes

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2006, 10:24:16 PM »
Brian, nice touch.

I never thought of #3 as a Biarritz, though. Maybe because it is short, or because the green is so soft--I could not really envision someone hitting a runner through the swale to a back pin. But that might be my own limited imagination and not the hole.  Have you ever tried running one back there?
"Perhaps I'm incorrect..."--P. Mucci 6/7/2007

Ian Andrew

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #10 on: January 01, 2006, 11:33:44 PM »
I'll speak for myself.

1) Tee shot played over an access road - The Old Course (#1, #18) yes as long as there is good visibility for the vehicle and the player

2) An extremely narrow green - Myopia Hunt (#9) a definate yes - the green offers an alternative to difficulty by length

3) Multiple blind tee shots - Royal County Down (#2, #11, #17) No, the occasional blind shot is just part of golf, but many would indicate a poor routing (to me).

County Down works because of:
1. the unique land
2. our acceptance of it's history


4) Tee shots that need to carry 220+yds over a quarry - Merion East (#18)yes, just not from the forward tees

5) Opening tee-shot that could cause multiple re-loads due to limited/no practice grounds - Prestwick (#1)would avoid this - I love the opener at Prestwick, but would never duplicate that opener. Again, history makes this acceptable

6) Greens set behind a hill/dune - Prestwick (#5), Lahinch (Dell Hole)yes, the modern examples are as fun as the old ones (Friar's Head)

7) Greens sloping front to back - Oakmont (#1, #10) done quite a few already. Going with the direction of the fall of the land often makes better green sites.

8] Greens with 5-10' of slope - Sidwell Park (#18) tried a couple, but always die in the field; Muskoka Bay's 8th was twice as severe as the current green. Which is still severe.

I think you need the right setting. Rustic Canyon sort of has one on the back nine, but they do end up looking fairly artificial. Friar's Head's 7th is quite good, but scale is important to pull it off.


9) Biarritz green - any CBM/Raynor course There are lots out there and Raynor was not the only one. I've seen Travis greens and even a Ross green that was a biaritz. I've seen quite a few, just not at the scale that some of Raynor's were supposably done at. I've done the deep central swale but on a typical size green

10) 40' deep bunkers - Royal Portrush (#17)
That works because it's actually a dune, when the feature is natural it works, when its completely artificial - it's a folly. Never done one because the land has never allowed it.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2006, 11:38:34 PM by Ian Andrew »

Tom Jefferson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2006, 11:51:23 PM »
One could make the case that most, if not all, of these features have been used by C&C at Bandon Trails.  

#4...no quarry, but forced carries on #1, #14, #18.

Not purely #5, as there is a practice center, but certainly the first tee shot can easily be a reload.

Not #6.

Amend #10, as the dune right of #2 is 40 feet high, not deep.

All the rest are used.


Tom
the pres

texsport

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2006, 07:47:21 AM »
If you want to see such features on a modern golf course, go North young man, go North!!!

#s 4,6,7,9 and 10 are all present onThe Quarry at Giants Ridge in Minnesota.

Jeff Brauer used these design features to make the course so special.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2006, 08:25:26 AM by John Kendall,Sr. »

Jason Blasberg

Re:Would a modern designer ever use these elements?
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2006, 11:26:16 AM »

Quote
2) An extremely narrow green - Tobacco Road #9, 13, 15[/i]

I played Tobacco Road for the first time this year and had I not just recently played #5 BGC, I would have thought that was the skinniest I've seen.
 

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back