[GDStudio]

The one thing that resonates in everyone's comments is this...

We are talking about Pete and his design(s).  We are analyzing every little bit of this.  There is a vision or expectation to what he brings to the game with his designs.  Therefore, he already has a weaker player beat...Mentally he has you scrambling before you take the first tee.  Hell, he has most beat the moment they realize they are going to play one of his courses.

The mental aspect is the dominant feature.  I think more architects need to bring this back to the game.  Forget length, the technology issues, and all the other crap TV and many developers force down our throats, bring back the mental aspect to the game!  Screw with the golfers head!  Make them think for once!  

[Dan Herrmann]

Let me push this discussion?  Is Pete Dye the greatest living golf course architect?

There is no such thing as the greatest living golf course architect, because the greatest golf course architect for me is not the same as the greatest golf course architect for you. The greatest golf course architect for the pros is not the same as the greatest golf course architect for the club members. Etc.

Garland,
I totally agree.  I would much more prefer to play Tom's or Gil's type designs....  But any good study of a science needs a kick in the arse once in a while to get the critical study back on track.

Did I love TPC-Sawgrass on TV - you bet.  Would I want to play it every day?  Heck no :-)

But we need to give Dye credit.  I truly believe that if it wasn't for Pete Dye we'd still be getting boring 1960-ish style courses built.  

[Rick Shefchik]

Does he have it right? I think yes, absolutely, for the PGA Tour. But I wonder what the maintenance budget is for a hole like this:



I'd love to play the Stadium course, and #11 in particular looks like an intelligent challenge that would be a lot of fun to try to solve. But when you're talking about a hole that has a creek lining the tee-boxes, a waste area short of the fairway, a long bunker with trees and grass islands left of the first part of the fairway, pine trees in the right side of the fairway, a water hazard that bisects the fairway, another long waste area that runs the length of the far side of the water hazard and parallels the second part of the fairway right up to the green, where three additional bunkers are located -- aren't we looking at an extremely busy hole, maintenance-wise? How practical is that kind of architecture for any but the most well-heeled or pro-oriented clubs?

[Matt MacIver]

Commenting on which course is harder in equal winds - Kiawah vs. Sawgrass - I'll vote Kiawah.  While Kiawah was designed with more prevailing winds in mind, I can tell you I lost a lot more balls in the high grass at Kiawah than at Sawgrass (#17 notwithstanding.... ).  

[Anthony_Nysse]

Rick,
  I know that things are different now, but TPC was designed to have VERY minimul in regards to maintenance. If you look at the old pics, the place ir rugged. I think that the expectations of golfers and having a PGA TOur Event changed that over time...

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()