[JMorgan]

Call me crazy, but crossing fairways.

Jeff (and others) have you proposed crossing fairways in a routing?  Is it uniformly such a major liability issue that it isn't even considered?

[Mike McGuire]

reverse two tiered greens

 I think they work well on par fives...if you know where the pin is it makes you think all the from the tee.

[Mark_Fine]

Hazards that are hazards, greens that transition to tees, limited if any cart paths (no macadum or concrete), fairway bunkers that are in the fairway, interesting short par threes, native areas on parkland courses (less manicuring of out of play areas),..

[Jason Topp]

Jason,

This might be a question for its own topic, but philosophically, many players prefer a putt they can read and execute.  The argument against the random and multiple contours in green designs is that the putt becomes more luck than skill.

I am not saying I agree with that, but just for the sake of argument, how would you  (or anyone else for that matter) argue against that contention?

Jeff:

I would argue that reading a green is a skill and that random multiple contours do a great job of seperating those that can read and execute from those that cannot.  If it is a private course, interesting contours are much more important because they create doubt and sustained interest in multiple repeat plays over the same terrain.

I do believe that there is a difference between good multiple contours and bad ones.  I have not ever been able to define it, but here are a couple of ways at getting at the issue.

One way is to identify examples:

Of courses with which I am familiar, I would classify the courses listed above as well as most of the old top line private courses in the Twin Cities as having good contour (Oak Ridge, Minnikahda, Golden Valley, Somerset, Interlachen, Minneapolis).  I would classify the following courses as having bad contour: Rolling Green (now Medina Country Club), Cambrian Ridge in Alabama, and Edinburgh (Twin Cities).  I also have felt frustration at the seeming randomness of the contour on the original greens at Veenker in Ames, IA (Maxwell) but I have probably only played the course 10 times, usually in a tournament and with more interest in making a putt when nervous than good architecture.

Another way to distinguish is to try and come up with general rules for distinguishing.  My best stab right now is as follows:

To me the most interesting greens are built to reflect the prevailing slope of the surrounds, with some counter slope to the green so that you have to choose which slope will control a particular putt.  The answer will vary greatly depending on the speed of the putt and based on pretty subtle directional differences.  These greens present a mystery that can be solved, but require that the player both make the right decision and execute.

Poor contour generally consists of big humps in which the direction of the break off each hump is pretty obvious, but it is difficult to choose an approach shot to make the putt easier.  Poor contour generally consists of big artificial humps, similar to moguls on a ski slope.  Poor slope requires a specific shot to a tight target rather than providing a side of the green to miss on an approach shot that will allow an easier putt even if the shot is not perfect.

[Phil McDade]

A few more:

-- Reverse canted fairways -- Oakland Hills 18th? -- that move one way and cant another (dogleg left with the fairway landing area/terrain angled toward the right).

-- Front-to-back tilting greens (I play on some munis in which ALL 18 greens slope back-to-front).

-- Fairway depressions, in lieu of fairway bunkers.

[mike_beene]

Speed slots like #6 at Kapalua.

[RDecker]

More Biarritz greens!

[Ted Kramer]

While I'm not sure if this is really a "design feature", I love the back porch at Caledonia looking over the 18th green and down the 18th fairway. There is something about a patio setting overlooking the finishing hole that I really like . . .I can't think of too many places that I have enjoyed more than that patio after a round of golf.

-Ted

[Ted Kramer]

A few other design features that I like:

*greens sloping front to back
*bunkers that actually matter, penal bunkering
*greens set on interesting angles relating to the fairway and landing areas
*tightly mown collection areas around greens
*specimen trees used sparingly, I loved the tree on the dogleg 1st at BP Black
*3 shot par 5s, #13? at Pebble

-Ted

[Jeff_Brauer]

Call me crazy, but crossing fairways.

Jeff (and others) have you proposed crossing fairways in a routing?  Is it uniformly such a major liability issue that it isn't even considered?

Oh, the thread title wasn't "Design features we would like to see Jeff Brauer use more often" was it?

Seriously, I have proposed, but not implemented the X factor a few times.  The most logical crossign points are near tees with ponds in front so no one will actually go in the affected area creating a safety factor, and cart paths can be X'ed also behind the tee.

Jason,

Thanks for trying to describe those green contours. This is a site devoted to golf architecture, not golf courses or golf course architects, but few have tried to articulate their ideas on philosophical questions like green contours, and fewer have done it better than you, even on your first "stab."

I was noodling on other features that might be used more -

Chocolate Drop Mounds

The Mae West Green (or should I say Dolly Parton to update it?)

Steps/Simple fences behind 18th greens a la TOC

Tees wider than they are long or,

Alternate Tees - such as walking off a green to either a left or right tee - to vary lines of play.

George Thomas "Fair Tee" where the tee is an extension of the FW

Fortress Greens

Combination Bunkers serving two fw or greens.

Railway lines as hazards

Bunkers that make no sense.

Humor.  (I once proposed each tee have a sign like those old Burma Shave road signs, and Golfers would have to play the whole course to figure out what the message was)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()