Fairway interest, strategy and mounds, where'd they go ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

In modern times it seems that golf course after golf course builds fairly flat fairways.

While they may have some slope, very few have features with character in them.

This may be a concession to maintainance, mowing, but,

Why don't we see more in the way of contouring within fairways in the DZ's ?

Ridges, mounds and moguls would seem to be interesting features that could be easily added.

Mounds, some as big as # 8 at Quaker Ridge add character, interest and strategy to a hole.  

Why don't we see more of them ?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

I could be wrong, but I always thought it was the JN influence.  He really thought of golf as a point to point game and didn't believe that a course should "hurt" a player.  He (and to be fair, other tour pros who also influenced architecture) felt a fw should be "receptive" to the well played shot and offer a reward, at least in part.

Its an interesting design question.  If a fw rolls everywhere is there any strategy to play to a particular part of it?  Or should we grind off at least one level area to create a prime LZ, perhaps at different sides or at different lengths, i.e., perhaps encourage a tee shot to be played to 260, 280, or 240 etc. rather than just let them blast away?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam Clayman,

Would you say that the pictures you've posted are typical of the courses built in the last 20 years ?

Would you also call the course pictured, one that caters to local golfers, other than the jack rabbits and cayotes ?

Anyone can focus on an extreme example.

But, most courses built in the last 20 years have employed grading to level the fairways, not create interesting man made features within them.

Jeff Brauer,

I think you can introduce strategy and/or desirable features.

The "Turbo Boost" being one of them.

Playing to a certain side of a large fairway mound can be another.

Introducing centerline features, be they bunkers or mounds/ridges can produce prefered and non-prefered alternatives to the golfer, and, it would seem that it could be done for minimal cost, both in the building and in the maintaining of the feature.

Another aspect might be impaired visibility.
Go to one side and the green is obscured, go to the other and the green is in full view.

Doesn't the 5th hole at Riviera have a large obstructionist mound to the right ?

It seems to me, with all of the earthmoving capablities enjoyed by architect and contractor today, that instead of leveling the playing field, interest and contour could be added to it, making the golfing experience more challenging, more interesting and more fun.

NOW, I clearly understand that TODAY a centerline mound that may direct a ball to a less prefered position isn't popular amongst the country club set.  In fact, I'd venture to guess that if one existed, every two years some member who suffered an unfortuntate bounce would propose a reduction or removal of said mound.

The beauty of architecture in the "olde days" seemed to be that the architects like CBM, SR and CB, said, "you wanted a great golf course, we built you a great golf course, stop complaining about the individual features, they all balance out, just go out and play it, we know what we're doing"

Whereas "today" the members say, "we know what suits our game best and we want to change the golf course to accomodate our game, our agenda, we know what we're doing, we pay the dues here."

[JESII]

This lack of smoothing out of fairways was one of my favorite characteristics of Hidden Creek. I feel a par should be earned by a series of well played shots as opposed to one.

[PThomas]

Patrick:  this time we agree!  

and fairways with features like you describe can also help make the course more demanding for the lower handicappers

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff Childs and/or George Bahto,

Are the mounds on the left on the 14th and on the right on the 16th hole at Yale natural or did CBM/SR create them

Paul T,

Everyone is entitled to my opinion.  

[Geoffrey Childs]

Pat

The NASCAR banking on #14 at Yale was the result of tons of dynamite.  It is entirely man made.

I believe that the fairway contouring on the right side of #16 is a natural feature of the land. When firm and fast it creates great interest in the drive as balls can be propelled right and into the woods or left back into the ideal place to go for the green in two depending on the shape of the shot and location of the first bounce.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff,

Thanks.

That proves my point that a highly interesting and functional feature can be created in the drive zone to create risk/reward, challenge, interest and fun.

That potential "turbo boost" on # 14 is interesting and unfortunately, all too rare.

Why do you suppose CBM, SR and CB were able to see the enduring values of these architectural features, and yet, architects, golfers and clubs can't seem to come to grips with them today ?

[Jimmy Muratt]

Patrick,

I think the reason we don't see much coutouring within the fairways in modern times is the most players want flat lies.....simple as that.  Most golfers consider it "unfair" if a tee shot that lands in the middle of the fairway kicks off the side of a mound and ends up in a bunker.  

Most golfers growing up in the U.S. have never played a course with rumpled fairways and when they do encounter it, it's outside their comfort zone and therefore deemed "unfair".  

It's great to see some of the modern designers now incorporating it into their design.  

[SPDB]

Patrick -
I think you answered your own question. "Fairness" and an increased ability to flatten fairways had lead to the place where we are now. I think that if centerline bunkers disappeared, it is not likely that it would be replaced by heavy contouring.

Fortunately, with respect to centerline bunkering i think there has been a fairly recent movement away from the homogenized look of the bunkering that sits entirely on the outside of fairways, and not necessarily just by the architects on here.

I think (hope) that this movement will continue and will feature earthwork in the fairway. Travis was a master at this.

[Jim Franklin]

Everyone is entitled to my opinion.  

Pat, that could be the funniest line yet on GCA.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

I'm familiar with a club that has a unique fairway, it's almost like a field of moguls.  Lies are totally unpredictable no matter where you are in the DZ.  Uphill, downhill and sidehill with a few in the bottom of the bowls.  While the lies are not treacherous or pronounced, they can be uncomfortable.  But, this is an integral part of the character of the hole.

Every two years or so there's a movement within the club to flatten this fairway, to remove the unpredictable and awkward lie.

And the argument is always couched in the term of "fairness"

The funny thing is that many will reference the lies at ANGC, thinking that they're flat.   When they're told that flat lies are the exception, not the rule at ANGC, they then turn the argument into, "well, that's for the pros, we're amateurs"
To which the response is, "so are the members at ANGC"

Yet, these same people love to play NGLA which has an abundance of squirrelly lies.

Who can change the culture of golf in the U.S. ?

Are the owner/developers in conjunction with the architects the answer ?

Certainly, the answer doesn't rest within the membership or potential membership.

[TEPaul]

"This lack of smoothing out of fairways was one of my favorite characteristics of Hidden Creek."

Sully:

Interesting you say that. I'd say that's a real credit to Coore and Crenshaw and The Boys and a few of their holes. Some of those contours at Hidden Creek you may have thought was a 'lack of smoothing out' were actually made to add interest. Looks like they pulled of that old architectural legerdemain---eg they "hid the hand of man".

Brad Klein was telling me something about a C&C technique I never heard before and that is they often end up with a lot of excess dirt on a site because they tend to take dirt away from around interesting features instead of just cutting a lot of fill out of somewhere and heaping it on top of what's already out there on their hole landforms.

[Jimmy Muratt]

Another modern course that has a tremendous amount of movement in the fairways, perhaps the most that I've seen of any C&C course including Sand Hills, is Old Sandwich.  The rumpled ground combined with the fescue surface makes for a very fun ground game.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jimmy Murratt,

C&C have a reputation of being minimalists and of leaving the land as it is rather than smoothing it out.

However, I wouldn't say that their practices were the norm for the last 50 years

[Jimmy Muratt]

Patrick,

C&C's pracitces definitely haven't been the norm for the past 50 years, that's why we went through such a stretch of uninspired and boring architecture.  

Unique fairway contours, mounds, angles, etc. add so much character to tee shots that it makes the game for more strategic and fun in my opinion.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jimmy Murratt,

Let's say that you and I agree on this and that we're correct in our general principles with respect to these features creating interest, fun and challenge.

If that's the case, and I think it is, why haven't more golf courses that have gone through renovations and modernizations incorporated these features in the redesign ?