Privacy on a golf course?

[TEPaul]

Is it appealing to you? Is the lack of it bothersome to you?

It seems to me that in theory at least many golfers believe that not seeing or being aware of other golfers on other holes is a good thing in golf and architecture.

To accomplish such a thing can be done in a few ways;

1. Trees that completely isolate holes from one another
2. Separating holes from one another in a routing structure

I must say that one of the really unique experiences of Pine Valley is the complete privacy and total "quiet" one feels, often quite subliminally, while playing the course. Essentially, if you actually thought about it at the end of the round you would realize you basically never see or hear another group on that golf course while playing it.

It seems to me the same sensation is present at Sand Hills because the course is routed on such an enormous piece of property. But the same could probably be said for some modern cart courses that have green to next tee commutes that are enormous (unlike a Pine Valley or Sand Hills).

On the other hand, to attempt to create the same atmosphere on most other golf courses that do not have the appropriate routing structure by tree-lining them is detrimental for a number of other reasons.

Even if I certainly must say the total privacy one experiences at Pine Valley (tree segregated) or Sand Hills (open) is unique to me and hugely appealing, I do not mind at all open courses where golfers can be seen all over the place.

What about you? Is privacy in a visual sense important? Are you really even conscious of it? Are you really even conscious of the lack of it?

[Dan Boerger]

Tom - I feel very strongly both ways! Seriously, for many of the reasons you articulate I enjoy the feeling that the hole I'm on is an isolated experience, yet I always like seeing lots of groups since it shows a vibrant course or club.

Trees (which I find myself defending more and more these days) can be wonderful and obviously natural barriers. It sure makes Pine Valley a better place, IMO. (And I also like some of the intimacy of the tee boxes in relation to the greens at Pine Valley.)

- Dan

[wsmorrison]

The many unique features of Pine Valley combine to make an extraordinary experience.  The isolation factor is one of them and it would seem to work better today than it did early on in the evolution of the club and course.  Why is that?  Well, in the early days, the club consisted of a group of close friends.  While there are exceptions, Pine Valley today has a large membership with a majority of guest play.  The joy of seeing friends and family throughout the round is not missed by the separation of holes.  On the opposite end of the spectrum is Flynn's plan for Pocantico Hills GC on the Rockefeller estate.  The course is mostly open with holes that reverse themselves and cross over (there is VERY little play).  Family members talk of the many times over the course of a round that they get to interact with others on the course and invent courses within the course.  This is impossible at Pine Valley but because of the membership makeup, it works.  Discreet holes would work well for public courses if the terrain and views lost to the isolated hole designs aren't of interest, especially in urban settings.

For private clubs, opening up of the golf course has often led to a return to the social interactions that can take place.  I have seen it at Philadelphia Country Club after their tree removal.  I imagine it is also true at Oakmont.  If Rolling Green would open up the course again in certain areas, it would promote greater member interactions.  On second thought, that might not be a good thing  Merion never had the extent of tree issues other old clubs have had and today much of the course is open and seems far more expansive than its small footprint would indicate.  It is a pleasure for members to see friends and family throughout the round there.

So it works very well in most instances, but there are others, closely tied to the type of membership, where it isn't as much of an advantage.

[Scott Witter]

Tom:

Depending on the site character, the surrounding land use, of course the routing, largely a product of the site and land available, privacy on the interior can be a great quality when it makes sense and then there are the small core designed private clubs, who as you recognize really don't have the right framework in their routing to afford so many trees to 'define' holes and give them privacy.  These to me are the perfect candidates to remove trees, many great examples are on the hot seat as we speak, to open up the great character of the site and naturally restore much of the lost playability.

There is another aspect of privacy and that is from the outside looking in and many of my clients are always concerned as to how they can treat the edge condition, where the club property meets the surrounding neighborhoods, businesses, etc., to create a better feeling of 'privacy'.  Often there is no easy solution as adding trees on an already tight course cause other problems

On the right land, such as Pine Valley and many others we know, the privacy/isolation created by the trees can be appealing, but it really depends on the individual perspective of the player and the quality of the experience they want/demand.

[TEPaul]

Dan:

The "close coupling" (ultra close green to next tee relationship) at Pine Valley certainly is unique given how isolated one hole feels from the other.

PV may be one of the most "close coupled" courses in existence, which was something George Crump was fanatical about. The only exception is between #11 and #12 and the "remembrances" indicate had he lived he would've "close coupled" those two hole as well.

[TEPaul]

Scott:

It has been my experience thus far now that we seem to be in a comprehensive tree removal mode on some previously treed up courses (best example Oakmont) that so many golfers fight tooth and nail to oppose any tree removal but when it is done (and even totally like Oakmont) a week later they can't even remember where the trees were or that they were there at all.

Frankly, it's a bit of a phenomenon.

[Scott Witter]

Tom:

I would like to say that so much of it is education, albiet a very slow learning curve of members and I like many other architects, superintendents and stewards such as you, are willing to teach, but then some simply can't be taught.  I think it needs to come from many expert, or respected sources, over and over before it becomes exceptable to remove.  Though as you know, so much of this is part of society, their habits and attitudes over the past few 100 years....irregardless of golf and their need to control/beautify the landscape.

It is an oddity that's for sure...In the past few years I have worked with three different clubs all within 20 miles of each other and when it came time to talk about tree management, each club had their own opinions flopping this way and that...you would have thought they were all in completely different parts of the country.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom
A really interesting question. In my experience, there are individual holes (if not courses) that produce a feeling of "expansive privacy" and others that produce a feeling of "focused privacy" -- and, in the holes/courses I'm thinking of, the difference is a function of routing and (more so) site character.

There's a replica course that I've played, on a good-sized site. When I got to the hole based on the 18th at TOC for the first time, I'd  never experienced anything like it. The fairway was so wide, the sense of space and freedom so appealing, I was absolutely hooked. The horizon opened up on all sides, and you couldn't see another soul. That was a feeling of "expansive privacy".

On another course I've played, which has 27 holes on a smaller site with many mature trees, and which was laid out by the owner-amatuer designer in the 1950s, the opening holes of two of the 9s are side by side, and pretty close together. It can be a pretty busy course, but luckily -- from my perspective -- the trees between each hole are tall enough and packed in closely enough that you can still get a sense of privacy, but in this case it is more "focused privacy".

I do have a preference for the first kind over the second, but I enjoy both, which is a good thing because if I want to play golf I'll be experiencing both anyway.

One of the other interesting things about this question is the "historical perspective". What I mean is, it is a question that's relevant today, but was it one that occured at all to the earlier designers/players? Pine Valley aside, when I see some early pictures of some classic courses that are NOW tree lined, you see that they were originally much more open (with saplings or small trees here and there, but certainly not "tree-lined fairways).

The answer to the following question I assume is very "course-specific", but do you think the designers at the time thought of this issue? Did they intend that their courses would eventually have a feeling of "focused privacy," but only when the trees matured? Did they/could they take the long view like that?

Peter

[mike_malone]

 I wonder if this falls into the category of the "views" near the course. It doesn't have anything to do with the golf but seems to affect players. In many cases I think it is associated with "privilege". It takes a willingness to buy a significant amount of land that won't be used for golf.

   I believe in a more efficient use of land for golf courses. When the space is used simply then there is no room for trees to be used as separators without ruining the playability.


   I think this feeling of privacy is best for an occasional experience, not a steady diet.

[Scott Witter]

Peter:

Once again, you have a great perspective.

Your expansive and focused privacy thoughts are spot on and an excellent way to characterize a site and the feelings evoked.

The routing perspective is interesting such that the expansive privacy could also take in the feelings expressed with off-site distant views.  Our imaginations are powerful and I would think many golfers have a very expansive sense of their own world when on course especially when they can also bring in spectacular views from the surrounding landscape.  Thompson was very good at this.

"Did they intend that their courses would eventually have a feeling of "focused privacy," but only when the trees matured? Did they/could they take the long view like that?"

I believe some certainly did, but I think more often than not, most of the architects in the past had nothing to do with the subsequent tree planting on their courses.  They saw the land for what it was when they arrived, IMO, not for what it could be with a mess of trees lining the holes.

[TEPaul]

"The answer to the following question I assume is very "course-specific", but do you think the designers at the time thought of this issue? Did they intend that their courses would eventually have a feeling of "focused privacy," but only when the trees matured? Did they/could they take the long view like that?"

Peter:

That's a very good question, and as far as I know noone really knows the answer to the question.

I do not recall any architect actually recommending that a golf course here in America that was an open site originally should remain so with the possible exception of Macdonald and NGLA.

On the other hand, I don't know many courses where the architect recommended that a lot of trees be planted on an open site with the exception of Flynn at Shinnecock.

So it's hard to say how those old architects felt about trees being planted on originally open sites. My sense is they probably didn't get into it that much (since it was generally after the fact anyway) but if clubs did it they apparently didn't seem to resist it or recommend against it, and that apparenly included Ross, an original Scottish linksman who could be expected to resist trees on golf courses if anyone would. But apparently even he didn't.

[Mike McGuire]

I have come full circle from liking the PV model to prefering to see other holes while playing. Somehow there is a greater sense of community when you see other groups on the course.

I also like the long views, especially if the land has a lot of movement as it does in the kettle moraine in SE Wisconsin.

It is nice to be able to see features (think of a bold Langford bunker) from different angles. Its fun to see upcoming greens. Seeing a pin position can get you thinking about it early.

[Joe Hancock]

I really was expecting another trip down memory lane from TEPaul. I'm sure there's some post-sunset escapades that have yet to be told....

Privacy, indeed....

Joe

[Gene Greco]

I really was expecting another trip down memory lane from TEPaul. I'm sure there's some post-sunset escapades that have yet to be told....

Privacy, indeed....

Joe

GCA simply lacks the bandwidth to include ALL of them.

[Jason Topp]

I generally like running into other groups, particularly on a private course or a public course where you know many people playing that day.

It seems like nearly every modern course isolates holes.  While I understand the attraction of such an experience, I think there is a downside to that approach.  

People tend to be too isolated in today's culture as it is.

[Kirk Gill]

In the "Big World" where there is room enough for a multitude of choices, there's certainly room for the joy of an utterly private, singular golfing experience. For those of us who have spent the majority of our golfing life playing public courses, the notion of a private round might seem to be of even more value, because of its rarity. In my experience it's usually when I play at an "off time" that I get to feel like I "have the entire course to myself," and I love that (thus, the feeling of privacy is a result of there being no one on the course more than there being small forests between holes). I once played Ceann Sibeal and was literally the only person on the course for virtually the entire round on a beautiful, sunny day. Amazing.

But Wayne brings up another notion that isn't that familiar to those of us who play public golf - that a more open course would allow you to see your friends from the club here and there throughout the round......something that would seem to me to be a really nice aspect of having membership in a club. On most public courses, I'd just as soon be alone. But one ugly spectre that rears its head a lot is that instead of having holes be separated by trees, they are separated by housing. I played a local course called Lone Tree, and the entire back nine is routed between low hills topped by McMansion after McMansion. All those windows looking down on you make you feel like a zoo animal. The OPPOSITE of privacy. I couldn't see any other golfers, and eerily enough, I didn't see any people in the houses or in the backyards...................creepy.

[TEPaul]

Well, MarkB---post #13!!

How metaphysical of you. Good show.




"I really was expecting another trip down memory lane from TEPaul. I'm sure there's some post-sunset escapades that have yet to be told...."

Joe:

There probably are. Post sunset, huh? Well, all that comes to mind at the moment was the time in Daytona Beach when I was about four years old and became completely petrified one night by the all encompassing uncertainty and fear of the total darkness in my bedroom. I was convinced there were goblins and dangerous trolls out there in the dark of my bedroom that were out to get me and so I sprung out of bed and rushed into the bathroom and somehow managed to crawl up into a high cupboard that wasn't much bigger than I was. In that high and ultra confined space I closed the cupboard door and felt like I was safe at last as I was now certain of what was around me in that confined space.

My mother found me the next morning all curled up in that high cupboard and that may have been the point at which she realized as long as I lived and she lived she was probably going to have her hands full.

How's that for a post sunset trip down memory lane? I've never thought of it before but perhaps that high confined cupboard afforded me some necessary and welcome privacy.

[Andy Troeger]

For me, I think the issue is not whether you can see other holes/golfers, but whether they're in play. Some older courses have holes so close together that its very easy to hit into other fairways or past other tees/greens. While its good for my game to have bad drives end up in other fairways, I'm not very comfortable on those courses do to my own inaccuracy and that of other golfers.

Its not a huge issue generally for me, but it would go down as preference.

[TEPaul]

Joe:

One time my wife asked my mother what kind of a kid I was. My mother responded:

"Oh, he was a sickly little soul, and we felt we had to feed him goat's milk just to keep him alive."

[Joe Hancock]

How's that for a post sunset trip down memory lane?

Wonderfully whacked......

Joe

[tlavin]

I used to like the tree-lined corridor look on golf courses until I got myself educated about turf issues.  Then I started to appreciate the beauty of looking across a golf course after we whacked several hundred trees and noticing the different elevations and the flow of the land.  I guess that both are pleasing to the eye depending upon your philosophy, but I think privacy on a golf course is overrated...

[TEPaul]

Joe:

Not long before that situation in the high cupboard in the middle of the night, perhaps the first really poignant memory of my life was sitting at the kitchen table one evening in Daytona Beach Florida looking South over the trees into the total darkness only punctuated by the red lights of a radio tower miles away off in the blackness. All of a sudden this all encompassing sadness came over me and the thought that I just shouldn't be there (in Daytona Beach Florida) was so palpable. I believe I felt I should be back in Long Island New York where all was right with the world in my opinion.

What do you make of that?

That was the first of perhaps a half dozen events I've had in my life I refer to as "Moments". A "Moment" to me is one of those ultra rare events of total clarity.

If I ever have a "Moment" relating to golf course architecture I promise you will be the first to know about it.

[Joe Hancock]

If I ever have a "Moment" relating to golf course architecture I promise you will be the first to know about it.

The dozer is full of fuel and ready to go.....at a moment's notice!

The very first course I did as construction super was in Northern Michigan. It was a series of corridors with a lot of room between the various holes because the owner wanted each group on the course to feel as though they had the entire place to themselves. It really turned out well in that regard. A lot of golfers go "up north" for that very experience.

Joe

[TEPaul]

"The dozer is full of fuel and ready to go.....at a moment's notice!"

Thank you, Joe. That's tempting and I might take you up on it. Who knows, I just may be extraordinary at it.

I should tell you that something good did come out of that otherwise trying time in Daytona Beach Florida and that was at a remarkably early age I did become, on that extraordinary beach at Daytona, one of the best and most creative architects and constructors of sand castles the world, or at least Daytona Beach, ever knew.

But alas, my remarkable sand castles were unfortunately not permanent and never actually lasted more than a few hours due to the tide.

Oh, the tide, that God-damned TIDE!

[Powell Arms]

Openness is an interesting question, especially in the context of the warm winter we enjoyed in the Northeast in December and January.  The opportunity to play tree lined course after the leaves had fallen was a very interesting change of pace, and made for a much more social atmosphere on the course.  The summertime view is generally isolated with a close coupling of tees and preceding greens.  The wintertime view allowed a view of the entire nine.  To me, the playing experience felt very different between these two extremes, and I enjoyed both.

However, if forced to choose one:  
Echoing Andy’s earlier post, let’s assume that openness doesn’t mean that other golfers are in play, specifically of my shots, and that were not talking about a crowded course on which I don’t know anyone, then I prefer openness for the ability to enjoy the lay of the land and the social interaction with other foursomes.