News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Robert Mercer Deruntz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Is this the best version?
« on: March 27, 2007, 01:23:38 AM »

Robert Mercer Deruntz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2007, 01:24:13 AM »

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2007, 08:55:35 AM »
North Shore CC, Long Island
Lots of very cool holes there
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2007, 09:44:32 AM »
Best version of what?

Robert Mercer Deruntz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2007, 09:46:28 AM »
This happens to be template green.  Is it the best version?  

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2007, 10:04:25 AM »
it's certainly easier than the one at North Berwick!
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2007, 05:47:53 PM »
North Shore has two very interesting double plateau greens on their course - right across the CP from each other

the Road hole green itself is really good also but the pot bunker fronting it not representative (unless a good one version has been added)
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

wsmorrison

Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2007, 05:52:48 PM »
While I cannot comment on this being a best of breed template or not, I think the whole idea of template greens is a rather poor one and a confinement of creativity, which rarely is in harmony with the natural surrounds.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2007, 05:53:14 PM by Wayne Morrison »

Peter Zarlengo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #8 on: April 03, 2007, 12:02:00 AM »
What about the one at Yeamans Hall? I read Ran's review and it looks pretty cool.  First hole I believe?

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2007, 12:55:13 AM »
Wayne:

On what basis do you make your comment? What greens (as opposed to green complexes that incorporate the surrounding area) are in harmony with their natural surrounds? Its my impression that the greenswards themselves are rarely in harmony with their natural surrounds, as green surrounds are rarely conducive to interesting putting surfaces.

Robert Mercer Deruntz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #10 on: April 03, 2007, 02:21:24 AM »
Sometimes through structure, great creativity is accomplished.  The case being made for this great double plateau greeen is both its fitting into the terrain and the brilliance of the green complex.  There are many great pin positions on this green.  From the fairway, the green really looks like it belongs in its position even though it is a template green!  Could it be the best?

wsmorrison

Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2007, 08:45:46 AM »
I can think of a multitude of greens that are incorporated into their immediate or distant surroundings in a natural way.  If you visit Flynn courses you will see the difference in a philosophy that requires taking the time and material to do the tie ins.  The tie ins may relate to a feature off in the distance, but it still provides a sense of naturalism.  Flynn's greens and surrounds tie in to hillsides and contours sometimes miles off in the distance.  This harmony works whether you are looking for it or not.  Flynn felt that the natural lines looked better and would require less maintenance over time.

Consider the greens at Cypress Point, Pebble Beach, Maidstone, Friar's Head, Hidden Creek, Pacific Dunes and most greens at Flynn courses such as Shinnecock Hills, Kittansett, Cascades, Huntingdon Valley, Rolling Green, Lancaster, Philadelphia Country, Eagles Mere, Lehigh and especially Pocantico Hills which was meant to be a low-profile estate course.

In my mind, structure by definition constrains creativity.  Sometimes creativity can overcome structure but not completely.  Rarely do the template greens blend in naturally with the surrounds.  You're right, this example is an unusually good one but overwhelmingly the template stands out as unnatural.  No doubt they can be fun to play and offer thrilling shots, but not in harmony with surrounds.  For the most part, naturalism is subordinated to design concept to an extreme.

Jason Blasberg

Re:Is this the best version?
« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2007, 08:26:52 AM »
Robert:

It's the most memorable double plateau that I've played in a very long time.  

North Shore deserves more credit for its green diversity that it receives, however, that is off set by the fact that it gets far less criticism for its tree density than it should.  I'll say it again, cut down 3,500 trees at North Shore and 90% of this Board would be banging down the door to play there.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back