[Michael]

As a "newbie" in this topic, I was hoping for a little basic insight to my question.

 I have been lucky enough growing up in NewEngland to have played some of the "clasic" tracks here, and through out the years played other "Newer" courses.

My Question is..did the designers in the past (late 1800 to 1930's or so) have a more critical eye for layout, and in using what was there, simply because they did not have the earth moving equiptment of today? I would think that  some of  them must have said.."I wish I could have moved that mountain over here, but I can't"

 This might seem a silly question, but the older courses just seem to have a "Different" feel to their challanges then the newer ones.

Michael.

[Tom_Doak]

Michael:

I think the biggest difference between old and new courses is not the macro-scale contouring, but the micro-scale stuff.

For the most part, the classic architects didn't have as difficult sites as some which are built on today.  They may have had a few severe topo features within a site, but they designed around them as much as possible, the same as a lot of us do today.

However, the standard of "finish work" was far different in the old days, when everything was done by hand labor.  There are a lot more wrinkly contours in the fairways, around the greens, and even on the greens of the old courses because they were finished at the scale of a man with a rake and shovel, not with a D-4.  You CAN create those same kinds of contours with equipment, but it's easier not to, and most people today would consider those sorts of quirks "bad finish work" which leads to a poor reputation for your company.

I think a bit of it is golf cart-related, too ... some of the older fairways are bumpy to ride on in a cart.

[Ken Moum]

I think a bit of it is golf cart-related, too ... some of the older fairways are bumpy to ride on in a cart.

Oh, My!

Now there's a sure sign of the Apocalypse.

Ken

[Phil_the_Author]

Another major difference in how they designed was the game as it was played with the equipment back then.

The ground was definitely used to create shots and therefor the design of green entrances was most important. ball flightas were lower and green surfaces nowhere near as short, thus causing courses to be designed around the expected play into them.

Today's equipment has nearly eliminated the ground game, and with much higher ball flights, green entrances and perceived shot values have changed the way courses are designed.

Bump an run is a forgotten concept in play and in design as well.

[James Bennett]

I think a bit of it is golf cart-related, too ... some of the older fairways are bumpy to ride on in a cart.

I think I now understand why I haven't seen any golf carts at Deal or at Alwoodly.  

The 'bumpy' bit might be an interesting design feature to use in areas where carts (and cart speed) need to be discouraged.

James B

[David Stamm]

 I would think that  some of  them must have said.."I wish I could have moved that mountain over here, but I can't"

 

Michael, when this topic comes up, I'm reminded of Jeff Goldblum's line in Jurassic Park. When debating about the ethics of cloning the dinosaurs he said, "Everyone was so worried about whether they could, they never bothered to ask if they should".  While I agree that there must've been instances when they wished that they had the capability of using areas of the property that at the time was not possible, and perhaps the course might've been that much better if they could. I think for the most part, the care and attention they gave to things that they could control provided us with the greatest era in GCA. The reference I was making to the movie quote was that while alot of today's architects COULD take down that hill, or make a interesting piece of ground flat as a pancake, IMHO more courses today would be interesting and playable to all levels of golfers if they stopped and ask if they SHOULD take down that hill, or smooth out those ripples in the ground etc.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()