[Kalen Braley]

My buddy has one of those golf calendars that has an interesting little tidbit about golf, usually centered around players.  But todays selection dealt with a quote from an architect who I believe it pretty well known to GCA'ers.  I'll withhold the name cause I don't want to distract from the topic.  The quote was:

"I don't have a clue where to put a fairway bunker anymore.  I hate the fact that we have to build courses longer every day just to keep pace with the equipment.  I'm tired of fighting it."

Do any of our resident architects ever feel this way when going to battle each day?  

I have seen the endless threads about equipment advances and how everyone feels about it, so I'm hoping to avoid this turning into another luddite-based "this is not how the game was meant to be played" kind of thread.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Randy Thompson]

Its a part of life, I accept it and try to leave room for future back tees if i can convience the developer.

[RJ_Daley]

Randy Thompson, thanks for joining the treehouse discussion.   I started to read the interview, but decided to get back to it later when I have enough time, because I want to take enough time to enjoy it.  It is apparent, there is great substance there.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

It would appear that the differences between the best and novice golfers have widened over the years, making it more difficult for architects to cater to all elements.

In brief talks that I've had with a few architects, they all lamented the trend, as have developers.

[Kalen Braley]

Pat,

I would suspect that this is the case as well.  While a small % of long bombers have really gained from equipment advances, the average golfer has been left behind I think for the most part.

I've been playing for about 13 years now, the last 10 or so actively using a driver and I would guess I've only gained 20-30 yards of distance in that time.  Most of which I would attribute to improving my swing mechanics.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

One of the things I enjoy about NGLA is that two (2) core challenges are/were presented by the architecture.

If courses are lengthened to 7,400, 7,600, 7,800 and 8,000 how can an architect hope to come close to duplicating the challenge to the broad spectrum of golfers on any given hole, other than par 3's ?

I think it's becoming more and more difficult because of the elongation of the holes, unless, very long flanking bunkers are introduced, and even then, they would become a repeating hazard for the high handicap, certainly not a desired effect.

Ron Prichard warned of this years and years ago.

He sent a letter to the USGA alerting them to the problem.

But, either nobody listened, or nobody reacted.

[paul cowley]

My buddy has one of those golf calendars that has an interesting little tidbit about golf, usually centered around players.  But todays selection dealt with a quote from an architect who I believe it pretty well known to GCA'ers.  I'll withhold the name cause I don't want to distract from the topic.  The quote was:

"I don't have a clue where to put a fairway bunker anymore.  I hate the fact that we have to build courses longer every day just to keep pace with the equipment.  I'm tired of fighting it."

Do any of our resident architects ever feel this way when going to battle each day?  

I have seen the endless threads about equipment advances and how everyone feels about it, so I'm hoping to avoid this turning into another luddite-based "this is not how the game was meant to be played" kind of thread.

Thanks in advance for any input.

Kalen....I really don't lament the changes, to me they are the new challenges....the new 'givens' that one incorporates into the design.

I note the differences and that becomes part of the factoring.

I have come up with ways of my own liking that, at least in my mind, will serve to make the older courses still relevent.....but we are not ready for that tonic yet, although I test for it when I can. Here more than anywhere.

This game will survive us well, regardless of our concerns.

[Michael Moore]

In brief talks that I've had with a few architects, they all lamented the trend, as have developers.

In extended talks that I've had with a few architects they all said "I expect that one day people will drive the ball four hundred and ten yards to this spot. From which I dare them to make a four."

[Patrick_Mucci]

In brief talks that I've had with a few architects, they all lamented the trend, as have developers.

In extended talks that I've had with a few architects they all said "I expect that one day people will drive the ball four hundred and ten yards to this spot. From which I dare them to make a four."

Michael,

I think you've proved the point that Kalen and I were making.

In your example, if it's nearly impossible for the golfer to make 4 from that spot, after having driven the ball 410 yards, how hard is it going to be for the rest of the golfing world to make 4 or 5 or 6 when they've driven it 320, 270 or 230 yards ?

What type of drugs were those architects on when you spoke to them ?

[Pat Brockwell]

Two years ago I sent a nasty little note to the USGA and actually got a call from some guy on the committee studying the distance issue. He explained to me that the ball hasn't gotten any longer in the last 20 years, it's only been made to feel better so that the best players now use them.  Yeah, right.

[Ken Moum]

Two years ago I sent a nasty little note to the USGA and actually got a call from some guy on the committee studying the distance issue. He explained to me that the ball hasn't gotten any longer in the last 20 years, it's only been made to feel better so that the best players now use them.  Yeah, right.

There is a bit of truth in that, as the TopFlites and Pinnacles were always longer than the Titleist balatas and professionals. But good players would never use them.

By the way, I just sent you a personal message.

Ken

[Brent Hutto]

I have the opposite problem. I've always hit the ball so short with the driver that from the normal men's tees most courses don't have any significant fairway bunkering for my game. One thing I enjoyed about playing older links, heath and moor courses in England was that the architect didn't necessarily appear to "put" the fairway bunkers at any specific distance. Between the semi-random bunkering (not really "random" but certainly not as standardized as at the typical USA course) and the wind on one hole there would be a bunker I have to play to the side of, on the next a bunker that I can clear with my best driver and a couple holes later one that looks out of range but catches my drive after a big bounce.

Now of course the stonger players do eventually reach a point where on those courses they can bomb away past even the farthest bunkers. But I implore architects of inland USA courses to spread the bunkers around a bit and perhaps avoid the possibilty of the entire course all at once becoming obsolete for the tee shots of the biggest hitters.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()