[JMorgan]

Patrick, I suppose one could make the argument that most of the golf population -- at least in the US -- has expected to ride in a cart since birth, and as a result perhaps they have not become acquainted with nuances of architecture as revealed by walking in the field of play.  They are more interested in the easy drama and getting to their ball quickly so they can make the next shot.

For that reason, the architecture has become muted, or less noticeable, and is less important to the average guy's "strategy" -- or lack there of.  Maybe those features don't even register, which is why most guys can't tell you much about golf architecture or architects, unless they're branded.  As a result, features such as waterfalls and island greens (and cart paths) suck up more design and construction time because they are a better draw.  Less time and money is spent "fining out" the interesting features in the approach and so on, more time on the marketing and flash.  

[paul cowley]

for muting architectural features ?

Has the introduction of golf carts caused architects to shy away from severe or dramatic architectural features within the field of play ?

One of the first major decisions one has to make when analyzing a golf site during the development of a routing is:

Can this site be walkable?

The answer to this question determines many design decisions down the road......and its a very definitive answer...a yes or no, because you can't have 17 holes where you can walk, and one where you can't.
I am sure C&C struggled with this and their routing with a few holes at Bandon Trails, but decided in the end it could be walkable....actually they didn't probably have the choice, and instead were trying to find the most walkable/challenging  layout.....but as an aside question...if they were not able to find a walkable layout and had to use carts, how much different would their routing be? Maybe considerable, because being freed from the walking constraints allows one to then seek out and incorporate features that would not be available on a walking course.
....but that's just the first decision.

Once you have determined that it has to be a cart type course then many decisions need to be made as consequence:

How can one best use the need for cart paths as a design tool?
How can one best use cart paths to take advantage of the site features when developing the routing?
Will the paths only have to link the course segmentally or will it have to be wall to wall?
What type of material will be used for their construction?

...and lastly, how does one best incorporate the paths as part of the design?
Are they designed to be seen as a part of the composition...or are they to designed to be hidden?

I think cart paths can be designed to be a beneficial part of a course....but only if the are incorporated as an integral part of the design....not applied as a Bandaid.

So I guess Patrick that in many cases the proper design and use of carts paths can actually help an architect incorporate severe and dramatic features within the field of play....as long as he starts the process from the beginning.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kelly, et. al.,

I wasn't referencing cart paths.

I was referencing the ability of carts to travel everywhere on a hole.

Eric Pevoto,

You bring up a good, and related issue, the ability of maintainance equipment to traverse severe and/or dramatic features.

Yet, if courses with severe and/or dramatic features could be maintained 60-80-100 years ago, you would think with modern equipment that they could be maintained today, OR, is the level and cost of labor/maintainance so high that getting mechanized equipment to those areas is problematic ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, as usual, posts a thread on some topic and not long thereafter he basically accuses most everyone of missing the point.

That doesn't say much for Patrick's point or how he presents it, does it?  

I think it speaks to the fact that Ran doesn't require an IQ test before allowing one to become a GCA.com participant.

Under the NEW GCA.com, an IQ test will be required.

However, I have good news for you.

At my suggestion, Ran has agreed to issue a sole exemption,  "grandfathering" or "Safe Harboring" one long time partiicpant who couldn't meet the new IQ standard.

You were the sole candidate, and are, the overwhelming choice for that exemption  [/color]

[Kyle Harris]

Pat, your question was extremely open ended. Intelligent people would make the connection that cart wear and tear necessitated cart paths and other compromises where carts would tend to congregate, like near tees and greens.  

That or maybe you just didn't expect us to think.  

[Matthew Hunt]

Think about it #9 at RCD would be ruined if the course had to be cart-user friendly.

[paul cowley]

"Kelly, et. al.,

I wasn't referencing cart paths.

I was referencing the ability of carts to travel everywhere on a hole."

Patrick....if you were, then you have my answer in advance.

I can't think of that many older, walkable courses with severe/dramatic features in the field of play that would require a cart to get to [I'm thinking of the up slope on #6 at PB as an example].....but I'm sure you can .

Most of those that do have at least a walking path to the side, while you go play billy goat to find or hit your ball.

On new courses, you just keep carts out of these more difficult play areas....but still allow them for play.

Tell me what I'm missing....its too early for a glass of wine.

[Bill_McBride]

for muting architectural features ?

Has the introduction of golf carts caused architects to shy away from severe or dramatic architectural features within the field of play ?

One of the first major decisions one has to make when analyzing a golf site during the development of a routing is:

Can this site be walkable?

The answer to this question determines many design decisions down the road......and its a very definitive answer...a yes or no, because you can't have 17 holes where you can walk, and one where you can't.

Golf Club of Scottsdale is a good example of a course where this good advice wasn't followed, for whatever reason.  On the 15th tee, the management stacks up some golf carts for the caddies and players - yes, they have a very active caddy program at this high end private club - to ride the next three holes that are pretty much unwalkable.

That pretty much put the course out of my most favored category although the rest of it is pretty decent.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat, your question was extremely open ended.


Kyle,

Do you call this open ended ?
[size=2x]
"Has the introduction of golf carts caused architects to shy away from[/size][size=4x] severe or dramatic architectural features[/size][size=4x] within the field of play ?"[/size]

Intelligent people would make the connection that cart wear and tear necessitated cart paths and other compromises where carts would tend to congregate, like near tees and greens.

If you're making that connection you're spending too much time with TEPaul.  Reread my initial question, it's pretty clear.[/color]  

That or maybe you just didn't expect us to think.  

You still haven't  [/color]

[Bradley Anderson]

Carts reduce fast firm conditions. While that may not have any effect on the architecture of the course, it certainly effects ball dynamics.

Speaking as a golf course superintendent, I can say that I would definitely use less water if I didn't have carts running every day.

Golf carts can do a lot of damage to turf that is wilting from low soil moisture reserves.

I can dry down the turf to point of wilting and bring it back to go another day, but when carts run over turf that is beginning to wilt, they damage the leaves.

[Adam Clayman]

Bradley, And that damage is worse on higher spots i.e. more severe features.

Patrick is on to something. I can recall almost wrecking in a cart going over some severe feature, where what lay beyond, was invisible.

[Bill_McBride]

Bradley, And that damage is worse on higher spots i.e. more severe features.

Patrick is on to something. I can recall almost wrecking in a cart going over some severe feature, where what lay beyond, was invisible.

An example where that could happen almost any day is Nicklaus' Grand Cypress where there are a bunch of 2' drop offs, very sharp, that aren't too obvious to someone speeding down the fairway and maybe drinking a few brewskis!

[Kalen Braley]

I think to answer Pats question in the form he asked it, in my personal experience the answer would be no.

In my experience, carts are the most dangerous and prone to roll over on containment mounding which in my understanding, containment mounding wasn't used all over the course until more recently, when cart use became a lot more common..perhaps 70-80s?  So this component could suggest that the answer is no...more containment mounding, more dangerous for cart use.

Flatter fairways could be used as a possible justification to say yes to this question. But I think this has much more to do with the advent of the various forms of heavy equipment and building flat fairways for cost savings, rather than making the fairways "golf cart" safe.

On a personal note, Lakota Canyon is where you can maximize your cart fun due to the fairway drop ins and huge swales between different sections of the fairways.  Just don't hit those drop-ins sideways or your could roll it.    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam Clayman,

I'm sure you and Bob Huntley can recall the two golfers who went over the cliff on # 8 at Pebble Beach.

Didn't that episode result in cart paths with high curbs and a cart path only rule at Pebble ?

Kelly,

I was referencing blind bunkers, blind drop offs and severe land forms such as can be found on # 5 at Riviera.

Features just waiting for an inattentive driver to be zipping along.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Like it or not some more than severe sites have become golf courses because of the golf cart.  

Another note makes me make further comment on Chambers Bay and their walking policies, many locals are upset that they are unable to play the course because it is too severe a walk.  Never mind that the RT Jones II links should have routed along the water on the flatter land.  Now that the course is built as it is, it would be almost impossible to install palatable cart paths.

Has this series of decisions relegated Chambers to perpetual financial losses?  Should younger players be forced to walk to allow older players to use carts?  Would this reduce traffic to the point where carts wouldn't destroy the fescue turf?  

One more story about severity of shaping, my wife and I were riding around Oak Valley in Beaumont CA when I drove over a pretty severe mound, high centering the cart.  No traction, not enough man power to get the thing unstuck and then an embarrassing moment when some groundskeepers showed up and in broken spanish getting them to help.  As we drove away they burst out laughing.  To make matters worse I dropped my next shot in the water.  I made their day!

[Michael Ryan]

I think Bayonne is a good example of a course that would not be as dramatic if they designed it with a thought towards carts and allowing for their use.  By establishing that it would be walking only, I believe they then designed a fantastic course with some dramatic landforms and hazards in play that only work on a course where riding is prohibited.  Not sure we will see something similar in the public space in this day and age.

[Adam Clayman]

Patrick, I'm not very familiar with the story you reference. When did that happen? I can tell you that carts are allowed anywhere, when the owners play in their annual tourney. The only request is they stay off the greens.

I do recall hearing that those carts paths were put in because at some point (I assume late seventies to mid-eighties) the maintenance was suffering badly due to the abundant play and "free reign" of cart traffic. I don't know if anyone died near that cliff on 8, for the previous 60 years of the courses existence.
On a similar note, I do know of a guy who fell down the cliff to the right of 6. He was walking.

[Scott Weersing]

The proliferation of golf carts has led to an increase of dramatic tee shots from severe locations.

The eleventh hole at Sugarloaf USA drops one hundred and twenty-six feet. Clearly dramatic, and severely difficult to pick the right club, control the ball, or hit the green.

I too am not a fan of elevated tees. It becomes very hard to control the ball if there is wind.

If you like lots of elevated tees, head to Canmore, Canada to play Silver Tip GC.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()