Again, Ron Prichard reads GOLFCLUBATLAS.com when he gets the chance and sometimes feels the need to contribute through some of us he knows who are on this website. Here's his latest message, unedited, on this subject:
"Hi Tom:
Spending a few moments between the Memphis/UCLA,and Kanasas/UNC,basketball game, and glanced at GCA. I was pleased to note that JimESII posted again on the topic; "Is it fair to equate distance technology with agronomic improvements?" As you know, I'm mostly inclined to watch the flow of comments, but every now and then I see a thread where I might pitch in, and hopefully push a few more people in the direction of a better understanding of the game as it was born.
In response to Jim's post at 2:39:39pm. today, Yes, "all things evolve...all the time", but I'm not satisfied to just sit by and watch it happen. There are many developments in golf - driven most often by monetary motives - which all to some degree impact the game. And what most have achieved has been detrimental in the sense that the games greatest golf courses have been seriously affected. And most golf courses have begrudgingly had to respond. (I also understand there are many who will shrug their shoulders and say, "so what" - I watched this happen during the Barry Bonds argument. These folks - and there are many who post on GCA, would see no harm in using aluminum bats in baseball. - who cares if all the ball parks are suddenly too small?)
Now, back to the topic - to simplify the point I was making, "any architect who makes an effort to really study the great golf courses which we can visit - from Royal Dornoch to Cypress Point will eventually understand the greatest means of defending any golf course is by creating fascinating, undulating, hence challenging putting surfaces. When this is achieved it immediately provides the means of establishing varying strategy from day to day - depending on the placement of the hole on the putting surface. (Yes the putting areas must be, can be, properly defended by deep enough, meaningful bunkers and on, and on.)
The great architects of yesterday recognized that golf in it's proper form was two games - in one. The first; was the journey from tee to green. The second; was the great challenge of playing effectively/successfully on the putting surfaces. When we constantly stress greater speed on these putting surfaces - achieved with improved species of turf, and of course such maintenance practices as rolling, we sooner or later reach a point where the green surfaces are so limited in cupping area, and, particularly under tournament playing conditions, so extremely quick, - clubs have little option but to rebuild the putting area/areas. The consequence --- we end up with the same sort of outrageously boring putting areas that we see week after week on the PGA Tour.
Most modern day architects, and this includes some of those who post here, should recognize and accept that their work, and the game of golf will be well protected, - and a better game if they learn to emulate the best work of ages past, rather than producing the sort greens and putting surfaces they learned from their mentors.
I'm getting tired, I type rather slowly, and Jim; Fairway treatment is a topic for another day.
Hope this helps a bit;
Ron
Tom; Perhaps you'll send this on. Take care of yourself;"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.