Are today’s greens too well thought out?

[Tom_Doak]

Paul:

The tenth green at Pacific is probably overthought by Ran's standard -- there is more going on there than you realize, at least in the back half of the green.  The twelfth is a pretty simple tilt.

Ran's comparison of the fifteenth at Garden City Golf is an interesting one.  Most of that green at Garden City is on a 3.5 to 4 percent tilt ... the part that's not tilts at 5 percent.  A green design such as that is entirely dependent on a certain green speed, and we modern architects can never be so certain.  That's why it's hard to build a green like that anymore.  Greens with more planned undulation are more safe to build because you may lose SOME of the hole locations if the green gets too fast, but you won't lose ALL of them.

[Sean_A]

In a cruel twist for the architect, the converse is true too. In an effort to look thoughtful, do architects know when to leave well enough alone? What living architect would cap the fifteenth hole at Garden City GC with a simple, ground hugging green on a tilt?

Ran

I think that's true,  you almost never see simple lay of the land greens that tilt.  Perhaps the 10th and 12th at Pacific Dunes are good examples of relatively simple modern greens. 

UK examples that I like:  2nd at Addington and 3rd at Whittington Heath.

But in general, internal contour is in vogue and some old UK and European courses are having their "lay of the land" greens dug up and contour added.

Paul

There are a load of great examples of grade level tilting greens in England.  I was just discussing Burnham's 18th on another thread.  The 2nd at Addington is superb, so is the 10th at Huntercombe.  In fact, Huntercombe's 12th is also excellent.  Of course, both greens are heavily influenced by centreline greenside bunkers, two of the very few bunkers on the course.  Now that I think of it, the 2nd and 5th at Huntercombe are also excellent examples of the type.  To be honest, Huntercombe has one of the most under-rated set of greens in England.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Forgetting for the moment the green speed issue, what is the general consensus on randomly and gently rollling greens?  Do they just naturally provide shot options and varying putts?  

Or is there some strategic benefit to "carefully planning" a reverse slope in one part of the green vs. an upslope to better hold the ball somewhere else?  Or providing so much up slope that backspin must be avoided/reduced to play to that pin?  Or tilting a green left to accept an approach shot from one side of the fw better?

The GA guys did have their concepts - like the Redan - which probably worked better when we could put more slope in the greens. Granted, the upsloped green became totally standard after WWII, but I question what percentage of reverse slope greens there really were, even in the Golden Age.

However, in general, I think most greens - then and now - are designed to drain water two ways, and both to the downhill direction and that "magical qualities" get assigned to them for the old guys.  

I think a few modern gca's really do put more strategic thinking into their contours.  (I know I try)  And thats even compared to the Golden Age, and I think its because there are more players in the gca biz that drives the focus to the very best shots. I also think its because technology allows greater accuracy on the approach.  

[Peter Pallotta]

For Scott W., I'm jumping in with my same old analogy. Charlie Parker's advice to improvising jazz musicians was "memorize the changes [i.e. the chord progression] and then forget them".  Which is like saying, get into your bones a feeling for the big shapes you want and need, and then you'll be free to let all the little shapes pour out spontaneously.  I guess like the musician, though, an architect has to be willing to let those little shapes pour out, 'cause in either case one can never be sure what he'll get.   

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:

I usually stay away from analogies between golf architecture and music because I don't have any idea what I'm talking about in the latter field ... but I like this particular analogy of yours.

Getting back to Ran's original point, modern golf courses are the equivalent of overproduced modern music.  They can change everything to the nth degree, but it just doesn't have the same feel as a live performance.

[Ryan Farrow]

Would building old school soil based push up greens be a legitimate option anymore? I couldn't even begin to think of how to spec something like this but as long as there is some subsurface drainage they have proven to last over 100 years.

With that said would it change anything? It should make a green easier to build and tweak than a USGA green right?

[Tom_Doak]

Ryan:

We often build push-up greens on sandy soils, and yes, the process is way easier.  I would not think of doing it on heavier soils because of compaction issues, as much because of construction as golf traffic or maintenance.

But either way we've still got to worry about modern green speeds.