News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2008, 03:47:57 PM »
Let me chime in here and make a bit of a different observation. While the topic here is "Best Course Design", my question is this course any fun to play?

Bette and I jumped on a plane a week after the first televised tournament in 1982? We played about 3 rounds that weekend, lost dozens of balls and left pretty much hating the course, just too hard. We have since never been back although we live here in Florida and have no desire to return.

I don't doubt Dye's genius and I enjoy some of his work and vis versa.
But I don't know how this could possibly be the "Best Course Design" if it beats you to death.

If I were to play it today, from the pro tees, I don't think I could break 100 and from the blue tees, probably not break 90.
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

Tim Liddy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2008, 03:49:05 PM »
You guys are tough. But we would not love you if you were easy.

Reviewing a golf course in 2 dimensions is a bit disingenuous. The repetitiveness is not as apparent in playing the golf course with its many nuances.  It reflects his influence from Raynor. How many different holes did Raynor build throughout his career, about 20? But the attention to the nuances and details of the golf holes make them special.  Plus a great symphony always has a repeating theme.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #27 on: May 11, 2008, 07:16:50 PM »
Tim:

I would agree that a great symphony always has a theme running through it, and that the TPC has a great deal of variety, with the caveat "for a flat course".

The repetitiveness was more apparent when the course was brand new and all the waste bunkers looked essentially the same.  When Bobby Weed was the superintendent (3-4 years after the course opened) he went back in with a couple of shapers (and Pete's supervision) and jazzed up a lot of those areas with pots and ridges, and that took some of the sameness out of the course.

Jeff:

I do not remember a lot of greens with central mounds ... just a lot of internal contour and terracing.  Most of the original greens looked contrived, because on nearly every one of them you walked up and saw four distinct hole locations designed into them on separate levels.  But the greens have been rebuilt 4-5 times since then and a lot of that has gone by the wayside.

Cary:

I remember playing the course on my second trip and shooting 78 from the white tees and 102 from the blues on consecutive days.  Like Pine Valley, a lot of the difficulty is the intimidation factor, and if you play the course from too far back it will eventually choke you to death, but it isn't as hard as you make it out to be -- and there were a LOT of fun shots, particuarly in recovery play.  I think that's one of its greatest features, there are so many recovery shots around the greens and some of them even scare the pros!

Andy Troeger

Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #28 on: May 11, 2008, 07:28:11 PM »

If I were to play it today, from the pro tees, I don't think I could break 100 and from the blue tees, probably not break 90.

Cary,
As a now 7 hcp I played the blue tees, played absolutely awful golf for most of the round, and shot 89. The course is tough, but other than #17 there are many recovery options and often it takes a fairly poor shot to lose a ball save the finishing stretch.

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #29 on: May 11, 2008, 08:20:08 PM »
What an anticlimatic finish and it doesn't seem fair to end 72 holes with one swing of a wedge...but it's the same for both players I guess, but I wouldn't want to lose it that way.

Does this make it a great course design? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just asking the question.
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

Tim Liddy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #30 on: May 11, 2008, 10:08:24 PM »
Speaking of  Bobby Weed-

One of my favorite stories about the TPC is Booby Weed’s membership application into the ASGCA of which one of the basic requirements is designing a minimum of 5 golf courses.  I believe that Pete was one of Bobby’s sponsors and told the membership committee Bobby had more than 5 because “he had done the TPC 3 times”.


Mark Bourgeois

Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #31 on: May 11, 2008, 10:54:52 PM »
Cary -- and Ran on the other thread

Aren't both of you judging not the 17th hole but the 73rd? Seems to me the criterion the PGA Tour applied wasn't "drama" as much as "end it."  Otherwise, why start there?

Mark

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2008, 11:36:00 PM »
 

 
And to bring some Merion spill-over into this thread, I don't think CB Macdonald was "the Father of American Golf Architecture", I'm starting to think it was Pete Dye.

 
 

Peter, please explain to me the reasoning to this statement.
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #33 on: May 11, 2008, 11:42:26 PM »
I would agree with Kalen's comment about Shadow Creek. Also, PGA West was built on a non descript abandoned orange orchard.


I think the question should read, "What is the best design from nothing" if I'm understanding Michael's line of thinking. If so, how about The Rawls course?
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Peter Pallotta

Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #34 on: May 12, 2008, 12:32:11 AM »
David -

That idea was tied to another one, i.e. that TPC seems to me a uniquely American course, and maybe the FIRST uniquely American course ever built. And that, in turn, was based on a sense that no architect more completely or successfully transmuted the fundamental principles of golf course design (as manifested in the great British links course) through the medium of a modern American soul than did Pete Dye.

I mean American soul as a compliment, i.e. optimistic, bold and honest, respectful of traditions but not rule-bound, a bursting sense of showmanship and self-confidence, inventive and willing to re-invent, and a friend of the entrepreneur, of technology, and of the big-time.

I’m not saying that Mr. Dye was the first to study the great British courses and to manifest their principles in his work. I’m not saying that Mr. Dye was the first to construct a golf course out of nothing, or out of virtually nothing, using modern technology. I’m not saying that Mr. Dye was the first to embody the American spirit in his work, or that he was the first self-confident showman. I’m not saying that Mr. Dye was the first to be knowledgeable about and respectful of the great traditions while still staying free to re-interpret those traditions and even to turn them upside down. And I’m not saying that Mr. Dye was the first to turn his attention to the big-money world of professional golf, and to tailor his work specifically to challenging the best players in the world.  But, it seems to me, Pete Dye was the first to be and do ALL OF THESE things ALL AT ONCE, and all together -- especially at TPC.

And in that sense, TPC seems to me to be the first uniquely AMERICAN course ever built.  And in the permission and confidence that Mr. Dye thus granted all those young designers who followed him to be uniquely American in their own way, I’d call HIM the “Father of American Golf Course Architecture” and not CB Macdonald.

IMHO.

Peter 

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #35 on: May 12, 2008, 09:30:51 AM »
I think it's important to realize that Sand Hills is a design because there were over 100 potential golf holes that the Coore and Crenshaw had available to utilize. 

Us hillbillies call that culling - not architecture.

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #36 on: May 12, 2008, 10:13:25 AM »
Mark: I agree with Ran that water is not a good design feature - maybe not for the same reasons, but I still agree.  Putting water into play is too simplistic and too penal - just create a lake a make the player hit a shot over or around the water - not too hard to design.  There are no recovery shots if you hit it in the water and a good design feature allows for a recovery shot  - at least that's my view.  I still view TPC as a well executed design for a tournament venue but unless you're Vijay getting all the balls you want for nothing, I wouldn't call it a fun home course.

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #37 on: May 12, 2008, 10:25:12 AM »
No in an answer no. However i do agree it is underated and a wonderful design worthy of study.

Matt Kardash

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #38 on: May 12, 2008, 11:08:13 AM »
I always thought that water on TPC wasn't quite as in play as often as everyone thinks. As long as you have a decent golf game there are only about 5 holes where water is realistically in play. These holes are 4, 13, 16, 17, 18 (and maybe you could say the canal that crosses the 9th is in play, but not really). To find water on any other hole you need to hit a monumentally bad shot.

I think Ran said that TPC had no great holes, except for 11. I think i could easily add 13 and 14 to that list. I think 13 is one of the most underrated holes anywhere. I find the dynamics of that hole fascinating. It always kind of reminded me of a much better, and more fun version of the 16th at augusta.
the interviewer asked beck how he felt "being the bob dylan of the 90's" and beck quitely responded "i actually feel more like the bon jovi of the 60's"

tlavin

Re: Is the TPC the Best Course DESIGN in the Past 60 Years?
« Reply #39 on: May 12, 2008, 11:15:20 AM »
I agree with the sentiment that it's the best design out of a piece of land that had absolutely nothing that recommended the placement of a golf course.  From that perspective, it's genius.  Also, I really do believe that it is the best test in the world of tournament golf.  Any style of golfer can win at Sawgrass, as we witnessed this past weekend.

Trying to answer what is the best course design in the past 60 years is surely an almost unanswerable question, because of the many variables.  Sand Hills, Pacific Dunes and many other terrific designs had some geographical and geological advantages that recommended the site for golf.  Sawgrass and Shadow Creek had nothing of the sort.  All four are, in my judgment, terrific designs and amazing accomplishments in the world of golf course architecture.  If I were voting, I'd probably lean toward the former, over the latter, because of my own personal biases, but one does have to give enormous credit to creating a masterpiece out of  a tabula rasa, as was done at Sawgrass and Shadow.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back