So, Pete's post has stuck in my brain for awhile now. And re-reading my response, "Something so basic and fundamental, but yet it changes everything," is now stuck in my head.
I agree with Pete that the single teeing grounds for all players would affect how each and every golfer chose to negotiate those hazards. Each to their own ability...that is all they could do.
BUT...what about the clubs and balls they were using when the courses were designed? Something so basic and fundamental, but yet I think we overlook it so very often. Frankly, I think being experienced with the golf clubs being used in the early 1900's is essentially to understanding what Ross, MacDonald, and Mackenzie were doing in terms of their strategic architecture.
I think back to playing The National Golf Links of America this past summer. I played it...and I am not really a good golfer by any stretch...but my first time out I shot 85. None of the par 5's felt daunting to me. But I played it with modern clubs. The bunkers were not too big of an issue with my modern 60 degree wedge. Hitting over the Alps hills wasn't an issue.
The strategy on that one...hit 3 wood as hard as I can at the aiming stick. Of course, I landed in one of those greenside bunkers. But, no problem, sand wedge that thing out and move on to the Redan.
However, could I play that hole with the same strategy using hickories? No way. A whole new level of strategy would have to be employed. And I think REALLY knowing your game and your limitations would have been a real key.
Another thing I notice using old clubs/balls and modern clubs/balls. Stopping the ball. Pinehurst #2 hole 5 (which I'll post again)...hitting over that bunker and stopping that ball on the green with older clubs/balls would have been a really tricky task. Heck, could it even have been done? I don't know. I think that would open up the strategy of playing to miss the green right and leave enough green and fairway to run the ball up. Again, knowing what you can do would have been a HUGE key given the relatively low level of technological advantage available to golfers back when this course was first built.
In fact, the reason I got interested in getting hickories and era balls (and the reason I hope to get persimmon clubs this Christmas to go with my balata balls) was to play with them...not just hit them once or twice...but to play rounds of golf with them and see what they were capable of doing and to see what effect they would have on how I managed my way around a golf course. What I found has been interesting for sure, but I am sure I've got A LOT more to learn.
I think what I've learned thus far is that using them required more understanding of my capabilities with the different clubs and different balls...and perhaps more strategy to score well. And I am wondering if modern equipment has minimized (or at least hindered) the need for strategic golf. Heck, if you can hit a ball 180 yards out of rough and still stop the ball on the green...what strategy is needed? Bomb and gouge, right?
But I suppose this has facilitated the need for greens stimped at 13, super deep rough, and narrow fairways. But isn't that penal architecture?
Anyway, just some thoughts.