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.


Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
I was wondering if there are some features from the classical era which would not be well received today? I am not talking about features which could not be done today because of environmental issues, etc. If there aren't any, does that add to the genius of that era in that they have so well stood the test of time?

Jed Peters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2008, 12:04:44 PM »
No cart paths.

No water hazards.

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2008, 12:18:37 PM »
By some "highly-skilled" golfers,I think punch bowl greens are not well received.

As example,a few years ago I was playing Black Creek in Chattanooga with 3 pretty accomplished amateurs.Each one thought a hole/green which allowed a ~ wayward shot to end up as close as an accurate shot was incredible.They took the position that a shot wide of the target should never be rewarded purposely.

I thought it was pretty interesting.Luckily,I'm not weighted down by being highly-skilled.

Sam Morrow

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2008, 12:33:20 PM »
By some "highly-skilled" golfers,I think punch bowl greens are not well received.

As example,a few years ago I was playing Black Creek in Chattanooga with 3 pretty accomplished amateurs.Each one thought a hole/green which allowed a ~ wayward shot to end up as close as an accurate shot was incredible.They took the position that a shot wide of the target should never be rewarded purposely.

I thought it was pretty interesting.Luckily,I'm not weighted down by being highly-skilled.

Interesting example, I wonder if it's that they don't understand the quirk and because they don't understand it they don't like it.

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2008, 12:38:53 PM »
Don't see "chocolate drop" mounds utilized much anymore.

Ken

Anthony Gray

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2008, 12:47:05 PM »
By some "highly-skilled" golfers,I think punch bowl greens are not well received.

As example,a few years ago I was playing Black Creek in Chattanooga with 3 pretty accomplished amateurs.Each one thought a hole/green which allowed a ~ wayward shot to end up as close as an accurate shot was incredible.They took the position that a shot wide of the target should never be rewarded purposely.

I thought it was pretty interesting.Luckily,I'm not weighted down by being highly-skilled.

Interesting example, I wonder if it's that they don't understand the quirk and because they don't understand it they don't like it.

  The advent of target golf has taken away imagination and variety to shot making. Great observatoin Sam.

  Anthony


JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #6 on: December 24, 2008, 12:50:55 PM »
By some "highly-skilled" golfers,I think punch bowl greens are not well received.

As example,a few years ago I was playing Black Creek in Chattanooga with 3 pretty accomplished amateurs.Each one thought a hole/green which allowed a ~ wayward shot to end up as close as an accurate shot was incredible.They took the position that a shot wide of the target should never be rewarded purposely.

I thought it was pretty interesting.Luckily,I'm not weighted down by being highly-skilled.



Interesting example, I wonder if it's that they don't understand the quirk and because they don't understand it they don't like it.

As been stated on here before,real good players don't usually "do" quirk.

Anything that allows a less-skilled golfer to "keep up" with a highly-skilled player,they don't like.I guess that would be one way for them to define "fairness" in a golf course.Hit a good shot,get rewarded;hit a bad shot,get penalized.The good players whom I know live in a very black/white world where golf is concerned.

Put blind shots in this category as well,IMO.

Kirk Gill

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #7 on: December 24, 2008, 01:32:18 PM »
An easy way to approach this question might be to ask which "classical features" have tended to be removed the most from older courses during periodic "improvements" over time?

A couple things come to mind - cross bunkers, square greens, center-line hazards.........
"After all, we're not communists."
                             -Don Barzini

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #8 on: December 24, 2008, 01:41:53 PM »
I spose the most messed with feature is width, both in bringing the rough in and narrowing fairway corridors with trees, but this is a more than welcomed these days.

One specific architectural feature not often used these days (I spose its because people don't like it) is front to back sloping greens.

Ciao
« Last Edit: December 24, 2008, 01:46:26 PM by Sean Arble »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

rchesnut

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2008, 01:57:19 PM »
Thinking about my round at North Berwick, I'd say stone walls that come into play on the course.

Also, thinking about Pasatiempo, holes that require a tee shot over a road.  MacKenzie saw nothing wrong with putting a tee on the "other side of the road" and requiring players to drive over it....he did it on 2 (that tee has been moved, but one still exists that is occasionally used) and 10 (gone).  He overcame objections by arguing that drivers would simply stop and wait for people to hit.   He did it on #1 at Cypress as well. 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2008, 02:41:45 PM »
Rob:

Your last observation is a good one.

In the old days, nothing on a golf course was really seen as a liability issue, so hitting across roads was okay ... and made the course flow a lot better than putting out, walking 75-100 yards from the green across the road to the next tee, and continuing.

An analysis of the top ten courses is particularly striking:

At Pine Valley, you hit across the driveway for the approach to the 18th hole and the tee shot at the fifth.
At Cypress Point, you tee off across 17 Mile Drive at the first.
At Pebble Beach, you hit your tee shots at 15 and 16 across residential streets.
At National, you hit the tee shot on 8 and the approach on 11 across Sebonac Road (which is pretty busy).
At Shinnecock, you hit the approach at 12 and the tee shot at 13 across a residential street.
At St. Andrews, you hit your tee shots on 1 and 18 across Granny Clark's Wynd.

There are tons of other examples of this.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2008, 02:43:22 PM »
Another feature (which I'm not sure counts as classical, but you see it a lot on older courses) which is frowned on today for liability reasons, is having a tee shot which hits over the previous green.

There are lots of examples of this overseas (Ballybunion and Lahinch and Royal Worlington jump to mind); not so many in America.

TEPaul

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2008, 02:55:41 PM »
I would say the classical feature (if one wants to call it a feature rather than maintenance) which would not be well received today is the treatment of the sand surfaces of bunkering back in the old days. I think most all golfers (perhaps present company excluded) would view the way it mostly was back then that way as unfair and far too inconsistent.

TEPaul

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #13 on: December 24, 2008, 03:02:19 PM »
Rob Chestnut:

Your observation about the proximity of roads on classic courses is a very good one. I'm actually beginning to consider that some of the old designers (perhaps primarily including Macdonald) didn't only not attempt to avoid roads but he may've actually even looked for interesting ways to use them in design and strategy.

I guess we can never forget that the proximity of a road in one of the most famous holes in the world long, long ago (#17 TOC) did not go unnoticed and unconsidered by the Old Guys as perhaps even a strategic consideration in the play of holes.

Jay Flemma

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #14 on: December 24, 2008, 03:10:10 PM »
Rob:

Your last observation is a good one.

In the old days, nothing on a golf course was really seen as a liability issue, so hitting across roads was okay ... and made the course flow a lot better than putting out, walking 75-100 yards from the green across the road to the next tee, and continuing.

An analysis of the top ten courses is particularly striking:

At Pine Valley, you hit across the driveway for the approach to the 18th hole and the tee shot at the fifth.
At Cypress Point, you tee off across 17 Mile Drive at the first.
At Pebble Beach, you hit your tee shots at 15 and 16 across residential streets.
At National, you hit the tee shot on 8 and the approach on 11 across Sebonac Road (which is pretty busy).
At Shinnecock, you hit the approach at 12 and the tee shot at 13 across a residential street.
At St. Andrews, you hit your tee shots on 1 and 18 across Granny Clark's Wynd.

There are tons of other examples of this.



Aren't there two shots (or is it three) over roads at Atlantic City CC?

Crossovers don't get used much today either, although I have no problem with Bayonne.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #15 on: December 24, 2008, 03:41:24 PM »
Jay:

There was actually one more road crossing at Atlantic City before we did our work there ... the second hole was a longer par-4, with its green across the road just behind today's fifth green.

We shortened the second hole and lengthened the fifth to take that road crossing out of play ... you couldn't see the cars coming from the right as they crossed the old second hole.  (In that case, however, the old hole was built first, and the road was added after the fact, to get to some interior lots.)

You still have to play across a road on the second shot to the first hole; the road accesses a couple of lots in between holes 1 & 9.

Jay Flemma

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #16 on: December 24, 2008, 04:02:23 PM »
Tom:  I remember those shots well.  That was a fun round.  I also took your shortcut on 10.  Of course then I double-crossed one (just like I did on 1 tee at Crystal), and found the H2O anyway.  Ugh.

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #17 on: December 24, 2008, 04:19:13 PM »
I have seen modern courses which require a shot over a road - I believe that Gil Hanse's French Creek has a par 3 over the entrance road.

Punchbowl greens are rare today - Blackstone in AZ has a par 4 where part of the green is a punchbowl.  I have thought it interesting that the punchbowl at NGLA was so late in the round - it does seem that a feature which could reward the lesser quality shot would logically not be in a position to affect a result toward the end of a match. 

How about the crowned greens at Pinehurst #2 - I know there is substantial evidence that maintenance practices have caused the crowning to become more severe - but I haven't seen that feature today.  I think what you do see today is severe drop offs on one side of a green but you do have a safe option which leaves you with a difficult/long putt. 

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #18 on: December 24, 2008, 04:22:42 PM »
At Lake Chabot GC in Oakland, you cross the entrance road on holes 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11.  On all but one hole the road crosses through a potential landing area.  The course was built around 1920 I believe.  Has anyone seen a car hit there?

Another worthy topic might be: "Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received on GCA.com Today"

Tom Huckaby

Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #19 on: December 24, 2008, 04:24:58 PM »
At Lake Chabot GC in Oakland, you cross the entrance road on holes 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11.  On all but one hole the road crosses through a potential landing area.  The course was built around 1920 I believe.  Has anyone seen a car hit there?

Another worthy topic might be: "Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received on GCA.com Today"

I have indeed seen a cart hit at Lake Chabot. I was not the perpetrator.  It was after a few bounces, but the bang against the side of the car still gave a fine sound.

And that would be a topic with very few positive replies.   ;D

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #20 on: December 24, 2008, 04:31:21 PM »
Ian,

You beat me to the punch.  I was thinking that based on road crossings, we now know that Lake Chabot is indeed in very lofty company as it is the grand mother of road crossings over any other course I've played.   ;D

P.S. I've seen some close calls as well for cars being hit....it feels like your playing dodge ball when you drive in and out of the place.

P.P.S.  We were sitting in the "backstop cage" on 6 tee once when we got rattled by an errant approach shot into 5 green.  ;D

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #21 on: December 24, 2008, 04:48:34 PM »
 :D  I get the feeling LCGC gets a disproportionate  amount of commentary on this site (or maybe it's a hidden gem? :P ).  Thanks for your account, Tom, I'd be willing to bet it's a weekly or at least monthly occurrence!

Kalen, while sitting in my playing partner's cart on that same tee, a bladed shot whizzed by us and hit the dashboard.  If the guy had actually yelled "fore" my friend might be dead...  :-X

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #22 on: December 24, 2008, 04:53:16 PM »
I think the best seat in the house is sitting in the cage behind 9 green and watching the balls plummet to earth off that cliff-like tee.

And it gets real fun when its wet out there and the ball disappears after almost completly plugging in the green.  ;D

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #23 on: December 24, 2008, 04:56:08 PM »
A couple of the templates come to mind, such as Alps and to a lesser extent Biarritz. One need only point to places like Prestwick, North Berwick, Sandwich, TOC, etc. and know that alot of those holes would not fly if built today.
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Name Some Classical Features Which Would Not Be Well Received Today
« Reply #24 on: December 24, 2008, 05:03:55 PM »
I think the best seat in the house is sitting in the cage behind 9 green and watching the balls plummet to earth off that cliff-like tee.

And it gets real fun when its wet out there and the ball disappears after almost completly plugging in the green.  ;D
:D Apparently that spot's not safe either.  Someone I played with over the summer said he nearly got hit by a ball that flew through a hole in the screen (look in the upper left corner next time you're there).  That's one angry golf course.

I also noticed on my last round the remnants of a paved cart path that went straight down that hill.  THAT must have been scary.



Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back