A good start for the new century?

[Ran Morrissett]

What are the highlight courses that will open at some point in 2000?There is Kingsbarn in May, which sounds super.Greg Norman has a course opening next September on the Mornington Peninsula south of Melbourne, OZ that is on geniune links land and will be super.C/C's Easthampton sounds/looks of exception.What else? I must be missing some surely.Would these courses have been built similarly in 1990? or can we see a marked improvement in architecture over just the past decade?  

[TEPaul]

The three courses mentioned by Ran seem to be designed as either 1/ A full-blooded return to the look and playability of the European classics or the American "Golden Age" classics. This is a great direction and really encouraging! There are three areas these "Renaissance" courses and designers will be wrestling with in the forseeable future in an attempt to wean the golfing public away from their "Modern Age" preoccupations. 1/ Trees2/ The desire for green grass (no roll).3/ The incompatibility of green contours and higher green speeds.I can't imagine how the solutions to these problems will play out but I'll bet the solutions will get progressively more difficult from 1 to 3.

[TEPaul]

This post has got me thinking about an even more difficult problem of the "Modern Age" mentality to the revival of the design and playability of classic courses. I hope to keep this to a reasonable length but here goes.Present preoccupation with par, GIR, gross score and the entire concept of "fairness" is totally incompatibile with many features and concepts of the strategic classics and the artistic freedom of the new renaissance designers. How can these directions and elements be made more compatable? Some answers may be found in the weaknesses of the handicapping systems. It's evident that gross score posting (or adjusted gross score) does not and never will translate well to a match play context. We can also assume that the vast majority of the world plays match play. Let me leave this for a moment and go to design.Do we know of or can we conceive of a course or design that has the tee to green and green complex variety and adaptability to accomodate a 72 hole stroke play tournament without going over the top and at the same time offer a match play setup (64 format) where par etc. is of little consequence or might become of no consideration? Could St.Andrews or Pine Valley offer this? Possibly! This would be the ultimate in adaptability, wouldn't it?Back to handicapping. The technology is here today to offer uniformity, score posting, and data analysis to produce individual handicaps for either form of play. With this handicap flexibility a course that spans the spectrum from a wild and fun match play setup to a non over the top stroke play setup you would have the best of both worlds and a solution to an inherent incompatability. Theoretically, the more varied the course, the more varied the individual handicap might become in either format. It would seem, however, that the variation would always be working in the direction of greater equality.Add in the necessary setup understanding of the course and its adaptability from maintenance, golf and tournament committeesand you would have total elasticity and a solution to the problem of the "damping down" of classic playability. More importantly you would have a green light for the artistic freedom of the "Renaissance" guys to design back to the way golf should be played.The "Golden Age" strategic designers were great at designing for every level of player. Maybe it will be the architects of the next millenium who will design in a solution for the inherent incompatibilty of the two formats-with a little help from the bureaucrats.I might be nuts, but it seems reasonable to me.

[John Sessions]

What is going on in Canada? Given some of the land (both interior and coastal), there ought to be a couple of stunners coming from there each year.

[Ran Morrissett]

Tom, First, I would hate to be your keyboard  Second, when I read your post, I can't help but think of Swinley Forest. There are no formal competitions, people don't fuss over  handicaps, nobody carries a pencil/scorecard, and the idea of par was just introduced in the past decade or so.Golf needs to be simple; it is far more enjoyable as a game. People in the UK have such an attitude and the courses are more fun as people don't worry about blind shots or fairness.I think it is the attitude toward golf in the US that is leading designers in to making far more "busy" and "complicated" courses than they should. As you ask, how can we change/reverse it?

[T_MacWood]

I agree completely, golf is much more enjoyable game when kept simple. The American's preoccupation with keeping score, of which I am guilty, can potentially ruin a wonderful day of golf. It takes away from the more experimental aspects of the game that match play premotes. The most enjoyable round of golf I had this year was in a gayle force wind at Whistling Straits. I made a decision on the 1st tee that I was going to enjoy the experience and not worry about my score. I had to manufacture some of the strangest shots that my imagination could mustard, like a hard knockdown 4-iron on the 137 yard 4th. I also was severely humbled more than once, but it didn't bother me, I was looking forward to the next opportunity to test my skill and imagination.I agree with Tom and Ran, we need to look overseas for a new attitude. Golf should be simple, challenging and fun.(Two other disturbing trends that need to be changed, too many don't walk and the demise of the caddy)

[Scott Kraus]

Don't forget about Crenshaw and Coore's course in South Carolina that is broadly going to pay tribute to Seth Raynor - that is the number one course for next year on my to-do list.

[JohnV]

Tom, after 3 rounds at Bandon Dunes earlier this year, I did the same thing for the last three rounds and had a wonderful time.  My wife thought I was somewhat nuts (or the wind had gotten to me) as I went about hitting all kinds of shots, just to see what would happen and laughing like a kid at the results.Match play is great, but it is still a competetion.  Frequently, I just want to hit shots and see what happens and not worry about what anyone else is doing or what my score is.  I'm not one to practice on the range and I don't see how you can hit those kind of shots out there anyway so I'll go on the course by myself and have fun with it.

[Dan Herrmann]

Hmm...  Have things in the world of GCA changed in the last 9 years?

[Mike_Cirba]

Hmm...  Have things in the world of GCA changed in the last 9 years?

Some obvious changes...

Tom Paul now uses paragraphs.

Tom MacWood is missed, the big lunkhead.

Ran rarely starts threads.

There are many more participants these days.


The one similarity and universal, timeless truth is what Tom MacWood summed up neatly;

"The American's preoccupation with keeping score, of which I am guilty, can potentially ruin a wonderful day of golf. It takes away from the more experimental aspects of the game that match play premotes. Golf should be simple, challenging and fun.(Two other disturbing trends that need to be changed, too many don't walk and the demise of the caddy)"

[Sean Leary]

What C and C course is that in South Carolina?

[Bart Bradley]

Chechessee Creek Club?

Bart