[Jeff_Brauer]

I have wanted to start this thread for a while, and on my "Who has the most varied greens?" thread, someone answered "those who follow the land" which prompts this today.

Please name me five greens from any course or designer in the US that follow the contour that existed when the course was built.  I believe even the greens at TOC were built, albeit some only by slighltly leveling the existing ridges they sit on.  Garden City and a few others may have some ground level greens in the US, but I can't really think of a truly "left the natural contours alone" green by Ross, MacKenzie, Thomas, etc.

I believe they were all built and that the "follow the ground" mantra is largely a myth and always has been.  Of course, if someone can name me several that I haven't seen, I will stand corrected.

Thanks in advance.

[Chip Gaskins]

#9 at Bandon Trails certainly doesn't seem like anything was done to the land.  i think i have even heard that Bill Coore has confirmed it.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Chip, for that matter, 9 at Sand Hills might qualify, too, although I always suspected that the big hole front left of the green was dug to get dirt to level the fw in front.

[paul cowley]

Jeff....I'll supply five from our soon to be opened course in Cabo.

All were either remove top vegetation and/or just finish grade the sand, add an irrigation loop and plant....no greens mix or sub surface drainage required.

#2
#5
#7
#15
#16
#17

Actually that's six.

[paul cowley]

I just re read the heading "a US Green", oh well, I will have to get back to you because we do have quite a few, but just spread around.

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
It would be impossible......aerification and mowing and nothing else would change them.....
Happy New Year.
Mike

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jeff, when I played Sand Hills a number of years ago I was having trouble with the par three 12th? (13?) It is an uphill 180 yarder.  The green runs away from the tee and I had a deuce of holding the green.  As luck would have it I had dinner with Bill Coore.  So I asked him, "What kind of shot did you envision for that hole?" I thought that was a clever way to phrase the question.  His answer was simply, "We just flattened down the bumpy spots on the green a bit and threw down some grass seed."  I guess you might call this a lay of the land green.

I might add number 8 at Royal North Devon.  It does not appear as though it has been manufactured at all.  The same might be said of the pretty bland 17th green.

Sorry about including RND  a forgot you asked for US greens.

[PCCraig]

The 7th at TCC in brookline is "unchanged" and the oldest existing hole on the course. It sits on the ridge and has some wild contours that are borderline unfair in spots, but is really cool. A front left pin is almost impossible to get it close to.

[Carl Rogers]

Jeff et al,
Not to hyjack the thread ... but ... isn't the allusion and illusion of careful sculpteding that creates a new defintion and context of 'natural'?

Tom D,
If you look at this thread, how much dirt was moved to create the 14th green at Riverfront? ... some thing tells me not much.

[Bill_McBride]

#11 at Pacific Dunes appears to have just been scraped more or less level.

There was some discussion in the past few days about one of C&C's first courses, the Cliffside course at Barton Creek.  A number of those greens slope front to back and appear to just sprawl across the natural terrain.  That's the main reason I love that course although the Fazio duo there get most of the attention.

[Adam Clayman]

Jeff, following the lay of the land does not necessarily mean greens are not shaped. To me, it means they tie in with the surrounding land, which was sensibly used as a guide in how to shape them, But i'll yield to those who have actually built one or two.

Wild Horse's  16th was purported to just be sitting there.

[Kyle Henderson]

#5 at Bandon Trails and #9 at Rustic Canyon, supposedly.

[Tom Jefferson]

Chip;
Number Nine green at Bandon Trails is above the surrounding terrain, and moves from grade in the front to about two feet above in the rear.

Number Five green is, to my limited knowledge mostly at grade, though I do know that Jim Craig moved some sand with shovels!!

Tom

[Mike Hendren]

 I believe even the greens at TOC were built, albeit some only by slighltly leveling the existing ridges they sit on. 

Jeff, I agree that the greens at The Old Course reflect the hand of man.  Could the 9th be the exception?

Mike

[Phil_the_Author]

Jeff,

You opined, "I believe they were all built and that the "follow the ground" mantra is largely a myth and always has been.  Of course, if someone can name me several that I haven't seen, I will stand corrected..."

Well, you must not have played Bethpage Black and please be ready to "stand corrected." On the Black, greens number 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 14, 15 & 18 were all built by "following the ground." They weren't pushed up or manipulated into their respective shapes other than by the simple act of digging out tree stumps and adding some soil to the holes and fertilizer to the defined green surfaces. They are absolutely "following the ground" upon which they sit.

In fact, one of the unique aspecys of them is that when they were made, a great deal of abnormal material (abnormal in the sense that greens built up wouldn't have) such as twigs, ground bark, etc.. that has deteriorated and broken down over the years create a number of little imperfections in the putting surface that come to fore the tighter they are cut and faster they run.

This was quite evident during the Open in 2002 as putts broke much more than most thought they would, even when they read the surface as being "flat."

Even the other greens that were built by "pushing soil up" to form them had a great deal of this plant materials ground into them and the same imperfections occur on these as well.

On the Red course, greens number 1, 3, 4, 12, 13, 15 & 18, were all built in the same fashion. The original Blue course had a number of greens that would also qualify as such.

[Pete_Pittock]

The greens at Oakmont seemed to be at grade, #1 and #10  come to mind.

At Portland GC # 6, 8, 9, 12, 18. Waverley has a number - 3, 6, 7, 10.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phillip,

I haven't been to BP in a while, but your assertion that they were that minimalistic suprises me, mostly because the bunkers were so "built" that I figured that the greens probably were shaped together with them. 

Pete,

I do think those greens at Oakmont are pretty close to ground level.  However, most of the greens at Oakmont are built, including the contours which don't appear natural on greens like 9 and 18, with their troughs and shelfs.

I appreciate the input.  Even so, my basic point is that with 15,000 courses totaling probably 225,000 greens, even if this list expands to 225 greens, the total amount of "follow the land greens" is 0.1% of the total.  It just doesn't happen very often, even for those gca's who try - like Bill Coore and Paul Cowley - and probably never did in this country, and maybe not in Scotland either.

Carl,

Yes, most greens are sculpted to achieve certain necessary functions - raised for drainage or visibility, built to be front to back sloping to hold shots, shaped to have at least two major drain swales for drainage, etc.  There is an art to tying that basic fill pad artistically into the existing surroundings to create the illusion that it is somewhat natural.  The basics include generally:

Following the ground with the greens contours (if it drains left, the green drains left),

Building the surrounds to mimic the natural ground - the highest mounds/earthforms should be on the high side of the green

Trying not to build slopes that are more than double the natural grade (some steepening is required to fit a basically flat pad into a sloping site) although sometimes a steep bank can work too.

Placing enough fill in at least the bottom of any built slope to eliminate the flat existing to built mound look and get a full transition back to natural grade in some naturally plausible way.   

[Phil_the_Author]

Jeff,

You commented, "I haven't been to BP in a while, but your assertion that they were that minimalistic suprises me, mostly because the bunkers were so "built" that I figured that the greens probably were shaped together with them..."

Consider the greens I mentioned on the Black, numbers 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 14, 15 & 18. Of these, only #13 is built where the fairway runs directly into it. 2, 3, 5, 14, 15 & 18 are built onto the tops of hillsides. #8 is built at the bottom of a natural valley form with the land rising up from the man-made retention pond fronting the green.

Other holes, such as 1, 4, 7, 9, 12 & 16 are extensions of the fairway entrances which were built up a small amount to appear as almost natural to the raised greens they front. They almost appear as if they rise naturally out of the ground. This is an aspect of there design that screams "Tillinghast" as the designer. He took great pride throughout his career in doing the finish designs of green entrances first and blending the green complex into how he expected them to influence play.

[Kyle Harris]

The 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 16th and 18th at Cobb's Creek.

Any number of greens on Findlay Layouts around Philadelphia, including most of Walnut Lane and Reading.

The 5th, 8th and 13th at Huntingdon Valley.

In the Ross camp:

The 8th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 16th and 18th at Jeffersonville GC.
The 3rd, 10th, and 11th at Schuylkill CC.

Isn't the ability to have a lay of the land green almost strictly site dependent? The Old Course has a lot going for it in that regard and on a site like that, why would one build up a green?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Phillip,

I looked at the photos on this site, and only 15 showed clearly, but it clearly is flattened out, with fill added on the right, because the surrounding slopes are 15-20%.  If No. 8 has a man made retention pond, then certainly the green was constructed, not found.

We may have different ideas concerning "following the ground."

I was really speaking of no construction other than tree clearing as you mention in your post.  I am still not convinced that many greens at BP really follow that mode.  As Kyle says, its really site dependent, and very few sites lend themselves non building of greens, with 1.5-3% slopes that can be used as is after clearing.

For that matter, I don't recall any greens at HV that simply follow the ground contours that were there, and I think the Flynn plans that I have seen (again, from memory) show some swales, etc., bunker construction et al that certainly imply that he built his standard greens, not followed the ground, even if some of them sit fairly close to ground level.

[Mike McGuire]

I think Erin hills has five. I have photos of #10 where they scraped out the green pad.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Yes, I agree EH has a few.

[Don_Mahaffey]

do these count?
15th, hard to see the green...because it's at grade?

6th, again sort of hard to see the green defined...because its at grade?

16th green


there are a few more that qualify...I think

[Jeff_Mingay]

Jeff,

It's tough to know exactly what other designers have done, but like Paul Cowley, I can speak from experience (if Canada counts!). At our last few projects, we've built greens using existing grade and contour on several occasions. Blackhawk: #9, #15 and #17; Sagebrush: #4, #6, #7, #14 and #15, for example.

[Sean_A]

do these count?
15th, hard to see the green...because it's at grade?

6th, again sort of hard to see the green defined...because its at grade?

16th green


there are a few more that qualify...I think

Don

Stop showing pix of that blasted course.  It looks too good to be true.  Who would have thought, grade level greens? 

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()