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.


Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2009, 03:19:09 PM »
All of the responses I have read here seems to make sense and work for the person using them.....none of us are going to change the others mindset and rightly so....

Kelly,
I tend to agree that there is a lot of skinning in all the original plans.....but people like that for some reason.....

Mike N....
I haven't seen Ballyneal greens but I do know that for the most part my greens come about in the field form the centerpoint....BUT I know what shot values and strategies I was after in the original strategy plan...and it usually remains about the same....
I will say that one of my favorite greens from the ODG's is the green that Jeff mentions...I have seen it in many places and rarely have I heard it discussed here.....I know it was at Merion in the original course but rarely has it been seen ...as Jeff says owners rarely allow it...but the
BIG HONKIN green is right up there with the Biarritz, the Redan.  CB McDonald had recommended it on several of the holes at Merion and Augusta National back in 1975.....(maybe this is revisionist history) ;D ;D ;D
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2009, 09:16:42 PM »
I also feel more comfy if I have a plan showing the 5% ADA ramp. Here in TX, we have to have those submitted for permits as well and then they check later. If I have it on plan, and it doesn't get built, then at least I have some evidence it ain't my fault. 

Jeff:
Can you explain what parts of a course are affected by the ADA?  Thx,
Carl

Don_Mahaffey

Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #27 on: January 01, 2010, 09:15:07 AM »
Jeff,
You write "I don't think those making the distinction between "pre-planned" and "on site" planning knows how indistinct those two methods are, or can be."

Ok, let’s assume I don't know how "indistinct" these two methods can be. Then please answer this question [and of course let me know if I just don't know what I'm talking about as this is just my opinion]. Why are the greens done by the drawers so different then the ones built by the Doak? Can you draw this, do you even like this? #2 at WP during grow in:


Ballyneal #7


When I see greens that were preplanned they look preplanned and when I see greens like those at Ballyneal, Apache Stronghold, and other courses where I know most of the work was done as described by Tom, the greens just look like they "fit" better to me.  
I'll grant you this, if I've heard one complaint about Doak, and C & C its good players don't like defending par at the green. It seems good players think par is best defended at the tee. So, I concede there may be a different mindset that drives the two approaches as well.

I think the two methods are different and I believe I can see the difference, but I also concede I'm biased as I like Tom's courses...and I like defending par at the green. I have more fun on courses that give me a little more room to play and ramp up the challenge the closer I get to the hole.  


Happy New Year and I hope all the architects who participated on this thread build a course, or two, this year.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #28 on: January 01, 2010, 09:39:03 AM »
Carl,

ADA requires at least one accessible route of less than 5% slope from the cart path to each green, two tees per hole, and to the fw at least every 75 feet.

Don,

I could draw either of those, with an initial opinion that the Ballyneal one shown would be easier than the Wolf Point green shown.  Your example actually strikes me as very non Doakian, with a fairly distinct teir in the green.  I have said before, and I think TD also said it, that when you use the contour line method of drawing greens plans there is a real tendency to bring two lines together into a one foot tier like that.

As to Wolf Point No. 2, if I was going for that concept on plan, I would draw the green outline at  big scale, like 10 scale, draw in the two or three basic drainage swales, then reach in my pocket for a handful of change and scatter it randomly on the plan in one quick toss.  I would then mark the quarters as 1' mounds, dimes as 1/2 mounds, nickels as 1/4 foot mounds and pennies as 1 inch mounds.  That would probably get an even more random plan of contours than a dozer guy, who also tends to repeat, and who is working in a constant unit of measurement - the width of the dozer blade. But, in both cases, the final would have to flow and there would be some field changes and it probably not be worth it to try too hard to relicate those random Diddel bumps on plan. 

The complaints I hear about Doak courses are similar to the ones you hear.  I think I tried to start that conceptual thread once and it got nowhere, but in reality, is defending or testing par mostly at the green the most balanced test of golf a gca can create? 

Many competitive Texas golfers (my son and his HS and college buddies included) dislike many aspects of the Rawls course.  They think the fw are so wide that its just bomb and gouge and that the green contours are ridiculous since you can land very close to many pins only to be rejected far, far away.  So they think the course favors long hitters and great putters over accurate drive and iron players. I am sure if we analyzed it hole by hole, we could find some greens and holes that favor other aspects of the game.

Of course, the old Augusta got the same complaints, leading to the Fazio changes.  But, no question, some elements of Doak designs go well against conventional thinking and are not for everyone. 

Happy New Year to you and all, and yes, I hope to be fortunate enough to build at least one new cousre in 2010.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #29 on: January 01, 2010, 10:06:10 AM »
Don/Jeff,
Listening to you guys discuss the "defend par at the green" scenario......
And the wide fairway "bomb" scenario....
Let me ask a question of you both....do you think you can have a strategic DRIVER hole if the driving area is narrowed and does not allow extremely different approaches to a green?   Now I'm not speaking of strategic by changing to a hybrid or three wood on the tee..etc.....
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #30 on: January 01, 2010, 10:12:34 AM »
I’ve spoken with many who do not hold Ballyneal to be quite the equal of other modern masterpieces such as Sand Hills because the greens in Holyoke are “over the top.”  I disagree with this assessment. Provided they don’t stimp above an 11, the greens are more than playable in strong winds. Sure, it’s tough to make putts, but the course is designed for match play (there are no tee markers, for instance). Each green is distinctive, memorable, and fascinating, not only for putting, but especially for chipping, pitching and approaching from wedge to wood distances. The daily pin position often dictate playing strategies from tee to green. Generally, the difficulty of a recovery shots is proportional to the magnitude of the error associated with the previous shot.

To my mind, the greens are criticized because they defy convention, but that boldness is the very source of their greatness. Certainly, I don’t think many if any other courses should try to copy Ballyneal’s putting surfaces. But, based on my limited travels, I consider these greens, as a complete set, to be ground-breaking “products” that tie in perfectly with their surroundings.

There are very few courses for which I have vivid memories of the green contours (even after several rounds) on more than a handful of holes. At Ballyneal, I can see the faces of 18 long-distance friends when I close my eyes.


Kyle,
     What handicap golfer do you think can most enjoy the demands of the greens at Ballyneal?

Great thread Don and all who have contributed. One of the best in a long time.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #31 on: January 01, 2010, 10:17:26 AM »
Mike,

Good morning and happy new year!

I think it has to do with the length of the hole and the angle of the green.  Doodle out a green angled 10 degrees left and extend the edges back out to the fw.  If we presume we want the strategic golfer to hit to the exact right edge of the fw for an open front approach shot, we will find that on a projected 200 yard approach, the width of the irght side of the fw would be twice what it would be if we anticipated a 100 yard approach.

If the fw is wider than that projection line on that side, it may be too easy a tee shot for strategy, or at least it will be easier.  If the green angles 20 degrees instead of 10 in the example above, the fw must be wider to find a perfect landing spot with advantage, if it angles 5 degrees, it could be narrower.

Now, not all approaches are coming from one distance,  nor does the approach need to from any exact angle to be easier than one from another angle, etc. so I am not proposing any new forumula for design.  But, in general, the geometry of the hole does help determine how wide the fw must be for strategy, and you can get into silly, useless width from a strategic perspective, at least IMHO.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #32 on: January 01, 2010, 10:43:25 AM »
Jeff,
Happy New Year to you also....
I understand your description....would you  agree that strategy begins at the green and goes toward the tee?   I think that one of the few ways left to protect from  the good players is to increase the difficulty at the green based on fairway position.....especially since so many of the players today are dropping the ball almost straight down on the greens.   Did you watch the tour school final stage and the bitching about those greens.....I hear they are going in to change them now....
I really like what Kyle said above  "Generally, the difficulty of a recovery shots is proportional to the magnitude of the error associated with the previous shot."     

IMHO the biggest pro/con today with severely contoured greens is the perception of the modern golfer as to what the game should give them for a good shot....I think the good players of today consider fairness such a huge part of the game....whther it be a consistent sand in bunkers, no rough bunker edges.....consistent fast green speeds, fairways with perfect lies....AND I think the tours want this because of the large purses and they do not want rub of the green to play into who wins or loses.....

But I do think part of the modernist movement is toward flatter, faster, top condition greens whereby tocuh becomes the most determining factor in the good players......just another way to skin a cat ;D


"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Don_Mahaffey

Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2010, 10:46:19 AM »
.do you think you can have a strategic DRIVER hole if the driving area is narrowed and does not allow extremely different approaches to a green?   Now I'm not speaking of strategic by changing to a hybrid or three wood on the tee..etc.....

So you have a very tight hole that requires driver because of the length?
For this particular hole, it sounds like it's more about execution than strategy because there are not different approaches to the green. Either hit the fwy or don't is what it sounds like. So, maybe the strategy is what kind of shot you hit, ride the wind, hold up against it, ...whatever, it still reads more about execution than strategy.
Now, and I'm reaching here, if that hole sits late within a course where most of par is defended at the green and most fwys are wide, but favor a certain side based on hole placement and green design, then maybe the fact that you know that hole is coming, and in the back of your head your "playing" it when playing the preceding holes, then maybe it's strategic?
Other than that, it sounds more about execution than strategy as your path has already been chosen.

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #34 on: January 01, 2010, 10:51:45 AM »
Don,
Hmmmm.
I say the wider the arc for the landing of the driver shot...the more difficult the shot to the green can be based solely on the design of the green....now I also understand what JB is saying above......and I also think that strategy is a constantly moving object and therefore can rarely  be as idealistic as we sometimes make it....you know like when the perfect approach hits the flag and goes in the bunker.....so many moder players do not like quirk....Happy new year.... ;)
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Don_Mahaffey

Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #35 on: January 01, 2010, 11:23:59 AM »
Mike,
I'm trying to interpret...but it sounds like your saying if the tee shot is hard then the approach can be easier and if the fwy is wide then the approach to the green can be tougher?

I don't know if I got all that right, but here is what I think.
Golf, IMO, is a dying sport. Participation wanes, it takes a long time to play and it's expensive. But, it’s also very difficult to be good at golf. So, if you agree with me on those points, then why do we want the game to be even harder for the majority of golfers? Why in the world do we want to build more tough courses, especially tough off the tee, because the better modern player thinks that is best?

The world has enough courses that squeeze us off the tee. Playing long narrow golf courses is only fun for a fraction of the golfing population, but I'll bet courses like Ballyneal are a lot of fun for the majority of golfers, and still plenty challenging for the better golfers like Jeff's son, if they can ever figure out that sometimes the best way to score is not to land right next to the hole.

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #36 on: January 01, 2010, 11:34:09 AM »
Mike,
I'm trying to interpret...but it sounds like your saying if the tee shot is hard then the approach can be easier and if the fwy is wide then the approach to the green can be tougher?

I don't know if I got all that right, but here is what I think.
Golf, IMO, is a dying sport. Participation wanes, it takes a long time to play and it's expensive. But, it’s also very difficult to be good at golf. So, if you agree with me on those points, then why do we want the game to be even harder for the majority of golfers? Why in the world do we want to build more tough courses, especially tough off the tee, because the better modern player thinks that is best?

The world has enough courses that squeeze us off the tee. Playing long narrow golf courses is only fun for a fraction of the golfing population, but I'll bet courses like Ballyneal are a lot of fun for the majority of golfers, and still plenty challenging for the better golfers like Jeff's son, if they can ever figure out that sometimes the best way to score is not to land right next to the hole.


Don,

I am saying if you give a guy the room to hit the tee shot wherever he is lulled into a false sense of security.....it is up to the architect to determine the varying degrees of difficulty at the green based on tee shot location......BUT as you also say.....cost is going to narrow more courses than expand them....
I do agree with your points.....and I think for the most JB is saying the same thing....
The reason I think so many good players do not like some of the severe undulations etc is because they feel they have a right to fairness for well struck shots......and golf has never been about how well you hit it as much as how well you can miss it.....
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #37 on: January 01, 2010, 11:34:20 AM »
Don,
Hmmmm.
I say the wider the arc for the landing of the driver shot...the more difficult the shot to the green can be based solely on the design of the green...

Even a Ga Tech fan can find a nut occasionally.  I think this was one of the great lessons of 2009's exodus into golf architecture.   Many times at courses like Ballyneal, Stone Eagle, Kingsley, Pac Dunes, We-Ko-Pa Saguaro, this past year, I found myself in short grass with a nearly impossible approach.  The left side of the fairway on #6 at Pac Dunes, the far right side of #6 at Kingsley.  But the key being, I was ON THE FAIRWAY.  Whereas at a tournament course like O Lake, there were many times I was in the rough, with a clear look at the green.

In my opinion, those courses listed above defended themselves with angle, bunker position, and slope.  Whereas those listed as "tournament" courses defended themselves with rough and width (lack thereof).

The Dude states further
Quote
...and I also think that strategy is a constantly moving object and therefore can rarely be as idealistic as we sometimes make it....

How true.  I learned this on Sunday watching a scratcher play at Carmel Valley Ranch.  What I considered strategy (keep it playable, run it up when able, two putt everything) was very different from his strategy (hit it in the fairway, attack the pin, ignore contour, aggressive putting).  It almost made me think I could take him--Net of course--at a joint like Ballyneal.  Almost. ;D  Happy New Year guys.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #38 on: January 01, 2010, 12:01:15 PM »
It almost made me think I could take him--Net of course--at a joint like Ballyneal.  Almost.



Ben:

You might be able to take a better player on a course like Ballyneal.  That's one of my goals ... to give you the opportunity, and to make them earn it if they're going to beat you, instead of it just being a walkover because they hit it longer and straighter than you do.

That is also, PRECISELY, why some good players don't like my courses.  They feel that my courses give an "inferior" player too good of a chance.  But I am fine with that.

Good players also think that they ought to be able to shoot a lower score at Ballyneal than they usually have to sign for -- it's so wide open they think they should shoot 63, and would have if they hadn't got an unfair bounce here or there.  They do not seem to understand that I am a big believer in penalizing the good player with a bad bounce, instead of rough, or a bunker.  And they do not seem to understand that they could have taken the bad bounce out of play if they were really paying attention.

Happy New Year.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #39 on: January 01, 2010, 12:29:33 PM »
I had not gone back and read the last ten posts on the first page before I posted above.

I see that Jeff was speculating about whether my method of defending par at the green is the most balanced test of golfing skills.  He is missing the whole point of what I'm doing.  In the end, golf is about having whatever skills you need to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.

My take is that the really good players he is talking about already have all the skills, and they could get through a simple obstacle course in record time.  So I am not trying to test them in that way.  I'm showing them something which ought to be simple, and saying to them, "If you are as good as you think you are, then why can't you tear this apart?"  And it frustrates them immensely because it appears that their ability to drive it straight isn't doing them much good.

But that's only because they haven't taken time to figure out the course and figure out WHERE they should be driving it to, to negate all those contours in the green and the approach so they don't get a bad bounce.  Sometimes it is clear they'd rather not go through all that brain damage, when they can just wait for a bad bounce and blame their troubles on an unfair design. 

The Rawls Course is not one of my favorite courses that I've done, because with a flat site like that I am always going to think that I could have done something better; I can't judge it by the standard of Pacific Dunes, that I got the most out of the property that I could.  But The Rawls is all about the concepts described above, just as Ballyneal is.  I am not in the least surprised that most of the college studs don't like it, because it's frustrating to them.  The coach at Tech told me a couple of years back that he's really only had one player so far who had figured out the course and how to approach the different hole locations, and not let it get under his skin.  I didn't ask his name, but I don't think it was Jeff's son.  ;) 

The week of my 21st birthday I was down in Jacksonville, following Pete Dye around like a little puppy dog during the first tournament on the TPC at Sawgrass.  That is where I learned most of this approach ... there, and in St. Andrews that summer.  People seem to have such a hard time reconciling my style vs. Pete's, but we are playing the same tune in this department; we are trying to frustrate the good player, ideally with things that don't make the course too hard for the average player.  I just don't have to listen to 150 guys trying to earn a living on my courses.

Tim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #40 on: January 01, 2010, 01:19:40 PM »
Mike Y, unfortunately Perception is Reality.  I've looked but can't find "golf must be fair" in the Rules of Golf.  But that doesn't stop the F word from constantly being used by golfers when things don't fit their game or ideals.  I say Golf and Fair are 2 four letter words that shouldn't be used in the same sentence. Golfers feel Rub of the green or luck shouldn't play into things (unless it directly benefits them) ;D  If they get it on the green, they feel they should have a relatively straightforward (ie single-breaking) putt for Birdie.  A double-breaking putt is tolerated if the rest of the hole is beneign.  But once you start throwing triple and greater- breaking putts, they start looking for the nearest tree to hang the GCA from because it negates their achievement of getting on in Prox.

I tend to agree that a hole should be Designed from the green back.  But a course is a progression of holes and that dictates that the hole be Routed from the tee.

The slopes leading into and off the green are probably the biggest defense attribute.  How receptive or rejective they are will be the #1 determinate of the difficulty of the hole.  Take the pinned section of the Ballyneal #7 green shown.  The punch bowl slopes will kick a short shot long but will be a backboard for long shots.  The strong left-to left cant of the resulting swales demands that a shot be played to the right of the pin or a cut shot into the grain of the contours. These are tricky to get just right. If the slopes get too steep, it is possible that a long shot into the back slope and a short shot off the ridge could result in the exact same putt (kinda like a skateboard U-ramp).  As this is a short 4, one can surmise that it will be approached with a high iron, so the GCA can get away with asking for a more precise shot. Would this green be good for a 485 yd par 4 playing into the wind, I, personally don't think so.

As for defending par at the green, I don't think it should be an all or nothing propositioin.  For rhythum and variety, I like to place the premium on different aspects of the game on different holes.  On some, execution of the tee shot is more important than the approach, provided one properly execute the tee shot.  On others, the tee shot isn't as critical as the approach.
And still others the premium is on the green.  As the round progresses, combinations are employed to require successive executions, then relaxed back to one if a breather is sought.

I believe the golfer plays against the course - so he's providing the offense, the GCA has to defend the course and sets up the defense.  Everyone likes a close game, blow-outs one-way or the other are no fun.  So, to tie-in to the "What make a Bad golf course bad" thread, if the GCA makes the course too well defended and beats the crap out of the golfer on every hole or too easier and the golfer isn't challenged, it's no fun and not exciting.  The trick is, especially since some golfers want more of a challenge than others (Type A competetors vs Type B walk-in-the-parkers) to reach a happy medium.

Mike N, while not my cup of tea, I have done a couple Rollercoaster greens.  The 10th at High Meadow Ranch in TX is about 16k sf but is more a Big-Honking segmented green. We also did a 15k sf 'C' shape green with slopes and tiers but not undulating on the Anchor hole on the Harborside Port course.  The problem I have is with wildly undulating greens is it takes a lot of expensive to construct and to maintain real estate to produce an adequete number of pin locations.  Plus most of the time, we have no idea who the super will be at the time of creatiion.  If you don't get the right guy, you could end up with a disaster on your hands and all the blame placed at your feet.  

Also, I believe that the more 3-dimensional greens are, the more 1-dimensional they are to read.  The big breaks telegraph the line, while I find, better players have more difficulty with more subtile breaks.  I like to try to plant a seed of doubt into the players read of the line.  Like Pete Dye says, "once you get those guys thinking, you've got 'em".  You will find my greens to contain much stronger features around the perimeter 10'-15' but be more subtile in the interior, pinnable area.  I will break up larger green with small rolls, tiers and punchbowls.  but I tend to shy away from features that subject to excessive drying and wetness.  Greens with Diddle bumps tend to have crispy nobs and soggy swales.  The grass grows differently and can putt differently.  The swales can become more thatchy while the nobs thin out.  Same with big tier slopes  (deck ramps) and roll-overs.  all the water collects at the base, sucked by gravity out of the higher area.  And trying to hand water the highs just ends up with more moisture in the lows.  And we all know where Poa likes to thrive.

If you make something that's going to require extra effort to maintain, those resources are going to be pulled from somewhere else, unless you have a big maintenance budget.
Coasting is a downhill process

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #41 on: January 01, 2010, 02:15:22 PM »

Kyle,
     What handicap golfer do you think can most enjoy the demands of the greens at Ballyneal?

Great thread Don and all who have contributed. One of the best in a long time.

Enjoyment is all about one's frame of mind, so I don't know that one's skill level will necessarily correlate with their level of pleasure.

Ballyneal is probably not a great course for novice players, but I've looped there with someone playing off a 26-stroke index who had a blast, even though he hit more than 2 putts per green more often than not.

A pro, or any golfer with much higher expectations, might shoot 4 under at Ballyneal and be furious because he missed a few short putts. Likewise, he may shoot even par and walk away with a huge grin on his face remembering some of his miraculous recovery shots on a day defined by poor ball-striking.


I agree this is one of the better recent threads. The posts I perused this morning are the best I've seen all year! ;)

Good to see you posting, Mr. G!




« Last Edit: January 01, 2010, 02:17:33 PM by Kyle Henderson »
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #42 on: January 01, 2010, 02:41:11 PM »
Tim:

There were several things in your post I disagree with, but most of those are just differences in style.  There were two that bothered me, though, both of them at the end.  First, there was this one:

 Like Pete Dye says, "once you get those guys thinking, you've got 'em".  

Do you happen to remember where you read that quote?  It's from The Anatomy of a Golf Course.  Pete Dye said it directly to me when I was working on the first preliminary plan for the Stadium course at PGA West.  [The actual direct quote was "once you get those dudes thinking, they're in trouble."]  I felt kind of sheepish about using it in my book, because it was conversational, and I didn't know if he really meant for it to be published; but it was so good I couldn't leave it out. 

Since I was there, I can tell you for a fact Pete was NOT describing how to use subtle contours in the greens to deceive the players when he said that.  He was talking about trying to make players face shots they were uncomfortable with -- half-blind approaches, half-wedge shots, those sorts of things.


Greens with Diddle bumps tend to have crispy nobs and soggy swales.  The grass grows differently and can putt differently.  The swales can become more thatchy while the nobs thin out.  Same with big tier slopes  (deck ramps) and roll-overs.  all the water collects at the base, sucked by gravity out of the higher area.  And trying to hand water the highs just ends up with more moisture in the lows.  And we all know where Poa likes to thrive.

If you make something that's going to require extra effort to maintain, those resources are going to be pulled from somewhere else, unless you have a big maintenance budget.


That one I didn't like, because whenever I am talking about how I do things, and someone wonders why more architects don't do that, another architect will imply that something about what I'm saying is inefficient, costs too much, etc.  Well, this is all part of the same equation.  Do you think the maintenance budget at Ballyneal is really higher than at most of the courses you've done?  I'd wager it is just the opposite, because the approach to maintenance there is in perfect harmony with the approach to the design ... it's okay with them if one of those bumps dries out a little too much and you get a bad bounce, or if there is a spot of poa annua in the low spot of a green.  Those are not maintenance problems; they're challenges for the golfer.  They only cost MORE if you are so tied down to that pursuit of fairness [or turfgrass perfection] that you are wasting time and effort trying to counteract their influence.  If you just let them be, they cost LESS.


Incidentally, I do build fairway bunkers and difficult tee shots from time to time; just not very many times on a particular course.  I think  the average player's inability with a driver already costs him plenty, without having to rub it in.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #43 on: January 01, 2010, 02:43:38 PM »
Tom,

I thank you and my Driver thanks you... ;D  Happy New Year....and what's up with this Spain thing?!
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #44 on: January 01, 2010, 10:29:09 PM »
 8) Though I've had only one play at Ballyneal, with two pre-play earfuls about it from Adam Clayman and Jim Urbina, I can't imagine those Ballyneal greens not using and fully framed by those "chop hill" crests, hill sides, and valleys for their settings.. the options there were certainly numerous, perhaps overwhelming.. but ultimately the loop must be closed

its certainly arts & sciences that make it work in many locales, and a type of empathy or respect at others when nature provides extraordinary settings and views that are not obvious in 2-d plans..

with a moderate amount of ball control, getting to the Ballyneal greens was more or less half the final challenge, it could take one quite a while to learn green things beyond where to aim or miss approach shots

i wonder how many rounds are played at ballyneal per year? 5,000 - 10,000??  would the maintenance regime change?

« Last Edit: January 02, 2010, 11:09:15 AM by Steve Lang »
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #45 on: January 02, 2010, 05:50:41 AM »
When I read Tom D's posts they seem incredibly influenced by GB&I links golf.  I especially like the idea of a "bad bounce" (which of course is nothing of the sort and just a bounce) being designed to either access a hole location or be rejected away from the hole.  Even his idea about conditioning and that when less than perfect it is effectively part of the design and therefore a problem to solve rather than eliminate.  Unfortunately, fewer and fewer links are wide enough to pull off this "safe shot" deception from the tee these days. 

A question for the archies: when building on good sandy soil, do you lot essentially treat green surrounds as green without having to spend the extra money in maintenance for the very short grass.  I can recall trying to explain this (without much success) once.  The person couldn't understand why the surrounding area wasn't just cut at green height even when I pointed out that one can comfortable putt on the surface so why bother cutting it all the way down?

Ciao 
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #46 on: January 02, 2010, 07:05:59 AM »
Tom,

I thank you and my Driver thanks you... ;D 

Does he/she like Ballyneal too?
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #47 on: January 02, 2010, 07:26:12 AM »
Tom D,
   I am curious how many rounds you think it would take for the average GCA'er to figure out the holes at Ballyneal? The reason I ask is that last summer on our first day at Ballyneal I could see very few obvious strategies at the green end. My initial impression was that you pushed your normal style to the point of abstraction and had gone too far. Part of that in hindsight I think came from fatigue from two full days of golf elsewhere prior to Ballyneal and there was at least a 2 club wind blowing for us that first day. It just didn't seem possible to get to where I trying to go on those greens that first day. On day two I began to notice more slopes that I could use to my benefit and slopes to avoid. I began to discern many more pin positions on greens that the prior day just seemed to be random motion. After two days of seeing Ballyneal I'm guessing I have probably only unraveled a fraction of the course.
   My overall impression is that you have to be a pretty good golfer (5 handicap or less) to really be able to utilize what you have put there at Ballyneal. This could be because I haven't figured out enough of the course yet to feel like I could manage my way around the course with a 10 handicap.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #48 on: January 02, 2010, 10:17:47 AM »


I tend to agree that a hole should be Designed from the green back.  But a course is a progression of holes and that dictates that the hole be Routed from the tee.

The slopes leading into and off the green are probably the biggest defense attribute.  How receptive or rejective they are will be the #1 determinate of the difficulty of the hole.  

Tim,
But can't we design from the green backward toward the tee while routing from the tee?  We are probably saying the same thing just different words.....

Mike
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Tom Doak quote on building Ballyneal's greens
« Reply #49 on: January 02, 2010, 11:39:44 AM »
Ed:

I think it would take a long time to figure out all of the possibilities for all of the different hole locations.  I'm not even sure I have figured them all out yet ... there are a lot of features that were just THERE, that aren't really designed at all, and I'm not sure I was clever enough to figure them all out while we were building the course.

I'll give you just one example ... #12, one of my favorite holes.  The right half of the green has two equally difficult high-plateau hole locations separated by a ridge; the left of the green is in a deep trough.  The most common complaint is that if you are on the right half of the green, putting toward a hole cut in the lower left half, the putt is "impossible" and may go several feet past the hole.  I played there last summer with a fellow architect who four-putted that green after two relatively good shots, and I am sure he does not see it kindly.

So, when the flag is on the left, if you know the course, you are just STUPID to hit the ball in the right half of the green.  You would be much better off missing the green short and left; you could still putt from there straight up the trough.  From the middle of the green back, the left edge of the green curls back upwards toward the next tee, and there's a fair amount of short grass up the bank, so you can deliberately miss to the left a bit and the ball will probably come back down toward the hole, instead of sticking up on the tier if you miss right.  And if you do miss on the right half of the green, and the hole is not FRONT left [in which case you should have missed short], you can putt up around the bowl and feed it back to the hole, instead of trying to stop the putt going down the hill.  My fellow architect left his ball three feet above the hole on the right front and had to putt straight down the drop, went ten feet by, hit a sloppy second putt past the hole, and missed a shortie.

Now, if the flag is in the right half of the green, it will take a very good approach to get there ... exactly the shot my friend hit when he didn't want to.  :)  If you don't hit a good drive on the left shelf of the fairway, the angle to get to the right-hand pins is very difficult, and you'll need a bit of help from the wind to stay up there.  [But, if you don't have help from the wind, it should have been easier to keep your drive on the left.]  And it's easily possible to misjudge a putt from the low left of the green to the upper tiers, because of the pronounced elevation change.  Some would call that Mickey Mouse; I call it the main defense of a 370-yard par-4.

The thing is, it's the left-hand hole locations [the easy ones] which people complain most vehemently about, but there are plenty of backstops in play there and plenty of bail-out room to avoid the impossible putt.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back