[Garland Bayley]

...
It seems like some berate gca's for building courses too tough (i.e., top 100) on one hand, and then beat them up for not trying to build a top 100 course in someones back yard for enjoyable every day play.
...

I guess I just gave up my goal of playing Pac Dunes and Sand Hills as I now know they are too tough. I better play Old MacDonald before it gets to top 100 status and gets too tough.

Typical stupid over reaction.....I did say that those kinds of courses are great for occaisional change of pace and special experiences. I enjoyed them when I went and trust you will to.

...

C'mon Jeff,

It was a joke. I thought I proved it was a joke by saying I had better play Old MacDonald before it reaches top 100 status.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Garland,

Okay, didn't mean to bust your chops, but used you to make my point.

But, I stand by my position.

Most of us in the biz probably hope to have one top 100 course (I know I wish the Quarry had made it, but it falls just short of points, but does rank highly on the public list).  But never have I figured that my career would be made up of all top 100 type opportunities.  TD has had a historically good run, but I bet even with great design, his percentages fall rather than go up just because that is the nature of the biz.  He had several "once in a lifetime" commissions right in a row!

Nor would I judge myself that way.  In fact, I believe that JN making his courses generally much easier as his career progresses is a great thing. He has stopped making courses tourney tough, even if that was his brief from early owners, realizing that they just don't all hold tournaments!   And I applaud the fact that TF based his career on providing signature design with less difficulty than Pete Dye, Jack, etc.  He saw the kind of course that was truly necessary to build (well, for affluent clubs anyway)

Lastly, the talk about top 100 lists here and elsewhere is a driver of too hard courses.  Isn't the desire for a "Top 100" course and for the gca to outdo himself what drove Pete Dye away from a charming Harbor Town style to PGA West?  And RTJ and Wilson to build such tough courses?

I think some to 100 list ought to be driven by the "could play it every day" criteria.  (not that some top 100's can't be) or perhaps the speed of play or minimal loss of golf balls quotient. 

[David_Tepper]

Here is a link to a list of the 21 completed Faldo courses:  http://www.nickfaldo.com/design/design_portfolio

6 of the 21 are in China, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Philippines & Turkey. They may be good, fair or poor courses, but I doubt they have been seen by many (or any) raters.   

[Garland Bayley]

... Isn't the desire for a "Top 100" course and for the gca to outdo himself what drove Pete Dye away from a charming Harbor Town style to PGA West?  And RTJ and Wilson to build such tough courses?
...

I certainly didn't get that impression about Pete from Bury Me in a Pot Bunker.
As far as RTJ is concerned, the original top 100 lists were simply the 100 most difficult courses. When the lists started, RTJ had no trouble making the lists. Perhaps he is even responsible for the lists being the way they were.

Golf Digest still uses concepts like resistance to scoring in their lists. I would suggest a minority here would agree it is the primary criteria like Golf Digest still makes it.

[JMEvensky]

Lastly, the talk about top 100 lists here and elsewhere is a driver of too hard courses. 
 

Like everything else you've written in this thread,this is really profound,IMO.

Maybe the problem is that "resistance to scoring" is the only good common denominator.Everyone can understand "my handicap is X and I shot Y".Not many raters can adequately understand or convey their opinions on maintenance,playability,bunker placement,etc.

A score is the only thing that can be reduced to a sound bite.

[Jeff_Brauer]

JMV,

What about the sound bite, "Hey, I only lost 1 Ball!"

I started a thread a little while ago asking what top courses aren't well liked, which was basically the same kind of idea as what I am posting here.  I grant that there is bias (although not universal) towards tough courses in top 100 lists.  I think difficulty is okay, but I hate courses that you might call "relentless challenges" that beat me up.  Those can even be okay if they are "purty" enough at least for my resort ventures.

The funny thing about gca is that we have gotten away from charming as a design goal in favor of stunning and highly ranked, at least for the big name new courses, or too many of them.  Sand Hills is charming more than tough isn't it?  A great example of how a great course can do both things well and in that case, Jeff Dawson is right on the money.  In the old days, I would consider NGLA as a perfect charming course that is also great.  Charm is looks of course, but also quirk, a variety of shots to be played, but not necessary the relentless test of accuracy that a US Open brings.

[Matthew Hunt]

Here is a link to a list of the 21 completed Faldo courses:  http://www.nickfaldo.com/design/design_portfolio

6 of the 21 are in China, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Philippines & Turkey. They may be good, fair or poor courses, but I doubt they have been seen by many (or any) raters.   

Loch Erne by Faldo is a very good course.

[JMEvensky]

I started a thread a little while ago asking what top courses aren't well liked, which was basically the same kind of idea as what I am posting here.  I grant that there is bias (although not universal) towards tough courses in top 100 lists.  I think difficulty is okay, but I hate courses that you might call "relentless challenges" that beat me up.  Those can even be okay if they are "purty" enough at least for my resort ventures.

I think you said it earlier when commenting,paraphrasing,that everybody here disses PGA Tour players but frequently looks at golf courses in terms of difficulties posed for them.

It's no epiphany to suggest that most people assume PGA Tour/USGA courses are great.They're on television so they must be the best,right?Plus,courses that a lot of the cognoscenti on this site rave about are unknown to all but a handful.

Walk over to the first tee at your local muni and ask them to tell you which state Sand Hills or NGLA is in.My guess is you'll get blank stares.So,how can anyone expect most owners/developers to request "charming" when few people have even heard of the best examples?

However,the guys at the muni can turn on the TV and see TPC@whogivesashit and KNOW that the course is exactly what they should aspire to play.

[Brian Phillips]

Here is a link to a list of the 21 completed Faldo courses:  http://www.nickfaldo.com/design/design_portfolio

6 of the 21 are in China, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Philippines & Turkey. They may be good, fair or poor courses, but I doubt they have been seen by many (or any) raters.   

Loch Erne by Faldo is a very good course.

Who says?

[Mark Chaplin]

Surely GCA are a reflection on the clients wishes. C&C and TD appear to attract descerning clients.

[Tom_Doak]

I believe that JN making his courses generally much easier as his career progresses is a great thing. He has stopped making courses tourney tough, even if that was his brief from early owners, realizing that they just don't all hold tournaments!   And I applaud the fact that TF based his career on providing signature design with less difficulty than Pete Dye, Jack, etc.  He saw the kind of course that was truly necessary to build (well, for affluent clubs anyway)

Lastly, the talk about top 100 lists here and elsewhere is a driver of too hard courses.  Isn't the desire for a "Top 100" course and for the gca to outdo himself what drove Pete Dye away from a charming Harbor Town style to PGA West?  And RTJ and Wilson to build such tough courses?

I think some to 100 list ought to be driven by the "could play it every day" criteria.  (not that some top 100's can't be) or perhaps the speed of play or minimal loss of golf balls quotient. 

Jeff:

I think you are way off base here.  I think that most architects (including you) ASSUME that a golf course has to be really hard in order to make the top 100 lists, and therefore, I would agree with you, there are many modern courses that are way too hard.

However, I do NOT agree with the premise that you have to build really long and hard golf courses in order to make those lists.  In fact, several of my most highly-regarded courses are NOT especially long or hard, and they have thrived because of it [which, I think, is why Garland was teasing you ... Pacific Dunes and Sand Hills are the two top-rated modern courses and neither is extremely difficult].

Also, your perspective on Mr. Nicklaus' and Mr. Dye's work is a bit off base.  Jack's courses were becoming more member-friendly for a while, but not in the past five years ... you obviously haven't seen Sebonack or Dismal River.  I think he had toned them down for a while when he found he wasn't breaking par at the grand openings, but now that he's not playing much anymore, the gloves have come off.  As for Mr. Dye, I do not think he EVER focused on top 100 lists ... his clients were specifically asking him to build courses to host PGA Tour events, and that's why he was making them so difficult.

[Rob Rigg]

Surely GCA are a reflection on the clients wishes. C&C and TD appear to attract descerning clients.

and great sites.

The fact that Mr Taylor and his business partner went with C&C at Clear Creek Tahoe is an example of this. Fazio had been there to route and evaluate for a previous investor, but the new ownership decided to bring in C&C - probably because they thoroughly enjoyed their other courses that they had played.

[Matthew Hunt]

Here is a link to a list of the 21 completed Faldo courses:  http://www.nickfaldo.com/design/design_portfolio

6 of the 21 are in China, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Philippines & Turkey. They may be good, fair or poor courses, but I doubt they have been seen by many (or any) raters.   

Loch Erne by Faldo is a very good course.

Who says?

Myself, it's in a lovely setting with 5 par 3's and 5 par 5's. The 5th and 18th which are both par 3's are among the beest holes you will find anywere. One critism is although the short par 4's and the Par 5's are top notch you probably need to be a certian standard of player to appreciate them. One of the best inland in GB+I and Faldo's best yet.

[Andy Troeger]

I believe that JN making his courses generally much easier as his career progresses is a great thing. He has stopped making courses tourney tough, even if that was his brief from early owners, realizing that they just don't all hold tournaments!   

Jeff:

Also, your perspective on Mr. Nicklaus' and Mr. Dye's work is a bit off base.  Jack's courses were becoming more member-friendly for a while, but not in the past five years ... you obviously haven't seen Sebonack or Dismal River.  I think he had toned them down for a while when he found he wasn't breaking par at the grand openings, but now that he's not playing much anymore, the gloves have come off.  As for Mr. Dye, I do not think he EVER focused on top 100 lists ... his clients were specifically asking him to build courses to host PGA Tour events, and that's why he was making them so difficult.

I agree with this regarding Nicklaus courses--the new ones that I have seen are the hardest of any that he's built--Painted Valley, The Concession, Old Corkscrew, and Idaho Club are all brutally difficult. To me, all of those four would be better if they were a little more golfer friendly!

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Are the tough top 100 courses that are spoken of predominantly in the US?

[Jeff_Brauer]

I believe that JN making his courses generally much easier as his career progresses is a great thing. He has stopped making courses tourney tough, even if that was his brief from early owners, realizing that they just don't all hold tournaments!   

TD and Andy,

Well, I might be off five years on my post. I really haven't seen the newest JN stuff.


Jeff:

Also, your perspective on Mr. Nicklaus' and Mr. Dye's work is a bit off base.  Jack's courses were becoming more member-friendly for a while, but not in the past five years ... you obviously haven't seen Sebonack or Dismal River.  I think he had toned them down for a while when he found he wasn't breaking par at the grand openings, but now that he's not playing much anymore, the gloves have come off.  As for Mr. Dye, I do not think he EVER focused on top 100 lists ... his clients were specifically asking him to build courses to host PGA Tour events, and that's why he was making them so difficult.

I agree with this regarding Nicklaus courses--the new ones that I have seen are the hardest of any that he's built--Painted Valley, The Concession, Old Corkscrew, and Idaho Club are all brutally difficult. To me, all of those four would be better if they were a little more golfer friendly!

[David_Tepper]

"Faldo courses achieve critical acclaim in latest rankings":

http://www.nickfaldo.com/archive/news/story/133

[Tim Nugent]

Sorry, I've only played one Faldo course and that was designed by Curley and Schmit athough I was wonder how that Iceland project (Faldo and Steve Symers) would turn out but perhaps the Iceland going chapter 11 nixted that one?  Guess it's safe to say Faldo is a production house

[Jeff_Brauer]

I shouldn't post this, but I have it on good authority that at the press conference for his Kansas course a few years ago he actually had to ask someone the name of his lead designer.....but every press release says hes intimatly involved as a "six time major champion."

Is it fair to call him a "production houses" since he used a Brit on that Kansas course, and Smyers and CS on other courses?  It actually sounds more like the "endorsement house" if you ask me, but he is prolific.

[Jerry Kluger]

Galloway National is the best Fazio course I have seen - it is very difficult.

TD: Sand Hills not difficult - I don't think that width automatically makes a course easy. The wind is a very tough variable which is often present so yes, maybe on a calm day it isn't extremely difficult, but would you not say that is the exception? That opening tee shot is not easy and if the wind is blowing then look out. You can go around SH and there ain't much that's easy with a difficult wind. Ballyneal can be viewed as easy but when the wind kicks up there is plenty of difficulty.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jerry,

To tie together the last two posts, I took my son to SH five years ago as a high school golfer.  Hist first shot, downwind on 1 went almost 400 yards (He had 143 left on a 540 par 5) He managed 69 in part due to a hole out for eagle on 16 and Bill Kubly commented that the only other guy he saw break 70 his first time out on SH was Faldo, which of course, pumped my son up pretty good. 

[Tom_Doak]

Jerry:

I did not say that Sand Hills was EASY, but it's not nearly as long or as difficult as, say, Colbert Hills, which is also in a windy environment, or 100 other modern courses that aren't in such windy places.

If I remember the story correctly, Mike Keiser's career-best round of golf is a 73 at Sand Hills, in his first time playing there.  I'm sure that was from the middle tees, but still, you can't call a course where a 10- or 12-handicap can shoot 73 really hard.  I do agree that it's harder than Ballyneal, though.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()