[Tim Nugent]

Routing an 18 hole course such that there are repetitive returns to the clubhouse seems like a formula incentivizing slow play, and certainly not conducive to a more free flowing round.

Patrick, is this not a case of operational mismanagement rather than one of design?  Also, just how close the return is has some bearing.  A couple hundred yards is close enough to get on/off the course but will not intice someone to leave the course mid-round, provided he has ample opportunities to get a beer and relieve his bladder on the course.

Randy - unfortunately golfers like one-handed food (they need the other to drive the cart with, LOL).  That's why Olympichas those hamburgers that can be served in hotdog buns.  Personally, I go for a Brat or Polish but then I live halfway between Chicago and the Cheddar Curtain (Wisconsin State Line for allyou across the pond and beyond )

[Tom_Doak]

I think there are two ways in which an architect can play a small role in helping to grow the game.

The first is to build a really outstanding course in an area which has never seen one before, as Alister MacKenzie did in Australia.  I have to believe that the long-term effect on golf in Australia was pretty powerful.

The second is to try and convince clients to include good facilities for juniors and a good junior program.  On most sites, we could easily find room for such a facility if we only looked, but these often fall by the wayside in the search for a "great" or "championship" course.

[Tim Martin]

I think there are two ways in which an architect can play a small role in helping to grow the game.

The first is to build a really outstanding course in an area which has never seen one before, as Alister MacKenzie did in Australia.  I have to believe that the long-term effect on golf in Australia was pretty powerful.

The second is to try and convince clients to include good facilities for juniors and a good junior program.  On most sites, we could easily find room for such a facility if we only looked, but these often fall by the wayside in the search for a "great" or "championship" course.

Tom-I like both ideas and especially the junior golf angle. How better to grow the game.

[Randy Thompson]

I think there are two ways in which an architect can play a small role in helping to grow the game.

The first is to build a really outstanding course in an area which has never seen one before, as Alister MacKenzie did in Australia.  I have to believe that the long-term effect on golf in Australia was pretty powerful.

The second is to try and convince clients to include good facilities for juniors and a good junior program.  On most sites, we could easily find room for such a facility if we only looked, but these often fall by the wayside in the search for a "great" or "championship" course.

Tom
I agree but would have left out the adjective..small in front of the word role. Let me ask you this, do you think the Australian market reiceved his course or courses as outstanding from day one and were they pretty much free of controversery. I ask because sometimes I visualize or design an area to have a native long look and when I am gone the golfers start bitching and eventually the area gets mowed and maintained. I have seen this happen to a lot of architects as well. I imagine he went through similar and it took time for the market to consider their particular product, outstanding.

[Sean_A]

I think there are two ways in which an architect can play a small role in helping to grow the game.

The first is to build a really outstanding course in an area which has never seen one before, as Alister MacKenzie did in Australia.  I have to believe that the long-term effect on golf in Australia was pretty powerful.

The second is to try and convince clients to include good facilities for juniors and a good junior program.  On most sites, we could easily find room for such a facility if we only looked, but these often fall by the wayside in the search for a "great" or "championship" course.

Tom

Do you feel an obligation to look after juniors?  Would you sacrifice the possibility of a better course to provide the junior facilities?

Ciao

[Kris Shreiner]

The architects in our merry band could offer an expert's take on the question, but why wouldn't you be able to integrate accommodation for junior play into design of ANY golf course, no matter how great? Now the forced carry situation might require some creativity, but most course designers could overcome that one.

In my view, the critical component, for the health and gradual, sustained growth of the game, is commitment to providing enjoyable, approachable opportunities for youth and adults, to gain exposure to, and learn the game. This isn't some initative de jour mentality so often put out by the game's administrative bodies. It would seem that a more comprehensive, cultural return to a true passion for golf, not just what profit can be derived from it, would be a good start. That, and embracing the fact that while it is a hard game, it can be fun, and enjoyed even more when shared with friends.

Think about it, how much money and resources are spent by course owners/operators and golf administrative bodies to conduct Championships? Plenty! All that outlay, for what, 5% of the total participating numbers? While I greatly appreciate, have attended and also participated in many of these top competitions, how much does this theatre really do to improve the game for the general player?

If you look at it that way, it's easy to see why the game struggles for general acceptance and growth. The resource and talent investment in what REALLY should be the focus...improving the OVERALL health of the game and opportunities for folks to be drawn to and find the game at affordable levels... is often lacking.

I don't blame the architects, though I hope they try and educate clients when possible. This isn't easy in many cases, as those with the money to fund course construction often have egos and ideas that run counter to what is most practical. All one can hope for is that the lessons of the current re-shaping of the game's landscape, both economic and environmental, don't revert to a path of the past.

[Tim Nugent]

Kris, there is no practical reason why just about any course couldn't be configured for Jrs. tomorrow and for the grand cost of 18-36 sets of tee markers.
Most fairways these days are mowed at 1/2" or less - pretty much where tees were 30 yrs ago.  Just find a fairly level spot along the edge of the fairway about 90- 150 yds out and drop in a set of Jr tees.  Heck, make them Green to blend in if you want.  Whalla - jr course.  Architects could help by designing in some flattish pad areas in their fairway grading - if they aren't used, no one would be the wiser.
We did this with our Jr Golf Camps and were able to have Jrs. play intermixed with grumpy old guys and not hold up play.  Granted, the walks are a bit longer Green to Tee but kids will run if you tell them 1st one there gets to hit 1st!  This also works great for Family Golf.  If the youngsters have to hit it 10 times to fget to the green and mom and dad just 2-4, they feel inferior and get discouraged.  Give them the opportunity to get there in the same number of strokes and they become more engaged.

As simple as this is, I sometimes feel that everyone wants "Somebody Else" to do the things to Grow the Game. 

[Tom_Doak]

Tim:  Crystal Downs created a set of junior tees exactly as you describe, just about the time the long-time professional's children started to show an interest in playing.  [And it worked quite well, considering his daughter is now on the golf team at Michigan State.]

That's a great addition, but not really what I meant.  What country clubs really need is a separate, small facility where kids can go play for an hour or two without getting in the way, and without adults bothering them.  That's what would make golf participation take off ... not only for the kids, but for the adults as well.  We could all justify playing a bit more if we knew our kids were having fun by themselves in a safe environment.


Sean:

So far my forays into providing space for juniors have been limited, and didn't involve sacrificing anything on a great course.  But I'm getting more militant in my old age; I have insisted we build something of the sort on our project in China.  Haven't figured out anything for Florida yet -- it is ten miles from the nearest town and geared toward resort play -- but I will work on it when I go back down there.

[JC Jones]

Sean,

I think it might be a tad unfair to place the responsibilities at the architect's feet.  They are hired to provide the client with what he/she wants.  Seems to me the responsibility is with the person or persons running the corporation who have hired the architect.  Certainly the architect can make some suggestions, but I don't feel they have any responsibility and thus, there is no dilemma.

[Jud_T]

JC,

I think you've hit on the crux of the problem.  Aside from the occasional feel-good muni situation or the Bandon/Barnbougle model, the guys calling the shots are concerned about marketing and profits, not creating the best course or growing the game.  Heck, they're not even necessarily golfers.  Sure the top tier of GCA's can turn down work, but most guys are trying to simply scrape together a living and are not in a position to do so.  I would guess that even Rennaisance or C&C have had to compromise to Real Estate lot concerns or simply a wealthy owner's whims on occasion.  After trying to do my first photo tour (keep an eye out for it in coming weeks) I realized that the ground game that we hold dear is not what pops in Magazine ads (hello Tom Fazio's career!).  Jeff makes some good points in this regard, although I'm not so sure I agree with him about green contours.  So what you end up with is short-term investment returns vs. the long-term goals of what might be good for the game, and maybe even for the long-term investor....

[Tim Nugent]

Tom, I was responding to Kris's querry- "The architects in our merry band could offer an expert's take on the question, but why wouldn't you be able to integrate accommodation for junior play into design of ANY golf course, no matter how great?"

But your example is spot-on. And, in a round-about way examplfies my "Somebody else" premise.  Just like the Pro at CD, I didn't see the light until I began playing with my girls when they were youngsters.  The older one could always hit it pretty good and didn't mind the Reds on our shortish 9-holers but then when #2 began, she was pissed that she could never hit it as far a #1 and therefore, could never "win".  So, like your Pro I made some Jr fairway tees to level the playing field.

And, RE:your Florida project.  Consider this, resorts attract families and what a better way to spend the day than as a family, on the course?  And it might be the only way for Dad (and Mom) to get on the course    Otherwise, FL has Disney and the Ocean to occupy them and those are both competing for the same Resort $$$

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I think it might be a tad unfair to place the responsibilities at the architect's feet.  They are hired to provide the client with what he/she wants.  Seems to me the responsibility is with the person or persons running the corporation who have hired the architect.  Certainly the architect can make some suggestions, but I don't feel they have any responsibility and thus, there is no dilemma.

JC

Sure my questions are unfair.  The entire concept of evaluating an archie's product is unfair if I am doing the evaluating - so at least I am consistent.  While I understand that archies are to some degree back benchers in this matter, I do believe that archies do make decisions which can help grow the game or not.  They may be very small and seem insignificant, but nontheless...Whether or not archies have an obligation to do so is a different matter and can only be answered on an individual basis.  However, I suspect that most would say there is no obligation, but it would be nice (and sensible from job protection PoV) if archies did think about Macro Golf while working on Micro Golf. 

Ciao 

[Tom ORourke]

Two points from a non-architect. 1. Regarding juniors - I believe Saucon Valley has a short kids course where you need to be able to break 50 for 6 holes before you can play on the big ones. Great idea if you have the room. Our place has a loop where they can play 3 or 5 holes as they learn and end up back at the clubhouse.  2. I think the two main topics are not at odds. I used to play at Eagle Lodge outside of Philadelphia, designed by Rees Jones (I believe Keith Evans did most of the work) for Cigna Insurance. It worked great for corporate golf in the lack of forced carries, and you could bounce a ball on almost every green. But when you went to the back tees he had done a great job of moving those tees not just back, but left and right and lower, not just higher and directly behind the whites. We needed to have a different handicap assignment for the back tees because the holes were so different. More prominent doglegs, longer carries, completely different angles on some of the holes. He built a course that was good for the people paying the bills, and their customers and employees loved the course from the whites. But the Philly PGA was played there for years and was a favorite of the local pros. You can do both. Unfortunately ACE Group bought a division of Cigna and the golf course, plowed it under and had Gary Player build the ACE Club. It may be a nice course but Eagle Lodge was a course where players of all handicaps were happy. It can be done.

[Matt_Ward]

JC:

You are spot on -- the client doing the hiring sets the terms of what he wants to see get built. No doubt an architect can influence matters to some degree -- but the client decides the final approach taken. I understand Sean's point and frankly it would be nice if many of the courses that dio get built were more user-friendly -- but as Tom D mentioned -- if space can be had having a separate 3-4 hole jr course or something akin to that -- would provide a mechanism to expose the gane to people who otherwise have to wait their turn or deal with a main course inhabitied by the steady players. Tim does make a good point -- you can include tee boxes that are much further up but the real issue would be whether such players can be on the same course at the same time when others during peak times are playing too.

[JC Jones]

One of my favorite Junior golfer rules I've ever come across is at Old Town Club.  There, a junior has to score an 18 (if I recall correctly) on the first three holes (I think this is a one time test) in order to be allowed to play the 15 remaining holes on the other side of the property.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()