Perhaps the problem is not best served by ‘trying to figure out how to squeeze a few extra strokes out of one's score’ but to fully embrace ‘the study of a golf course’s architecture’ to produce courses that reward the golfer for his efforts.
Perhaps the 20th Century approach of being unable to honour a single architect for the complete design of the Golf course has watered the project into 18 attempts to get one hole right. Do I detect fear in the air, are the latter day designers utilising the word strategic in the hope of wall papering over the cracks, nay chasm knowing that the skill qualities of the modern golfers lies not from within but via their modern equipment.
Penal designs which test the golfers, from his/her orienteering abilities to navigate (read and understand) the course, yet it’s not just the course but also includes the positioning and location of the hazards as well. Strategic has become the modern word for ‘being easy’ of seeking the lazy option, strategic has lost its bearings and is in desperate need of some GPS to try and relocate itself. The problem is that architects that follow strategic have themselves been lost to the market place and still believing that there is some skill let alone golfing merit in Island Greens or Greens pebble dashed with bunkers. More to the rear than to the front – why, could it be to save the player a shot if he misjudges his shot even though his Range Finders gave him the correct details, just his lack of skill his equipment or aids could not hide, but have no fear the Strategic designer is at hand to save you a stroke or two. After all Golf is these days all about the lowers score.
IMHO multi design teams do not work, they like most things modern are the product of compromise and one place that compromise must not be allowed to surface is in design. It like Christ and the anti Christ, Anti Matter vs. matter all very explosive and ultimately serves no useful purpose for the business in hand.
Free the designers, high light the real designer as being the guy who routed the course, name the designers of the Greens construction team and shapers, ditto the fairways and hazards but define the course designers who IMHO is the guy who is routing the course as he set the line which all others have to follow from shaping to adding hazards.
Put pride back into announcing the designer and perhaps we will see more flare coming from that Design House as more way want to be known at the Designer. Share the honour over the Team and you reduce competition, cream will not rise to the surface but may well leave for companies who see the merit of acknowledging the Designer.
Many seem happy to utilise Templates but scared to mimic the guys who originally designed them for fear that the original were to penal, but Hell guys this is Golf, each golfer will find his own level and will be more than happy with his lot.
Pamper to the privilege few and you get what we have today inherited, which IMHO has lost more than half the real enjoyment of Golf. Do not believe me then fine but look to TOC between Allan Robertson and Old Tom Morris the modern course dating back some 500-600 years owes more to these two than to anyone else it its long history Examples 1, 17 &18 Holes new, Double Greens, saving double greens on the Eden Estuary, wide fairways new Tees result of land retrieved from the sea, the list goes on but all done between 1830-1880. Radical and challenging changes in their time, yet today they add to the magic and mystery of TOC’
It’s not as if we do not have the talent, we do – many have shown what is possible, the problem IMHO is the direction some of you are going. But then it is only my opinion,
Melvyn
PS. Penal like Castor Oil is actually good for you, but no one likes the tatse. But then, easy will never be found in The Real Golfers Dictionary.