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.


Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2011, 03:31:33 PM »
Melvyn,

I would hazard a guess that many of them just grew, as trees are wont to do...

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2011, 08:18:18 PM »
Is the consensus that the statement means trees directly in the line of fire?

I think the statement speaks of where the trees should influence the shot, i.e. in the air or in the landing zone.


Kyle:

That is the correct interpretation of my statement. 

Of course, some may think I am an "idiot" for talking about trees as a part of golf course design, even though they exist naturally on sites for golf courses all over the world.  These people think golf should stick to the features of links courses, however unsuited they might be to other landscapes.  Thankfully most architect post-1910 were more practical than that!  I suspect even Old Tom would have been practical about the use of trees in design, had he ever been asked to design courses where trees were an important part of the landscape.

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2011, 08:25:25 PM »
I guess it goes to show, apples do fall from trees and rot.

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2011, 09:25:41 PM »

Tom

Lets just pray you have not killed Askernish by suggesting trees, after all apparently they are on all courses worldwide.  For the record Old Tom did use trees on inland courses, thought you might have known that - had you been into the history of your profession.

Ryan

Not quite with you, do you mean the Big Apple, seems slightly unfriendly to your fellow countrymen? What have they done to upset you so much?

Melvyn

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2011, 09:59:00 PM »
Melvyn,

Those of us in the U.S.A. are refraining from using "killed" metaphors for a few days, in light of recent news items.

For the record, though, I have never planted a tree on a golf course to try and influence the strategy of a golf hole.  I've only taken trees that God or Nature has left behind, and decided not to take all of them away just because some guy from Scotland tells me I should.  Everyone has to listen to their own conscience and I am happy with mine.

P.S.  I should think someone from the U.K. ought to be able to understand the difference between "on courses all over the world" and "on all courses worldwide".  Damned silly of you to let an American teach you about syntax.

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2011, 11:49:11 PM »
Tom

I have submitted my opinions, I have explained my reasons re trees, I offered no instruction to anyone, but submitted a simple opinion or dislike of trees on golf courses.

I embrace knowledge, I hope that I learn many new things every day I have left, I am more than happy to let an American teach me, as I have no issues with the USA, it seems it’s the other way round.

Yes perhaps it was not an appropriate word to use and my heart and condolences go out to all touched by such horror and carnage.

Melvyn

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Architectural Statement
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2011, 10:55:35 AM »
Melvyn, you are differentiating between "true links golf" which I think is played on less than 200 courses in the world, and golf in general, which is also played in parkland, heathland and other non-links settings, on many thousands of courses.  Trees are right at home on the vast majority of courses in the world.  If planted and managed propoerly, they are a joy and an enhancement to the pleasure of the game.

It's like the old Beach Boys' song, "I Wish They All Could Be California Girls," but unfortunately they aren't!