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.


Peter Goss

Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« on: January 14, 2002, 04:27:30 AM »
While it is interesting, absorbing and enjoyable to examine classic golf holes (including reverse Old Course) on this website and in books and magazines, there is usually very little mention of the prevailing wind and its effect on strategy and the architecture of the golf hole. Particularly so for links golf where the wind is such a huge influence.

I presume our better course architects take this into account when designing holes for length of bunker carry etc and general strategy (for still days or opposite wind days).

Perhaps some indication of prevailing wind conditions should be attached to hole drawings to allow the reader to "feel" the hole as it is usually experienced rather than analyse from yardages only.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Lou Duran

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2002, 06:24:07 AM »
Good suggestion Peter, specially for areas where wind is a consistent factor.  A mistake in design that I have often seen is making the real long holes play with the wind and the shorter ones into it.   This tends to reduce variety, with the  holes within their class (3s, 4s, 5s) playing similarly.  Another problem that I encounter frequently is the lack of consideration of weather conditions in the set-up of a course.   Wind in my part of the country (TX) can offer considerable resistance to scoring, and can be as great of a  strategic element as a well located hazard.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2002, 06:39:58 AM »
Great point Lou. I feel course set up takes weather less into account than the original design. However I do feel it is a mistake to have the longest 4 if 470 plus into a prevailing wind, if the setup can not be adjusted for it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom Doak

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2002, 06:44:56 AM »
We pay a lot of attention to the prevailing wind -- if it's significant and predictable.  However, you do also have to consider how the course will play if the opposite wind shows up:  I've played a couple which were just ridiculous [all the short par-4's nearly driveable, all the long par-4's three-shotters].

John B. makes another good point, that a lot of course setup nowadays is done in total disregard for the weather conditions.  On many courses it's all driven by a pin placement sheet:  even Pacific Dunes, because it's run by a management company which insists on pin sheets.  The crew at Pacific Dunes would love to set up the course themselves, but they do the best they can within the boundaries of "front, middle, back."

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2002, 08:15:07 AM »
For the prevailing wind and the routing or design I like Crump's idea and the Pine Valley dictate to "box the compass" and the more the better! He actually went into the project with a "no more than two holes in the same direction" concept and routed the course that way!

And I like Doak's #3 and #4 Pacific Dunes a lot even considering the wind is strong but seasonal and really does blow in both directions. With that and those two holes side by side and one after the other can make for so much variation and also make the golfer aware that golf at the mercy of the wind is just golf, not necessarily something like formulaic GIR!

And for the holes and the wind direction there is generally a prevailing wind arrow on every routing drawing I ever saw.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich_Goodale

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2002, 08:50:27 AM »
I think this is a highly overrated criterion.

For one thing, at least on the traditional GBI links courses, there really is no such thing as a "prevailing wind."  IN fact, at many courses the direction of hte wind will change 180 degrees on the day just on the change in the ocean tides!

For another thing, as Tom Doak rightly implies, any golf hole that is properly designed will be interesting and challenging to play regardless of in what direction and at what speed (within obvious limits) the wind is blowing.

Thirdly, I have played far too many courses, some far too recently, where apostles for the course tell me something to the effect of:

"Gee, it's a shame, but you really didn't get to see how the course can really play, because it wasn't the 'prevailing wind.'"

To me, this sort of statement is a cop out for either a poor design or a completely unimaginative golf game........
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Lou Duran

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2002, 10:12:47 AM »
Rich:

In many parts of the world there is a prevailing wind, and it is  often the major factor on how the course plays.  I believe that an architect would be remiss if he failed to seriously consider the general direction and severity of the wind in his work.  And due to site characteristics, "boxing it in" as TP suggested is not very often possible.  A way to make a course more playable is to provide sufficient flexibility in the design, and to set-up the course with regard to weather conditions.

I played the Ocean Course at Kiawah on a relatively calm day.  It did not have teeth that day and I don't believe that it was representative of how it normally played.  Perhaps my game lacks imagination, certainly the design was not deficient, but my opinion and experience would have been different had the wind blown as it often does.  We've seen Watson, Nicklaus, and Woods tame a couple British Open courses (Turnberry, TOC) when the wind was benign.  I know that they separated themselves from the field and that low scores do not mean poor design, but perhaps your friends, the "apostles", may have a legitimate point.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2002, 01:59:57 PM »
Well Lou, you sort of let Rich off light there. Here he is bragging about GBI golf again at the expense of the US course, saying the wind changes with the tide and such over there and makes for great golf. But here with the prevailing wind all it does is expose poor design.

Well, I would tell Rich that some of those links courses that head straight out for nine and straight back for nine are alarmingly poor due to their shockingly unimaginative routings best evidenced by TOC (don't blame me, Hunter said that). Those kinds of courses are so bad they NEED THE WIND TO CHANGE every time a wave breaks just to hold anyone's interest on those routings!  

Where with our consistent prevailing wind our brilliant designers create great interest by turning the holes and the golfers from one minute to the next by their brilliant "box the compass" routings and designs!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich_Goodale

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2002, 02:11:44 PM »
Tom

When I move back to Scotland and you finally decide to come over there and for the first time play those great links with me, I shall show you just what you have missed in the 1st 1/2 of your life and you might, just might, not any longer waste your summers again trying to 4-putt the 1st at NGLA in the Singles or outdrive the Jay Siegel's of the world in the Crump....... ;)

Rich

PS--I'm not braggin'.  Just reportin' on what Mother Nature herself chooses to expose to me.....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2002, 02:15:31 PM »
Something about Mother Nature exposing herself to Rich sounds X-rated.

Or is it just me?

 ;)

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2002, 03:22:08 PM »
Tom IV --

It's just you!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2002, 04:02:10 PM »
Rich,
I agree with you about the wind constantly changing on the GBI links.  The wind can not only change 180 degrees, but you can experience numerous kinds of weather all in one round!!  Furthermore, you haven't played "real" golf until you've experienced true links golf.  We play a very different game here in the U.S.  
Mark
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich_Goodale

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2002, 04:03:08 PM »
Tom IV

I like that new title!  Let me clean up this and a few other threads.

1.  DON'T fool with Mother Nature!!!  But, if you have to, just lie back and enjoy it......

2.  Yes, we missed you at Boulder Ridge.  It is so absolutely perfect that I think you should cash in all your Webvan stock and buy a membership, and then bring us all back to play it again.  We're sure not going to open up OUR wallets....

3.  Vis a vis my ability to hit that high soft 3-iron, you, and far too many others, have assumed wrongly, tragically wrongly in at least one tragically wrong case, that the guy you have played golf with a few times is indeed the REAL Rich Goodale.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  I am in fact 6' 5" and bear a very strong resemblance to Osama Bin Laden.  For obvious reasons, I have used a cadre of surrogates, mostly 5' 7" tall and far older than I ought to be to represent me in GCA events.  Most of those surrogates can play golf OK, but none of them REALLY knows how to deploy and employ the CLAW.  If Gentle Ben could have found this mechanism 20 years ago, who knows how many majors he might have won.....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Doug Wright

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #13 on: January 14, 2002, 04:15:07 PM »
Rich,

Are you a CLAW man? I knew I was simpatico with you in some way...The CLAW has saved my golfing life. Just watch out, though, you need to keep this quiet. Dan King or his ilk will come on here and say something like "The CLAW is not golf, and oughtta be outlawed."

And re Tom IV, if they ever have that NorCal vs SoCal battle royale, I for one will show up just to see the following grudge match: "Tom IV vs. The Emperor."   ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Twitter: @Deneuchre

Rich_Goodale

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #14 on: January 14, 2002, 04:27:59 PM »
Doug

If the SC/NC event ever gets off the ground, we could schedule a whole week of "grudge" matches vs. the Emperor.  Get in line, for the matches or the tickets......

Yes, the CLAW is perfect, and Dan King has seen it many times, the most recently this Saturday.  He will come over to the dark side sooner rather than later, like Noel Freeman, etc. ad infinitum......
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:01 PM by -1 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2002, 04:57:42 PM »
Having witnessed the power of "THE CLAW" firsthand, I can attest to its otherworldly, Faustian powers!

But, Rich...even you have to admit that it's not "natural".  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Greg Ramsay

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2002, 05:03:20 PM »
In Tom Doak's routing here at Barnbougle Dunes, Just as interesting as the prevailing wind, was his raising the issue of the rising and setting sun, considering that a higher percentage of golfers play in the morning, you don't want them playing into the rising sun as the glare will obscure a lot of the more subtle features.  We are still yet to finalise which will be the front and back 9's.

I agree with the comments about 'boxing the compass' having holes in all directions, but the reality is that not all sites allow this, such as ours where one of our 9's is predominantly out and in.  We had better not have pin sheets Tom!  They do have them at Kingsbarns though, but are not as simple as 'front, middle, back' they have 5 spots on each hole and the caddies are told by the starter that the pins are 'A,B,C,D or E' all over the place, the greens there are so big.

Greg Ramsay
www.barnbougledunes.com
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich_Goodale

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2002, 06:23:57 PM »
Mikey, Mikey, Mikey....

Golf is not natural.  In order to hit the ball left to right (or right to left, for those of your mollydooker affliction) you need to TRY to hit it right to left (or left to right, for you and Dan King, etc.).  In order to hit it right to left (or left to right for you) you need to try to hit it left to right.  In order to get the ball UP you must hit DOWN on it.  The best way to get a buried lie in the bunker out of the bunker is to try to drive it down deeper in the bunker with a wedge as hard as you can.  Oh well, you get the picture.  In this context, the CLAW is as natural as the cylindrical "hamburgers" you get at the "turn" at Olympic Lake (which is in fact the 11th).

Which takes me to Greg and Barnbougle Dunes....

So why do you have to have 2 "9's" there.--about as far from civilisation as is Orange county, but with fewer Taco Bell's to clutter up the landscape?   How about a 7, and than a 4 and then a neat little 3 and then another three that leaves you 850 yards from the clubhouse and then a really heroic/strategic hole that makes that glass of whatever you drink in Tasmania at the 19th hole supremely satisfying?

Just wondering....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan King

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #18 on: January 14, 2002, 07:17:09 PM »
Yep, I've seen the claw way to many times.

I've seen it so much that I got a quick little lesson in how to do the claw on the putting green before our round Saturday. My Dago putter rebelled against the unnaturalness of the whole thing and refused to make a single putt all day. Meanwhile, the clawmaster made ever putt he looked at(except when he was my partner.)  Now I'm stuck either resting my Dago putter for a few months or going to the claw (or just giving up this blasted game!)

Quote
Kramer:  Hey
Jerry:  Hey
Kramer:  Hey ya want these (He throws down the golf clubs) I don't want em!
Jerry:  What?
Kramer:  I Stink!  I can't play!  The ball is just sitting there, Jerry, and I can't hit it!  I only hit one really good ball that went way out!
Jerry:   Well what happened?
Kramer:  I have no concentration!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Peter Goss

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2002, 11:50:16 PM »
Thanks Tom, Greg, Lou, TEPaul for the comments.
Interesting about the rising and setting sun! Boxing the compass is laudible and reduces risk of many holes straight down wind or headwind but doesn't really address the issue of what can be designed within a hole to produce alternative strategies. And as Greg mentioned, some areas of land don't always allow such luxuries of boxing the compass but still turn out brilliantly (Old Course StA).

How may a golf architect incorporate features to ensure temptation when the prevailing wind rises, drops or turns around?

If the 175m North Berwick Redan was consistently played directly into a 30 knot wind, the strategic appeal of playing over the huge bunker to the pin would be lost on most golfers.

Our local (southern Australia) winter climate produces Westerly winds 68% Easterlies 5% and calm 28%, while summer is 38% Westerlies, 37% Easterlies and 25% calm.

So apart from daily setting of  tees and pin placements what else can be done?

Diagonal fairway bunkering would be one useful strategy-great excitment and temptation when the wind turns! Tees slightly back ( I take your point re too far back Lou) for usual downwind holes - do architects work to a length (+ or -15 yards per hole) for such situations? Strategic bunkering on the sides of usual crosswind holes that may be ignored on calm days. What about green shape (?longer greens) and slope? What about surrounds - is this a legitimate use of front of green bunkering?





« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2002, 03:49:51 AM »
Here is a passage from Some Essays on GCA by Colt and Alison:

"In evolving his plan, the architect will bear in mind that the majority of his longer holes should not be against the prevailing wind, and the same consideration would apply to really long holes if he decides to include one or two in the round. It is also desirable that he should not arrange too many holes running consecutively in one direction, for in a wind, from whatever quarter it blows, these may become monotonous. In the same way it is preferable that the short holes should face every quarter of the compass in order to secure variety on a windy day. He will also endeavour to avoid skirting a boundary at several consecutive holes, and, if he must do so, he will endeavour to arrange that the out-of-bounds area should not in each case lie on the same flank. If the boundaries have to be skirted frequently during the round, he will try to arrange these holes in such a way that the slice and the pull are equally treated in the aggregate, with perhaps a slight preference in favour of the pull."

To me this sums up what thought should go into the prevailing wind on a golf course..

Cheers Brian
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

THuckaby2

Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2002, 06:28:33 AM »
Before we get too carried away here, let me TESTIFY that I have seen the Goodalian CLAW make a lot of putts, true.  His performance on the recently aerated greens at NGLA was otherworldly.

But I have also seen said claw MISS a lot of putts - his performance later that same day on the perfect greens of Shinnecock was very ordinary.  

The many rounds I've played with Rich post-CLAW have gone that way - some great, some not so great.  The great days are incredible, I will say that.  

But I am NOT convinced, nor should any of the rest of you fall prey to this DARK SIDE of putting.  Remember, once you embrace it, forever shall it dominate your destiny.

I'll take my chances with my creaky conventional style, thank you.

BTW Rich, are you SERIOUS about Boulder Ridge?  The one friend I have who toured it said there was room for 15 holes and they put in 18... meaning it was very cramped.  He hated it.  Not that I have a spare $187,500 lying around for the membership there, but I could cash in some "favor chips" to play it every so often, and I was wondering if it was worth it... Oh well, I had wanted to see it with you guys, for a favorable same-day sounding board, but given you completely blew me off (missed me - ha! Guess I "missed" the phone call re that one... I probably SAW you guys as I drove by - no, I'm not bitter.  ;)), I'm going without y'all, probably next week.  We shall compare notes then....

In the meantime, re me v. the Emperor, oh yes, I am likely about 10th in line.  He's ducking me anyway - I offered to rearrange my entire 2002 schedule to facilitate an audience, but my peon hubris was completely rebuffed.  

Ornery Tom IV (I like that also!)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2002, 06:45:23 AM »
Peter,

I agree with Lou Duran about the long holes with/short holes against, as you do end up with a lot of driver/6 iron holes.  Sorry Mr. Colt!  Actually, we try to box the compass with not only par 3 and 5 holes, but also try to balance long and short 4's as well, so the golfer is likely to have at least one really long par 4 in any wind.

Our feature design respects the prevailing wind in the main golf season as well.  It's easy in the midwest, where the summer is southwest winds, and fall/winter is northwest.  A north facing hole can almost count on having a left to right cross wind of some type.  In Texas, it's a bit harder, because summer winds come from the south, winter winds from the north.  Our only saving grace is that it is usually too cold for a Texan to play this time of year when the wind comes from the north. ;)

We design features to account for the wind, usually canting the green or fairway landing areas with the wind - ie a left to right wind, we - as often as we can - angle the green slightly right to better accept the likely shot (a good player will use the wind, and the ball will simply drift for the average player).  Of course, we always follow the natural ground features, and if the wind will usually blow right, but the ground angles left, we angle the green left, but flatten out the angle and simplify the green shape to present one "blob" of a target, figuring the golfers will use different shot patterns.

We also design greens by giving more depth and less angle to the line of play to a downwind green, reasoning the wind reduces backspin, while we might elevate the green a bit more, figuring few will "run it up" downwind.

There is a short 4 here in Fort Worth that plays downwind, with a creek in front and a shallow Bermuda grass green.  It's amost impossible to hold the green most days.   Had I designed that hole, the green would have fronted the creek, but been deeper, allowing a shot to the back of the green.  When the pin is in front by the creek, players would still have the challenge of getting close, or avoiding a downhill putt, but could hit some part of the green.

Conversely, into the wind it would usually hold as designed, and we would have probably done the green as the architect did do it.  When a green is usually into the wind, a shallow green and frontal hazards (for moderate and short holes) is better, because the wind helps "stick" a shot.  On longer holes, where there are no frontal hazards, we usually lower the green, allowing more runup against the wind.

Of course, we widen everything if we feel there will be a consistent crosswind, unless we want a really, really, tough tee or approach shot.

As for hazards, we use the wind to create the most temptation, if possible. Generally on tee shots, I place the the hazards on the up wind side of the landing area if they encroach into the fairway.

In a downwind situation, I place hazards in front or the landing area, to create carry hazards when the golfer has most confidence he will get the distance (as you mentioned in the REdan hole), pinching bunkers beyond the landing area in head winds . Directly into the wind, a hazard at 300 or so yards creates the "I want to get as close as I can to have the shortest second' dilemma", tempting the player to play aggressively close to the hazard, when downwind, that type of hole would be a no brainer to stay well back.

For flanking hazards in the landing area, I usually put on the downwind side, so the player can aim somewhere out over the fairway and bring it back as close as he dares to the hazard.  It just seems too uncomfortable to ask a player to aim out over a hazard to get it back in the fairway, especially if its water.  (Road hole excepted here)  

Of course, this is just one architects opinion, and I could be wrong.  Especially here.  ;)  But it is a philosophy of making targets possible to attain, and punishing a misplay, not creating targets that no reasonable shot can attain.  It also  considers the typed of shots good golfers usually want to hit.  There is more, but I have got to go. :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tyler Kearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2002, 07:41:41 AM »
When a prevailing wind exists throughout the year, it is only appropriate to design accordingly, and Jeff Brauer's ideas above detail the comprehensive approach to accomplishing such a design.
In other geographical areas, where wind direction is less predictable, it seems to make sense that much effort should be placed on routing holes in a variety of directions. If this is an impossible task due to the tract of land at hand, then a balance must be found between the harder and easier holes (not considering the wind factor), so that the course doesn't play 6 or so shots harder when the wind blows from the north as opposed to the south. I do not suggest that efforts of design should be intended to make the course play the same on a day to day basis, that would be rather banal. Overall, the wind should add interest to the game (for its presence always makes the golf course play slightly different from the day before), but it should never defeat the golfer before the first tee shot.    
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture and the prevailing wind
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2002, 07:56:29 AM »
T Kearns,

I don't have a real problem with a six shot difference.  Just as certain par 4's should occaisionally be considered par 5's and vice versa, I don't mind at all players stepping to the first tee mentally calculating par at either 66 or 76, depending on conditons.

The design concept TEPaul calls "greens within a green" works great in a variable wind.  That is, provide one fat target with an open front that allows fairly easy access with different kind of shots, while having a few tucked pin positions that are hard to harder depending on the wind.  By moving the cup around, and naturally varying conditions, the prime pin position and the risk/reward change every single day of the year.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back