Ground Game: A must for any great course?

[Gene Greco]

Ben:

   Does Dave Hensley work hard? I bet he does.

I also think Jared and the rest of Kyle's crew also work hard at the Sand Hills Golf Club.

 All the crews at all of these courses have worked especially hard this summer just to keep the grasses ALIVE.

They are working day and night like dogs to try the best they can to ensure that those traveling to their courses from far and wide enjoy their time during their "golfing retreat."

So on Dave's behalf (and Jared's) your point is well taken.

                    Gene

 

  

[Ben Sims]

Dr. Gene,

My post was meant as no slight.  I have no doubt that the crew at SH is every bit as talented as those elsewhere.  I was merely commenting on what I have seen at BN with regard to Dave and crew's work there, and the original turf selection.  I don't have a basis for comparison because--regretfully as you know--I haven't been to SH yet.  Though the sand may be perfect out there, the temps and preciptation patterns aren't.

[Gene Greco]

From my perspective, a great course should permit a ground game, but generally not require it.

BTW...This is my answer to Greg's question as well.

The course which is considered by most to be the greatest in the world, Pine Valley, has limited ground game.  

[Bruce Wellmon]

I loved Ballyneal AND Dismal River.
I loved Dismal River AND Ballyneal.

[Gene Greco]

Ben:

   Your post was not taken as a slight.

 It was (re)enlightening for me and probably for Brian as well, he being of moon pants fame.

         Gene

[Greg Tallman]

OK, the concensus is that it is NOT an absolute which I believe we wll knew to begin with.

Question for Tom Doak - Will you one day take a shot at a course that will require a prediominantly aerial game? Why/Why not? If yes, what must the site have for you to go this route?

[Steve Salmen]

Jared,

Since I have not yet played Sand Hills, I'm in no position to dispute anything you have or have not said about the place.

However, I disagree with what I interpret to be your opinion: that fun=great.  IMO, fun=great golf course that does not beat you up.  From championship tees, would anyone consider Pinehurst #2 or Carnoustie fun? Fun courses to me are Shoreacres, Lawsonia, Pasatiempo, and Yale.  They demand good shots but do not harshly punish mediocrity.  They allow you to make some mistakes yet not destroy your handicap or ego.

I had a a lot of fun at Ballyneal in 30mph wind the whole day.  I just moved to forward tees on holes into the wind and back on the holes downwind.  I can assure you, I would not have had fun playing tips into the wind all day.

BTW, the private club I belong to in the US is one of the least fun courses I've ever played and it has two awful holes.

[Mark Pritchett]

Jared,


However, I disagree with what I interpret to be your opinion: that fun=great.  IMO, fun=great golf course that does not beat you up.  From championship tees, would anyone consider Pinehurst #2 or Carnoustie fun? Fun courses to me are Shoreacres, Lawsonia, Pasatiempo, and Yale.  They demand good shots but do not harshly punish mediocrity.  They allow you to make some mistakes yet not destroy your handicap or ego.

I had a a lot of fun at Ballyneal in 30mph wind the whole day.  I just moved to forward tees on holes into the wind and back on the holes downwind.  I can assure you, I would not have had fun playing tips into the wind all day.

Are you saying you play or played Shorearces, Lawsonia, Pasa and Yale from the tips? 

[Jared Kalina]

Ben-

You made one omission from the praise you heaped on Dave Hensley -- the guy has a limited amount of water to work with each year.

Maybe that's not the case anymore - it was three years ago - but at that time when I visited with him over the 4th of July they were on pace to run out of water.  I can't imagine how nerve-wracking that would be.  Sand Hills doesn't have that issue, thank God.  It definitely would have been depleted by now.

Granted, they don't get the cart traffic to create all those nasty burns, but with a summer like this, I don't know how he does it.  Sleep would surely be difficult every night.

[Tom_Doak]

Ben-

You made one omission from the praise you heaped on Dave Hensley -- the guy has a limited amount of water to work with each year.

Maybe that's not the case anymore - it was three years ago - but at that time when I visited with him over the 4th of July they were on pace to run out of water.  I can't imagine how nerve-wracking that would be.  Sand Hills doesn't have that issue, thank God.  It definitely would have been depleted by now.

Granted, they don't get the cart traffic to create all those nasty burns, but with a summer like this, I don't know how he does it.  Sleep would surely be difficult every night.

Jared:

It might actually be a blessing in disguise.

Another of our courses, Stonewall, also has a very limited water supply, and in case you've never been there, Philadelphia has its share or brutal summers, too.  The superintendent, Dan Dale, uses this fact to his advantage.  When the course starts to get a bit brown in early summer, and the members start to question why, Dan just looks them straight in the eye and tells them if he starts watering now, he'll run out in August and the place will burn up -- so the limited supply has reduced the pressure on him to water for the sake of color.  And over the years, he's wound up with a sward of turf that's pretty resistant to drought, or it would have died by now.

Stonewall is a walking-only course, too, and you are right, that helps reduce the stress [and the need for cosmetic watering] a lot.  I'll bet not many people think about how much more water their course uses because they have golf carts driving in the fairways.

P.S.  I hope that Dave H. and Dan Dale are not losing too much sleep over their situations.  You can only do what you can do.

[Tom_Doak]

OK, the concensus is that it is NOT an absolute which I believe we wll knew to begin with.

Question for Tom Doak - Will you one day take a shot at a course that will require a prediominantly aerial game? Why/Why not? If yes, what must the site have for you to go this route?

Greg:

I don't know the answer to that question.  I don't think I've ever turned down a project because I thought the site would not allow for a reasonable amount of ground game interest, and I'm honestly not sure that I've seen a site where it couldn't be incorporated.  At Pine Valley, Crump excluded ground game options by choice, not because the site forced him to ... and would you not say the same for Diamante?

So would I refuse to build a project if the George Crump of the 21st century called me and wanted me to build something of the same ilk?  Probably not; yet I might try to convince him that such a project NEEDED a couple of bounce-and-run approaches because it is one of the rare things that the best golfers have trouble doing ... it's only the lesser golfers that are troubled by the aerial demands of Pine Valley.  [And even Pine Valley does have a potential running approach or three -- I am thinking right off the bat of #1, and #4, and especially #13 -- although the last time I played there it was so wet that balls were plugging in the fairways.]

Now, there are plenty of courses where the ground game is impractical for a good player because the turf conditions make it too unpredictable compared to the aerial option.  If you had a course where you decided you had to use zoysia fairways, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to think that good golfers are going to bounce the ball into the greens.  But, many seniors are still going to be hitting their 4-woods between the bunkers instead of flying over them, so having an open entrance is still a plus.  Riviera, with its kikuyu fairways, is another example of this.

[Scott Szabo]

I just returned from the Yucca/Ballynizzle Cup and the conditions were fantastic, especially given the recent drought that we've been experiencing in this region.  If anything, the course played a bit soft for the morning rounds; there was a bit of humidity in the air that likely was the cause.  The ground game was certainly in play, as always at Ballyneal.  Dave should be commended for the work he has done, and continues to do. 

I'd bet the same can be said for the staff at Sand Hills. 

The conditions these fellas have to deal with on a regular basis, from drought to monsoons, shows just how good they are at being able to present these courses in the manner they were intended.  I, for one, know I take what they do for granted from time to time.  I'd bet I'm not alone in that regard.

[John Kavanaugh]

So what's next, we gonna cry for how tough the guys out at Bandon have it?  btw. How is Ballyneal going to build a second 18 if they don't have enough water for what they got?

One of the great things about the guys working out at Dismal is that they could care less if you know their names.

[Greg Tallman]

So what's next, we gonna cry for how tough the guys out at Bandon have it?  btw. How is Ballyneal going to build a second 18 if they don't have enough water for what they got?

One of the great things about the guys working out at Dismal is that they could care less if you know their names.

No, you should cry for us for we have had 6 inches rain in 3 years. Better yet save the tears for once on site, the moisture would help.

[John Kavanaugh]

Greg, take a look around, you're in F'ing Mexico.

[Greg Tallman]

OK, the concensus is that it is NOT an absolute which I believe we wll knew to begin with.

Question for Tom Doak - Will you one day take a shot at a course that will require a prediominantly aerial game? Why/Why not? If yes, what must the site have for you to go this route?

Greg:

I don't know the answer to that question.  I don't think I've ever turned down a project because I thought the site would not allow for a reasonable amount of ground game interest, and I'm honestly not sure that I've seen a site where it couldn't be incorporated.  At Pine Valley, Crump excluded ground game options by choice, not because the site forced him to ... and would you not say the same for Diamante?

So would I refuse to build a project if the George Crump of the 21st century called me and wanted me to build something of the same ilk?  Probably not; yet I might try to convince him that such a project NEEDED a couple of bounce-and-run approaches because it is one of the rare things that the best golfers have trouble doing ... it's only the lesser golfers that are troubled by the aerial demands of Pine Valley.  [And even Pine Valley does have a potential running approach or three -- I am thinking right off the bat of #1, and #4, and especially #13 -- although the last time I played there it was so wet that balls were plugging in the fairways.]

Now, there are plenty of courses where the ground game is impractical for a good player because the turf conditions make it too unpredictable compared to the aerial option.  If you had a course where you decided you had to use zoysia fairways, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to think that good golfers are going to bounce the ball into the greens.  But, many seniors are still going to be hitting their 4-woods between the bunkers instead of flying over them, so having an open entrance is still a plus.  Riviera, with its kikuyu fairways, is another example of this.

Gracias.

What is the longest course in your portfolio? What if a client said he wanted a long, hard golf course where the pros would have trouble breaking par? Said client had a wonderful property and intended on luring a Tour or USGA event.

Would you be reluctant? Would you simply say no?

Better start thinking in such terms because that dau is coming... probably not too far down the road.

Regarding your question about Diamante. That is the course that was the impetus for the "question".

Not sure how many times I have played there but quite a few time anyway. As noted it never dawned on me that the ground game is not in play whatsoever. That fact did not take away from my enjoyment of the course or overall opinion of it... I think it is wonderful and quite fun and the fact that the ground game thought never hit me is more or less validation of what is there and my own answer to the question.  

As one who grew up on a course with a whopping 8 bunkers this surprises me a bit as flying it to the hole was generally the last option during my formative years as a player.

[Greg Tallman]

Greg, take a look around, you're in F'ing Mexico.

What does that have to do with rainfall? If we were 190 mile east we would average maybe 65" per year.

And for the record, I'll take where I am living over where you are living all day every day.

Cabo isn't really "F'ing Mexico" but it is f'ing great. 

[Tim Pitner]

So what's next, we gonna cry for how tough the guys out at Bandon have it?  btw. How is Ballyneal going to build a second 18 if they don't have enough water for what they got?

One of the great things about the guys working out at Dismal is that they could care less if you know their names.

As one who is not a member of any of the CO/NE prairie links clubs and admires (mostly from afar) each of them, I find these little snits between interested parties on this site to be quite tiresome.

[John Kavanaugh]

Tim,

Please point out the snit.

[Greg Tallman]

Tim,

Please point out the snit.

Oh please John.

[Ben Sims]

So what's next, we gonna cry for how tough the guys out at Bandon have it?  btw. How is Ballyneal going to build a second 18 if they don't have enough water for what they got?

One of the great things about the guys working out at Dismal is that they could care less if you know their names.

John,    

My post was not for celebrity, and I am sure that Dave couldn't give two figs about me mentioning his efforts.   I was merely applauding what it takes to keep fescue in that climate.  But so Dismal won't feel left out (God forbid another prairie course gets mentioned without them all getting mentioned), Jagger Mandrel is the terrific super at Dismal River.

[George Pazin]

Is the concept of ground game though of too narrowly, in terms of approaches only?

I like this question, and I'm disappointed it didn't seem to get the attention it deserves. I could swear I posted something about it in the thread, but must not have.

I think most people's idea of the ground game is indeed far too narrow. It seems most think it means you should be able to top it around the course, or get around with a putter. To me, I think of the ground game as anything that requires more thought than "What's my drop and stop yardage?"

That's the opposite approach of Greg's question - it uses a definition too broad - but I think the ground game has a certain negative connotation among better golfers, as they simply view it as a means of appeasing lesser golfers (like me).

Certainly there will be occasions when the best option - maybe even the only option - is a high spinning shot. I just think it should be minimized, and there should be a distinct emphasis on allowing players to get around in almost any way possible. Yet the exact opposite seems to be preferred by most, on here and elsewhere.

To me, the essence of golf - and golf course architecture - is: Here is the tee. There is the hole. Get it in the hole in as few strokes as possible.

In a weird way, I think that's the most unheeded lesson of TOC (guessing here, haven't had the pleasure myself). There seems to have been a move somewhere along the way toward the architect decided the path to the hole, and the manner in which said path is approached. I don't know when it happened, but the shift was rather complete, as I see very few holes that evoke the spirit I desire.

That theory also explains why I never win the armchair architect contests...

[David Bartman]

No, out west, Riviera, Pebble Beach, Torrey Pines, Muirfield Village,

not sure what walking has to do with all of this , but I for one, don't think walk-ability should be a requirement in determining a great golf course.

I agree with the poster that course conditions in the US are generally detrimental to allowing a ground game to be a viable option.   

[Colin Macqueen]

George,

I concur with you when you say ""I think of the ground game as anything that requires more thought than "What's my drop and stop yardage?""

I play a ground game from up to 120 metres out at every opportunity and I rather think that this approach would only be stymied when playing on very, very spongy turf. If I find the going a bit soft I just bunt my ball a bit harder! Fast and firm is best but in my world not paramount for the ground game.

Cheers Colin

[Tom_Doak]

What is the longest course in your portfolio? What if a client said he wanted a long, hard golf course where the pros would have trouble breaking par? Said client had a wonderful property and intended on luring a Tour or USGA event.

Would you be reluctant? Would you simply say no?

Better start thinking in such terms because that dau is coming... probably not too far down the road.

Greg:

Well, our client in China is certainly interested in hosting a big tournament, so that day may already have come ... but he isn't insistent on a particular length for the course in question, and he's probably well connected enough that it won't be the deciding factor on whether it happens or not.

I have been reluctant about similar situations in the past ... one of the reasons I wound up not designing Erin Hills is that Mr. Lang spoke openly of having a 7800-yard U.S. Open course, and I thought that was nuts.  [As it turned out, we were both right!]  Another potential client in South Korea had a similar assignment, and I said I would do it if they would also let me build a 6,600-yard course for one of the 5 other courses they wanted to build -- but no, they wanted them all long and hard, so I passed. 

On the other hand, I have it on reliable information that my design for the Olympic course was longer than most of the other entries -- and it had some ground game components, too.  But I think the result of the Olympic competition showed that the Tour would rather deal with other designers than with me, so I doubt I'm going to design a lot of tournament courses.