What is the most under-rated course attribute on this site?

[Brett_Morrissy]

Dave, you are right, only gets discussed when a tourny goes to top track I.e. Pres Cup at RMGC.

[George Pazin]

Small scale land movement versus large scale.

[hhuffines]

I would an element of firmness to the speed of greens.  I also like greens that have front to back slopes.

[Bruce Katona]

Playability & enjoyment by the average golfer.

For a course to be "successful" - it should look difficult to play but be very playable and enjoyable to play by the customer/member.  The player wants to say" What a day, I shot 78/82/91 at XYZ Golf Club, what a great day."

The typical golfer wnats the following in his course -
1. Tees in good condition- move the markers around to limit wear & tear.
2. Greens in good condition - 9-10 is more than fast enough. Above that speed too many 3 putts.
3. Fairway grass in good conditon. Green/Brown is ok as the ball runs farther allowing them to hit the ball farther.
4. Rough height minimal. Find an errant shot quickly and have a chance to advance the ball. 3" rough is no fun for the typical player and it slows down play.
5. Collars and approaches can be a bit higher in height. Tight lies are difficult for the avergae player.  A bit more grass allows them to scoop the ball up and ont the green.
6. A Hot beverage cart girl with a cart full of cold ones!

[Carl Rogers]

The quality of golf from the forward tees.  Go play your favorite course from the forward tees and tee off with a five iron.

[Sean_A]

I think this group under-rates ROUTING.  Far too often, it seems that we get focused on pictures of holes but not how they connect together.  Several on this site praise Tobacco Road, for example, but the back nine routing is a mess.

For me, the two most important criteria to determine great golf are ROUTING and the GREEN COMPLEXES. 

Bart

Bart

The problem with talking about a routing is very few of us are in a position to know what is a good or bad routing given the constraints of a given project.  Sure, we can talk about the walk in the park or rhythm aspects of a routing, but getting into the hows and whys of a routing really should be left off the table unless one knows the project very well. 

Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

The problem with talking about a routing is very few of us are in a position to know what is a good or bad routing given the constraints of a given project.  Sure, we can talk about the walk in the park or rhythm aspects of a routing, but getting into the hows and whys of a routing really should be left off the table unless one knows the project very well. 

Ciao

And that's one of the reasons ROUTING is the most underrated aspect of golf architecture on this site, because it's so hard to discuss.

The routing is far and away the most important part of the design.  If you get the routing right, you get the drainage right, you get the forward tees right, and you ought to get the green complexes right because you're in a good place to build a green.  And no one has mentioned it yet, but you get the construction budget right, which is a key part of any project's ability to survive.  It's even a lot easier to get the mowing lines right, if you think that's the most important thing.

To me, the one aspect that gets more and more important as I get more experienced is the transition from one hole to the next.  If it's really good and seamless, you don't even think about them, and you don't get out of the flow of enjoying yourself on the course or of playing well.  If you get the transitions wrong, the enjoyment goes down markedly.  And the transitions, of course, are the ROUTING, too.

[Sean_A]

Tom

Yes, I think of transitions including how the course interacts with the house (for me this is a critical aspect of the design because golf is not merely about shots - its as much a social game for most) as part of the walk in the park aspect which is of course a routing issue.  In some ways it seems modern designers at least understand the importance of transitions, but often times they can't resist going for that wow factor which compromises the ideal.  It is a rare thing to find an exceptional hole after an awkward transition and that should be the criteria for breaking the rhythm.  Unfortunately, with carts beings prevalent, its easy to sideline walking transitions in favour of riding versions.  Its almost as if routings for walkers and riders are two totally different animals. 

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

The quality of golf from the forward tees.  Go play your favorite course from the forward tees and tee off with a five iron.

If you really want to experience what the forward tees are like, use restricted flight ball or use the same club a weaker player would hit.

a 3 wood from 160 requires an entirely different skill set than a 8 iron from 160 as the 3 wood will roll at least 20-30 yards due to the reduced spin and height and requires the green to have an opening in front.
I've played quite a bit with my son as he was growing up using the same clubs he was and loweing the clubhead speed to face similar challenges. Swinging at 1/2 speed out of the rough requires some unaggressive club choices
I do cheat from the bunkers though as I use a full normal speed swing, and this is a huge advantage over a lower clubhead swing player.

actually a very different/fun game as you interface with the hazards ON the course, rather than those OFF the course.

[BCrosby]

Routing is hard to talk about for another reason. Routing a course differently usually amounts to a very different course. But that course wasn't the one that was built.

For example, you can criticize William Faulkner's long sentences or you might no like the way he depicts a character. We all understand what you are talking about (though we may not agree).

But criticizing him for not writing a different book, one unlike the one he actually wrote, is harder to do.

Bob

[JMEvensky]

Routing is hard to talk about for another reason. Routing a course differently usually amounts to a very different course. But that course wasn't the one that was built.

For example, you can criticize William Faulkner's long sentences or you might no like the way he depicts a character. We all understand what you are talking about (though we may not agree).

But criticizing him for not writing a different book, one unlike the one he actually wrote, is harder to do.

Bob

I'm currently reading Go Down Moses--criticizing WF would be pretty easy for me to do this morning.

[Garland Bayley]

Enjoyment by the masses.

IMO opinion, this is exactly backwards. The most under-rated course attribute of architects in the dark ages (heroic?) era was enjoyment by the masses. One of the most prevalent attributes stressed on this site is enjoyment by the masses. Why else are we stressing width, alternative ways for the hack to get around, aversion to ponds, etc.