[Patrick_Mucci]

golf course architecture, is that the same period when the game transitioned from Match to Medal play ?

Did the shift to medal play influence the design of golf courses ?

[Bill_McBride]

Not sure what you mean, haven't the biggest US tournaments (U.S. Open, Western Open, North-South) mostly been tested at medal play? Club play among amateurs has always been primarily match play, as well as the U.S. Amateur. 

There has certainly been a shift from match play in college golf, which we played in the early '60's, to medal play which predominates today, but not sure that would have affected golf architecture.   

[Sam Morrow]

Not sure what you mean, haven't the biggest US tournaments (U.S. Open, Western Open, North-South) mostly been tested at medal play? Club play among amateurs has always been primarily match play, as well as the U.S. Amateur. 

There has certainly been a shift from match play in college golf, which we played in the early '60's, to medal play which predominates today, but not sure that would have affected golf architecture.   

Were the biggest US events played at medal because The Open Championship was played at medal?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sam,

The PGA was at match play.

Bill,

The US Amateur was changed to medal play and on site medal play qualifying was also added and remains today.

Many local clubs also transitioned their CC to medal.

TV and football are a great combination, TV and match play aren't a great combination.

TV accelerated the transition to medal play.

The 18th hole and even the finishing holes took on greater significance with the advent of aTV.

How many times have you heard criticism that the finishing hole is weak ?

Bethpage ?

Didn't medal play and TV alter the perspective and architecture of the finishing hole/s and especially the 18th hole ?

[Mac Plumart]

TV and match play aren't a great combination.

You know people say this all the time, but I find the opposite to be true.

Ryder Cup Match play is always great tv.  The US Am was off the charts.  Most, if not all, match play events I've watched are really entertaining.  I, frankly, can't say the same of all rounds of a 4 day stroke play event.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

Pat, not sure if it's coincidental or if one is a factor of the other.  

It most certainly has to do with the popularity of television and use of golf as an advertising vehicle rather than design of golf courses.  Most all of the ODGs we like were not practicing and/or deceased by the time WWII ended and television gained in popularity. RTJ just happened to come along at this time, and Wilson, Tull, and others were building rather homogeneous golf courses.  

I never had the feeling that the RTJ style courses, that 'target golf' bulls**t were designed for matchplay, but to create a sameness in conditions for a stroke or medal play event.  All the excessive 'containment' mounding, framing, pond for interest, etc. Why not just let the pros drop a ball at 100 yds and have a wedge and putting contest?  

The hideous TPCs, with their formulaic finishes, are most definitely designed for television.  "Where's the exciting finish?"
Here it is: let's have a par 5 with water, a par 3 over water, and a par 4 with water, and a floating car.  How nice.  Most every TPC finishes like this.
"Where's the waterfall?"  That's not a waterfall, dummy.  That's someone pissing down your back.

To Mac's point, yes, the Ryder Cup is exciting to watch, but that's a team event, for country or continent.  
I can't say the same for some of the Anderson Consulting or whatever the Matchplay is called now.  
The US AM is exciting as well, it's typically a good golf course.  


Stroke play will typically finish in "x' time.  Thus, television can plan to sell "y" number of advertising spots.  Feinstein talks about it in some of his books, and tournaments (ANIT) being structured to tie in to the next show (60 minutes) to pick up extra ratings.  

What if a tournament was match play, finishing 7 and 6 or 9 and 8, with 2 hours of tv time to fill?  What about the ratings?  What about the advertising?  Maybe CBS and Golfweek can do a 2 hour special on the Tiger Tracker   to fill the time.  

What if it's John Smith vs Mike Brown in the finals?  Who would watch that?  

Stroke play ensures there will be golf, absent weather or technical delays, to fill the block of time and sell advertising.  

Pat, will answer your second question shortly.  Am doing this from my DROID phone.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TV and match play aren't a great combination.

You know people say this all the time, but I find the opposite to be true.

Ryder Cup Match play is always great tv.  The US Am was off the charts.  Most, if not all, match play events I've watched are really entertaining.  I, frankly, can't say the same of all rounds of a 4 day stroke play event.

Mac,

When you're televising a final and one golfer wins 9 & 8, how do you fill all of the empty time.

Or, when bogies are winning holes, will the viewers interest be held ?

At medal play, the golfers playing their best get air time.

[Dan Herrmann]

Pat,
I think it's much more obvious than the change from match to stroke play.  In my opinion, it's economic - the advent of the Great Depression did more to end the golden age than anything else.  Follow it up with WWII, and you have deadly combination.  (Ironically, these decades seem to have led to our greatest era of municipal design, but that's a subject for another day)

To me, the fascinating subject to study is why post-WWII golf course design (before the "Dye era") was so mediocre.  

[Doug Braunsdorf]

Dan, my thinking is it's television.  RTJ just happened to come along at the right time, maybe when there was a void if you will.  By the time the Great Depression ended, many to most all of the ODGs were deceased.  So there was a void, and it happened to coincide with television.

[Mac Plumart]

TV and match play aren't a great combination.

You know people say this all the time, but I find the opposite to be true.

Ryder Cup Match play is always great tv.  The US Am was off the charts.  Most, if not all, match play events I've watched are really entertaining.  I, frankly, can't say the same of all rounds of a 4 day stroke play event.

Mac,

When you're televising a final and one golfer wins 9 & 8, how do you fill all of the empty time.

Or, when bogies are winning holes, will the viewers interest be held ?

At medal play, the golfers playing their best get air time.

Pat...you are right in that the worst fear is the 9&8 blow out.  But we have stroke play blow outs and the tv execs just highlight the player blowing everyone out.  I think this 9&8 fear has a slim chance of materializing and the drama that occured at the US AM is a great reward for taking the risk of the 9/8.  IMO.

Who cares if a bogey wins the hole?  I don't.  I want to see two golfers battle each other and the course.  In fact, they could set the course up to make it a big test and/or have the matches on extremely challenging golf courses.  Bogey's are fine by me.  Along those lines, I don't care if the guys are hitting drives 360 yards or 280 yards.  Big drives are only "big" in relation to their competitors drives.  Just like winning scores are relative to your competitors.

And to medal contests only showing the best golfers playing their best...I disagree.  We see Tiger all the time.  Playing well or not.   We see lots of Phil...playing well or not.  In an ideal world, your comment would be correct...but our world isn't ideal.

With that I'm out.  I've learned debating you is a losing cause...at least for a debater (debator ) of my skill.  I prefer discussion to debate.

 

[Wayne_Kozun]

There are a couple of other issues with match play tournaments - there are only two players on the course (unless you have a 3rd place match as well) so there isn't much action going on and you can't have too large of a gallery when there is only action on one hole.

You have a much higher probability of a blowout in match play since you only need one of two players to have a bad or great day and it isn't close.

And, as mentioned, what happens if there are two no names in the final?  You don't have Tiger and Phil playing so you don't have their shots to air.

[Sam Morrow]

Sam,

The PGA was at match play.

Bill,

The US Amateur was changed to medal play and on site medal play qualifying was also added and remains today.

Many local clubs also transitioned their CC to medal.

TV and football are a great combination, TV and match play aren't a great combination.

TV accelerated the transition to medal play.

The 18th hole and even the finishing holes took on greater significance with the advent of aTV.

How many times have you heard criticism that the finishing hole is weak ?

Bethpage ?

Didn't medal play and TV alter the perspective and architecture of the finishing hole/s and especially the 18th hole ?

According to many on this site the PGA isn't a major event.

[Matthew Petersen]

TV and match play aren't a great combination.

You know people say this all the time, but I find the opposite to be true.

Ryder Cup Match play is always great tv.  The US Am was off the charts.  Most, if not all, match play events I've watched are really entertaining.  I, frankly, can't say the same of all rounds of a 4 day stroke play event.

Mac,

When you're televising a final and one golfer wins 9 & 8, how do you fill all of the empty time.

Or, when bogies are winning holes, will the viewers interest be held ?

At medal play, the golfers playing their best get air time.

Pat...you are right in that the worst fear is the 9&8 blow out.  But we have stroke play blow outs and the tv execs just highlight the player blowing everyone out.  I think this 9&8 fear has a slim chance of materializing and the drama that occured at the US AM is a great reward for taking the risk of the 9/8.  IMO.

Who cares if a bogey wins the hole?  I don't.  I want to see two golfers battle each other and the course.  In fact, they could set the course up to make it a big test and/or have the matches on extremely challenging golf courses.  Bogey's are fine by me.  Along those lines, I don't care if the guys are hitting drives 360 yards or 280 yards.  Big drives are only "big" in relation to their competitors drives.  Just like winning scores are relative to your competitors.

And to medal contests only showing the best golfers playing their best...I disagree.  We see Tiger all the time.  Playing well or not.   We see lots of Phil...playing well or not.  In an ideal world, your comment would be correct...but our world isn't ideal.

With that I'm out.  I've learned debating you is a losing cause...at least for a debater (debator ) of my skill.  I prefer discussion to debate.

 

The biggest issue with match play on TV is that there simply isn't a lot of golf to show, at least in a traditional bracket event ype of format. That's why the Ryder Cup works ... plenty of golf being played. But when you only have two people playing golf, that's a lot of dead time between shots, and that leads to people switching the channel.

[BCrosby]

Tom Simpson used the "dark age" of gca to refer to inland British courses built pre-1900. People have used the phrase here to refer to the RTJ post-WWII era.

Whatever the value of the term, neither usage has much to do with medal vs. match play.

My guess is that the best way to think about the infleunce of medal play on gca is to begin with the USGA's Open set-ups beginning sometime in the 20s'. They had (and still have) a huge influence on what people think good architecture is supposed to be about. That influence continued well past the RTJ era.

In that regard, Mike Davis is a happy change of pace.

Bob   

     

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Simpson used the "dark age" of gca to refer to inland British courses built pre-1900.

People have used the phrase here to refer to the RTJ post-WWII era.

Bob, that's the era I was referencing.

Whatever the value of the term, neither usage has much to do with medal vs. match play.

I would disagree.
That's also the time period that TV began its romance with golf and it soon became evident that match play and TV were not as good a combination as Medal play and TV.

My guess is that the best way to think about the infleunce of medal play on gca is to begin with the USGA's Open set-ups beginning sometime in the 20s'. They had (and still have) a huge influence on what people think good architecture is supposed to be about. That influence continued well past the RTJ era.

I don't know much about US Open set ups in the 20's, but, can relate to the set-ups in the 50's and later.

I think Joe Dey had a significant influence.


In that regard, Mike Davis is a happy change of pace.

Mike's a terrific fellow, but, are the set-ups for USGA events substantively and systemically different ?     

[Peter Pallotta]

Pat - it will be interesting to see what answer emerges to your last question in the coming years, i.e. to see what Mike Davis' philosophy really is. Everyone who knows him here seems to agree he's a fine fellow and a breath of fresh air re USGA set-ups. On the latter point, I'm not (yet) so sure -- but my bias/intuition is that almost no one rises up the ranks of a corporation/organization without embodying/sharing that corporation's basic ethos and predilictions.

Peter

[Jud_T]

We all should be rooting for great weather and a great finish at Pinehurst.

[Mike_Young]

I think we will one day refer to the dark ages as the period in golf design where it became an enhancement to real estate and golf courses were designed more to sell homes and lots than to play the game.  This one thing changed the way courses were routed.  It changed their playability because difficulty became a promotional tool for selling vs. the course down the street.  And it created a maintenance level that could not be maintained for a reasonable fee just so RE would sell better.  And the main thing:  it created clubhouses that would destroy a club.   IMHO

[Jim Sherma]

I think we will one day refer to the dark ages as the period in golf design where it became an enhancement to real estate and golf courses were designed more to sell homes and lots than to play the game.  This one thing changed the way courses were routed.  It changed their playability because difficulty became a promotional tool for selling vs. the course down the street.  And it created a maintenance level that could not be maintained for a reasonable fee just so RE would sell better.  And the main thing:  it created clubhouses that would destroy a club.   IMHO

Mike - very well summarized. The influence on site planning and routing decisions is a very important legacy of this era.

[Dan Herrmann]

Mike - are your running for office?  I'd vote for ya!

In one post, you've outlined the dark age perfectly and provided a great warning to future clubs as to how NOT to proceed.

Well done, sir.  Well done.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

I hear you, but, the business model for retiree/vacation homes in the sun belt in the 60's, 70's, 80's to current date almost mandated that arrangement.

The reaction, by "golfers" to that sun belt arrangement was the introduction of "golf" clubs to those areas, for those who wanted to retain the same ambiance that existed in their northern clubs.

I think you have to compartmentalize and seperate the residential/resort community golf world from that of local non-resident clubs.

 

[Mike_Young]

Mike,

I hear you, but, the business model for retiree/vacation homes in the sun belt in the 60's, 70's, 80's to current date almost mandated that arrangement.

The reaction, by "golfers" to that sun belt arrangement was the introduction of "golf" clubs to those areas, for those who wanted to retain the same ambiance that existed in their northern clubs.

I think you have to compartmentalize and seperate the residential/resort community golf world from that of local non-resident clubs.

 

PAT,
Of course you have to compartmentalize.  The local non-resident clubs such as Pine Tree or Chechessee are not the places I'm speaking of...yuo are talking of golf clubs...I'm speaking of RE developments trying to sell exclusivity to owners when we know that exclusivity in golf cannot be purchased but has to be earned.   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

That's why I stated that you had to seperate the two, residential/resort community golf from local golf clubs.

Hey, at a course I'm very familiar with, the Green Chairman, after spending the winter in Florida, wanted to put a waterfall behind one of the greens, because he saw a few that he likee in Florida at residential/resort community courses.

YIKES.

[David Cronheim]

A lot of posters here rip RTJ at every possible turn, but what he was doing in the early part of his career was no less revolutionary than what the ODGs did earlier or what people like our own Tom Doak, or Pete Dye, or C&C would do later. Now, it's fair to say that what he's done perhaps has not stood the test of time as well as some other architect's work, but I have often found the biggest problem with some of his courses to be the changes made from the original layout. Much the way many of the ODGs work was changed and there is now a furious clamor to restore that work, I wonder if 20 years from now we won't see a similar push to restore RTJ's work.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

I agree, i think there's a built in bias against almost everything "jones".

I've played a number of his courses that I like.

Don't forget that RTJ, the USGA and TV formed a triumverate that greatly influenced golf in the 50's, 60's and 70's

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()