An appreciation of Golf Course Architecture

[Jeff_Brauer]

Rick,

Based on the "foodies" I know, they relish the mismatch of great food in a "hole in the wall" while the "average" diner would mix all those elements together in their assessment of a restaurant.  Part of that has to be the "snob" appeal of knowing something others don't, and of course, lauding it over them!

Hmm, foodies and golf architecture buffs aren't really all that different are they?  For the matter, average restaurant goers and average golfers probably are pretty much the same, too, in their overall evaluation of their chosen recreation places......

[Jud_T]

He appreciates value, but has to like the course, first and foremost, to see ANY value in it at all.  Playing a course you don't like for fee only is not value seeking, its being cheap!

I agree with this.  Playing a course you don't like at any price is no fun.  Problem is since I've been slumming it here there's fewer and fewer courses I like... 

[Steve Lang]

   Do you like the fried chicken at the North Platte Airport because you're immersed in the history of the place or its just such a good plate of food?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Probably because you just got off a long flight and anything tastes good......

Jud, you make another point about the variance of what golfers (all of us, snobs, newbs, six packs) value or like - it sure changes over time.  I wonder what percentage of us like simpler as better over time, as opposed to most, who I presume "elevate" their tastes (or expectations) over time?  I suspect that many of us, after chasing any "holy grail" including "better golf" at some point get to the point of our lives where its "been there, done that" and all of a sudden, the value of the high end places goes way down, even though they haven't changed a bit.

[Adam Lawrence]

Rick,

Based on the "foodies" I know, they relish the mismatch of great food in a "hole in the wall" while the "average" diner would mix all those elements together in their assessment of a restaurant.  Part of that has to be the "snob" appeal of knowing something others don't, and of course, lauding it over them!

Hmm, foodies and golf architecture buffs aren't really all that different are they?  For the matter, average restaurant goers and average golfers probably are pretty much the same, too, in their overall evaluation of their chosen recreation places......

It isn't just snob appeal. Great food in a hole in the wall is likely to be cheaper than great food in a five star hotel. So the perceived value is higher. Same applies to golf I guess.

[Sean_A]

He appreciates value, but has to like the course, first and foremost, to see ANY value in it at all.  Playing a course you don't like for fee only is not value seeking, its being cheap!

I agree with this.  Playing a course you don't like at any price is no fun.  Problem is since I've been slumming it here there's fewer and fewer courses I like... 

Yes, this is a given for me.  The course has to be a certain quality level/provide enjoyment level before I get any value out of it.  Of course, this is the crux of the issue with value.  There is a huge percentage of golfers that will  not pay over X amount regardless of other factors.  Most of the time I am willing to be convinced by the high green courses and will give it a go once to decide for myself.  Its only the select few courses which are in the stratosphere of Pebble etc at which I will not pay because I know its impossible for me to get good value at that sort of cost.   

I don't know if people realize, but all of my recommendations with course reviews have a value element included.  I work off a basic principle that there is no reason I can't play a very well designed course in a lovely setting for $75-$100 anywhere in the world.  That doesn't mean I am not willing to pay more.  I know there are many courses still offering good value at $150+, but I am more critical of the course if its quite expensive because I expect more for the higher green fee.  Of course this means its hard for very expensive courses to impress, but shouldn't that be the case when I know I can be impressed for far less somewhere else?  I realize that over time there will be more and more courses I like that I won't visit, but there are tons of good courses out there, so I don't feel a need to take a bath with green fees. 

Ciao

[Chris Johnston]

Good thread.

As shared last year, the experience and value sell. 

Remember, in the great quest for real or perceived perfection, it's 100% about fun.  Thank goodness for that.

[Matt Neff]

I often wonder if golfers separate "architecture/design" from maintenance and management.  

If by this statement you're questioning whether the average golfer even makes this distinction, I completely agree.  Unfortunately, I think the finer points of design (and sometimes even the more obvious) are often missed by the average golfer but you better believe they'll notice and have an opinion on green speed or bunker conditions.  I think it's more common for most golfers to discuss conditioning and ultimately form their opinions on a course based on conditioning versus design for 2 reasons:  1.  I think conditioning is more obvious to them and its affect on their game than the contouring of a green surrond or other more subtle feature 2. I think most people feel they know more about what the conditions should be and therefore are more likely to discuss them.  I'm sure we've all heard plenty of people talk about pretty architecturally mundane courses as if they were Augusta because the greens were rolling 14 and it was wall-to-wall green.  I genuinely believe that there's a large percentage of golfers (especially among casual golfers) that have literally no idea what's involved with designing a golf course and how design influences their game.

[Jud_T]

I work off a basic principle that there is no reason I can't play a very well designed course in a lovely setting for $75-$100 anywhere in the world. 

Ciao

Guess you're not planning any golf in Tokyo in the near future...

[Sean_A]

I work off a basic principle that there is no reason I can't play a very well designed course in a lovely setting for $75-$100 anywhere in the world. 

Ciao

Guess you're not planning any golf in Tokyo in the near future...

Jud

I lived in Japan for a year, a time when I wasn't playing golf.  If I go back, it won't be for golf unless its for the odd game.  As I said, I am willing to give most places a go once (the Fuji at Kawana looks interesting), but Japan is far too fascinating to spend too much time on a Gaijin game.

Ciao

[Ivan Morris]

I'm one of the many who will not pay over X-amount, period. I'm lucky that I was able to play on so many great courses in top championships for a relatively tiny entry fee. It was good while it lasted! Of course, the way I played colored my thinking on how great or otherwise the golf course was. The restaurant analogy isn't a bad one.