Is there such a thing as a

[Patrick_Mucci]

poorly routed golf course ?

I'm trying to think of the courses I've played and if any of them suffered from a BAD/POOR routing.

I remembered that some courses had glitches in their routing, Atlantic may have been one, but, I wouldn't describe the original routing as BAD/POOR.

The criticism of Atlantic was that there were crossovers, yet those offering that particular criticisim gave Merion a pass for the exact same thing.

Now, I'm hearing about the routing at Streamsong.

So, give me real examples of courses with bad routing and what makes them bad ?

[Mike Nuzzo]

What do you mean "hearing about the routing at Streamsong?"

I see poorly routed courses all the time - they are everywhere.

[Mark Saltzman]

What do you mean "hearing about the routing at Streamsong?"

I see poorly routed courses all the time - they are everywhere.

Mike, is it easier to identify a bad routing than a good one?

[Nigel Islam]

Pat you need to leave New York and come to Indiana &Kentucky if you want to see poor routing. My definition is if you have to wonder where the next hole is more than once a round and back track then the course is likely not routed well. I play a lot of new courses just for the experience, and good routing does stand out as much as poor routing. Most modern architects do a decent job, but the locally built courses tend to be an experience.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Nigel,

Could you name the courses so that I can view them on google earth.

Thanks

[Tom Culley]

Pat,

I think you and many other users will struggle to figure out the routing of Tilsworth, a course i played many times as a junior.

Here's a link to it on google earth. Have fun!  

http://goo.gl/maps/iqk5Z

Edited to enter shorter URL.

[Mike Schott]

Pat you need to leave New York and come to Indiana &Kentucky if you want to see poor routing. My definition is if you have to wonder where the next hole is more than once a round and back track then the course is likely not routed well. I play a lot of new courses just for the experience, and good routing does stand out as much as poor routing. Most modern architects do a decent job, but the locally built courses tend to be an experience.

That's a difficult standard to achieve. Even Rustic Canyon has some confusion on the back nine. It took me a bit of study of the yardage book to find the 10th tee and there are a few crossover walks to tees on that 9. I was fortunate to play with some locals who showed me the way to a few of those holes.

[Tom_Doak]

poorly routed golf course ?

I'm trying to think of the courses I've played and if any of them suffered from a BAD/POOR routing.

Patrick:

I've looked at plenty of routings where the holes didn't fit the ground ... where a massive piece of earthwork would have been unnecessary if the hole had just been slid back 100 yards on the ground so that the high spot that had to be cut was the landing area, instead of a hump between the tee and landing area. 

It's much easier to see on a plan than on the ground, though.  On the ground, you have to look for evidence of the earthwork.  I'm guessing you are just missing it; plus, you don't play many modern courses (and on flat ground in Florida it's harder to make this sort of mistake).

[Jeff_Brauer]

Any courses with 90 degree doglegs is almost always obviously bad.  Holes too close together.

I will disagree with TD about high points being the best natural landing zones, although I agree hills between tee and fw aren't so good either.  I know one archie who places most LZ's on high points, but if you hit a poor tee shot, the next shot is always blind, so its not the best for the average golfer.

I have also seen routings where, IMHO, the archie missed every hole by about 30-50 yards.

[Joel_Stewart]

Look at how Fazio routed Friars Head and then compare to what Bill Coore did.

There a number of poorly routed courses.  I play a course called Richmond CC which after the first 6 holes has a terrible routing.  Back and forth along the side of a hill.  

[Jeb Bearer]

Look at how Fazio routed Friars Head and then compare to what Bill Coore did.

There a number of poorly routed courses.  I play a course called Richmond CC which after the first 6 holes has a terrible routing.  Back and forth along the side of a hill.  

What was Fazio's routing like at Friar's Head?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm not surre it qualifies as a poor routing but Inverness is certainly unimaginative. There are a lot of straight holes that go back and forth in the same direction.

[Phil McDade]

Patrick:

I think Erin Hills suffers from some poor routing decisions -- and by that I don't mean the individual hole corridors (some of which are among the best and coolest I've seen) or the holes themselves (several of which are very good). But the transitions between greens and tees are often awkward, and not intuitive -- when I first walked it a few years ago, starting at 1 and trying to finish on 18, I got lost and ended up walking down a fairway that I thought was on the front nine, only to realize I was on #17. That to me is a sign of poor routing. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that Erin Hills was built (and modified ) as a championship course open to public play, and one that has great elasticity in its design -- one of the course's strengths, I'd argue, for top-level play. But it makes for an overall routing that is -- at times -- quite poor, i.e., long walks to tees from previous greens, not-intuitive transitions between greens and tees, a somewhat un-natural feel to how the course should be walked. See this thread for a look at the course and routing issues:
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45966.0.html

[Nigel Islam]

Nigel,

Could you name the courses so that I can view them on google earth.

Thanks

Here are few off the top of my head here are a few. Mind you I consider these courses to be goat farms, but the Golden Age only visited this part of the country in a few places.

Pride's Creek Peteresburg, IN
Henderson Country Club, Henderson KY. I played in November and the hole signs were down. I got turned around three times.
Lakeview in Rockport, IN
Whispering Pines, Indianpolis, IN (Lawsuit waiting to happen)
Phil Harris, Linton, IN

[Nigel Islam]

Pat you need to leave New York and come to Indiana &Kentucky if you want to see poor routing. My definition is if you have to wonder where the next hole is more than once a round and back track then the course is likely not routed well. I play a lot of new courses just for the experience, and good routing does stand out as much as poor routing. Most modern architects do a decent job, but the locally built courses tend to be an experience.

That's a difficult standard to achieve. Even Rustic Canyon has some confusion on the back nine. It took me a bit of study of the yardage book to find the 10th tee and there are a few crossover walks to tees on that 9. I was fortunate to play with some locals who showed me the way to a few of those holes.

It is a difficult standard to achieve, but you can have a very good course that may not have a great routing for whatever reasons, but I am totally talking about Doak 1s here. The routing may not even be the worst part of the experience

[Jerry Kluger]

Pat: I too believe that a routing which can often leave you in jeopardy of being hit by a ball from an adjoining hole is bad. I felt that way at Jasna Polana in New Jersey and I was hit at the Arthur Hills Course at what is now Trump Washington.  

I really like Galloway National but they really forced the routing along the bay causing you to double back after playing one of the holes.

[Tom_Doak]

I'm not surre it qualifies as a poor routing but Inverness is certainly unimaginative. There are a lot of straight holes that go back and forth in the same direction.

Actually I think Inverness is a very very good routing.  It's a very tight site which forces a lot of parallel holes, yet the holes hit the topo in different ways to create a lot of variety.  The 1st and 10th are a great example right out of the gate.

[Tom_Doak]

I will disagree with TD about high points being the best natural landing zones, although I agree hills between tee and fw aren't so good either.  I know one archie who places most LZ's on high points, but if you hit a poor tee shot, the next shot is always blind, so its not the best for the average golfer.

I have also seen routings where, IMHO, the archie missed every hole by about 30-50 yards.

Jeff:

Actually, I seldom put the landing zones on high points myself; I am much more inclined to play down and back up, or to hit both shots across subtle valleys across a side-hill, as I learned from Mr. Dye when he routed The Honors Course.  Bill Coore is better at putting landing areas at the crest of a hill, and I envy him for it, although occasionally I see a good opportunity.

My point was just what you said at the end, I've seen so many routings where missing the holes by 30-100 yards required brutal earthmoving on land that really wasn't too steep.

P.S.  Who always routes landing areas at the top of hills?  You can tell me in a p.m. if you'd rather not out him in this thread.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jerry Kluger,

I agree on Jasna Polana, how could I have forgotten it

Flak jackets and helmets should be available in the pro shop

[John Ezekowitz]

Jerry Kluger,

I agree on Jasna Polana, how could I have forgotten it

Flak jackets and helmets should be available in the pro shop

I always felt like Jasna was a huge missed opportunity. Very cool piece of property (a lot of which they did not use for the golf course; I'm sure there were other concerns there) in a good location that could've been something special. Instead you get poorly routed, one-note golf. That first hole is one of my least favorite holes ever.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff Brauer,

Are 90 degree doglegs the sign of a bad routing or a limited site.

Adios has about four 90 degree doglegs, bit it seems that the course was crammed into a confining site.

Trump WPB has two

Tom Doak,

I understand what you're saying, but could you provide the names of some course where that situation exists

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom Doak,

Personal message sent.

Sounds like Pete taught you like Nugent taught me.  Playing across subtle valleys nearly never gets old, and the targets just present so well.  Of course, if you can play down and then gently down to the green, its always a bit better than down and up to the green. 

I am actually surprised to hear you say you route down and up, thinking I have seen you write that this is the "too typical" hole pattern. Of course, I understand that its important to occaisionally look for and consider holes where the tee is low just for variety.

[Tim Liddy]

I have noticed that MacKenzie normally, but not always, routed perpendicular to the contours, starting high, hitting to a low and back up to the green (Augusta, Crystal Downs). Dye routes more with the contours, with lows between tee landing and green areas. As green slopes have gotten softer, it becomes more difficult to see the green surface when using MacKenzie's philosophy, as the golfer is below the green and looking up, explaining many of the blind views to the green surfaces at Augusta. Always many exceptions and possibilities to this generalization. Strategic views to portions of greens depending on which side of the fairway always add interest and variety.

[J_ Crisham]

Patrick:

I think Erin Hills suffers from some poor routing decisions -- and by that I don't mean the individual hole corridors (some of which are among the best and coolest I've seen) or the holes themselves (several of which are very good). But the transitions between greens and tees are often awkward, and not intuitive -- when I first walked it a few years ago, starting at 1 and trying to finish on 18, I got lost and ended up walking down a fairway that I thought was on the front nine, only to realize I was on #17. That to me is a sign of poor routing. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that Erin Hills was built (and modified ) as a championship course open to public play, and one that has great elasticity in its design -- one of the course's strengths, I'd argue, for top-level play. But it makes for an overall routing that is -- at times -- quite poor, i.e., long walks to tees from previous greens, not-intuitive transitions between greens and tees, a somewhat un-natural feel to how the course should be walked. See this thread for a look at the course and routing issues:
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45966.0.html

Phil,  Great call on Erin Hills- A fellow GCAer and I walked my  first time here carrying our own bags. Big mistake- it is 9 miles of walking versus a typical 5 mile walk for 18 holes. Hard to believe given the blank canvas to start with the final product could not be better. For the record I have played both pre and post reno- it still is mediocre IMO.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

I've looked at plenty of routings where the holes didn't fit the ground ... where a massive piece of earthwork would have been unnecessary if the hole had just been slid back 100 yards on the ground so that the high spot that had to be cut was the landing area, instead of a hump between the tee and landing area. 

Tom, as a percentile, how much of that is bad individual hole design and how much of that is bad routing  ?

It's much easier to see on a plan than on the ground, though.  On the ground, you have to look for evidence of the earthwork.  I'm guessing you are just missing it; plus, you don't play many modern courses (and on flat ground in Florida it's harder to make this sort of mistake).