News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Patrick_Mucci

aesthetics, especially aesthetics that enjoy most favored nation status with the GCA crowd ?

The Bridge and Maidstone threads triggered this thought.

The two courses are virtually unchanged in terms of routing and individual hole design, yet many, including myself are fawning over the look of the bunkers and yet others are claiming a dramatic improvement.

What dramatic improvement is possible if the courses play essentially the same ?

Has it become all about "looks" ?

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2013, 11:33:25 AM »
An ugly bunker can influence play as much as a stunningly beautiful bunker, but don't you enjoy playing a course with beautiful bunkering more?

Given equal playing values, aesthetics can improve the experience.   

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2013, 11:52:17 AM »
Bill,

It's a matter of form versus substance.

What defines and distinguishes an "ugly" bunker from a "beautiful" bunker ?

A bunker is a hazard

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #3 on: May 26, 2013, 12:10:21 PM »
Agreed.  The function may not change but the appearance of the bunker can be improved.  Improved drainage, liner replacement, erosion control. 

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2013, 12:13:16 PM »
Yes.

There was a good thread awhile back dealing with "magazine architecture" and designing for the good looking photo op.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2013, 12:38:29 PM »
Has it become all about "looks" ?

I did wonder the same thing.  Worse yet, I wonder in looking at the pictures whether the bunkers will be LESS expensive to maintain, or MORE expensive to maintain.  But, I've been wondering whether it's "all about looks" for years, in many many threads about dramatic restorations that were mostly bunker re-dos.

To be fair, some of the work at The Bridge seems to be about making the green-to-tee walks easier, which is to be applauded.  But, that work is lost in the myriad photos of all the newly-edged bunkers.  I've mentioned a couple of times that these threads would be more useful with more description and FEWER PICTURES, but I am always shouted down for saying so.

I'm not saying that building beautiful bunkers is meaningless.  We try to make every feature we build look good as well as play good.  But, what's more important is whether the bunkers affect how golfers play the hole.

Sadly, it's easier to convince a club to prettify a bunker than to move it to be a better spot.  Most work at clubs involves either putting the bunkers back to where they were originally [restoration], or putting them all at 270-285 yards from the tee [renovation / modernization].  If you had an original idea to put a bunker in a really thought-provoking spot, it would be too controversial for the membership to approve.   :-[


Mark Saltzman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2013, 12:49:05 PM »
Patrick, there are others that can speak more intelligibly about this, but the changes at The Bridge are absolutely NOT SIMPLY AESTHETIC.

Tees have been shifted, bunkers have been moved, fairways and areas around greens have been re-graded.  I think the only thing that is unchanged is the putting surfaces.

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2013, 12:53:58 PM »
I don't know exactly when the "hairy" bunker design idea took hold but it's clear that it is aesthetic rather than design orientated. That said it does present a natural look and contrast to other more plain vanilla bunkering.

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2013, 01:56:17 PM »
Patrick, there are others that can speak more intelligibly about this, but the changes at The Bridge are absolutely NOT SIMPLY AESTHETIC.

Tees have been shifted, bunkers have been moved, fairways and areas around greens have been re-graded.  I think the only thing that is unchanged is the putting surfaces.

I can't speak of Maidstone as I haven't seen the changes.

Re The Bridge:
It' OK to not like it or question the need, but to suggest it's a "hairy bunker or aesthetic " change , and not about strategy and how the holes play,would be a mistake.
While all work is done in house, I'd also say it's mistake to think any of these changes are minor.
That said, it's done one hole at a time, and buttoned up immediately and Many members are unaware of how much work is being done and how much earth is being moved.


Perhaps those suggesting more text and less pictures, should READ  ;) ;) the text.
Although to be fair, I agree with everything Tom wrote about aesthetics vs. placement.
When bunker acreage is reduced by 60%, and fairway acreage is increased dramatically, and nearly all bunkers are shifted to random and inconsistent carry/skirt distances off the tee generally IN the fairway after previously being iN the rough, that's hardly a bunker edge treatment, and DOES definitely affect how the holes [play.

Perhaps some are confusing the pictures of the holes that are NOT renovated yet(2 partially,3,4,5,6), but simply did have a different bunker edge treatment aimed at preserving sand.
Tom, maintenance time has gone way down as there are virtually no washouts, we used to spend a lot of time after every rain repairing,and every spring from winter blowout.

Holes that have been redone
1 comes pretty close to playing the same off the tee although new bunker on right may steer players left into more maintained bail area-long hitter has a bunker protecting the preferred left angle. The second shot is much more run up friendly as the turf was recontoured to feed onto the green, but also to feed into the bunkers if not properly executed as opposed to before where everything funneled to the same place.
partial redo-#2 may play the same for a low handicap, but is much more friendly to a higher handicapper-more to be done on this hole as bunkers are not new.
7 plays entirely different on both the drive, as well as the second shot. to say nothing of 50 feet less of walking uphill from previous green
8 plays entirely different on the drive, as well as the second shot-80 yard shorter walk to 8 tee
9 plays entirely different on the second shot, although I'd say that changed strategically 6 years ago when we added a cross bunker and added more fairway on the second shot behind it to capture a great angle in. 50 yard shorter walk to 9 tee and 20-30 feet lower in elevation, in addition to valley before fairway filled to soften down then upness.
10 tee shot way different and somewhat disorienting, second shot play s way different with centerline bunker, cross bunker farther left and large greenside bunker replaced with false front/chipping area-perhaps for a long hitter the hole plays the same if he challenges left fairway bunker successfully and hits green in two
11 plays way different with bunkers protecting angle and second shot plays differently with fairway turf lifted and recontoured to provide a run up that distinguishes between a good shot and a bad shot (bunker) and doesn't simply gather from both sides
12 where to even begin-virtually unrecognizeable and tees 50 yards closer(and lower) to 11 green replacing a 30 -40 foot climb then downhill tee shot  ::) with a 5-10 foot rise over the length of the tee shot.
13 totally different angle-tee much closer to 12 green
14 drop shot downhill par 3, now slightly uphill with recontoured run up area and fallaway right side approach, dramatically enlarged chipping area over green -walk off 13 green to tee now level, replacing 10 foot drop down followed by 40 foot walk up.

15 tee shot plays different and involves carrying a bunker to get the best speed slot and certainly plays different if one drives it right as we removed about an acre of bunker ::) ::)
16 previously 100 foot climb up to 85 foot drop shot par 3-now an uphill hole with the tee located 15 yards from 15 green, rebunkered to challenge the different angle which also affects the bounce on the tee shot sideboard, which can be used to access front right pins
17 previously 380 hole par 4 walk up, play down, now a 290 par 4 (tee level and near 16 green)with entirely different bunkering and 5 different areas to approach from depending on pin placement, wind and player ability-all made possible by an untouched great green with multiple tilts.
18 plays similarly ::) ::), bunkers angled slightly better, more fairway added to promote challenging those bunkers-Ironically it was this hole that convinced me to get much more involved on a daily basis(second hole we renovated) as I would say this change was mainly aesthetic and DID not change the way the hole played much ---leading me to conclude no reason to do that much work if not gaining any placement/strategy.

And that's not even close to a comprehensive list of all that was done including many lowerings of material in front of bunkers so a ball will roll into them,many approaches lifted and improved to give an opportunity for a ball to roll where directed rather than a forgiving concave resulting in the same result for balls mediocre or not, and many, many  modern looking overshaped areas recontoured. Additionally ,many, many tees have been relocated to create angles, shorten walks create strategy etc.
Most fairways have been adjusted as well, some the entire perimeter of the hole changed.
The only thing untouched is greens, but certainly many green surrounds have been reworked.


Pat,
If you think the holes are virtually unchanged in their design  in terms of how they play, you're a moron ;).
Ironically, the holes changed the most are now member favorites..

I do think we don't give the average golfer enough credit for recognizing strategy and fun.
Perhaps it's that we don't have many low handicappers, but our members love the changes, and comment about how much more fun and interesting the course is.

I don't think the course is easier or harder, but definitely have more choices to make.

Here's the thing-we're not done yet, and even after that the nature of these changes is such that they will need 2-5 years to mature, which is why I've been reluctant to post about it.
Very interesting for the few GCAers that have seen the before and after, but we're not quite ready for prime time judgement.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 07:47:17 PM by jeffwarne »
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2013, 02:43:53 PM »
All in favor of the eye candy renovation at a private club. It makes the chatter more positive which helps with club morale. Some tree removal and some strategic bunker relocation is good too, but let's not overly deprecate the eye candy.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2013, 04:23:21 PM »
Pat
Please keep me out of your we.
Mike

For example:
Has everyone, except Mike Nuzzo and others, become ignorant...
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2013, 05:39:37 PM »
Even strategic courses need signifiers. I wonder if the restorations that seems to focus on aesthetics are in fact accomplishing much more than that, i.e. by highlighting and re-emphasizing a hazard, they are also bringing renewed attention to the strategies that those hazards create.

Peter  
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 09:23:48 PM by PPallotta »

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #12 on: May 26, 2013, 05:59:38 PM »
Even strategic courses need signifiers. I wonder if the restoration that seems to focus on aesthetics are in fact accomplishing much more than that, i.e. by highlighting and re-emphasizing a hazard, they are also bringing renewed attention to the strategies that those hazards create.

Peter 

Peter,

I see your point but examples of aesthetics serving function are, in my limited experiences, few and far between.

What concerns me more however is the effect the eye candy has on the golfing public. I find myself frequently de-constructing club golfers' whole thinking on good golf. For most, when you actually break it down, a well manicured course equals a good course. People literally struggle to separate style from substance. The result of course is that a brown fairway is apparently a bad fairway, and so on and so forth.

In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #13 on: May 26, 2013, 06:42:17 PM »
Build an exact replica of 16 at CPC and replace the sea with a slurry pit. Same design but is it the same experience?
Cave Nil Vino

Michael Goldstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #14 on: May 26, 2013, 07:17:15 PM »
From the photographs there is more sand exposed at Maidstone.  Therefore, on 10 at least, there would be less lost balls & more recovery shots - meaning more golfers interact in varying ways with that fantastic green complex.   

@Pure_Golf

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #15 on: May 26, 2013, 07:50:42 PM »
Maidstone and The Bridges are very different projects and really can not be compared.  You have very different memberships.

Maidstone was built in 1891 and The Bridge in 2002.   The Bridge is about fixing poor construction, architecture and playability.  (Sorry to be so blunt.)

Maidstone is about bunker and dune restoration, site lines and mowing patterns.   

Lloyd_Cole

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #16 on: May 26, 2013, 08:32:25 PM »
Even strategic courses need signifiers. I wonder if the restoration that seems to focus on aesthetics are in fact accomplishing much more than that, i.e. by highlighting and re-emphasizing a hazard, they are also bringing renewed attention to the strategies that those hazards create.

Peter 

Peter, great to see you're still here and making intelligent comments. Except, in this case, surely an unnatural looking bunker would attract more attention to itself, wouldn't it?

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #17 on: May 26, 2013, 08:35:21 PM »
I think that Redanman (Bill V) has a great phrase for what I thin Patrick is getting at - "Bunker Fetish" :)

Lloyd_Cole

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #18 on: May 26, 2013, 08:38:13 PM »
And a dull course with Muirfield/Thomson style bunkers does not become an interesting course upon the re-styling of the bunkers alone. In fact it looks rather like the over the hill dame after the surgery. I'm with Tom, as I'm sure most us us here are - move the bunkers if the hole is dull.

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #19 on: May 26, 2013, 08:41:40 PM »
Absolutely, Lloyd!

Peter Pallotta

Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #20 on: May 26, 2013, 09:23:08 PM »
Lloyd (hope all is well) and Paul -

I'd so often expressed my dis-interest in discussions about bunker looks/aesthetics (as opposed to placement/function) that when Pat asked the question again I thought I'd challenge myself to look at it differently. I guess my theory, applicable perhaps especially to us here at gca.com, is that bunkers created to fit their surroundings (i.e. to look natural) might better tie in those surroundings and thus give the eye/mind pause to explore the strategic relationships between the hazards and the fairway/hole as a whole. In other words, maybe  ugly/unnatural bunkers draw more attention to themselves than to the architecture/design, and for this reason alone should be altered/restored.  (Of course, if the course/design is lousy to begin with, nothing will help highlight non-existent strategic relationships.) A stretch, I know, but I thought I'd give the counter-argument a shot.... :)

Peter     

Lloyd_Cole

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #21 on: May 26, 2013, 10:49:06 PM »
Lloyd (hope all is well) and Paul -

I'd so often expressed my dis-interest in discussions about bunker looks/aesthetics (as opposed to placement/function) that when Pat asked the question again I thought I'd challenge myself to look at it differently. I guess my theory, applicable perhaps especially to us here at gca.com, is that bunkers created to fit their surroundings (i.e. to look natural) might better tie in those surroundings and thus give the eye/mind pause to explore the strategic relationships between the hazards and the fairway/hole as a whole. In other words, maybe  ugly/unnatural bunkers draw more attention to themselves than to the architecture/design, and for this reason alone should be altered/restored.  (Of course, if the course/design is lousy to begin with, nothing will help highlight non-existent strategic relationships.) A stretch, I know, but I thought I'd give the counter-argument a shot.... :)

Peter     

Peter,
The problem is 0.001% of golfers are as intelligent as you are and the double bluff, albeit a noble endeavour, is wasted on pretty much all but you (and me, and Pat, and... sorry)

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #22 on: May 26, 2013, 11:46:04 PM »
Build an exact replica of 16 at CPC and replace the sea with a slurry pit. Same design but is it the same experience?

+1, funny and minimalist.

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #23 on: May 27, 2013, 12:23:57 AM »
I'll try to contribute.  Over the years, the concepts of aesthetics and shot values for me have merged.  It seems many beautiful courses also rank as the best courses.

As much as I love beauty, I have had golfing experiences on courses where the simple act of just choosing the club and the shot to hit, on every shot, made golfing great.  Playing great golf shots is the higher ideal, but often the two meet.

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Have we become ignorant of strategic value and more focused on
« Reply #24 on: May 27, 2013, 12:26:37 AM »
Chappers,

Remove the sea (ie. coastal location) and you remove the wind, the air, the expansive view.

You can't do the whole "Hole X without Feature Y" argument. Courses are built where they are and if they weren't where they are, they'd have been built differently.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back