[Patrick_Mucci]

in the early part of the 20th Century ?

I was thinking about greens in particular.

Pragmatically, elevated greens would seem to accomplish at least two important functions with drainage being one of them.

But, it would also allow the architect to create tactical situations, vis a vis protecting hole locations with steep banks and bunkers, a situation only made possible on sites with poor soil/drainage, by elevating the green, thus allowing bunkers to be close to or even above grade.

And, did drainage place a premium on hiring the likes of people like Raynor and Francis ?

In reflecting upon the work of the ODG's I can't think of many courses where the greens were at grade.
GCGC being one of the few exceptions due to the soil/subsurface.

Like the chicken or the egg, was it drainage that shaped early architectural features/greens or another influence ?

And, wouldn't elevated greens be the beginning of the death knell for the ground game ?

Attention morons !

Please think before typing.
Then, think again before hitting the send key

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

Yes, generally true, though there are some other early U.S. courses where greens are built at grade [Oakmont, Myopia, and occasional greens on Ross courses].  This is one of the things that separated American golf architecture from the UK version, where most of the greens on links courses are at-grade and most of the bunkers are dug into the ground on sandy soils.

One of the main things that's different about my work than that of most modern designers is my fondness for building greens at grade, and not bringing fill to them, which promotes ground game options.  But, with that approach I can't locate my greens just anywhere; they have to be sited so that the drainage works around them.  This is but one feature of design that the vast majority of amateur experts overlook.

[Niall C]

Tom

I think it's fair to say that the UK went through it's plateau phase as well, some of which still remains on courses like Moray, RDC and Nairn to name but three. I recall reading Darwin lamenting the demise of plateau greens and suspect that over time a lot of them got designed out as courses evolved. To address Patrick's question about drainage, I suspect that it was irrigation rather than drainage that allowed those type of greens to be built.

Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

In the UK many of the older inland courses which are well over 100 years old were built at grade. Indeed, the technique called dew ponding utilised quite often until the 1950s almost calls for this. So I do not think that it was the sandy soil of the links that led to this but rather that golf was played overwhelmingly in the drier summertime on such courses.

Jon

[Dan Herrmann]

Of course it was, and continues to be a factor.  I think it's by far the most important part of golf course design unless the course is in an arid climate.

[Bill_McBride]

One thing that has always interested me is early punchbowl greens where drainage was anticipated through the sandy base.  There are a few modern examples like the 13th at Tobacco Road.  Others?

[A.G._Crockett]

Patrick,
To make a short story long, this past March I was in Savannah, GA in the midst of some of the wettest weather I've ever seen in GA.  There was a 4 hr. break in the rain, though, before I had business to tend to and I went to Bacon Park to play.  Bacon Park is a Ross muni with most of the original design intact.

However, back in the 80's the city added a third nine and split the Ross holes among the three nines; the new nine is basically inside the two original nines.

Because I had the place to myself, I jumped around to play all of the Ross holes, along with several of the newer holes.  The Ross holes were uniformly dry; one would have barely known that it had even rained.  The newer holes, OTOH, were an absolute quagmire; you could barely walk in the fairways for the slop.  The difference was startling.

So I'll say "Yes!" to your question.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

Yes, generally true, though there are some other early U.S. courses where greens are built at grade [Oakmont, Myopia, and occasional greens on Ross courses].  This is one of the things that separated American golf architecture from the UK version, where most of the greens on links courses are at-grade and most of the bunkers are dug into the ground on sandy soils.

One of the main things that's different about my work than that of most modern designers is my fondness for building greens at grade, and not bringing fill to them, which promotes ground game options.  But, with that approach I can't locate my greens just anywhere; they have to be sited so that the drainage works around them.  This is but one feature of design that the vast majority of amateur experts overlook.
Tom,

Does building greens at grade require a "broader" field of vision in terms of the surrounding terrain and it's influence on macro drainage patterns ?

Does it require intervention, in the way of drainage,  in areas removed from the green area ?

And how does that influence or compromise the ideal hole from the practical hole ?

[Carl Johnson]

Somewhere, and probably here on this site, I read that Pete Dye (of all people!) said that golf course architecture was 95% drainage and 5% common sense.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Somewhere, and probably here on this site, I read that Pete Dye (of all people!) said that golf course architecture was 95% drainage and 5% common sense.

Carl,

I think Donald Ross said words to the same effect.

[Thomas Dai]

Somewhere, and probably here on this site, I read that Pete Dye (of all people!) said that golf course architecture was 95% drainage and 5% common sense.

So let's see, that gives 5% for green committee's to definitely mess up and 95% for them to attempt to mess up!
All the best.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()