[Patrick_Mucci]

Anthony,

That reminded me, so is Pebble Beach

[Steve Kline]

I think Jason's point is not does the operator mandate carts like at Pebble or Harbour Town dut does the routing itself make it so that carts are mandatory. And, in that sense, I agree with Jason that it can't be a great course if I have to take a cart just to make it around. I walk everywhere. If I can't make it around physically, you have really achieved something.

[Jeff_Brauer]

As Tom Fazio pointed out in his book, its unlikely that any great mountain setting course could be built without cart paths, allowing us to create great golf on sites formerly not useable.

What are the great, old mountain courses, like Banff?  Do they have large elevation changes or just mountain backdrops?  Or is the true mountain course a modern invention resulting from carts/cart paths?  Or put another way, did the old guys really walk more than we would on a hilly site, or did they just avoid them as impractical, as a general statement.

What is the course with no cart paths that has the greatest amount of actual elevation change within the golf course?  What is the pre cart path era golf course with the most elevation change?

Just curious. If there is a trend towards more mountain courses then maybe it is a result of carts.  But, if few of those are ranked highly, then does it say the rankings really are on golf, and not fabulous mountain views, whereas Pebble Beach might attain its ranking largely in part to the ocean view?  Is an ocean view that much more desirable than a mountain view?

Pre coffee noodlings......

[Tom_Doak]

What is the course with no cart paths that has the greatest amount of actual elevation change within the golf course?  What is the pre cart path era golf course with the most elevation change?

It has paths now, but Pasatiempo was built with no paths and has 300 feet of elevation change from #11 green to #2 green.  That's the most I can think of, off the top of my head.

Of course, it went bankrupt once.

[Tom_Doak]

As to the title question, it is a great example of black and white thinking.  I don't know why Jason needs to set up reasons to disqualify courses from being "great", but I think he should be open-minded to the possibility, instead of ruling out courses he has never seen.

I think I'm safely in the camp of someone who favors building walkable courses [and I have a golf bag to prove it ] and any course that isn't walkable is going to take a bit of a hit in my mind.  But, if it has enough great holes and it's generally intimate and there are one or two very difficult walks [Highlands Links and Kapalua are excellent examples], then who is Jason to tell me different?  

On first glance, the Himalayan Golf Course appeared to be unwalkable due to the steep elevation changes -- but in fact, they have no way to get golf carts around it, and it was one of the all-time great walks I've ever had in golf [although whoever demanded the course should be walkable for 36 holes would disqualify it].

Jason, you're welcome to make any rules you want for your own self, though you risk putting your foot in your mouth by publicizing them.  Just don't make any rules for me, okay?

[Jason Topp]

Tom -

Are there any Doak 9's or 10's that are not reasonably walkable?  I cannot think of any.

[Mike_Young]

The explanation I would really like to hear of the topic question segment "Walking is what separates golf from pinochle, bowling or blackjack. "

But I really don't know what a cart course is.  The biggest turn-off for me is the cart paths themselves and the efforts put into hiding them.  As more people begin to walk I wonder where cart paths will go.  Supposedly the wear and tear from carts will not be that noticeable on bermuda grass if you have less than 25,000 rounds (12,500 carts) I play a DR course that has 33,000 rounds and half of those are walking.  Carts should not be an issue.  Yet so many consider great cart paths a significant improvement.

[Will Lozier]

Highland Links is a great course, to most it is a cart course (although in September we followed 4 walkers who played in less than four hours).

Walking is nice for those who can, it has nothing to do with great golf courses (in spite of what less than a dozen great courses think).

Ditto on Highland Links...I walked 36 in less than 7 hours total and, it is a lovely walk made better actually by the 500 yard walk from the 12th green to the 13th tee along the Clyburn!  Phenomenal course!

Cheers

[BCrosby]

Mike Y.

Agreed that the bigger issue is cart paths. I watched a prominent architect, while redoing my course about 15 years ago, spend an inordinate amount of his time making sure that cart paths couldn't be seen from tees.  Which is all very nice, but golf architects should find better things to spend their time on.

Bob

[Steve Lapper]

Tom -

Are there any Doak 9's or 10's that are not reasonably walkable?  I cannot think of any.

Might be in Rancho Mirage, CA??  Though you'll have to the great decider himself!


PS....I really like it and think it's great fun, but "great"  as a stand alone description for a golf course is a word I'd reserve for very, very few.

[Dan Kelly]

Jason,

I thought the original Sutton Bay was a great course. Walkable, yes, but barely.

Surely "great" involves more than Doak 9s and 10s?

[Michael George]

Jason:

The Doak Scale is again a subjective measure.  Tom's point is that greatness can be determined by each golfer.

For example, for an older golfer that cannot walk, this question may be much different than you.

[Mike Hendren]

As Tom Fazio pointed out in his book, its unlikely that any great mountain setting course could be built without cart paths, allowing us to create great golf on sites formerly not useable.

What are the great, old mountain courses, like Banff?  Do they have large elevation changes or just mountain backdrops?  Or is the true mountain course a modern invention resulting from carts/cart paths?  Or put another way, did the old guys really walk more than we would on a hilly site, or did they just avoid them as impractical, as a general statement.

What is the course with no cart paths that has the greatest amount of actual elevation change within the golf course?  What is the pre cart path era golf course with the most elevation change?

Just curious. If there is a trend towards more mountain courses then maybe it is a result of carts.  But, if few of those are ranked highly, then does it say the rankings really are on golf, and not fabulous mountain views, whereas Pebble Beach might attain its ranking largely in part to the ocean view?  Is an ocean view that much more desirable than a mountain view?

Pre coffee noodlings......

Fazio's Alotian Club might be Exhibit A.  Also C&C's Plantation course at Kapalua.  I've played neither.

Bogey

[Ronald Montesano]

It is the search for objective criteria that led me to this thread.  

And that should be, in my estimation, where the thread should have ended. There simply are no objective criteria for determining greatness. If that is your quest, Senyor Quijana, fare thee well. I hope you have a good Sancho at your side.

[JESII]

In my experience, the ultimate is Royal New Kent.

I think it's great and don't care that everyone here hates the 18th hole.

Does anyone know the total mileage of the cart path there? Over 7 miles I'd bet and they didn't work very hard to carve out walking short cuts...although it's been 10 years.

So I would say yes, a cart course can be great...but it's not a desirable goal.

[Chris DeToro]

I think what I hate the most is when cart paths come into play on holes.  Sure, I should just hit every green, but at times, I miss and when those cart paths are in the line of flight, I'm all of a sudden left with a much longer pitch shot and scuffed balls...

[Carl Nichols]

At least half of the posts on this thread seem to have little relevance to Jason's original question.  Just because a course is cart paths only for those who decide to ride doesn't make it unwalkable for those who walk -- Harbourtown is a perfect example of this.  And just because older folks or people with disabilities can't walk a course doesn't make it unwalkable for those who can and want to do so.  Jason's question, I think, is limited to the question of whether a course can be considered great if it can't really be walked even by those who are physically able and want to do so.

[Bill_McBride]

Walking lost its charm with the introduction of the double strap bag. I can't hardly stand looking at "them" and the clicking of the irons is inexcusable.

You do know you can walk with just one strap over one shoulder?  

[Tim Pitner]

To paraphrase Bobby Jones, there is golf and there is cart golf and they are not the same.  So, logically, you can't have a great course on which to play golf if it can't be reasonably walked.  Is there such a thing as a great course for cart golf?  It depends on how you define great, but there might be.  

[Bill_McBride]

I say no.  Walking is what separates golf from pinochle, bowling or blackjack.  

And what if a disability prevents you from walking, does that make it an inferior golf course ?

A cart course might be the best solution at a particular location but a course cannot be great if it cannot be walked in a reasonable manner.  

What does "reasonable manner"  mean ?

If someone has a contrary view, I would love to hear it.

I had great difficulty walking Sand Hills, does that disqualify it from "great" status ?

I think Jason is talking about courses where riding is not optional for 98% of players.   In this modern age, many courses fit that description.  

[Michael Whitaker]

My host rode in a cart at AGNC.  It's a pretty good course.

Sand Hills allows carts, probably more than 50% of play.  It's pretty good too.

Over the three days of my visit to Sand Hills 100% of the play I observed was in carts. I was shocked. When I asked the starter about all the riders he said that very few walk the course and the vast majority of play was in carts.

[Bill_McBride]

What is the course with no cart paths that has the greatest amount of actual elevation change within the golf course?  What is the pre cart path era golf course with the most elevation change?

It has paths now, but Pasatiempo was built with no paths and has 300 feet of elevation change from #11 green to #2 green.  That's the most I can think of, off the top of my head.

But Pasatiempo is quite walkable, even for old guys like me.  It gets your heart rate up but it was designed to be walked.  

I've never played Pebble with the continuous curbed cart paths, and really have no interest.   The memories are better!

[Michael Whitaker]

Walking lost its charm with the introduction of the double strap bag. I can't hardly stand looking at "them" and the clicking of the irons is inexcusable.

I'll bet you cry over the demise of leather soled golf shoes with metal spikes.  

[BCrosby]

"I think what I hate the most is when cart paths come into play on holes."

There is a cart path that runs along the left edge of the 10th green at the Crabapple course in ATL. Becasue the green is angled front left to back right, the cart path results in a version of a reverse Road Hole green. I'm not sure it was intentional, but it's kinda cool.

I do agree with your larger point.

Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

Walking lost its charm with the introduction of the double strap bag. I can't hardly stand looking at "them" and the clicking of the irons is inexcusable.

I'll bet you cry over the demise of leather soled golf shoes with metal spikes.  

No not at all.  I hate walking golfers who click their irons like it is a mating ritual.  The double strapped bag has made it almost impossible for even the most considerate of golfers to prevent this obnoxious Chinese water torture.  Newsflash:  Walking golfers are not pretty and do not add to anyones experience.  You should not be seen nor heard.  On to your point about metal spikes, I used to love to click my spikes across any hard surface.  I was a regular Gregory Hines on toast. Thank God that is gone from the game.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()