News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2014, 08:39:09 AM »
Bigger than average size greens for wear and tear & more variety of pin locations.
Variable tee boxes both in terms of distance & direction
Avoid repetition and sameness
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2014, 09:03:57 AM »
Mike,

I agree with what you state...

Many heathlands are the ideal "play every day" courses. The three I would choose would be West Sussex, Alwoodley & Woking

Really the compact, walkable and quick round is the most important thing here... For links courses, I might choose Strandhill, Arklow and North Berwick

All of these also have clubhouses overseeing and close to much of the action on the course (North Berwick aside) which brings the whole social aspect in to play...

The overall scale of most modern courses lets them down in the "play every day" category. They are quite simply too big...

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2014, 09:15:41 AM »
Ally, the scale of golf courses is something that has gotten larger, and does negatively impact in certain ways.  Of course, if you put paths in, then greens and tees often have to be further apart. If you build bigger greens as suggested, they also take up more room.  Of course, cities, roads, houses, lots, etc. have all gotten bigger from the old days, either because we have found we need the room, or we can afford it, or some combo of factors.

Another thought, but with all these good suggestions, many of which have been implemented at many courses, sort of lead to a formula for designing such places, which of course, many here object to.  But, at some point, if the goal is X, the design response must be some variations containing the basics of Y to accommodate the goals of the design.

You can see how every era starts to get a sameness of design to their courses, as most are trying to meet the then current criteria for design, whatever that might be.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2014, 09:46:06 AM »
JEFF AND ALLY,
I agree that scale is a good way of describing the overall "everyday" feel.  I also think one of the reasons we lost much of that was design features that could photograph easily from the air. 
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Rees Milikin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2014, 09:55:01 AM »
Winter Park CC - I could play this everyday.  Why?  Short, but challenging Par 4's, 3 mid distance par 3's (would love to see the original chip shot par 3), and 1 really good dogleg par 5.  Also, there is no water, fairly generous fairways, a challenge, never that far from the clubhouse, and no tee times.

Carl Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #30 on: May 08, 2014, 10:00:09 AM »
Reading the Beverly thread got me to thinking why it is I like Beverly so much.  For myself, it's my favorite in Chicago.  I'm sure most will disagree and give 100 reasons why a few are better but that's not why I like Bev.  I try to play as many of the nationally recognized tracks I can when I am in an area or when I go to an area specifically to play those tracks but it is rare that I find one where I can honestly say to myself that I could play it everyday.  I think one reason Donald Ross was so popular was the intangible factor he designed into so many of his lesser courses of "I could play this everyday" and IMHO there is an art to designing a course one can play everyday.  So many of the courses designed today have that missing.   Where are some of these courses and what factors make them such?

A few of the things I can identify within these types of courses are:
1. walkable with close green to tee transition
2. compact
3. fun shorter par 4's
4. good grill area
and that's just a start..
I can name you three everyday course for me as a start, Holston Hills, Beverly, Belvedere.

What are the others and the other factors?

My home club, Carolina GC in Charlotte, is a Ross course that fits the description, with an exception that could be overcome.  The length of the course from the back is about 7,100 and the front about 5,250.  However, only three of the 11 par 4's are what I'd call short, and of those only 2 are much fun.  The fix would be to provide some good rated and sloped mixed tee options.  In any case, I do play it just about every day - four last week and so far three this week.

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2014, 10:10:23 AM »
Jeff,

Whilst the points you make are all legitimate reasons why the scale of golf courses have become bigger, I guess a good question would be are these reasons show stoppers to providing smaller (in scale, not necessarily length) golf courses?

I think we sometimes see “big” courses because of pre-defined safety corridors (to be expected) but even because they look somehow better on the drawing board master plan (not legitimate)…

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #32 on: May 08, 2014, 10:23:02 AM »
8. Elasticity.  Ability for the same course to play vastly different depending on the playimg conditions and/or the pin placements on a sometimes-daily-basis. 

Hidden Creek has all 8. Rivermont has most. Love playing both.

I think this is the most important factor.  A course where hole locations can seriously change a hole is a damn great course.  It's also critical that the people that set the holes understand the game of golf.

We used to have a guy who's workers set the holes in the same 3-4 locations.  Our new guy and his team use every square inch of the green surface.  I can't tell you how fantastic that makes playing your home course.

Bryan Icenhower

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The art of creating the every day golf course
« Reply #33 on: May 09, 2014, 12:55:52 PM »
8. Elasticity.  Ability for the same course to play vastly different depending on the playimg conditions and/or the pin placements on a sometimes-daily-basis. 

Hidden Creek has all 8. Rivermont has most. Love playing both.

I think this is the most important factor.  A course where hole locations can seriously change a hole is a damn great course.  It's also critical that the people that set the holes understand the game of golf.

We used to have a guy who's workers set the holes in the same 3-4 locations.  Our new guy and his team use every square inch of the green surface.  I can't tell you how fantastic that makes playing your home course.

Couldn't agree more.  If the course you play everyday has the ability to mix what club you are hitting into the green even under the same conditions, it adds different challenges and is not the same game day after day, weekend after weekend.  Mix in different conditions, and most days I show up I challenged in a different way then the last time I was there.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back