[Paul Gray]

Just to add to the pot (and correct me if I'm wrong) but doesn't the typical Florida course populated by the elderly tend to be excessively watered and thus contrary to what is ideal for older golfers? Firm and fast keeps the old boys playing long after they've lost the ability to fly the ball any distance, links golf being the prime example, where they love nothing better than running a 5 iron in from 140 yards.

[Carl Rogers]

The firmness or softness of the fairways is a length factor.  For the short hitter, the last 15 yards of roll really count.

[Philippe Binette]

nice ideas here.. but, why not just built a good golf course.

a good course is good for everybody, forget all the yardage to par relations !!!

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/england/rwn/

seems like a nice place to play golf in my older days

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I am not suggesting that distance is irrelevant. I am suggesting that if the green complexes are impossible to negotiate without the aerial game, you've eliminated a sizable percentage of the players and more than half of the seniors and women.

Actually, Neal and I were having a discussion some time back on the subject of what can euphemistically be called "inclusive architecture." The idea is that each hole should theoretically be arranged in such a manner that a player can complete it with only a putter. In other words, along the ground from tee to green, using the contours of the topography to direct their ball in the desired direction - or to skirt or tack around interior hazards.

For lack of a better term, I've always referred to this as "playing chutes and ladders," a favorite childhood game of mine. My recollection is the putter theory originally came from Peter Thomson in an interview many years ago. This might be the key to designing inclusive golf courses. It strikes me as backwards the way half these firms do their cuts & fills - especially in trying to present an interesting or original green complex.

Why always cut in front of the green and then build up the putting surface? How about just the opposite? Playing into an amphitheater - even a punchbowl of sorts - has a more intimate feel. Not for every hole, but being able to get the ball close to the pin a variety of ways is key to the enjoyment of golf for the weaker player.

Arranging the topography to welcome the ball onto the putting surface  - as opposed to constantly shouldering it away - keeps everybody in the game. Forced carries onto the putting surface over deep bunkers, with no way to bounce in the ball from a different angle, is anathema to the roots of golf.

Punitive rough is insanity on a course frequented by seniors and women. Obviously, what constitutes "punitive" is in the eye of the beholder and I'm a bit dogmatic on the subject. My opinion is that arbitrary rough lines have no place in the game of golf. In fact, I would strive for no rough at all - most of the time all it does is mask poorly conceived architecture. If you play the angles right, then you get rewarded. If not, then pay the penalty. Asking Milton and Constance Rutherford to hack their ball out of even 1" rough accomplishes nothing and compromises their enjoyment. If you want to design a senior track, make the challenge 90% intellectual, not 90% physical.

And though every trap does not have to be a splash bunker, watching Saul Bernstein and Abe Goldman try to climb out of those idiotic traps at Lake Merced is painful. A hazard ought to present a reasonable challenge for seniors. Throwing Mrs. Havershire down a well with her sand wedge and expecting her to splash the ball out of perdition is lunacy.

Our courses in America are too hard for weaker players and we ought to strive to design them as close as possible to Prestwick or Lahinch or North Berwick or Swinley Forest, where it is a joy to play - even for the very elderly. I believe that women give up the game in droves not because it takes too much time, but because our paying fields are often little more than thoughtless obstacle courses.

End of Rant.      

Gib

I agree with all you have written except the part about bunkers.  I don't see the point of shallow bunkers.  Just slap in mounds/hollows instead of ugly flat bunkers.  Not only will it look better (when handled by capable hands), but they will play better. 

I know it hasn't been mentioned and maybe it needs to not be, but fairway width is important.

Senior, penior, the course I am describing IS good for everybody except smash mouth golfers.  We don't need a "senior" label to build them.  We need archies and developers with some grit to dig in and do what is right.

Ciao

[Gib_Papazian]

Maybe I did not make myself clear. I am not a proponent of splash bunkers, although flat sand traps with mounding in front works pretty well. I'm suggesting more of a scaled down version of Raynor with walls a bit less vertical.

When you have these ungodly deep bunkers that are difficult to climb in and out of, it creates an impossible situation for a percentage of players out there. On a golf course designed to cater more towards seniors, women and weaker players, my sense is the face should be no more than five feet from base to top.

Any taller than that and you've got to generate some clubhead speed to pop the ball straight up. That is a difficult task for Mrs. Whitfield and her Tuesday foursome in the Ladies Golf Section.   

It should go without saying that fairways ought to be dry and as wide as possible - with absolutely no rough. One other poster mentioned the over-watered bogs, which I see too often in the Central Valley of California. Hit splat, hit splat, hit splat - all because they are trying to grow the wrong variety of grass IMNSHO.   

[Sean_A]

Gib

Don't get me started on courses growing unsuitable strains of grass for a particular climate.  Its madness, but ever so common. 

I understand where you coming from for Raynor-like bunkers.  Thy needn't be that deep (or with firm sand).  Yeamans Hall convinces me of that.  But, they do need some bite or why bother?  Its not that I am too fussed if there aren't bunkers anyway, but if sand is on the menu make it count.

Ciao

[Mike Nuzzo]

Everyone
    

Gib
Since you haven't been to Wolf Point how can you say everyone?
Do you really think Tom wouldn't design a great course for the seniors?
Peace

[Gib_Papazian]

Mike:

Here is what I wrote:

"Everyone on this thread seems incorrectly focused on distance, which is only a small part of the equation - a point that seems to escape the factory firm drones chained to their drafting table, who obviously never actually watch seniors suffer their monstrous creations."

Is Tom a factory firm drone chained to a drafting table?

Uh, no.

I actually thought Apache Stronghold was a terrific golf course for every level of player. It is a terrible shame it is closed.  

Actually, the best combination of strategic interest and approach options I've ever seen (in America) might be Rustic Canyon.  

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I can say with 99% certainty that there won't be any center line bunkers at the new course to developed and built at Verrado.

[Matthew Petersen]

I can say with 99% certainty that there won't be any center line bunkers at the new course to developed and built at Verrado.

Well, there's one on the Raven course there. How much can people be expected to tolerate?

[Ken Moum]

Since I am firmly in you demographic, I have to say that IMHO nothing is worse than a course that limits the top end of par threes and fours like that. If you don't have any long holes, in order to get over 6000 yards you'll be stuck with a bunch of holes that are ~175 and ~375. For a typical senior hitting it 180-220 holes like that are evil.

I'd MUCH rather have holes of 125,  225, 321, and 440 over a couple at 175 and a couple at 375.

Do that and make the "regular" tees about 5,900 yards (up to 6100) and I'm a happy camper.

Ken

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I played Raven at Verrado early today ($29) and spoke to an assistant  pro who told me that no announcement has been made yet but   Tom Lehman's company has been selected.  Not unexpected considering that he did  Raven with Fought. Construction may start soon.

www.lehmandesigngroup.com

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Here is some info on the course with a video of Tom Lehman talking about design:

http://verrado.com/victory/golf/info/?utm_source=Verrado+Victory+District+%2855%2B%29&utm_campaign=c8552fe3d7-Waiting+for+Victory+%234220%2F10%2F14+3%3A37+PM&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_de0b9216bd-c8552fe3d7-310363493

The course may not open until 2016 but the "Playground" will open early 2015.

[Bob_Huntley]

Gib,

As usual I have to agree with you on old farts and course lengths. However the perfect answer was provided by Henry Cotton at his course at Penina in Portugal. When old age and aching bones caused problems, he elected to tee up any where which provided that he could hit green in two shots. I've tried it and like Mikey, I liked it.

Bob

 

[Thomas Dai]

Lack of forced carries from the tee and no water carries into the greens ought to be prime considerations.
atb

[Adrian_Stiff]

I would take a different stance in relation to par and look for around 6300 yards but keep the Par at 72, looking at lengths like this:

Par 5s 475, 480, 490, 500.
Par 4s 300, 320, 340, 350, 365, 375, 395, 400, 420, 450
Par 3s 140, 155, 175, 195.

Solely I don't think you should design for just a senior player, but 375 in 2 shots is about their distance, so only 4 of those holes are really tough. Those holes are still entertaining for a flat belly though modern Par would be 69, only the 500 is really a 5, the other three make up a good combo of six strong par 4 holes.

6300 from the backs probably relates to 5500 yards from the front and most play would be at around 5700 which is good for most people because most think they like 500 yards more than they do.

Quite a lot of people really struggle to carry the ball 100 yards 'unteed up' so that would be a big consideration.

Overall my description is quite like an average UK golf course.

[archie_struthers]

 

They've been building them for fifty years or more.  Whether it be an executive course , chip and putt or par three , this isn't a new  "innovation" .

At some point it's just marketing , isn't it ?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Don't forget to add bathrooms every 2 or 3 holes...

[Bill_McBride]

Don't forget to add bathrooms every 2 or 3 holes...

Or lots of bushes.........

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()