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.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2016, 05:07:10 AM »
Adrian:


Ah, yes, the "car park test" was how Perry Dye defended some of his awful courses against my criticisms in The Confidential Guide.  [Note:  in two of those instances, the courses he was defending no longer exist, so presumably the car park was not as full as he suggests!]


What bothers me about all these arguments are the people who claim that they know what the mainstream wants, and that the mainstream rules.  Yes, there are plenty of people who like The Belfry.  There are also plenty of people who think it's crap and would never pay to go there.  Golf is a niche business and one size definitely doesn't fit all.  You've just been listening for too long to your own regular customers, who naturally see things your way, without considering that others like something much different.


I do not worry about whether everyone will like my designs, as long as they attract enough people who do like them to support themselves.  Where a couple have failed, it had little or nothing to do with the undulations of the greens, and everything to do with an over-optimistic business model or plain bad management.

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2016, 05:56:19 AM »
Tom - We are probably agreeing on the same thing.


Variety is the key, but what one person thinks is great another thinks is not. We can argue all we want about Golf Course Architecture and we are going to agree on the architectural merits of The Belfry. There are over-riders and 'the people' want to play the one where Sam holed the putt, Nick made an ace blah blah blah. People playing golf on course A B or C has many other factors before you get to the golf course architecture.


What you are wrong on though Tom is I have tried to move people into the way this group here thinks. I am a big fan of your work, I like Coore & Crenshaw too but there are not really other architects who I put on the pedestal I put you on. We have a site where we have 36 holes, one is very much like 'Golf Valley' 'Paris National' the other is a course much more on the wavelength of this group. For every 4 rounds played 3 will be on the one you/this group don't like and that is a fact. It was 1 in 7 so the gap is narrowing. One chap a month ago complained that it was the worse course he had ever encountered and cited reasons for it's badness that are the reasons we like on this forum.


Undulating greens can be over-done, you can have too many and you can create a golf course where you have to think so much you get a near headache. I played that one in Palm Springs that Pete Dye did with the island 17th with the rocks around and it was so hard I actually did have a headache worrying about which side not to miss on. That was almost unenjoyable.


We are in the entertainment business and we have to produce a product to entertain, multiple routes to doing that of course but the BIG MINUS to this forum is that in most eyes the architecture is way down the list and condition is a big over-rider, cart girls, two loops of nine, par 72, buggies, 7000+ yards (from the backs) are box tickers for Joe Public.


The BOTCP test is the box ticker for the corporate world. It is probably the main reason why I get work because people know my golf courses make money, hopefully when I have passed on someone will more understand the architecture that I have included.



A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2016, 06:08:07 AM »
Adrian

I fully understand where you are coming from.  That said, the car park test for a great many places I visit would suggest practically every club in the country is going out of business  ;D  No doubt, some are struggling to one degree or another. 

To be fair, you didn't have space to create another big course at Players...no?  Also, my impression is the Stranahan is being improved as and when money is available because you couldn't do everything from the get go.  Does the Stranahan break even?  In any case, I don't think people are suggesting big plots of land being used for smaller courses....at least not me.  I am only saying take what the land offers, the total length of the course shouldn't be the reason not to build it.

When I see courses with the space between tees coverning enough ground to create par 3s I can only shake my head.  I think the only place I have come across like is the NC State course.  I wonder if it would stay afloat without the association to the uni. 

Ciao
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 06:27:32 AM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

David Davis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2016, 06:32:08 AM »
Ok as much as I hate to admit it. The parking lot was totally full and the course was very busy. it's semi private, the cost of the round was 65 euro, which is cheap for this area. It was a national holiday, a Tuesday with perfect November weather. Sunny and 60-65 degrees.


On the other hand if a course isn't busy on this day here it's already gone out of business.


It's also to my knowledge the only real modern course in the area. The older courses don't have anything of architectural significance either. Munich is the richest city by far in Germany and has a fair number of golfers and a fair bit of young golf talent. The practice/training facilities at Golf Valley seem excellent with a huge range on grass that is managed very well. High quality practice balls. A beautiful modern club house and very high end pro shop. Those things they do right for their clientele. A lot of good playing young golfers are attracted here. Around the course you can see the Germany Alps so the setting is beautiful.


It's not all bad. It's just as stated not what we love for the most part here on GCA.


I did meet the owner a few years back, he looked me in the eyes and told me that they built the #1 golf course in the world. I said congratulations and that I was happy he thought so. I didn't argue or disagree as anyone that crazy could very well have been carrying a gun. Safety first!


By the time we arrived at the token island green par 3, I was contemplating another sport. Luckily I cut down my 4 euro deficit in the match to 2 euro on that hole and finished really strong to avoid bankruptcy.


For the record I went for the par 5 in two. It was matchplay and I was in so much pain from the holes architecture I thought 240 yds into the wind over the water....I got this (I can almost hear you calculating how long my drive was and which tee we played). I was happy to concede the hole and hold the flag for the other 3, 2 of which had also hit into the water, to putt out. 4 guys under 5 hcp and 3 of us hit into the water (which says nothing albeit our hcp's are inflated)...and they thought it was my play on that hole that had made me sick.
Sharing the greatest experiences in golf.

IG: @top100golftraveler
www.lockharttravelclub.com

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2016, 07:15:43 AM »
Adrian

I fully understand where you are coming from.  That said, the car park test for a great many places I visit would suggest practically every club in the country is going out of business  ;D  No doubt, some are struggling to one degree or another. 

To be fair, you didn't have space to create another big course at Players...no?  Also, my impression is the Stranahan is being improved as and when money is available because you couldn't do everything from the get go.  Does the Stranahan break even?  In any case, I don't think people are suggesting big plots of land being used for smaller courses....at least not me.  I am only saying take what the land offers, the total length of the course shouldn't be the reason not to build it.

When I see courses with the space between tees coverning enough ground to create par 3s I can only shake my head.  I think the only place I have come across like is the NC State course.  I wonder if it would stay afloat without the association to the uni. 

Ciao
Sean - I think the Stranahan breaks even. There are considerable cost savings in the UK having more than 18 holes and in that respect your unit cost per round comes down. This works the other way if you have a 9 hole course obviously. With The Players Club I am not money driven and fortunately can afford to experiment a bit hence 'The Stranahan'. Yes I could only work with the land that was there, it is 5500 yards but I am not 100% that if more land became available and I could hike it up to 6200 yards I would do it and in that respect I probably have changed my mind from a few years ago where I saw it's length as a minus. There are people and it has more than doubled, perhaps even tripled that love it and for those same reasons on here that we like but it is a tough sell and I relate it to something like this.


Scenario A : Build a 130 yard par 3 with the green in the middle of the lake and pretty much it is an instant hit.


Scenario B : Build a 360 yard par 4 nice wide fairway couple of traps down the left, completely open on the right but the green aligned so the fall is right to left and with a grass bunker on the green side right that isolates the ground game...thats a slow burner... thats a learner.... in time it will get loved but in most instances golfers only play a golf course once so whilst subtle the great architecture get's missed. I think this happens a lot.


Education is a way forward, I have never actually seen a golf course architecture book that shows the 30 or 40 types of hole with description, pictures and text maybe we need this, unfortunately the education is against us and we are served up on a TV diet of fast food architecture. I really watch very little golf on TV now outside the majors much to do with a screen which pretty much does not change from week to week.


The Car Park Test is more the financial case and really has very little to do with any architectural grading, it is more to emphasise my point that the real top 5 courses are the ones voted for by the feet.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2016, 08:05:31 AM »

I love this picture and it's(300 yards between tees) exactly why I think we should keep supporting hot balls and hot drivers.
'Heck yes it's fun to hit it long!!!
By the time I get there technology will make this hole reachable and I'll be 70,( and hell will be frozen over.....)




Jeff, when I walked up to this sign with my borrowed clubs for the day. I dug into the bag to find the hardest ball I could, it was a Pinnacle Golf red. The thought that ran through my head was, "Dear Lord, please just this once grant me Jeff Warne's distance off the tee"


Clearly, she wasn't listening to me...


Just say another prayer she doesn't give you my accuracy.......
That truly is a chilling picture.
It's no wonder Germans are so strict about letting beginners on the course
"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

Peter Pallotta

Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2016, 09:57:20 AM »
Reading this I'm struck by the sense that what golf architects have in common with writers and musicians and painters is this: the unwillingness and/or inability to fully accept that what they themselves value most and think most important in their work is very often not what their readers/listeners/golfers care about at all. 

Reminds me of the story an Anglican minister tells: he laboured over a long and intricate and emotionally powerful sermon, and was quite proud of the results. In church that Sunday he delivered it with skill and passion. Afterwards, a man came up and shook his hand and thanked him enthusiastically for a truly wonderful sermon. The minister was gratified, and couldn't help asking "Do you mind telling me, I'd be curious to know: what part of it did you find most helpful"?  And the man in all earnestness replied: "It was a moment about half way through. You said something like 'Well, that ends the first part of the main argument, and now I turn to the second part' -- and I realized in a flash that this was exactly my situation, where I find myself in my life: the first part is over, and it's now time to turn the page and start the next part of it! Thank you!"   

Elegantly contoured greens, subtle strategies, seamless integration of fairways and rough, flowing and walkable routings -- no: but that high, dry spot that if you accidentally hit it sends your tee shot careening down the fairway for an extra 40 yards is fantastic!  :)   
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 10:11:21 AM by Peter Pallotta »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2016, 11:16:09 AM »
Nice, Peter.


Bob

Ruediger Meyer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #33 on: November 04, 2016, 01:15:33 PM »
Ok as much as I hate to admit it. The parking lot was totally full and the course was very busy. it's semi private, the cost of the round was 65 euro, which is cheap for this area. It was a national holiday, a Tuesday with perfect November weather. Sunny and 60-65 degrees.




Just nitpicking here, but it is not a national holiday. Only the catholics get off work, while we poor people in Northern Germany have to work...

David Davis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2016, 01:48:31 PM »
Ok as much as I hate to admit it. The parking lot was totally full and the course was very busy. it's semi private, the cost of the round was 65 euro, which is cheap for this area. It was a national holiday, a Tuesday with perfect November weather. Sunny and 60-65 degrees.




Just nitpicking here, but it is not a national holiday. Only the catholics get off work, while we poor people in Northern Germany have to work...


Rüdiger,


My bad, you are absolutely right. It was a Bavarian Holiday. I'm clearly becoming one of them given they don't think they are actually part of Germany and call it a national holiday ha ha.


Sorry that you were stuck in the office...


However, just think of all the 700 yd par 5's you missed.


David
Sharing the greatest experiences in golf.

IG: @top100golftraveler
www.lockharttravelclub.com

Jaeger Kovich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #35 on: November 05, 2016, 07:13:05 PM »
David, I think I played the other course at The Valley. I remember the holes pretty well... Your reaction to the owner's comments were much more polite than mine would have been! Did they have their eyes on a Ryder Cup?

David Davis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #36 on: November 06, 2016, 04:36:06 AM »
David, I think I played the other course at The Valley. I remember the holes pretty well... Your reaction to the owner's comments were much more polite than mine would have been! Did they have their eyes on a Ryder Cup?


Jaeger, I think you played the other 9 and missed this one (there are 3 9 hole courses). You probably played the 9 that ends with this short par 4 were you hit 5 iron and wedge to the green surrounded by water across the pond from the island green par 3. Yes the course was built in hopes of landing the Ryder Cup. If you remember I believe Germany pulled out in the end. No wonder as the Germany Federation was trying to deal with the #1 course in the world and they probably wanted a fee equal to 5x what the Ryder Cup offered.
Sharing the greatest experiences in golf.

IG: @top100golftraveler
www.lockharttravelclub.com

Ruediger Meyer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf architecture - gone absurd
« Reply #37 on: November 06, 2016, 05:28:32 AM »
Actually, they lost the bid to a not yet built course which afterwards lost against Le Golf National in Paris. I think they threw their hat back into the ring for 2022 but again where overlooked by the German Golf Federation.


The Club claims to have 1200 members and they are writing on their website they only have reduced availabilities for new memberships. So I would assume they are pretty happy with what they offer.


Never been there myself and I am not on the edge of my seat to go there either

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back