Exaggeration for the sake of the next hole

[Tim Gallant]

I am listening to the new Bon Iver album this morning, and while I can't pretend to be any big fan, I was struck by how some songs feel really over-exaggerated with synths and autotune while others seem simply simple.


It got me thinking about how some artists believe that the beauty of the whole is superior to its individual parts. Did he intentionally make some songs feel overly complex to highlight the really (seemingly) simple songs and vice versa?


This THEN got me thinking about golf courses. I know there have been threads here talking about how not every hole has to be a standout hole, and sometimes it's ok to have a few 'average' holes as it frames the really great ones more-so and provides a better flow. My question though: is there a hole that essentially was altered or over/under embellished with the specific intention of highlighting the preceeding / following holes? I guess only the architect would know for sure, but i'm curious if one might have taken what would have been an OK hole and potentially made it slightly worse for the sake of the summation of the whole?

[Ally Mcintosh]

I don't think any architect deliberately designs an average hole. But I do think it's sometimes best to try and scale back the design input on certain holes so as to keep it simple. Not sure I'd ever do this with the sole purpose of highlighting other holes, though. I actually prefer when there aren't standout holes.

I genuinely believe in the album as opposed to the single.

However, I see your point and I think we can all agree that a course is better when it has easier patches and harder patches. Whether it is better if it has blander patches and more exciting patches I can't quite buy in to.

[Tom_Doak]

When we were building Pacific Dunes, I fought hard to not over-embellish the 12th and 15th holes.


As some will remember, 11 holes were built and grassed in the spring months, and we came back in the fall to complete holes 3, 4, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 18.  [Interestingly this included all of the par-5 holes, but that just happened because they were the holes furthest from the clubhouse and irrigation source.]


I felt like a lot of the first batch of holes had one or two key features that made them memorable, and I was afraid that it would feel like a gimmick if EVERY hole had its own memorable moment.  I also knew that #12 was one of the weaker holes aesthetically, and would tend to be lost in between the holes before and after, but I felt that was better than trying too hard to force it to compete.  I don't know that's exactly what you were describing, but it's similar.


In the end, that single bunker 130 yards from the green on #12 makes the hole without drawing attention to itself, and Mr. Keiser let us go there.  He was far more concerned about #15 -- which I was not, because I liked the green site so much -- so we kept adding bunkers in the second-shot landing zone there until he was convinced it had enough oomph to it.


Shadow Creek is another course where I was told [by Mr. Wynn] that a LOT of thought was given to making an ebb and flow of emotions during the course of the round, including deliberately subduing the design on certain holes [10-11, 16] so as to make the holes afterward more impactful.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tim - this is a very good lense through which to look at gca, and one that I never thought of before. As Ally and Tom have noted, maybe no architect will ever intentionally make a hole 'un-memorable', but it does seem to me that a course works better when holes that are (or seem) more difficult and complicated are followed by those that are (or seem) simpler, easier and less memorable, and vice versa --- especially when the holes actually play in the opposite way than you had imagined. In musical terms, someone once described good jazz as "the sound of surprise".
Peter
PS -  the one great course I've played, Crystal Downs, manages this trick very well. The Par 3s, which I really like, are simple in their presentation and apparent choices/challenge, and thus serve as perfect foils to the flashier/more memorable holes.

[Ian Andrew]

There is no question that the 11th at Highland Golf Links in Nova Scotia is intended as a breather hole. The first 10 holes at Highland run up and down the landscape like an out of control roller coaster slicing wildly through rolling wooded terrain. The 11th completely contrasts , built on the flat valley bottom almost like the high flat section on the roller coaster ride that sets you up for the next big drop.

The hole was designed as medium length par four – bunkered only for alignment – its fairway the widest on the course with an unusually flat and wide-open green. The 11th is a chance to catch your breath, hopefully make a par, and prepare for the next dizzying run of holes over Highland's rumpled terrain. More importantly it offers the best view of the surrounding mountains on the course. Thompson let the player relax and enjoy the views of this magnificent hidden valley, giving them time to savour this special place.

Roller coaster designers know they must space their thrills with breaks to maximize the enjoyment of the ride. Architects from the golden era used the breather hole between dramatic sections to relax players before taking them through a second difficult or dramatic section. A well-designed breather hole also builds anticipation for the next section.

A little restraint goes a long way in making other sections even more memorable.

[Tim Gallant]

When we were building Pacific Dunes, I fought hard to not over-embellish the 12th and 15th holes.


As some will remember, 11 holes were built and grassed in the spring months, and we came back in the fall to complete holes 3, 4, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 18.  [Interestingly this included all of the par-5 holes, but that just happened because they were the holes furthest from the clubhouse and irrigation source.]


I felt like a lot of the first batch of holes had one or two key features that made them memorable, and I was afraid that it would feel like a gimmick if EVERY hole had its own memorable moment.  I also knew that #12 was one of the weaker holes aesthetically, and would tend to be lost in between the holes before and after, but I felt that was better than trying too hard to force it to compete.  I don't know that's exactly what you were describing, but it's similar.


In the end, that single bunker 130 yards from the green on #12 makes the hole without drawing attention to itself, and Mr. Keiser let us go there.  He was far more concerned about #15 -- which I was not, because I liked the green site so much -- so we kept adding bunkers in the second-shot landing zone there until he was convinced it had enough oomph to it.


Shadow Creek is another course where I was told [by Mr. Wynn] that a LOT of thought was given to making an ebb and flow of emotions during the course of the round, including deliberately subduing the design on certain holes [10-11, 16] so as to make the holes afterward more impactful.

Tom,


Thank you for the response, and this is exactly what I was thinking. However, my follow up to this would be: so you mentioned that you fought hard not to over-embellish the 12th or 15th and for the most part, the 12th stayed aesthetically simple. However, if you took that hole in isolation, do you think you could have made it a better golf hole?

[Tim Gallant]

Tim - this is a very good lense through which to look at gca, and one that I never thought of before. As Ally and Tom have noted, maybe no architect will ever intentionally make a hole 'un-memorable', but it does seem to me that a course works better when holes that are (or seem) more difficult and complicated are followed by those that are (or seem) simpler, easier and less memorable, and vice versa --- especially when the holes actually play in the opposite way than you had imagined. In musical terms, someone once described good jazz as "the sound of surprise".
Peter
PS -  the one great course I've played, Crystal Downs, manages this trick very well. The Par 3s, which I really like, are simple in their presentation and apparent choices/challenge, and thus serve as perfect foils to the flashier/more memorable holes.

Peter,


100% agree and it would appear from Ian's response that at HL, this was a conscious thought. It is fascinating to know that sometimes, the absolute best and most spectacular hole is not built for the sake of the whole.

[Tim Gallant]

There is no question that the 11th at Highland Golf Links in Nova Scotia is intended as a breather hole. The first 10 holes at Highland run up and down the landscape like an out of control roller coaster slicing wildly through rolling wooded terrain. The 11th completely contrasts , built on the flat valley bottom almost like the high flat section on the roller coaster ride that sets you up for the next big drop.

The hole was designed as medium length par four – bunkered only for alignment – its fairway the widest on the course with an unusually flat and wide-open green. The 11th is a chance to catch your breath, hopefully make a par, and prepare for the next dizzying run of holes over Highland's rumpled terrain. More importantly it offers the best view of the surrounding mountains on the course. Thompson let the player relax and enjoy the views of this magnificent hidden valley, giving them time to savour this special place.

Roller coaster designers know they must space their thrills with breaks to maximize the enjoyment of the ride. Architects from the golden era used the breather hole between dramatic sections to relax players before taking them through a second difficult or dramatic section. A well-designed breather hole also builds anticipation for the next section.

A little restraint goes a long way in making other sections even more memorable.

Ian, this is very educational for me. How big of an impact does a player's emotions have on your decision making process when developing a golf course. Are you constantly asking: 'How will a player feel throughout his/her round here emotionally?' Would the answer to this ever make you 'dumb-down' or 'jazz-up' a hole to help keep the emotional level of the golfer where you would like?

[Tom_Doak]

my follow up to this would be: so you mentioned that you fought hard not to over-embellish the 12th or 15th and for the most part, the 12th stayed aesthetically simple. However, if you took that hole in isolation, do you think you could have made it a better golf hole?

Tim:


Per what I've been writing about The Loop, I'm certain we could have made the hole more memorable by adding more bunkers and features, that would have impressed some raters who would tell me there's no "strategy" to the tee shot [i.e. not enough bunkers], or that the green site is too wide open on the right for the "better player."


I don't think such changes would have made the hole better ... actually I think they would have made it worse.  First of all, the hole takes advantage of the prevailing winds.  Into the wind in the summer, it takes two very good shots to clear the central fairway bunker and leave yourself a manageable approach; and the more you aim away from the left side off the tee, the more the wind pushes your ball away to the right.  Downwind, it's reachable in two, and the subtle valley we built on the approach really helps to steer a ball into the green if you have taken a left line off the tee, which is hard to do because again, the jet stream wants to push you down the hole out to the right.


It's just that nobody is going to notice subtle things like these when they are going from the 11th at Pacific Dunes to the 13th.  And that's fine; nobody has to notice.  The idea that every hole should be memorable is a bit of a mix-up of goals.  Every hole should be very good, but it's only natural for some to be more memorable than others.

[Carl Rogers]

Tom & Team executed this idea in a similar way on hole 17 at Riverfront, a short-ish kind of tight par 4 with the most laid back green complex on the course in contrast to the 18th green which is the largest and most all over the place green complex on the course.  Oddly enough on hole 17, the closer you get to the green the more downhill side hill the approach shot becomes much harder.

[Tom_Doak]

Tim:


I noticed this morning that none of us has really given an answer to your question.  We've all answered the opposite question:  do you ever underplay a hole for the sake of the next hole?


I guess you can conclude from that, that exaggeration is the rule in modern golf architecture, not the exception!

[Tim_Weiman]

There is no question that the 11th at Highland Golf Links in Nova Scotia is intended as a breather hole. The first 10 holes at Highland run up and down the landscape like an out of control roller coaster slicing wildly through rolling wooded terrain. The 11th completely contrasts , built on the flat valley bottom almost like the high flat section on the roller coaster ride that sets you up for the next big drop.

The hole was designed as medium length par four – bunkered only for alignment – its fairway the widest on the course with an unusually flat and wide-open green. The 11th is a chance to catch your breath, hopefully make a par, and prepare for the next dizzying run of holes over Highland's rumpled terrain. More importantly it offers the best view of the surrounding mountains on the course. Thompson let the player relax and enjoy the views of this magnificent hidden valley, giving them time to savour this special place.

Roller coaster designers know they must space their thrills with breaks to maximize the enjoyment of the ride. Architects from the golden era used the breather hole between dramatic sections to relax players before taking them through a second difficult or dramatic section. A well-designed breather hole also builds anticipation for the next section.

A little restraint goes a long way in making other sections even more memorable.

Ian,


Unfortunately, I have never been to Highland, but I do want to question you a bit on your description of #11 as "intended to be a breather hole".


I am wondering what that really means. Does the routing of the golf course just result in the site for #11 being a "breather hole"? Or were there specific steps the architect took or didn't take that means the architect "intended" for the hole to be a "breather".


By the way, about 15 years ago I had the pleasure to walk and then play Burnham &
Berrow. Funny thing. I don't remember the hole number, but remember thinking a particular hole was fabulous precisely because it was a "breather" that gave the golfer time to relax a bit and just enjoy the walk.


What I struggle with is: was that the architect's intention or just good fortune the way the routing worked out?


Interested to hear your thoughts.