[Mike Hendren]

I can't help but wonder if golf courses were meant to be enjoyed or renovated.   While the current restoration(?) trend is yielding excellent results,  at my age I can't imagine sacrificing even one year of play to turn a very good course into an even better(?) one.  One can always hang another ornament on a beautiful Christmas tree. Does every wall need another brick?


Are money and ego driving the trend under the guise of stewardship?


Bogey

[David Ober]

I can't help but wonder if golf courses were meant to be enjoyed or renovated.   While the current restoration(?) trend is yielding excellent results,  at my age I can't imagine sacrificing even one year of play to turn a very good course into an even better(?) one.  One can always hang another ornament on a beautiful Christmas tree. Does every wall need another brick?


Are money and ego driving the trend under the guise of stewardship?


Bogey

I would absolutely take the other side of that argument. Renovations are long overdue at many courses, and there are always other places to play during the down time.

[Mike Hendren]

I must apologize as I see that I posted an identical thread one year ago.


Let me go at this from a different perspective.   For the monied, is architecture threatening to trump the game itself?  Or are the playing field and playing inextricably intertwined?


I have yet to enjoy any course more than the one I grew up playing. 


Mike

[JMEvensky]

I think the more people travel, the more they want "better"--and I concede "better" isn't always better.


How do you keep 'em down on the farm once they've seen Paree?

[Peter Pallotta]

How do you keep 'em down on the farm once they've seen Paree?

That reminds me of the table talk from "My Dinner with Andre". Andre might say the function of art (golf course architecture) is to bring people to Paris or Mount Everest, literally sometimes but certainly metaphorically. Wallace might say the function of art is to help people experience Paris or Mount Everest right where they are, wherever they are i.e. to foster the capacity and willingness to see beauty and greatness all around us, in the here and now.

The latter is much harder to do, and there's very little money in it.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think this is a good question.


The massive renovation / restoration market isn’t really as big in GB&I, almost exactly because no membership would ever sign off on their course being closed for a year in the name of “architecture”.


Of course, this in turn means that most courses have strayed a little less from their original vision than many US equivalents. Plus it also helps that most of our top tier courses can be renovated whilst keeping some of the holes in play at all times.


So I would say that the game still trumps the architecture over here. Does look like that line is a little more blurred over there.

[Adam Lawrence]

I think this is a good question.

The massive renovation / restoration market isn’t really as big in GB&I, almost exactly because no membership would ever sign off on their course being closed for a year in the name of “architecture”.

It's kinda interesting that one of very few really enormous projects, the sand capping of Loch Lomond, was done at a club that closes for the winter, and one of the conditions of the project getting approved was that the course would be open as normal during the season.

[Tim Martin]

I think this is a good question.


The massive renovation / restoration market isn’t really as big in GB&I, almost exactly because no membership would ever sign off on their course being closed for a year in the name of “architecture”.


Of course, this in turn means that most courses have strayed a little less from their original vision than many US equivalents. Plus it also helps that most of our top tier courses can be renovated whilst keeping some of the holes in play at all times.


So I would say that the game still trumps the architecture over here. Does look like that line is a little more blurred over there.

Ally-I think the thing in GB&I is that many/most of the courses haven’t been tampered with as early and often as those in the U.S.

[Niall C]

Tim


Actually I think it is the opposite in the UK. I think an awful lot of courses have been tweaked fairly often. At members clubs there are always new committee men who have their own ideas and want to implement them.


Niall

[Tim Martin]

Tim


Actually I think it is the opposite in the UK. I think an awful lot of courses have been tweaked fairly often. At members clubs there are always new committee men who have their own ideas and want to implement them.


Niall

Niall-The extent of the tampering may be the sticking point. In the U.S. some of the previous renovations rendered certain courses unrecognizable as to the original designer’s intent and style. That said I can’t argue that courses haven’t been “tweaked” in GB&I.

[Tom_Doak]

Tim


Actually I think it is the opposite in the UK. I think an awful lot of courses have been tweaked fairly often. At members clubs there are always new committee men who have their own ideas and want to implement them.


Niall

Lots of little tweaks but you don’t have to restore a green if you never blew it up to begin with.


And to the OP :  100% yes, ego and (easy) money are driving the restoration business.

[Sean_A]

Tim


Actually I think it is the opposite in the UK. I think an awful lot of courses have been tweaked fairly often. At members clubs there are always new committee men who have their own ideas and want to implement them.

Niall

Lots of little tweaks but you don’t have to restore a green if you never blew it up to begin with.

And to the OP :  100% yes, ego and (easy) money are driving the restoration business.

I have been saying for years that dialing back the ball ain't a guarantee that courses won't be altered. It's part of human nature to change things. It's money in pockets which enables the changes.

Ciao

[Niall C]

Tom

There's no doubt that in the UK you don't really get the wholesale changes with a complete makeover from one style to another that you get in the US although I noted in a recent Sean tour that the course he played had all the greens rebuilt in recent years. When I think of the courses I've been a member of most had some greens rebuilt in recent memory. It's that constant gradual evolution that makes me a bit sceptical when someone discovers a golden age course over here and declares it shouldn't be touched in order to preserve the original architects intent/vision/design.

Historical research is important and god knows I've done my fair share, but what I think anyone should have in the forefront of their mind when proposing changes is are the changes going to make the course better ? And in determining that they really should have professional input IMO.

Niall 

[Ted Sturges]

Very interesting topic...


My two cents-


I was a member at Broadmoor Country Club in Indianapolis when Renaissance Golf Design did a renovation that included tree removal, some bunker renovation, putting green outer boundary recapture, and fairway mowing line restoration.  All of it made the course so much better (thank you Tom Doak and Bruce Hepner).  That work has improved the golf experience for everyone that has followed the dateline of the restoration work.  Prior to that phase of tree removal, some of the holes were borderline unplayable.  Playing that golf course pre 2000 left one feeling like Broadmoor was a lost opportunity, or an opportunity waiting to be seized.  How can one not be for that?


Lots of other examples of similar transformations in golf (Oakmont, Yeamans Hall, Camargo, Shoreacres to name 4).


TS 

[Mike_Young]

Very interesting topic...


My two cents-


I was a member at Broadmoor Country Club in Indianapolis when Renaissance Golf Design did a renovation that included tree removal, some bunker renovation, putting green outer boundary recapture, and fairway mowing line restoration.  All of it made the course so much better (thank you Tom Doak and Bruce Hepner).  That work has improved the golf experience for everyone that has followed the dateline of the restoration work.  Prior to that phase of tree removal, some of the holes were borderline unplayable.  Playing that golf course pre 2000 left one feeling like Broadmoor was a lost opportunity, or an opportunity waiting to be seized.  How can one not be for that?


Lots of other examples of similar transformations in golf (Oakmont, Yeamans Hall, Camargo, Shoreacres to name 4).


TS

My two cents,I view TD's reno/resto work as examples of KISS strategy (keep it simple stupid) and IMHO he will tell a green chair or a committee what he thinks...BUT most fo the reno/resto work done in this country is overblown BS sold by guys who will do what a club wants instead of what is needed.  And this is able to succeed in this country because the average club green chair has ZERO idea and he is succeeded by another each year who also has no idea....but they desire an architect who listens to them more than they listen to him.  Hell a few years ago I saw a "design committee at a club think they were restoring by GPSing the perimeter of the ODG drawings on the ground and then interpreting the third dimension.  Europeans do less because they enjoy playing golf if sustainable conditions.  Americans of don't enjoy the actual golf as much as they do the other elements such as the newest iron or driver, cart path conditions, flower beds and having a locker room better than their buddies club...AND so we constantly wish to update...JMO

[V_Halyard]

I can't help but wonder if golf courses were meant to be enjoyed or renovated.   While the current restoration(?) trend is yielding excellent results,  at my age I can't imagine sacrificing even one year of play to turn a very good course into an even better(?) one.  One can always hang another ornament on a beautiful Christmas tree. Does every wall need another brick?


Are money and ego driving the trend under the guise of stewardship?


Bogey

Your thoughts if a once excellent course has deteriorated over  the decades?

[Mike Hendren]

Vaughn, "deterioration" cuts a wide swath.  Are we talking "aged gracefully" or "repeatedly bastardized by committee and the Joneses?"


I do think the current restoration craze is fabulous with amazing results, at least visually.  But I can't help but wondering if the memberships of Oakmont, Philly Cricket, Baltusrol, Wannamoisett, Beverly, Brook Hollow, Inverness and Rolling Green and others sat around the locker room wringing their hands and lamenting that their course had gone to hell in a hand basket and repeatedly asking themselves WWGD - What would Gil do?


My view is perhaps warped by my preference for and love of "good enough" golf architecture.  I've finally returned to playing and enjoying the game and have no time for chin-wagging, beard-pulling or photographic documentation.  Perhaps that seats me firmly at the rube/kid's table but that's okay - frankly, at day's end I find the cognoscenti boring and pretentious. I'm much more interested in WWAG - Where Would Arble Go?


Let me bring my initial thread to a single point:   Is Looking Mountain lacking in any way?


Please let me know if you're headed to Nashville.


All the best,


Mike

[Sean_A]

Tom

There's no doubt that in the UK you don't really get the wholesale changes with a complete makeover from one style to another that you get in the US although I noted in a recent Sean tour that the course he played had all the greens rebuilt in recent years. When I think of the courses I've been a member of most had some greens rebuilt in recent memory. It's that constant gradual evolution that makes me a bit sceptical when someone discovers a golden age course over here and declares it shouldn't be touched in order to preserve the original architects intent/vision/design.

Historical research is important and god knows I've done my fair share, but what I think anyone should have in the forefront of their mind when proposing changes is are the changes going to make the course better ? And in determining that they really should have professional input IMO.

Niall

Courses in GB&I change more often than people realise. Even club members quickly forget changes. I am a member of a place that has not had a full 18 uninterrupted holes in play for 5 or 6 years. To date, I remain unimpressed.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

GB&I courses have constantly changed as successive committees want to leave a legacy, however small. Niall is right… but I more often see it as death by a thousand cuts rather than “improvement”.


In many ways, a full on redesign / renovation is actually a better option. One may not like it but at least someone has to stand up and really own it.


That’s what happened more in the US…. The death by a thousand cuts approach rarely gets reversed.

[Sean_A]

GB&I courses have constantly changed as successive committees want to leave a legacy, however small. Niall is right… but I more often see it as death by a thousand cuts rather than “improvement”.


In many ways, a full on redesign / renovation is actually a better option. One may not like it but at least someone has to stand up and really own it.


That’s what happened more in the US…. The death by a thousand cuts approach rarely gets reversed.

I wouldn't say death in our case, but the loss of variety in favour of codified design is lamentable.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Oh, I 100% agree

https://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/digital/magazine/issue66/44/

[Tim Martin]

I do think the current restoration craze is fabulous with amazing results, at least visually.  But I can't help but wondering if the memberships of Oakmont, Philly Cricket, Baltusrol, Wannamoisett, Beverly, Brook Hollow, Inverness and Rolling Green and others sat around the locker room wringing their hands and lamenting that their course had gone to hell in a hand basket and repeatedly asking themselves WWGD - What would Gil do?

It seems that the restoration at Wannamoisett has an eye on the Northeast Amateur more than anything else. I watched a short video with Andrew Green talking about repositioning fairway bunkers to keep up with the modern game. Finally I can’t imagine that much needed to be done to enhance the experience for the members and if anything possibly give them a more forward set of tees to play from.

[David Kelly]

The massive renovation / restoration market isn’t really as big in GB&I, almost exactly because no membership would ever sign off on their course being closed for a year in the name of “architecture”.

Off the top of my head I can think of dozens of GB&I courses that have undergone extensive renovations in recent years. 


Entire new holes have been built at - Royal Portrush, Portrush Valley, Royal Dornoch, Cruden Bay, Machrie, The Eden Course, The Renaissance Club, Royal Liverpool, Liphook, Seaton Carew, Portmarnock, Rosapenna Old Tom Morris, Portsalon, The Island, Ballyliffin Old, and Narin & Portnoo.  And those are just the courses that have received completely new holes. That leaves out extensive renovations at places like Turnberry, County Sligo, Trevose and smaller reno/restos at New Zealand, The Addington, Blackwell and Woodhall Spa, not to mention what happened to Wentworth West. 


Not only that but every course that hosts an Open has been tweaked extensively over the years.

[Ally Mcintosh]

David,


Most of the GB&I courses you mention are different sizes of work to the type of 8 figure full on renovations that happened at US courses from holes 1 through 18, completely altering the aesthetic and feel.


As you might notice from my article above (and from extensive posts on here), I am dead-set against the size of work that has been done at a lot of UK courses, far beyond what is necessary.


But none / very few of the courses you mention above actually had to close and all of them were left with a similar sense of place.


There’s a huge restoration market in the States exactly because so many courses have undergone a complete transformation via renovation… Many members in the UK would hardly understand how different their courses are because their renovations were more subtle and happened slowly and piecemeal. As I said, death by a thousand cuts.


Only recently have bigger projects started to occur (like Turnberry or Machrie). Maybe the restoration market in the UK will flourish in 40 years, returning some of these courses to what they were before. Wentworth West might be a good starting point.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Very few U.K. clubs have the funds for a full 18 hole renovation/restoration. By the same token, few clubs have had the funds in the past to make too many drastic changes from the original design.


Most classic courses over here have changed (sometimes dramatically) due to tree growth, bunker deterioration, green shrinkage, and altered mowing lines.


Any proposed “renovation” which goes further than rectifying these relatively simple problems over the period of a few winters should be treated with suspicion IMO. Anything else is about ego.


Drainage is where most clubs should be putting their attention. Also, in the age of the ubiquitous Motocaddy, getting golfers round the course without churning up grass pathways into a morass of mud…

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()