Routing question-hypothetical

[Dan_Callahan]

I was looking at an aerial photo of a nearby state park and was trying to envision how a golf course would fit the land (I'd attach the photo but I can't figure out how). This is a fairly wide peninsula with a north-south orientation. It covers almost 250 acres and is surrounded on three sides by the ocean.

Assuming there is room to do an out-and-back routing, would you prefer to keep the water on your left side or on your right? Can anyone clue me in as to how an architect would make such a decision? I know the general rule of thumb is that bad golfers tend to slice, so water on the right is more penal. The other option would be to cross over with an inland hole, but that wouldn't take full advantage of the ocean vistas.

[Rick Shefchik]

I was thinking of a crossover point as soon as I read the description of the peninsula. My preference would be for a course that offers as many holes with water on the left as right. In fact, two crossover points would be better; something like this:

1 through 5 with water on the right, cross over and play 6 through 14 with water on the left, then cross over again and finish with water on your right on holes 15 through 18.

Even a routing like that, in my mind, wouldn't be an ideal mix. It would probably be too complicated and confusing, but some kind of crossover every two holes or so would be optimal.

It's one thing for a links course to play out and back without crossing over, if there's no water; but if every hole is going to have water on one side or the other, I think it would be a lot more interesting to have the water change sides as often as feasible.

[Brian Phillips]

Dan,

Send the file to me and I will put it for you if you want.

Cheers Brian

[Dan_Callahan]

Brian,

I just sent you the file. Let me know if you don't get it or have trouble opening it.

Thanks,

Dan

[Tom_Doak]

Rick,

The problem with making a lot of crossovers is that it's much harder at the crossovers to get the greens and tees close together so the course is easy to walk.  This is the best reason to limit crossovers.

You can use parallel holes running across the peninsula to make a crossover, as MacKenzie did with the two par-3's at Alwoodley.

[Dan_Callahan]

I think I finally figured out how to post the picture. It's an outstanding property with views to the Boston skyline. The park starts at the lake you see near the center of the photo. The peninsula extends to the north and is roughly 250 acres. A wide sandbar connects the two major land masses. What you can't see is that the terrain has some great hills at the center of the property and sandy beaches along the coast.

[Tony_Chapman]

Dan - That appears to be some piece of property!!!  

What is interesting about the site is that it appears you have three different directions you could place holes the water on a side. Unlike, say Pebble Beach where the water is one border, not three. You have more directions to play with on this piece of land that it appears an out and back routing may not be the most ideal.

I think if an architect, say Tom since he already posted, wouldn't look at this property and try to get a series of holes that all play along the water consecutively. They would try to get as many holes bordering the water as possible and, it appears from your description, they would have an excellent opportunity to make some good inland holes. You may also try to incorporate a green or two that brought you from the inland portion of the course to the water. So, you played a hole that ended at the water but didn't start there.

As a golfer, I wouldn't want to have 6-8 holes play on the water then none of the other. Rather I would like to play on the inland holes, then the water, back to the inland and back to the water or something of the sort.

Hope this makes sense.

[Tim_Weiman]

Dan,

First, I like the subject of your thread. Over the past several years, we have been sadly lacking in good threads about routing.

That aside, reading your original post and viewing the picture brought the Old Head in mind. If you have been there, then you know that while the site has unbelievable water views, there is very little if anything interesting about the ground.

So, for your site, before talking about water on left or right, I'd want to know what the ground offers. Are there any holes just crying out to be built, so much so that including them might have to be considered a priority?

[Dan_Callahan]

So, for your site, before talking about water on left or right, I'd want to know what the ground offers. Are there any holes just crying out to be built, so much so that including them might have to be considered a priority?

Good question.

There are a few green sites that I think would be important to include. The first is at the outermost tip of the peninsula that juts out to the west. The second is the land mass filling the east side of the pond.

The light green field at the center of the photo is the highest point of the property (a pretty significant hill). It would be nice to take advantage of the views from there, either with a tee box or as part of a hole that runs up and over the hill.

Although it would be interesting to play a hole over the ocean to the northern part of the property, there needs to be a safe way of traversing the sandbar. That northern block of land is about 850 yards long (measured from the end of the sandbar to the north coast line). The two clearings on it are both hills, and a valley runs east-west between them. That would be an obvious spot to cross over—it is about 500 yards from one side to the other.

[Andrew Summerell]

What's the wind like ? Is there a prevailing breeze that is common to the area, as this could also play a part in the routing. If the breeze is a factor it's great to have holes that point to the 4 corners of the compass.

You need to see the topography as well. There is no reason to cram holes next to the water just because it's there, when there could be better holes in the interior of the property.

There are also a few places to use the waterline as a diagonal hazard on the drive. That's always a nice way to give the golfer a few options.

[Forrest Richardson]

Looks as if the width is adequate for holes running an all directions...not just in a string like some peninsula layouts.

The "right" or "left" question is more a matter of which way the hole leans. For example, water to the right is of no extreme hardship to the predominant slicer if the hole moves to the left. Conversely, water to the left can be very troublesome, if not more that with water to the right, when a hole hooks around the drink.

I would tend to side on whatever would create the best adventure.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Personally, I wouldn't give two seconds to slice or hook thoughts. I'd scout the property for the best natural green sites and use them to determine how I route the course.

[Forrest Richardson]

Don,

Green sites are but one element of determining routing. But I would take exception with your approach to exclusively determine green sites and route from just those determinations.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Forrest,
Granted, I couldn't route the course based on green sites alone, but I'd sure try and use as many good ones as possible when developing a realistic routing. I honestly would try and not let the water being on one side or the other determine the routing. Using the natural features as much as possible would seem to me to be the most cost effective and the better design. But, I don't design courses except on dinner napkins or in my dreams so I'll defer to your experience. I just don't see why one wouldn't walk the property and find the best features before one started worrying about shot shapes, or par, or length, or vistas, or wind, or......

[TEPaul]

Very interesting thread!

I think the example of the aerial from Boston combined with the posts on this thread indicate some instructive things about routing particular types of properties.

Routing long narrow peninsula shaped properties with limited latitude side to side creates routings that sort of flow on their own to a large extent. Look at TOC, North Berwick, NGLA, even Merion. The hole landforms on those courses are somewhat self-evident. The only true routing variation one could have on properties like those would be to use the same basic landforms and routing but in reverse!

But when you throw in real interesting and complex topography on those long narrow sites it potentially gets more interesting for some holes but also far more complicated to route successfully.

I'm glad Tom Doak mentioned Alwoodley. That site is a long hooking peninula shaped site but if there was water around it (if it really was a peninula) Mackenzie (or Colt?) routed the course really well when it comes to the question of having the water on either side of holes (variety).

Holes #7, #14, #16 are the "crossover" holes on that course. Personally, I prefer to call holes like that "connectors" or "separators" not "crossovers". To me the "crossovers" in a routing sense are when you walk from #13 green over #7 to #14 tee and when #3 tee plays over the midbody of #16. The latter particularly I consider really interesting old fashioned hole crossover quirk!

But the topoprahy at Alwoodley is not all that complicated in a routing sense and because it isn't one can see from the routing drawing or an aerial that Mackenzie was able, without much problem, to make the course very efficient in a land use sense (not much wasted space!) and a course with much right and left variety. If there was a ton of interesting topography on Alwoodley it probably would've made his routing and design job far more complex to do!

[Norbert P]

 FYI - To draw a routing on the given picture,  simply...

  Right click on picture...
  SAVE AS... click
  Choose folder location (eg GCA Golf Designs)  
  Name your file,
  and then
    save as .bmp file, or if you have a better Painting program than the cheesy one I've got, use it.  All I have is Paint and it came with my Costco Lo-Buck Special computer so it must be in every Windows PC.

  Whenever you make changes later, be sure to click on FILE (in upper toolbar),
 and then click SAVE.  

  If you want to send the picture, make another file of it ...

  SAVE AS... and change name and convert file type to .jpg (jpeg).  This will require less time in transferring and downloading to/for recipient.

  (If there are any errors in this post and you wanna kick my ass,  get in line.)

 BTW ... saving in .bmp format will give you zoomability on picture.

[RJ_Daley]

Dan, where is that land exactly?  Is it on the Cape near Provincetown?  I was there last summer and all I could see was potential site after site.  Is this merely a theoretical exercise for funzies, or is this a serious effort?  Given you have stated it is a State Park, I can't believe that any serious official consideration would ever be given to converting it to a golf course.  But, it sure looks good and is fun to imagine.  Have you tried to use Terraserver to get an aerial and topo?  Perhaps our main man Scott B., "King of the Aerials", could pop up a link if you tell him where it is at and if they have a file on that particular land.  With the aerial posted (or link to it) perhaps we can have a little contest to route the course?

It would sure beat all the humdrum posting going on here lately.