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.


Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
PGA Pros talk architecture...
« on: June 27, 2006, 03:48:59 PM »
Sorry if this has been been posted or referenced before but I've been away for a few days. You will note nothing was said about punchbowl or biarritz greens:

From the Hartford Courant:

If Designing A Course, What Features Would You Include?
June 25, 2006
 
Jesper Parnevik - "Not very long, traditional and challenging. The British Open courses haven't been touched in hundreds of years. And [they're] still a challenge. Smaller greens, a few par-4s that present a challenge."

Phil Mickelson - "Make sure the subtleties and nuances around the greens, especially in the chipping areas, are critical. I like what is at Winged Foot, where the greens go one way and the edges fall off and come back up, because it creates a whole different variety of shots and whole different challenge."

Carl Pettersson - "I would make it very similar to Hilton Head. Obviously you'd have to have the right piece of land. Fast fairways running into trouble, not much rough, the trees being the trouble. And small greens."

Retief Goosen - "Toughen it up, but not necessarily by lengthening it. I like an old-style course with trees, rough and sand traps."

J.B. Holmes - "Tree-lined for sure. If I was designing it for me, every hole would go left to right because that's how I like to hit my shots. I'd want a good ball-striking course with lots of undulations in it."

Patrick Sheehan - "Small greens, tight fairways and under 7,000 yards."

Olin Browne - "A short par-3 and short par-4, because people seemed to have neglected those particular kind of holes."

Billy Andrade - "Small greens because they're harder to hit and [they] bring the short game into play."

Brad Faxon - "Make it look natural, like it has been there. I'm a bigger fan of older-style courses."

Corey Pavin - "Grow rough, tighten the fairways. Have fairway bunkers ... to require more accuracy with your drives."

Joe Durant - "Trees that [are] integral to the design of the course and strategic bunkering. I know it's difficult when you have to go in and clear trees, but trees give you definition and force you to shape the ball around."

Brett Quigley - "A great practice facility and try to keep the course as firm as possible. You only need a few inches of rough if you have firm fairways and greens because the ball won't stay on them."

J.J. Henry - "A drivable par-4, like the 10th at Riviera or 15th at the TPC at River Highlands."

Paul Azinger - "I think the key is to have a nice, clean look. You want bunkers underneath the greens, bunkers staggered off the tee and some bends in the fairways and hills."

Kenny Perry - "You'd want a little Pebble Beach in there, a little bit of Muirfield Village [and] Riviera - scenic, with history. I don't think you can build a new golf course that will please everyone. Some guys will love it, some guys would hate it."

Joey Sindelar - "I prefer that 5 yards offline is a 5-yard penalty and 10 yards offline is a 10-yard penalty, and so on. I like consistency. There wouldn't be too much out of bounds and it wouldn't be water-laden. A slightly more vanilla version of Bethpage Black."
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Wyatt Halliday

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #1 on: June 27, 2006, 04:29:47 PM »
J.B. Holmes - "Tree-lined for sure. If I was designing it for me, every hole would go left to right because that's how I like to hit my shots. I'd want a good ball-striking course with lots of undulations in it."

Sure this isn't Nicklaus? :P

Jonathan McCord

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #2 on: June 27, 2006, 05:13:42 PM »
A lot of players seem to prefer small greens. ::)

Why not large greens with great undulations, so when you miss your still on the green but have an extremely difficult putt?

Of course, that would probably be unfair. ;) ;D
"Read it, Roll it, Hole it."

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #3 on: June 27, 2006, 07:18:25 PM »
 Jonathan,

  I'm with you. At Yale yesterday we were treated to huge greens with many different possibilities for fun positions as one plays the course again and again. If the greens are too small the course could get pretty boring. Plus the recovery shot is more fun when the green is big and you have an unfavorable angle.
AKA Mayday

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2006, 03:30:15 AM »
Fairly meaningless comments, aren't they?

Retief Goosen - "Toughen it up, but not necessarily by lengthening it. I like an old-style course with trees, rough and sand traps."

Thanks, Goose.

~Matt

MikeJones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2006, 06:02:19 AM »
It's predictable that a lot of those players seem to want the architecture of the course to suit their games.

As a general rule I don't think that active competitive players are very objective about good course architecture. It's only after they have retired or semi retired that they start to see the bigger picture.

Kenny Lee Puckett

Re:PGA Pros talk architecture...
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2006, 11:46:42 AM »
To borrow a phrase from a friend:

PGA Pros talking architecture is a little bit like having "Michael Jackson talk about babysitting."

Not a totally blanket statement as some pros (Crenshaw, Nicklaus, Fezler, Weibring) have turned out some strong work.

Enjoying the apparent contradiction of the Subject of this thread, and please pass the Jumbo Shrimp...

JWK