[Jim Thompson]

Reading through this I am left wondering how much equipment and the level of hand / finish work needed affected the design on green fronts?  It seems a lot easier / quicker to me to build a couple of bunkers into the front of a green then to take the time to tie in approaches with some character, especially if I had to work with horses and skids.  Did frontal bunkering come about because it was easier during the barnstorming era of gca?  After which did it just catch on or become accepted by later generations?  I wonder.

Cheers!

JT

[TEPaul]

Jim Thompson, if you really mean what you wrote in that last post of yours you probably think most of those involved in architecture way back when were as stupid as Ron Prichard, who happens to be one of the best researchers today, thinks they may've been. Those guys were probably not passing the Holy Grail around, they may've been just struggling to understand what was going on with some pretty rudimenary things to do with both golf and golf architecture.  

[Jim Thompson]

Tom,

I don't know what they were thinking.  What I was thinking is that if I had sent someone a routing or center lined a routing with some general grade drawings and came back the next season to see how the clean up had gone, it would be a whole heck of a lot quicker to throw in some bunkers to fix some tough spots then to move a bunch of dirt around and do handwork.  Especially if I had to tweak 18 holes and was scheduled to leave on the train the next week to get back across the pond for a couple years.  I don't think they where limited in their thoughts as much as they were limited, at times, by equipment, labor and hours in the day.  Imagine what CBM would have done with a D6 or Raynor with a laser on a blade or Banks with a full size excavator?  I think they may have just had to make the best of it, which makes their accomplishments even greater in my book.

Cheers!

JT

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

You asked, "While I realize that many fairways have been narrowed, do you ever come across greens that favor an approach from the right or left rough, areas that used to be fairways ?"

The first green at Winged Foot West. In fact, both Jones & Espinoza played to the far right side of the fairway during the week and both from the right rough during the playoff. Today that area is in or on the rough line and was rather deep within it during last year's Open.

In addition, Tilly wrote before the Open that the drive should be played to the right center of the fairway. Today that area is as above, along the fairway edge, rough line, as they are narrower.

[TEPaul]

JT:

I think you're right on the money. A lot of those old architects who were on the move probably didn't think all that much about how some approach would work in play or strategically.

It's cool to look at some of those old courses and particularly their green sites and try to figure out where they got their fill. In almost all cases they got it right there, right next to the green site. Just do some digging, produce the fill to construct a green or level it against a slope and VOILA, you also had places to put sand where you dug out the fill.

Called form follows function.

But then, later, after WW1 and into the 1920s they got way more into what they came to call "scientific" or "modern" architecture (I think the way they used those two words they tended to be almost synonymous)---eg the placement and molding of all kinds of features for the purpose of influencing the way people played their golf ball strategically.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Thompson,

Had those old guys been able to drive a D-6, they might not have been so ingenuous with their thinking.

It would have been simple to take the easy or lazy way out.

I think their need to be creative and get it right the first time was one of their talents.

Philip Young,

I played the West Course prior to the 1959 U.S. Open.
It's my view that the 1959 U.S. Open was the begining of the demise of WFW and other Open venues.

Soon after the 59 Open there were tree plantings to narrow the corridors of play and the narrowing of fairways vis a vis moving in the rough, both of which altered play.

If one walks a number of "Championship" golf courses, prefered locations to create the optimal angles of attack, NLE.

They've been altered by mowing or planting.

Modern day golf has "channeled" the golfer to predetermined areas, eliminating the wonderful concept of "choice" that was once inherent in the game.

Today, the line of play is often dictated rather than "hidden".

Discovering the "hidden" line of play was part of the lure, fun and mental part of the game.

The schematic of NGLA offers some insight into "hidden" or creative lines of play that evolve during the course of a round.  

[JohnV]

Yes, the better player plays the air game today, but I play with guys whose handicaps go all the way up to 26 on a regular basis.  Some of them are having to bounce the ball onto most of the greens on our course because they can't reach them in the air or if they can, they can't stop it quick enough.  Therefore, for them, the ground game isn't just an option, it is the only way to get on the green in regulation (or 1 over regulation in some cases).  Keeping the approaches interesting makes the game more interesting for them.

The same can be said of most women players.  Even for many of the better players.  When we setup a hole with a front hole location on the Futures Tour, many players did have to bounce it on to get it close.  The better ones realized that, the others didn't.

As I go out to do USGA ratings at a lot of courses, especially those built in the dark ages of the 50s and 60s, I see the standard two bunkers pinching the approach down to 5 yards wide and forcing the air game to be the only way to play.  This plays havoc on the weaker golfer and frequently means higher slope ratings as their extra landing area gets so narrow.

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

First, are the trees planted on WFW after the '59 Open still there?

Second, you asked, "While I realize that many fairways have been narrowed, do you ever come across greens that favor an approach from the right or left rough, areas that used to be fairways ?"

My answer was WFW green #1 with specific reasonings and references. I really don't understand what you are trying to say to this in your response. It would seem that you are implying that additional tree plantings have removed the preferred angle of play into this green therefor agreeing with what I stated as an example.

Please tell me what I am missing here.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Phil Young,

I was reiterating, reinforcing what you were saying.

Any time a green cants, I would have to imagine that the prefered angle of attack is from the location that's on the same side as the low side of the green.

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

I appreciate the answer... so used to the parry & thrust on here that only that side of my brain was working! Sorry.  

Phil

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()