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.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #25 on: October 02, 2008, 09:24:36 AM »
Barney,

I take credit for the concept of a "Treedan" where the topography  must be utilized to sling a ball around a large specimen tree onto the green.  Known otherwise to Hillbillies as the dog-leg par three.

Not well received I confess.

Mike



Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Tom Huckaby

Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #26 on: October 02, 2008, 10:22:27 AM »
shivas:

You are a seething cauldron of original thought, that's for sure.

But as for your last one... whoever said Sand Hills was supposed to be considered purely "links golf'?  It's in the middle of Nebraska for god's sake!  If that's a links than I'm Oprah Winfrey.  As I said each time you posited this before:  links-ish golf it may or may not be (and I think it is, regardless of raised greens), GREAT golf it most certainly is.

TH


Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #27 on: October 02, 2008, 10:31:21 AM »
I believe the correct new term is Prairie Links.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #28 on: October 02, 2008, 04:10:45 PM »
Hi Dick Daley:

Nice to hear from you and to see my quote "people want to play more, not pay more".

Aside from that, to answer John K's question, several years back I warned about the dangers of the golf technology arms race and predicted it wouldn't be long before we were seeing an 8,000 yard course.

That warning was dsmissed by some who argued that there was no evidence to support my claim.

Now I see a thread "Closing in on 8,000 yard courses".

Was my argument "original"? Of course not. But, valid? Yes!

Hope you are well.

Tim
Tim Weiman

Jim Franklin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #29 on: October 02, 2008, 04:15:20 PM »
Erin Hills is already 8200 yards.
Mr Hurricane

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #30 on: October 02, 2008, 04:32:09 PM »
Using sticky white rice or cocaine instead of sand to push angle of repose limits in bunkers ... truly original thoughts that could come from nowhere else but here.


JM....that's interesting enough [at least for us], that I did an experiment.

I used Mahatma Jasmine rice and guessed the angle of rice repose to be in the mid 20 degree range.

I then substituted flour for cocaine and found that it has a steeper angle.....which translates into a reduced volume  vs rice.

Of course one must compare the raw cost of both materials against the the quantity needed to be able to make a true budget comparison.....I can readily find a wholesale cost for flour, but I'm not sure what coke costs when bought in volume.

Maybe some of our GCAers can help.


[Ignoring the cocaine stuff]

How in hell does the maintenance staff at True Blue keep that bunker on I think #17, the over water par 3?  That front right bunker has a flat bottom and then suddenly rares up maybe 8 feet to the front of the green, and the sand is nearly vertical.

Now that's an "angle of repose!"  :o

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #31 on: October 02, 2008, 04:53:40 PM »
TE Paul's "Big World Theory" which to me means that it takes the entire spectrum of golf course architecture to make us fully appreciate our own favorite courses and styles. For example, I take it to mean that while studying the ODG's, whether or not MacRaynors are your favorite style, we are fortunate that such a well-defined group of great courses exists, because from that style (and others) we can contrast the work of Tilly, Mackenzie, Ross, etc. When studying courses of current guys, the courses by Fazio, Rees and Nicklaus can be contrasted with the minimalists like Doak and C & C. And I think that is very cool.

Mike_Cirba

Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #32 on: October 02, 2008, 05:46:35 PM »
Anti-Strategy

Tom Huckaby

Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #33 on: October 02, 2008, 06:22:30 PM »
Matt Ward and Patrick Mucci each admitting they were wrong about something.

Whoops!  Of course that has never happened, but it surely WOULD be original.

TH

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #34 on: October 02, 2008, 08:48:19 PM »

#13 at Augusta National is NOT a strategic golf hole....if 2 options exist on a tee shot, and nobody ever attempts one of those options, that shot presents ZERO strategic choice.


Well, I beg to differ.

Which options are you talking about? The option of driver vs. some other club (like, Goosen's famous iron on the final round two years ago)?

Or the option of where to place one's drive? Surely "options" includes placement as well.

The standard play is essentially bail out right with a driver, giving yourself a long second off an unevent lie into a green sloping towards Rae's Creek, which is perpindicular to your shot. See: Tiger,  every Masters he's played.

The gutsy play is driver down the left side of the fairway, flirting with the creek, to give yourself the best lie on that fairway (really, the only flat lie on that fairway), and -- doubling your reward for flirting with the creek -- a much more open shot into the green, in which Rae's Creek runs away from the player, and the green provides a much better target (remember the green is much wider than it is deep, so coming in from the extreme left side of the fairway opens up the approach). See: Jack, back nine, final round, '86. (Ever see Tiger flirt with the creek on the left side of the fairway on the final round when he's in contention? Me neither...)

The short-hitter's way is to simply play a safe drive/fairway wood out into the fairway (still 50 yards wide?), lay up to your best wedge distance, and pitch-and-putt your way to a birdie (hopefull). See: Zach Johnson, '07 Masters. Worked for him.


Tim Bert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #35 on: October 02, 2008, 09:59:46 PM »
I believe Mike Hendren coined the term "stretch Biarritz" on this site.

Josh Smith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2008, 05:36:31 PM »
I had hoped "Movable Greens not floating" would create some back and forth as far as feasibility and fun golf, but other than an owner of a top tier Prairie Links course I haven't heard a lot of response on it.  I would be interested to hear others thoughts.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,33503.0.html

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2008, 05:56:20 PM »
Do they have to be correct?

How about the notion that flat speedy greens provide a fairer challenge to better players than contoured greens?

-----

I've read several thoughts on here that merit mention (though I don't have the background to say if they're original or first posted on here):

1) John Kirk's time theory;

2) Tom D's noting the paradox of the statement that all shots should be rewarded in proportion to their quality and its inherent flaws;

3) Pat Brockwell's thoughts on Shinney and the 2004 Open (see my tagline).

I'd list another one or two, but don't want to appear self-serving. :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tom Huckaby

Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2008, 06:06:11 PM »
Do they have to be correct?

How about the notion that flat speedy greens provide a fairer challenge to better players than contoured greens?


First I've heard of that.

Now if you were alluding to my theory about puttin g that some got but you never did... well... it was quite different from the above.  But please let's not argue that AGAIN.  Just note that agree or disagree, it wasn't even all that original - I crystallized it from the thoughts posted by several others.

TH


Peter Pallotta

Re: Original architectural thoughts first posted on Golf Club Atlas.
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2008, 09:58:30 PM »
John -

your tag line -- "Natural stagnation is unnatural" -- is interesting. I think you're right, but here's a counter-point: I don't think any architect has ever been able to design a course such that entropy makes the course more of what it was intended to be, not less. But that doesn't mean such a design is impossible. If it ever happened, I might then say that natural stagnation is the most natural and interesting of all golf-architecture-related processes.

Anyway, original thoughts - here's one I had recently: "The medium is the message". 

No, not actually original in general, but in the context of golf course architecture I think it may be.   

Peter

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back