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.


Phil Benedict

  • Karma: +0/-0
Discovery vs Construction
« on: April 21, 2009, 03:34:13 PM »
In reading the New Yorker story on Askernish I was struck by the author's distinction between golf holes being 'discovered' rather than 'constructed' in the days of Old Tom.  Identify the route to take and cut the grass. 

Were golf holes discovered in the US, or are the early 20th century classics mostly the result of construction?  Can it be said that modern US courses in remote, treeless places like Sand Hills were discovered more than constructed?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2009, 04:56:40 PM »
Phil,

I still think about 90% of holes designed today are mostly discovered in that they fit the topo well without grading, other than to build greens, tees and bunkers.  Not many golf features can be laid right on the ground without some construction.  And, bunkers aren't natural on most sites and tees really aren't.

On my current project, I am probably grading only 4 fw's out of 18 to achieve vision and get my cuts to build greens and tees.  A few more flat areas may get touched to improve drainage and a few hilly ones touched to avoid long drainage swales.

I still consider that I found the best holes on that project, and only will use construction on limited areas to build them.  The site isn't as good as some in the Scottish dunes or even Sand Hills, which do limit the amount of construction extraordinarily, but the principles of finding good natural holes is about the same through the green on nearly all sites.

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2009, 06:16:55 PM »
Phil,
I don't think there was much fairway shaping in the US until the 1980's.....IMHO it was mainly tees and greens.... ;)
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2009, 06:57:24 PM »
Mike,

It was relatively less, but there was some. I have seen holes at Beveryly, White Bear, etc. that Ross graded and all the books show building fairways out over swamps, etc. when required.  The old guys tended to get their cuts from fw or adjacent areas to keep the horses fresh and many of the cuts are now well hidden by trees, etc.  It also helped that they had not truly discovered fw mounding at that time and most contours mimic the natural flow of the land pretty well.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2009, 07:11:04 PM »
Mike,

It was relatively less, but there was some. I have seen holes at Beveryly, White Bear, etc. that Ross graded and all the books show building fairways out over swamps, etc. when required.  The old guys tended to get their cuts from fw or adjacent areas to keep the horses fresh and many of the cuts are now well hidden by trees, etc.  It also helped that they had not truly discovered fw mounding at that time and most contours mimic the natural flow of the land pretty well.
agree.....
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2009, 07:30:32 PM »
Of course, it also helped that they didn't need to build detention ponds for housing, avoid wetlands, direct drainage to filter ponds, lower fw for housing views and so on......

Still, on a good site with few restrictions I can move less than 100-125K of earth. And most of that is because features are just bigger than they used to be, if only by a smidge.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Roger Wolfe

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2009, 07:45:09 PM »
Our 1st and 2nd holes at CGC were "discovered" by Kris Spence.  Purchased originally to be the driving range, Kris had an epiphany and we ended with a great par 5, a great par 4 and a 7 acre lake.  Only the dam was "constructed?"  The rest follows the natural lay of the land.  "Discovered holes, lake and dam pic" attached.

Roger Wolfe

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Discovery vs Construction
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2009, 07:50:58 PM »
Here is the master plan for the two holes...

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back