Chapters III and IV had a good number of "rules" to follow. (number of hills, valley widths to fit holes, sand trap drainage, water for irrigation requirements, placement of the clubhouse, required acreage...) I'm guessing these rules are pretty good guidelines but what I have difficulty wrapping my head around is when you can disregard the "rules" and when someone feels comfortable breaking the "rules." Should the rules only be broken out of necessity?
You quote regarding V screams Max Behr to me. I love it!
Mac, I read the opening quote for the chapter titled "Beauty and Utility" and was sure it would be my favorite chapter of the book, I wasn't disappointed. That being said I re-read the chapter because I wasn't exactly sure if Thomas placed a greater emphasis on utility or beauty. After the re-read I was surprised at how great an emphasis was placed on drainage. To me it seemed like the beauty side was discussed more but quotes like "the practical side of green building must consider drainage and subdrainage of the first importance" show a greater emphasis should be placed on utility.
So does anyone disagree? Should a greater emphasis be placed on Beauty or Utility? Similarly in a hypothetical (or not so hypothetical situation for the architects) if you were building a course would you start with aesthetics and make the utility work or would you start with utility and make it aesthetic?
Is the reason this book is so well liked the numerous pictures and illustrations?
I am not too pleased to read statements such as the following: "Water hazards are some of the best and most thrilling of natural strategy, and sometimes artificial water hazards are well conceived." (emphasis added)
He goes on to praise Pine Valley as ideal golf country in part due to it's lakes. I have yet to see anyone execute a recovery shot from the bottom of a lake, and yet he touts the necessity of providing for recovery shots.
Garland I'm going to be honest and admit I haven't really examined many of the pictures or illustrations. I wish more were referenced in the text. I figure I will go back and review them when I'm done reading.
What are people's favorite images so far?
I had the same quote pulled out in my notes as something I wasnt expecting to find in a Golden Age book. He does put a vague caveat that water should not be overdone. When artificial water hazards were mentioned in the thread on ODG caring about weak players that quote came to mind.
The rest of the paragraph was also interesting (the bit about variety and a course having virgin trees, sand dunes, plateaus, rolling hills, lakes and streams). I kind of like a general uniformity to courses. I want some sort of identity to a course. Thomas cites Pine Valley as a course that has lots of variety. I haven't played it but I have played Bandon Trails and it has holes in diverse settings.
Do people generally like the diversity of Bandon Trails and Pine Valley or do they want more of a single identity to a course?