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.


Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #75 on: February 16, 2013, 12:45:25 AM »
There's a great ad for Streamsong in this Month's MGA Golfer.

Maybe someone with graphic and computer capability could post it

Here you go...

Image Is Clickable For A Larger Version




Image Is Clickable For A Larger Version
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 12:15:48 PM by Michael Whitaker »
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #76 on: February 16, 2013, 01:00:05 AM »
Michael,

That's it, thanks.

Doesn't look like Florida

Can't wait to visit

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #77 on: February 16, 2013, 11:56:46 AM »
Michael,

That's it, thanks.

Doesn't look like Florida

Can't wait to visit

Pat - It was interesting to me to see three ads in the Met Extra for golf in SC... Cliffs, Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head!
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

Bryan Izatt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #78 on: February 16, 2013, 12:32:45 PM »
Mike,

I wonder how you would compare the walk at SS Blue to Pacific Dunes?  PD has a fair amount of up and down and a number of longish walks between green and tee.  And, the wind there can be more fearsome than SS.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #79 on: February 16, 2013, 10:40:59 PM »
OK, so now I feel like a complete dick that I have gotten you to pull out the topo and spend time calculating the elevation changes. Let me just say that from the 7th green through to the finish of the round I felt like I was primarily walking uphill. Obviously, not every shot/hole was uphill, but most have an uphill element to them... as do the walks between holes and between shots. You obviously like to route holes from one high spot to another. Take the first hole at Cape Kidnappers, for example. It's a great hole. The tee shot plays to a hilltop landing area, with a second shot to a hilltop green. But, in between the tee box and the fairway landing area you have to walk down into a valley then climb back out of it. After the second shot, the same thing... down into a valley then climb back out. If you compare the elevations of the playing areas on a topo it looks fairly level, but there is a lot of huffing and puffing on that hole.

When I reached the 14th at Streamsong Blue and looked up at that green on top of the hill I thought, "Man, do I really have to climb up there."

Michael:

There's no need to feel like a dick.  I'm accepting your comments at face value, and trying to figure out how much uphill is too much for you. 

I've heard the same criticism at a couple of my courses in the past.  Sometimes it's a function of the land and how hilly it is.  I think the fact that it was your second 18 holes of the day, that you walked up to the first tee, and that the sand on site is pretty soft and shifty, all contributed to your difficulty.  It must have gotten in your head by the time you got to #14 tee, if you looked at that hole (all of 15 feet uphill in 520 yards) and found it so daunting.

You are right that I often route holes across the land from ridge to ridge to ridge, with valleys in between.  That's the way Pete Dye showed me how to route holes when he was working on the plan for The Honors Course, the first summer I worked for him.  I pulled Pete's drawing out on Wednesday to show one of my young associates the same thing for our routing book.  It's primarily for drainage, that way the big surface flows are not going across the landing areas.

But, I did do this routing in concert with Bill Coore, and several of the most uphill holes are from his original 18-hole plan, so I don't think this one is the best example of how I always mess up the routing for walkability.

P.S.  I hope Chris J. gets a bridge built for the tenth at Dismal River before you get there to review it!  ;)

P.S. to Bryan:  I think Pacific Dunes is generally flatter than Streamsong, or at least the holes right along the coast are.  Also, the walking is less sandy.  Loose sand in Bandon just blows away ... many of the walking paths were built with gravel to make them less taxing.

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #80 on: February 17, 2013, 12:51:20 AM »
OK, thanks for letting me off the hook a bit... I think!  :-[

I remembered you talking about Pete Dye teaching you to route from ridge to ridge... we had a brief discussion about this topic after I played St Andrews Beach, which I found to be a very challenging walk. Golf nerd that I am, I've thought a lot about "why" you and other architects make some of the decisions you do on routing a course. One theme I've observed is a preference you seem to have (in my mind) for uphill shots/holes. With that in mind, I had to smile when I saw that you reversed the first hole at North Shore from downhill to uphill. My reaction was, "Of course he did!"  ;D

By the way... I don't think you "always mess up the routing for walkability." On the contrary, some of your courses fall into the "Best Walks In Golf" category for me:  Barnbougle Dunes, Pacific Dunes, Old Mac, Ballyneal, Sebonack and The Renaissance Club. The tough walks were St Andrews Beach and Cape Kidnappers. I took a cart at Lost Dunes and Black Forest, but both of those seemed a tough walk for a variety of reasons... some which have nothing to do with the course itself. Other than Heathland in Myrtle Beach those are the only courses of yours I have played.

The Nicklaus course at Dismal is so difficult to walk you don't have much to worry about in comparison there!!!  :)

Maybe I should come up with a "Whitaker Scale" and give every course I've played a walkability score. Then I could publish a companion to your new Confidential Guide. In my case I could call it The Geezer's Guide To Walking Golf;D ;D ;D  It might be a big seller!

Thanks for gladly suffering golfing fools such as me the way you do. We are all most appreciative of the time and effort you put into trying to educate us.
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not New
« Reply #81 on: February 17, 2013, 04:36:09 AM »
Whitty

I am curious about your theory because it sounds very much like how ODGs routed courses - a lot of over valley holes which often means climbing hills.  In fact, when I think of that sort of routing Ross jumps comes immediately to mind.  What do you spose is different between the up n' down Ross (and lets add Colt too) courses and Doak's courses?  One immediate thought came to mind is often times the added walk between tees that most modern courses seem to embrace.  The other which came to mind is length of courses.  Usually, moderns are longer courses.  There are quite a few hilly courses (too hilly for top notch design) I enjoy, but they are old and tend to be 6000 yards and less (and have little walking between tees) - thus saving the legs a bit for hills.  

Ciao
« Last Edit: February 17, 2013, 06:31:47 AM by Sean Arble »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Will the golf courses be irrelevant in determining whether or not
« Reply #82 on: February 17, 2013, 06:22:11 AM »
Sean's point about length is a good one.  I may be wrong, but my guess is that if Tom and Bill had sole discretion that neither course would tip out at close to 7200 yards. 
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back