[Jeffrey Stein]

I'm spinning off Ally's topic of subtlety vs eye candy..The question was asked if a golf course could be overcooked with visual distraction?  I believe this varies greatly depending on the architect, character of the site, and time period. The point was also made about a particular golf course feeling highly stylized.  One architect who is most famous (and skilled) for his highly stylized designs in Mike Stranz.  His work at Tobacco Road is so artful, purposed, and screaming with style that it feels artificial despite its seemingly natural setting.

I guess this all comes down to a matter of taste as mine clearly leans toward a seamless natural landscape that happens to have some golf holes draped over the grass.  In the modern day Tom D and Bill Coore do this better than most and have the restraint to let their sites speak for themselves when the opportunity presents itself.

Which architects and golf courses would you put in the category of being highly stylized?

[Tom_Doak]

I think a list of the most stylized architects would have to include Robert Trent Jones Sr., Robert Bruce Harris, and Jim Engh.  Their style seems to show through no matter what piece of land they built on.

[Joel_Stewart]

I would have thought Tom Fazio would be the undisputed leader in a specific style?

[Jeffrey Stein]

Who would be at the top of the list for variety of design... Tilly, Colt, Mackenzie?

Tom you have showed great variety in your designs despite all the ocean views you seem to get your hands on!  This may be a hard question to answer but would you prefer to take a truly unique piece of ground, for the sake of diversity, or a marginal site with water views??

[Jeff_Brauer]

Hey Jeff,

Tilly is generally regarded as having the most design variety, although, I have to wonder if it was intentional, or simply because he used a bigger variety of crews, with some knowing more what he wanted and others not.

I would also add TF to the stylized list near the top, although he does have more variety than most folks give him credit for.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sort of a subset to the primary discussion, but within any gca office with staffers, the trained eye can probably tell whether a Fazio is a Fazio/Marzolf or Fazio/Banfield, etc.

[Dan Herrmann]

Wouldn't Pete Dye be considered as a man who created stylized golf courses? 

[Thomas Dai]

How about Desmond Muirhead? Symmetry. Shark jaw bunkers.
All the best

[Jeffrey Stein]

Ally Mcintosh --

...Also playing Boston GC lately, I was amazed at how many ideas and “features” were incorporated in to the course. I thought the course was superb – likely the best modern inland course I have ever seen – but I started questioning whether the architect and crew were almost so skilled that they could just add things for fun. Although minimalist and natural looking, Boston GC is also quite stylised. And that is what I’m getting at in many ways. Every modern golf course is designed and built with a style.

Has anyone else been to TPC Boston?

I have only played one Hanse design, Rustic Canyon.  The golf course felt very much connected to the landscape around it and was loaded with strategic options from tee to green.  The result of this connection allowed for all those "man made" elements to blend into the background.  I could only say that the golf course had a style all of its own in thanks to the beautiful canyon where it resides.

Is there a different case at TPC Boston?  What is the style there?  Are the strategic elements too obvious or over-done in some way or is it just the opposite?

[Charlie Gallagher]

    Let's be very careful with course names here. TPC Boston and Boston Golf Club are two completely seperate animals. TPC Boston is an Arnold Palmer that has been retouched by Brad Faxon, Gil Hanse, and a few other hands. Boston Golf Club is purely the Hanse team's creation.
    Hanse's style is to let a good piece of land do the talking, at least I would say that is stongly presented at both Rustic Canyon and Boston Golf Club. Hanse's bunkers tend to be flashed up with shaggy tops and appear  irregular in transitional natural areas. They tend towards a more formal curvalinear profile when surrounded by fairway.   He is a master at employing  natural land forms into the strategy on his holes. As an example, the 2nd hole at BGC employs a rock outcropping in the landing area that is in play for the longer hitter. I would bet that many architects would have dynamited that ledge. Hanse tends to set holes in wider corridors and employs strategy through width very well. You can often drive it away from trouble only to find the approach becomes more taxing by doing so. Hanses  greens have significant movement to them, often in harmony with the surrounding land's contour. His greens at Rustic and Boston are wilder in contour than those at Applebrook, but that may be due to the greater topographical variations at the first two sites as opposed to the latter.  It will be quite interesting to see how he contours the Olympic venue's greens, given that sites flatter character.  
   I don't know if that describes a style, or just tendency.
    I would say that another architect who masterfully uses width, naturalness, shaggyness, contour variation, and angle highly effectively is Tom Doak, having just played Ballyneal. The virtue of firm soil is also a prominent feature at Holyoke.
    

[Ally Mcintosh]

I agree with most all of what Charlie says.

I thought Boston GC to be masterful. My point was that it was full of features created or utilised to catch the eye as well as to direct play. It was so well done that when you play the course, you know that the right choices were made, you know that the course would not have quite the same impact without these visuals being employed.

In visual (and style) terms, it is a bold golf course rather than a subtle one. And I mean that in the best possible sense. I am sure there are many playing strategies that have subtleties out there...

[Mike_Young]

Sort of a subset to the primary discussion, but within any gca office with staffers, the trained eye can probably tell whether a Fazio is a Fazio/Marzolf or Fazio/Banfield, etc.

Jeff,
I know of a couple of TF close by where you can tell which shaper did which bunkers.... (back nine and front nine)

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think a list of the most stylized architects would have to include Robert Trent Jones Sr., Robert Bruce Harris, and Jim Engh.  Their style seems to show through no matter what piece of land they built on.

Tom,

Couldn't the same be said of Pete Dye ?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sort of a subset to the primary discussion, but within any gca office with staffers, the trained eye can probably tell whether a Fazio is a Fazio/Marzolf or Fazio/Banfield, etc.

Jeff,
I know of a couple of TF close by where you can tell which shaper did which bunkers.... (back nine and front nine)

I have seen more than a few courses by the big guys where I suspect one associate left the project for China or something and another finished the back nine.

As to bunker shapers, it can make a big difference.  At the first La Costa project, we got the same young man who shaped for JN and TD at Sebonac.  Honestly, the best artwork bunkers I ever did, ditto for Damian.  We talked more about bunker subtleties than I had ever had, or maybe even ever thought of.  For instance, I had never had a bunker guy ask me where I wanted the bunker nose highest, left, center or right?  Then, what about the next one in the same bunker?  How about comparing them to the hole before and after?

But, people do notice those kind of subtle differences, even if they cannot explain them in those graphic terms.  So, its no surprise you can tell the difference in bunker shapers.

[Jeffrey Stein]

Pardon the typo...I suppose I mentally melded the two very different "Boston" Clubs.

Charlie and Ally thanks for the clarifications, if my experience at Rustic is any indication it seems like I would surely enjoy more of Gil's original work.

[Jeffrey Stein]

Charlie,

I went to see the site in Rio just this June.  Gil actually told me the movement on the ground reminded him of the scale at Rustic Canyon.  From my observation of the few green sites which Gil had roughed in , I would expect to see a wide variety in the putting surfaces with some bold contours thrown in as well.  Royal Melbourne and perhaps some features from the Old Course seem to be where most of the inspiration is coming from.

[Charlie Gallagher]

Jeff,
    That's great information regarding the Rio Site.
 One thing I worry about is the dreaded word"fair". Some of Boston Golf Clubs most distinctive holes get criticised because of a perception of unfairness. I've heard that said about the 5th hole, the short uphill par 4. Seems the green's too narrow. I've heard that charge leveled at the left side of the 6th green, too narrow, and at the deck and slope on the 11th green, too severe.  
   I respond by saying that all of those holes are playable if you remember Clint Eastwood's eternally solid advise "A man's got to know his limitations." Two examples. If you hit a high shot onto the back deck on 11, a par 3 of about 175 yards,  it will hold there, but it has to have a high trajectory.  On the 6th hole, a medium to short par 3, if the hole is left you better be Hogan accurate or you are very likely to over cook it and go into the back bunkers where the recovery will land on a down slope and there's a good chance you may go off the green's front. But if you just aim at the middle of the green the trouble is reduced and you have a nice uphill putt for birdie.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()