[TEPaul]

On the recent Sebonack article thread it was mentioned that Doak did a topo routing of the golf course perhaps even before seeing the site, and apparently that routing is what the course is.

Seems to me that some of the best architects are truly adept at topo routing. Ross was obviously good at it "site unseen" and a number of others seem to be, or to have been. Gil Hanse tells me he visualizes sites well off topos. From some experience on my part I might say Coore might too.

I've spent hundreds of hours trying to route a few golf courses on the ground and even with the topo in hand and the topo has never made that much sense to me in a over-all visual sense as to what you see when looking at the land and hole landforms on site, particularly the over-all scenes, back-drops et al.

Is this knack to route and even design off a topographical map some special talent or is it just something anyone can get used to? If it is, I'll tell you right now I have absolutely none of it. I know how to read a topo map but to get a feel for a routing, a design, whatever, I just have to look at the land first---the topo map just doesn't do the job for me.

Any of you had experience this way?

I feel that noone can truly understand the entire spectrum of golf course architecture without FIRST doing some routings. It really is a jigsaw puzzle on the ground.

[James Bennett]

I looked at Doak's Anatomy of a Golf Course, and his routing/topo examples.  It didn't mean a thing to me.  Even when I saw Doak's solution, and went back to the Topo, it still didn't mean a thing to me.

I think Geoff Shackleford had a similar component in his book, where the reader was encoruaged to design a hole.  Too hard for me again.

That remains one of life's great mysteries.  Some people have a skill to see and visualize from some data source (eg a topo map) and others don't.

I think I'd need to enrol in Golf Architecture Topo Map Reading 101, and then take the summer semester remdial classes as well, and then hope for a low pass at best!

James B

[Mike Nuzzo]

I recall watching an episode of Sunday morning some time ago.  The segment was about a glass blower.  He turned a blob of soft molten glass into a beautiful mermaid in front of the camera.  He was working from a very vivid image, he was the only one who could see it however.  It was thrilling to watch.

Spacial relations, visualization and imagination.

And that is just the beginning, there is so much more work to be done - as at Sebonack.

[Tom_Doak]

I think some people are better at it than others, even among those in the business.

I learned very little about it from Pete Dye, though ... I had to learn it on my own.  Most of that learning process for me came from High Pointe.  We had a very good topo map of the ground, and I studied it endlessly, going back and forth between the map and the ground for a couple of months while the project was delayed in permitting.  By the end of that time I could point to any little wiggle in the lines on the map and go out and point out that spot on the ground, and then I knew how to read a topo map.

It's funny though how you can be thrown off even when you know how to read the map.  When I'm working on a map with elevations in meters, all the contours are bolder than I'm used to, because every line represents 3.3 feet instead of two.  If you're working at a smaller scale, say an inch to 300 feet instead of an inch to 200, the lines are closer together so you think everything is going to be steeper than it really is.  I ought to know how to adjust my thinking by now, but I'm still used to reading the map at a certain scale and visualizing things based on that scale.

[JWL]

TEP
I think that TD hit on the most important factor in routing from topo mapping.   One must be able to translate mentally what the contours are actually saying, and that comes from actually having spent time on sites and know when you are walking on 3:1, 4:1, 5:1 etc. slopes.    Then when  you work at a scale and the contour lines say a slope is such and such %, you have a mental picture of what that really means.   Also, as TD indicated, all topo mapping is not equal.   I also agree that meters are much more difficult to mentally translate regardless of scale.    A certain amount of design takes place during the routing process also, piecing together the combination of 3's, 4's and 5's desired as well as lenghts and direction of play.    Most of all, good routings fit the land and strive to mesh with the exisiting land.  Of course, some sites have little to offer and most all interest has to be created.    There are also many, many other factors other than contours that usually have major impacts on routings.   As you said it can be a complicated jigsaw puzzle.    That is why we usually try to look at as many different ways of routing a course that seems feasible.   Usually, after much deliberation some form of composite is usually the final routing.

[paul cowley]

I've heard it mentioned that Tom D has a special memory for detail, sequence and recall of golf holes or courses that he has previously played......I can appreciate that as I have a similar skill that I will try to describe that was innate in my person but honed by use.
I am self taught in almost all that I seem to make a living by, so this particular skill came the hard way and I could not teach it to others....hell, I am going to have a hard time describing it at all.

I suppose it involves what some might describe as a 'photographic' memory but I would describe it more as an imprint memory skill .....
I can look at and while doing so almost scan a topo sheet, survey or aerial that  once I 'load' or notice its detail, I have the ability to see this again in my minds eye.....eyes closed or even open [I try to not use this zone much while driving, but hey, if you ever hear of a wreck of mine where I left the road for no apparent reason, well now you will know the rest of the story].
But the loading part is only part of it as I can fully minipulate, explore options, solve problems, basically design in detail in my head......I can see details and colors, numbers, read wording etc......I can redraw on paper and at a fairly close  scale these same elements if nessesary .....I can flip to a certain part and 'zoom' in at times, but the main thing is that I can remember enough to be able to design from in my minds eye, then I just download it later when I get to paper...oh and it also comes in handy on site exploration, I'm never lost because I've got the map!....I hope you get the picture, as its not easy to convey unless you are in here
Not only is it usefull for GCA but also for conceptual landplanning, which I seem to be doing alot more of lately, not that I nessesarily want to.

...maybe you all do this too [except for TP who has eliminated himself already....pity really, but he does write so well instead.]  

[Yannick Pilon]

Good topo maps are an architect's best friends when they are done properly.  Being able to route a golf course on a topo map before you get to a site is something that is certainly most helpful.  I can't see myself doing this job if I was not able to do that.

Architects that can't do it must not be very common.  At least I hope so!  The same way you can be tricked by a map and its contours with regards to the elevations, you can also be tricked by the size of a property by the way it looks on site.  Sometimes the property looks (or feels) huge, when in fact, it is too small.

Another thing to consider: what about sites covered with trees?  Walking in the woods will sure help you figure out how the site works, but I find it does not help much if you can't see more than 30 feet in front of you.  

I prefer to walk a site with at least a couple routings done for it in order to look for certain features I could incorporate in the routings that were prepared before hand.  The routing ultimately changes most of the time in the process, but at least it gets us started....

[RJ_Daley]

I suspect there are quite a few of us armchair fanatics that participate here that have similar experiences of obtaining topos, playing with routing, taking the topo to the field to see how close you came to what really is there on the ground, etc.  I did this a number of times, although not in the last few years.  It is part of our disease and passion for this subject we spend so much time discussion here.

I think I always loved maps.  Back in the 60s in college, we had to obtain a core of science credits to fulfill your degree requirements.  Those that didn't do well at the difficult subjects like chem and physics, etc., had the easy out with geography and geology.  I loved the geography classes.  They had cool topos and stereoscopic aerials of various interesting land formations in our area of Wisconsin (Baraboo bluffs, sand dunes along Wisconsin River, morraines, etc.)  I used to spend extra time looking at the topos and aerial stereoscopes, then go hiking on the land.  That all carried over to interest in routing on topos that I obtained on properties of interest for golf course design.  

The sand hill topos and aerials are great for this sort of hobbiest pursuit.  What a thrill it must be to make a living at it, like Doak did at BallyNeal and C&C at SH!  I could do that sort of thing and devote more time to it than actually playing golf.  Thanks to Geoff and Gill for the time they had me out to Prairie Club walking the routing and tweaking it that time.  What fun!

[Ian Andrew]

Tom Paul,

I had a teacher (who was excellent but had a blunt personality) who described reading topography plans as intuitive.

He said 2-3 in the class will see every shape without any instruction.

3-4 will learn to read the grades with a short amount of practice - it will come to you - but grading will always be "work" for you.

The rest of you better learn to fold drawings and print like a draftsman. As hard as I try, I can not teach you to see or understand grading.

[George Pazin]

Question for the archies:

Do you ever do a preliminary topo routing, only to find that walking the terrain for the first time yields a dramatically different course?

I guess what I'm asking is, do you feel "married" to your topo routing, or is it merely a guide?

As an aside, there is no better way of learning something than to dissect it yourself. Book learning, classroom learning, learning from a mentor, etc., is terrific, and often needed, but there is nothing better than ripping apart whatever your doing and really getting down into it. I knew nothing about printing t shirts when I started my business, but I think I learned more for myself in the first 6 months than I've been able to teach to any of the 30-some odd people that have worked for me (on the other hand, maybe I'm a bad teacher ). You simply pay better attention when you are motivated enough to do something for yourself.

[Jeff_Brauer]

George,

Of course!  The amount that a topo routing varies after you walk in the field is literally, well, all over the map!  In some cases, I have made few changes (Midland Odessa comes to mind, where there is no topo to speak of) while others with good topo have gone through over 30 generations (or sub generations with just minor changes) to get the final.

Topo routings are good for assigning basic spaces, but you can't tell exactly where the speciman trees are, what vistas are there, little topo signatures, etc.  And, once an on site feature changes one hole, well, as the saying goes, "da knee bone connected to da thigh bone....."

[Lester George]

TEP,

I think, and have written many times, that this topo and routing excercise is the foundation of good architecture.  

I believe all architects can do interpretive design in the field once the site is prepared(cleared) but less than half of them can actually "see it" from the topo with enough details of terrain to describe, draw or otherwise depict the final product clearly.  It is the true "gift".  It is ceratinly that for me.  I can not tell you how many virgin sites I have been on where I had already determined with 90% confidence where certain holes, features and greensites would be.  I determined this before ever stepping foot on the site by studying (not glancing, or reviewing) but studying the topo.  

I was taught to look for certain "occurrences or situations" in  the terrain which make for good holes.  I was also taught to look for certain "bad situations" which almost always lead to bad routings, bad holes, bad courses.  

I am atrue believer that the routing is the master stroke, if you mess it up, you will not recover.  

Lester

[Steve Okula]

TEP,


I was taught to look for certain "occurrences or situations" in  the terrain which make for good holes.  I was also taught to look for certain "bad situations" which almost always lead to bad routings, bad holes, bad courses.  

Interesting, Lester. Would you be good enough to share examples of "good situations" and "bad situations" with us?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()