[Jordan Wall]

I was talking with some one yesterday on this site and we kind of had a discussion about the Couer D'alene golf course.  Much to my surprise, I found out people here did not really like the course and did not like the floatng green.  I really dont have a problem with this but what is wrong with courses that are 'contrived', and not very natural looking?  Where would golf be if we did not have some of these courses where they were not so natural looking?  There are some great golf courses that arent exactly the most natural looking in the world, courses such as Whistling Straits and that Trump course in California.  Basically what I want to know is what your guys opinions are on some of the great courses that are 'contrived'?  Could these courses really be made any better with the land they were given?  I mean, you cannot always have the perfect land for a golf course, so it is OK to contrive one, right?

Thanks, JW

[cary lichtenstein]

Get ready for the slaughter

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jordan,

Well, my opinion on Coure D'alene is you should like "whatever floats your green.....er boat.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Pace another post on what constitutes the Golden Age, but what I think is true of the best classical courses is that they were contrived to look natural.  I cannot comment on Couer d'Alene as I have never been there, and I have no objection to an island green as such, but does it look and play as if it were part of nature?

[Tim Gavrich]

I'd have to agree with Jordan.  I think that from a "pure golf" perspective, the natural or unnatural look of any golf hole or course is irrelevant when considering the strategic merits of said hole or course.  From an aesthetic standpoint, I'll definitely agree with the purist ideal that a truly great architect makes a course look as though it has always 'been there.'  However, I do not believe this quality is necessary in creating an enjoyable golfing experience.  In fact, I quite like the more avant-garde in golf architecture.  Mike Strantz's Tobacco Road, therefore, is one of the most interesting golf courses I've seen.  And some of you may laugh, but I also really enjoyed the Great White at Doral.  The resort completely renovated the course this past summer, and it's much more fair than it was, I'm told (I never played it in its previous state, unfortunately).  The Dye Club at Barefoot down in Myrtle Beach is very manufactured, but I still enjoyed playing it.

In short, a natural look is a good attribute, but it is by no means the be-all-and-end-all.

[Paul Payne]

Great example, I love Tobacco Road and you would be hard pressed to find a more contrived course than that.

To me I like a course with real merit strategically and remains attractive on pleasing to the eye. By that I mean one that doesn't cause you to flinch at the view. It is a fine line I guess but if you can contrive a course into its natural surroundings it is probably a good course.

Once you get past the layout itself it may be more an issue of aesthetics in the end.

[Jay Flemma]

I absolutely love Tobacco Road...and what a great price too!

I also agree CDA is contrived, but it was interesting overall, fun and a relaxing time...at least its a resort course with some character.  Not a bad price either in May with the $99 rate and room...great for bringing your wife/girlfriend for a getaway for a few days...but no, I wouldn't host a tournament there.  But it is what it is and for what it is its nice.

Wonderous variety is the staff of life;)

[Bill_McBride]

It's really fun, but I wasn't bothered a bit by whatever might be contrived at Tobacco Road!  I am a huge fan of the golden age courses where everything is just so natural (except the square cut tees!), but Tobacco Road just lays across that tortured landscape in a very natural way.......

With the exception of a couple of forced carries (#2, #18), there was always a way around, as well as a lot of opportunities to use the slopes at the green to work the ball.  If you aren't having a good ballstriking day, it's a toughie, but with a couple of exceptions always fair.

After a trip that included three classic Ross courses (Southern Pines Elks, Mid Pines and Pine Needles), Tobacco Road wasn't out of order at all, and just over the top a few times!

[Theresa Stotler]

I would agree that Whistling Straits is a contrived natural looking tract.  I think the difference lies in the architects ability to make you think it is as natural as what they built it on.  Most modern golf courses are contrived as they take a computer generated hole and make it fit into the land.  What modern course has been built that has no contrived holes,  trust me all architects choose to contive holes that will give them the ability to let the golfer think that this hole was not contrived, but in fact, it is.  It is in the mind of the golfer that this looks so natural, because we want to believe that golf is a true unblemished game.  It is only when someone like trump has a golf course built that seems so contrived that we take noticed of the absurdities.

[Wayne Freeman]

"Contrived" to me carries an image of a computer generated golf course with a lot of unnatural features.  Trump National in Calif. is one such course-  a swath cut out of the side of a hill with a couple of huge waterfalls- yes it does have stunning ocean views and a few good holes, but not much substance.  I've never been a very big fan of PGA West for much the same reasons. Maybe the only so called contrived course in my mind that belongs in the top tier of courses is
TPC Sawgrass.  It is so visually intimidating and so challenging and diverse-
     Although I've only been to Whistling Straits once, I didn't find it contrived at all. To me, it looked like it had been there for 100 years and I thought the work was remarkable. The great architects today do that.  Of course things may be a little easier if you can find wonderful pieces of property.
Crenshaw and Coore can build awesome tracks that fit into the natural lay of the land by moving minimal dirt.  Anyone fortunate enough to play Friar's Head or Old Sandwich can't help but be awed by what was done there.  Again you would think that these modern courses were just meant to be where they are and that they've been around for generations.  
       
   

[Kyle Harris]

Jordan,

Contrived to me generally implies that the architect built the golf course in spite of the features on the site.

For example, missing a perfectly good feature that could have been integrated into the hole to make things interesting in order to have a more "acceptable looking" hole that isn't nearly as interesting.

The idea isn't so much about a manufactured look (Honestly here guys, how many courses are truly natural?) but about making a manufactured appearance that completely misses the golf features of the site.

The 15th hole on the White Course was built next to (and not including) a perfectly good Redan shoulder. The hole as it exists now is a rather bland adaptation of the 17th at Pebble Beach instead of using a feature that was already on site. That's contrived.

[Jordan Wall]

Myt main point is there are lots of GREAT courses that are contrived.  Merry Christmas.

[Kyle Harris]

Jordan,

Merry Christmas.

Which ones?

[tonyt]

Jordan,

The CDA site is both undulating and by a large body of water. That hardly constitutes a poor site. So perhaps the course there could be a missed opportunity? I'll say this. If I saw the site and had to build a course, I wouldn't immediately start thinking of trap doors into an island and under a green. But thats just me.

Heck, Sawgrass was built into a highly regarded course from a hell hole of a barren site, and water's edge courses like Whistling Straits and Kingsbarns were crafted out of very plain land. Perhaps then the fact that Whistling Straits and Kingsbarns are far more highly regarded than CDA is a great example of contrived design gone wrong. I couldn't agree more that contrived architecture is both necessary in places and achieved to solidly good quality in others. Its just that a lot of contrived design seems to be by those who feel they are only capable of wowing a golfer with the extremeties of making statements (be they of high quality or low), and digging up and moving a lot of planet earth to do so.

At the very least, a course should at least look like it is supposed to be there in its spot, and that aim is achieved brilliantly in some places and not even attempted to its disadvantage by others.

[Jordan Wall]

Tony, I agree with you.  Lets talk about Fazio's course in Las Vegas, Shadow Creek.  I dont know if you would call that ideal land, though he did create his own environment for the course, but that is definitely a great 'contrived' course.  I really think that these types of courses are critical for golf and are very good for the game.

[JNC Lyon]

     Be careful how you use the word "great."  I'm sure there are many courses that are contrived that are fun, interesting, with a lot of merit.  But Great???  I have played a few courses which were contrived and liked by many on this site (Ocean Courses) and I have played courses which were contrived and not liked by many on this site, but I still found them to be interesting, but GREAT?  I don't think so.  Even the Ocean Course, which I liked a lot, but I wasn't as in love with it as many on this site are, would not qualify as great for me.  Maybe this is only because I played it once, but "great" is not a word to be used lightly.  
     I have played four courses that would qualify as great for me (The Country Club, St. George's, Oak Hill (East), and Oak Hollow (old Pete Dye muni in NC, great piece of property--undulating peninusla in a manmade lake.  Course is unknown to many, but I found it to have more than a dozen holes of great merit--worthy of study, thrown in with a few excellent heroic holes)).
     I find contrived holes often ignore the best features the architect has been given to work, and in contriving something the architect will miss an interesting feature of the land 99.9% of the time.  I would bet Shadow Creek would have been more interesting if it had included the desert on a few hole, just to throw the golfer off balance, especially if the holes weren't contrived.

[Sean_A]

I agree with Mark.  By definition all golf courses are contrived.  I would even go a step further and state that I have seen only a few truly natural courses.  I think architects can reasonably hope to achieve a reflection of nature, not a creation of nature.  

I have little doubt that the setting and/or attention to aesthetic detail are nearly always essential  element(s) in the making of a great course.  This doesn't mean that I think the design of a course is secondary to eye candy, but personal ideas of setting and attention to detail (think of bunker styling, tee shapes, fairway cutting, straight or wavy fairways) are what people often argue about.  Sometimes people even disagree about a few core architectural issues.  However, I think on several threads it has been established that it takes all types of holes presented in a balanced and well routed manner to create (or contrive if you like) excellence.  

What amazes is that there is so much agreement about was is considered great.  This general agreement leads me to believe that golf courses are like Democrats and Republicans.  The parties claim to be unique.  In reality they share many more qualities, characteristics and policies than not.  

Ciao

Sean

[cary lichtenstein]

I found nothing wrong with the "floating green" at Couve de Alene" except it just looked out of place.

But, I thought it was fun to play.

[Jordan Wall]

Is it really true that contrived courses do not possess some of the strategic merit that more 'natural' looking and 'not contrived' courses possess?  I thought Whistling Straits had (or has) lots of strategic merit and that course is contrived.  By the way, I also think Whistling Straits is a great golf course

[Kyle Harris]

Jordan,

Depends on how you define strategy, and it's also a value judment here. My own views are that the golf course should make the best use of the natural features present on the site. Also, the golf course should provide a strategic test such that the golfer is presented with a series of decisions and choices to make throughout the round in how to score.

Hazards should be constructed and implemented so that they are in a position to harass and challenge the shot chose by the golfer.

No golf course looks natural.. that whole one plant growing over a large area thing hinders that. However, the golf course should look as if a blanket of grass were set over it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()