[George Pazin]

Doug Braunsdorf made an interesting point on the "courses that exceeded expectations" thread (and the fact that I'd agree with him about Hidden Creek exceeding expectations is irrelevant... ).

Doug brought up the criticism of HC being relatively flat and said it's in a coastal plain, deal with it.

So I started thinking about elevation changes. For me personally, they are overrated. I think a good player deals with them rather easily, simply by virtue of how often they are faced with the adjustments.

Bumpy land - crumpled land, I like to call it - on the other hand, seems more difficult to me. Awkward stances place a much higher uncertainty on the outcome of a shot than elevation chance, for me personally. I don't know, maybe it's the level of golfer I am. I do know that when questioned about the difficulty of TOC, the great man Jack stated that it's not really difficult so much as it's awkward.

In a perfect world you have both. Elevation changes and natural contours in the ground. But I think many modern courses I've played place a much higher premium on elevation changes than bumpy land, going so far as to really smooth out fairways too much.

And now that I think more about elevation change, I like it more when a fairway is travelling down or climbing up gradually, because then you have to deal with an uphill, downhill or sidehill stnace. What I really dislike is a flat stance where I'm trying to guess on an adjustment, up or down, doesn't really matter. Just doesn't seem all that interesting to me - I'd go so far as to call it overrated.

Was denken Sie?

[Gary Daughters]

George --

Bumps all the way.  They add elements of variety, mystery and unpredicability.  Visually they can be stunning, especially early and late in the day.

[Jim Thompson]

George,

I think it all goes back to the human nature that folks like Mr. Sweet are so happy to say is a fair reason for anything.  The fact of the matter is that man takes some pleasure in being elevated above other things.  Elevation creates a sense of self importance or power and for those interested in partaking of the view more than the experiencing the golf it is a false sense of fulfillment.  It's just like the downhill par three that backs up to water, you can put a pretty poor hole that spot but the view will always make up for its short comings.  

Give me the bumps, ripples, deflections, bounces and breaks over pool tables any day.  Afterall, there's a lot of great golf on what most would consider ugly landscapes, but there's a lot more awful golf on great landscapes.  Its not the architects fault either, he's just trying to provide a given set of customers what they will enjoy.  Most customers in golf are just victims of human nature, whether its going for the coupon, the twilight rate, or the faux test.  Most golfer's however, seek to test their nature and character on a course.  Sadly golfer's make up a very small percentage of the pool of customers found in the golf market of today.

Cheers!

JT

[A_Clay_Man]

George, You know it brother!

[RJ_Daley]

Adam, I get sea sick just looking at those photos of BallyNeal... in a good way.

[A_Clay_Man]

Dick, Congrats on the 120 year record for Green Bay, no wonder you are sea sick. Have you played any winter golf?



I'm drunk, in a good way.

[Derek_Duncan]

Steve Smyers talks about this all the time. He's rarely gotten to work with naturally interesting sites so he's had to create the stances in the fairway and think about the way they affect ball flight works with the other common strategy considerations like angles and hole placement and driver options. It's a pretty intellectual way to design, in my opinion.

[RJ_Daley]

Dereck, I haven't seen any of Smyers work.  But, I agree that it takes a real artist to shape such ripples and rumples on a flat plain.  It seems that those who try rarely get it right.   Usually, you get some sort of LZ area mogul field that looks like it belongs in the X-game venue.  

MacKenzie spoke of the natural shape and patterns of rippled sand features and how to best route across and with them.

It is a shame that there are not greater population centers out on the vast sand hills.  That way, more of that great land would be convenient to create wonderful golf for masses of people.  Every serious golf course archie ought to have a crack at such rumpled, sandy loam terrain.

Adam, I got two days of golf in during Jan.  Yes, the warmest Jan., on record.  Last week, 22 holes on pretty nice conditions, considering.  Now, 4" snow today.  I need to get a Feb., round in so I can say I played every month of the calander here on the frozen tundra.

I see Nebraska was pretty nice too.  I don't think Josh would be able to take the pressure of me pounding on his door everyday asking him to let me out there.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

George-

  Thanks for the kind words    
Another course that often featured "crumpled" terrain was Tobacco Road.  
I thought the various stances offered much in the way of challenge to the golfer, and given the softer conditions we as a group faced during DCII this past October, some were downright difficult.  
I recall my drive on Sunday on #1 was in the fairway, but the awkwardness of the lie caused me to switch from the 4 wood (to go for the green in two) to an nine iron, just to get down by the "neck " in the fairway and hopefully have a flatter lie.  

#9 was also a shining example.  The drive zone features so many small ridges and folds, and the fairway was wet, so drives didn't get much roll--or roll down to one of the flat spots in between them.  Add to this having to hit to a green elevated about 30 feet up--I seem to recall my ball was downhill/sidehill for my second shot.  Nerve racking!

[Paul_Turner]

George

I'd agree minor movement is the most interesting.  And obviously links golf is the epitome of this.  You really don't need much movement create interesting shots.  

But sometimes you get courses that have both.  Big elevation changes and the micro stuff.  The Hague (Haagsche) and Eastward Ho! come to mind.  Then it's spectacular!

It's v rare to have an inland course which really crinkles with humps and bumps.  De Pan in Holland is the best example I know.

[Sean_A]

I like elevation change and humpty bumpty.  Pennard is a great combination of the two.

Ciao

Sean

[Mike_Cirba]

Isn't one of the fair criticisms of bumpy land that the ball tends to always settle into the lowest points, creating areas that wear badly and ultimately leaving level shots anyway?

I'm also curious to understand where there is rumply ground at HC?  There are some elevation changes on the property, about 40 feet as I understand it, but I wouldn't exactly call the fairways micro-rolling in the way that, say PD, or even a fairly shaped modern course on a flattish property like Wachesaw Plantation in SC.

[Mark Brown]

It's always great to have elevation changes but the two bumpiest courses I've played are Prairie Dunes and TOC

[T_MacWood]

I was going to say, before Paul beat me to it, courses like Eastward Ho! are fabulous because they have both. Cape Breton is another example.

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Pazin,

The land is, what the land is.

Unless you're an advocate of moving a lot of dirt and creating elevation changes.

Mark Brown,

Prairie Dunes has some very good elevation changes.

Mike Cirba,

I don't think that's the case with "bumpy" courses as much as it is with courses with inverted drainage systems like Old Marsh and The Medalist.

Bumpy courses don't feed to a specific low point, thus balls don't collect in a given area.  Inverted drainage systems with steeper grades tend to create that which you object to.

[JohnV]

George Pazin,

The land is, what the land is.

True, but if you're looking for land for a golf course which piece of land would you prefer?  A site with a lot of elevation change or a flatter site with lots of bumps?

Can a course have too much elevation change?  Can a course have too many humps and bumps?  Which do you think occurs more frequently?  I can tell you which one does here in western PA.

Mike Cirba,

I don't think that's the case with "bumpy" courses as much as it is with courses with inverted drainage systems like Old Marsh and The Medalist.

Bumpy courses don't feed to a specific low point, thus balls don't collect in a given area.  Inverted drainage systems with steeper grades tend to create that which you object to.

I've seen plenty of hollows in Scotland and Ireland that were divot havens because all the balls collected there.  If the fairways are firm and the grass isn't very long, balls will roll into the hollows between the bumps.

I'm pretty sure none of these courses had inverted drainage systems.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JVB,

It's not like you get the pick of the litter with land.
And, you usually can't design your own parcel exactly as you'd like it.

Theory is one thing, reality another.

In addition, today, environmental and permiting issues often determine the areas of play, and not our preferences.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()