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.


paul cowley

Limiting course length....not equipment.
« on: July 15, 2007, 09:42:26 PM »
I like that concept from the design side of things.

I think 7200 yds is adequate.

Do whatever you want design wise as long as you don't exceed the official limit of 7200 yds for tournament play.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2007, 09:47:46 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

JESII

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2007, 09:50:08 PM »
Any examples or thoughts of what it would enable you to do that you don't right now?

p.s. I like the concept...

paul cowley

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2007, 09:58:06 PM »
Any examples or thoughts of what it would enable you to do that you don't right now?

p.s. I like the concept...

Jes....not really, beyond that it would hold US to a standard....and not them. :)

Designers work best with boundaries that they try to adhere to.

Some of the time :).
« Last Edit: July 15, 2007, 09:58:53 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Peter Pallotta

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2007, 10:44:24 PM »
Paul
I think I agree with the idea that creative types work best within boundaries they're trying to adhere to. I also think it's wise of you to look at the 'technology question' from the only side of the equation you can actually (or at least, realistically) have an impact on. And finally, I'm almost certain that 7,200 yards will be long enough for just about anybody for years and years to come. But, you're speaking about tournament play, and in that context -- and all else being equal -- which of the architect's 'tools' do you think would come in the most handy working within that boundry?

By the way, I'm not sure "all else" HAS to remain equal.  A tournament course like the one you describe wouldn’t necessarily have to play as 'hard' (relative to par) as other ones, would it?

Peter  

Doug Siebert

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2007, 09:37:20 PM »
So given that's your philosophy, what do you do to preserve the challenge for better players given the limited length?

Obviously one way is to make the driving very challenging so that you fear the consequences of an inaccurate drive and leave your driver in the bag, but that's hard to do without just being penal, and it makes things hard for the higher handicappers no matter what tees they play from.  Especially since most of them automatically reach for their driver on every par 4 or 5 unless its really obvious there is something they need to stay short of like water or a ravine.

If the holes were relatively wide open so that driver could be used rather freely, that will leave a lot of par 4s with a wedge approach even at 7200 yards, or leave no truly long par 4s and just a bunch that are short iron approaches.  Do you just concede that the good players will eat it up and not care since you are designing for the masses and not the scratch golfers?  Or do you handle it with small greens and heavy contours to require them to get really close if they want a good look at birdie, plus very firm surfaces so that even wedges won't easily stop?  The defense at the green end is time tested and known to work well, so long as any one defense doesn't get out of hand and cause slow play due to the amount of short game shots and putts being played amongst all classes of golfer.

I'm not arguing for 7800 yard courses, and like the idea in principle of trying to design courses so that length is a rarely used method of increasing difficulty rather than the primary method.  But while I've seen some really good examples of short but challenging courses I've unfortunately seen more bad examples of how not to do it!

So I'd hate to see this principle accepted by all architects without them also accepting some good ideas behind it beyond limiting total distance because I can't wait to see how my linear miles of lateral hazards 10 yards off the fairway some courses would be given to make them sufficiently "challenging" in the mind of an unimaginative architect who just adds 50 yards here and there when he wants to crank up the difficulty.

Sure, a long par 4 that makes you hit a 4 iron at the green is always going to be challenging because 4 irons aren't really scoring clubs and it doesn't take much error on the drive before that 4 iron shot becomes an even longer shot out of the rough where the green is not even in reach any longer.  But a hole where you have a wedge in your hands and still don't feel confident you can find the green, or feel confident you can find it but worry you might leave yourself in a place where two putts aren't guaranteed, let alone a decent look at birdie, and it can provide everyone not named Tiger all the challenge they can handle.  And the 95 shooters who aren't hitting more than a handful of greens in regulation anyway aren't going to be bothered by missing the small greens or only getting a handful of one putt greens, that's the norm for them anyway.
My hovercraft is full of eels.

paul cowley

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2007, 10:45:36 PM »
Doug.....thank you for a well thought answer. I take it you are not a golf Pro, but instead someone who understands the requirements of day to day golfers.....and these are the main people I strive to design for.....which is not an easy task, as there is nothing average about the masses and this is the reason I try not to debate general specifics in this forum. I much prefer site specifics.

Conceptually I like the challenge involved by having to design within a distance box.....but I would have to leave it up to the site to figure out how I would accomplish it.





« Last Edit: July 17, 2007, 05:18:37 AM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Jon Wiggett

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2007, 04:14:48 PM »
Paul,

don't know what you've got against golf pros, I think you will find most club pros understand the average golfer a lot better than you give them credit for.

As for the challange without length one obvious way is through increased use of par 3s as this requires the low handicapper to hit a longer approach but gives the higher handicapper a good shot at par. Also using short par 5's for the members whilst playing these as long par 4s for tournaments. This does mean you have to give up the par 72 fetish

paul cowley

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2007, 04:46:42 PM »
Joe .....we agree on your last two points.

As for the first, well, I work with a Pro and I can assure you I have nothing against him [or them].

They play at such a different level its hard to design for them without providing additional length. That is why I suggested  7200 yd cap to work within. That would be the challenge.
I probably should have set the limit at 6900 yd par 70, but this was really just a late in the day throw out thread that I thoght would get little response [but at the time of the day I posted it I thought it was quite brilliant ;)]

Tom Doak has stated he would enjoy designing a course to try to provide a challenge for the elite players, and I would be interested to see what he might come up with.....especially if it is also not too overly challenging for the masses.

BTW..Davis Love [who I work with], is much more interested in how our designs play for the general populace....not people that share his same abilities.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2007, 05:12:19 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2007, 05:52:36 PM »
I like that concept from the design side of things.

I think 7200 yds is adequate.

Do whatever you want design wise as long as you don't exceed the official limit of 7200 yds for tournament play.

Paul,

I'm old enough to remember when 7,200 yards was considered a bear of a golf course, suited only for the best golfers in the world.

Had a cap been placed on length, I think the I&B issue would have been addressed earlier.

paul cowley

Re:Limiting course length....not equipment.
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2007, 07:33:05 PM »
Patrick....I totally agree. Which is one of the reasons I am trying to distance myself from the creation of this thread.

When I re read it, I said wait a minute....10 years ago 7000 yds was what we were trying to reach, when possible, for overall distance on a new course...and it could be a par 72 to boot.

How fast things have changed.

So using this math, anyone older than about 35 should remember the old days before distance got out of control.

I assume you are at least that old.

Tom Paul told me just last week that he was going to turn 50 this year, and that he was excited abou playing some senior events in his area. ;D
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Tags: