[Jud_T]

Niall,

The multiple play thought is a good one, particularly for courses with a lot of subtlety or local knowledge.  Unfortunately it's not realistic in terms of travel or access in many cases.  Even guys like Doak who are perhaps good enough to "get it" in one go will admit to the occasional miss after a 2nd or 3rd look.  Yet another reason that the ranking lists are a bit of a joke.

[MClutterbuck]

Yes, all these would be factors for me if I was developing a course ... but not so much if I'm hired to design one, since there's nothing an architect can do about any of them.

Yet I believe you did mention once that routing the course so that certain holes "capture" certain long views or frame the holes with features is a plus.


Would it be true that all other things equal, the ability to showcase the nicer views is certainly an architectural merit?
 

[Jim Lipstate]

One way to think about it would be to see what was memorable even years after completing the round. Thirteen years after playing Old Head what I remember are the views. Two years after playing Old Mac what still intrigues me are the multiple different ways I could have played each hole. I don't think I would ever tire of playing that course. The setting and views add to the experience but the intrinsic experience of the course is what remains memorable for me.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()