[BCrosby]

Charlie,

I accept people will broadly think me mad for this but I have long believed there is significant architectural value in miniature golf. After all, it's fundamentally about the ground game and angles. In essence, it's core then lies in exactly the same place as good Golden Age architecture. 

It's really not such a huge leap from TOC to The Ladies Putting Course to miniature golf. It's really just the same game.

I've had the same thought. A good putting course can call for as much or more imaginative play as a real course does. 

I'd guess that you can build crazier things into putting courses because there is a narrower range of playing skills. Everyone can hit a putt.

Bob     

[archie_struthers]

 




Greta question posed by P2 and many fine replies . Enjoying the thread immensely !

[Matt Frey, PGA]

I made my maiden journey to Fishers Island along with fellow GCAers Joe Bausch and Mark McKeever last weekend weekend.

I have always liked the way Raynor's courses looked, but I too, really like more natural courses, especially the way Flynn built courses.

I took a ton of photos, but I figured I would share my favorites.

NO. 3 - PLATEAU


NO. 4 - PUNCH BOWL






NO. 5 - BIARRITZ


NO. 8 - ROAD HOLE


NO. 9 - DOUBLE PLATEAU


NO. 10 - KNOLL


NO. 11 - EDEN


NO. 13 - WATERLOO


NO. 16 - SHORT

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Matt.


Yes, it was Joe's photos of Fishers that I had in mind when I started this thread. Yours confirm my new found appreciation.


Interestingly (to me at least), this broadening of taste hasn't diminished my original preference. Joe's photos of Hays Harbour, especially the pictures/holes (?) numbered 2. and 5. capture what seems to me ideal.


Peter

[cary lichtenstein]

I was looking at a set of fine photos from Fishers Island, and it occurred to me that of all the things I've been wrong about regarding golf course architecture I've never been more wrong about anything than I was in my original and long-maintained dislike of/lack of appreciation for the "engineered look" of golf courses by Messrs MacDonald and/or Raynor. In their expert hands at least, I have now come to see how perfectly 'scaled' and 'presented' are the classic features and principles of gca. Now, the obvious answer is that I was blind and biased before, but now my eyes have cleared. But what actually changes, I wonder -- what is happening when a formerly unseen "quality" is suddenly recognized? If something similar has happened to you, how do you explain it for/to yourself?

Peter   

Its a light bulb coming on and its enlightening. You literally can't believe how someone 100 years ago had the vision..just remarkable

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()