Modern Courses: Timelessness vs Timeliness

[Peter Pallotta]

For those of you who have played many of the good and great courses built between 1970-2020: do some fine modern courses feel 'timeless' while other fine modern courses feel 'timely'?
Do some seem like they could've been designed & built 60 or 70 or 100 years ago, while others seem more clearly of their own time, i.e. designed & built between 1970-2020?
If so, what are the 'tells' -- what elements/factors give you that sense of timelessness and which give you that sense of timeliness?
If so, do you tend to prefer one type over another?
And if so, of the good and great modern courses you've played, which might you describe as the most timeless and which as the most timely? 

[Sean_A]

Pietro

When I think of timely and timeless in golf the first thing that comes to mind is the footprint of the course. These days the amount of land used for courses is far more than 100 years ago. In this regard Harbour Town is maybe the most timeless I have played. It has a familiar compactness and efficiency of space which harkens back to the Golden Age. However, it would have been unusual a 100 years ago because it embraces loads of trees as integral aspect of the design.

I don't think I have played a great modern course which sprawls out close or maybe more than twice the size of some wonderful classic courses. But that approach is certainly timely. Much of the very current fads in architecture are about using space more efficiently. This approach appeals to my sensibilities.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Peter, I’ll give you a simple answer for one niche element: links courses.


Since the 1970’s, every Eddie Hackett course feels timeless in so much as it could have been there for 120 years.


Every other links course built since that time does not because more was done. The design talks ahead of the land.


I am not saying Hackett courses are always better (I’ve often stated that the detail is extremely rudimentary on many of his courses), just that they all feel timeless.

[Peter Pallotta]

Sean - thanks: I hadn’t thought of Harbour Town’s footprint as an element of it’s low-slung timelessness.

Ally: and thanks too: that’s a terrific & evocative phrase, ‘the design talks ahead of the land’. I would steal it for my own use, but I don’t think I could pull it off like you do!

Peter

[Sean_A]

I had an interesting experience with differences in green construction a few years ago. We had a basic temp in place layed over natural, quite wavy ground. Small footprint, simple, no construction. The real green was being rebuilt and was all in about 10x the size (maybe more) as the temp and arguably no more interesting. That was a serious eye opener for me seeing the two next to each other as a way to describe the evolution of design. I guess little by little there were reasons why the new build style was necessary, yet I quite happily played the temp and miss it.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Sean,


I don’t know the course you talk of but your story could equally be a good example of something we rarely talk about, namely that the Golden Age architects were modernists. They were far from minimalists. They “built” far more of their designs than anyone who came before.

[Sean_A]

Sean,


I don’t know the course you talk of but your story could equally be a good example of something we rarely talk about, namely that the Golden Age architects were modernists. They were far from minimalists. They “built” far more of their designs than anyone who came before.

Without question Ally. To some degree this is what set them apart from previous archies.

Still, it's interesting to see completely natural greensites and realize the stark difference to built greens, even on a good site.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

I had an interesting experience with differences in green construction a few years ago. We had a basic temp in place layed over natural, quite wavy ground. Small footprint, simple, no construction. The real green was being rebuilt and was all in about 10x the size (maybe more) as the temp and arguably no more interesting. That was a serious eye opener for me seeing the two next to each other as a way to describe the evolution of design. I guess little by little there were reasons why the new build style was necessary, yet I quite happily played the temp and miss it.
Ciao

I reckon I know the temp and the under re-build green you're describing. The temp was delightful and challenging too. On a hole where they've subsequently moved the tee as well. And the following hole also has a lovely ground level but rascally evil green.
atb


PS - as a general aside, decades of top dressing presumably has the effect of slightly raising ground level putting surfaces as does bunker sand-splash.