[Brian_Gracely]

45th Anniversary Issue of the magazine (no, I'm not a rater and this isn't a plug to sell the rag).


1) Luke Donald plays a round with a set of 1959 clubs and a mix of 1959 balls and ProV1x.  Basically tells us what we all should know...."the balls make a huge difference" and "the technology is making the game alot easier to play"

2) In an interview with Arnold Palmer, he talks about his design business and how he doesn't build the courses that he'd like to build or would be challenging to him, but that he builds them to the boring specs that his clients request.  He mentioned that his "ideal" course would have challenges similar to Pine Valley.

The first article was a nice read.  The second left me with very mixed thoughts.  As a Wake Forest grad and a huge fan of Mr.Palmer (both as a golfer and a person), I can't bring myself to criticize the man.  But I struggled with his responses.  Here's a guy that obviously knows the game,
has great respect for the game, and is not struggling for money.  So why does he continue to build courses that he knows are not challenging his design skills?  At what point does the $$ over-influence the ability to walk away?  

[Matt_Ward]

Brian:

The King was quite direct on course design -- he said he designed layouts primarily to satisfy the needs of clients. That's pure and simple.

The King went on to say he would really enjoy designing courses that go beyond the needs of clients. Clearly, the interest to satisfy the wishes of people has been the focal point and as a result the Palmer / Seay tandem doesn't have anywhere near the depth of quality courses given the number of overall projects that has AP's name attached to them. In many cases --they are simply cut'n paste versions of others with few exceptions.

The only thing that puzzled me is that given Palmer's stature I don't think it would have been too difficult for him to stand a bit more forceful with clients and say no once and while and design courses with a bit more sophistication and diversity.

Nothing like keeping the gravy train of $$$ moving ahead ...

[JohnV]

I wish they would have had Donald hit a couple of Top Flite Rocks from back then just to see how far they would have gone relative to today's Titleist.

[Tom_Armstrong]

I take it these were new balls made to 1959 specs?

[JohnV]

No, they were some balatas from about 10 years ago which were the oldest balls they said they could find that probably were still good.  The clubs were from 1959.

[Brian_Gracely]

I take it these were new balls made to 1959 specs?

I don't know if they were actual 1959 balls or the oldest balatas they could find.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

I think the test loses it's validity due to the fact that
balata balls had a shelf life of 2, maybe 3 years before they would lose compression. I don't how much they lose overall but it may account for the low liners and feel that Luke Donald experienced.

The irons didn't seem to have much differences, especially when considering the Wilson's were 1 1/2" shorter and weaker lofted than the new irons used, making me question what is more detrimental, the ball or the driver?

   

[J_McKenzie]

In defense of Arnold Palmer:  Perhaps the biggest influence on golf course design, and on the game of golf itself, since the "Golden Age" of architecture is that Golf has become a business- a big business.  

Except for a relatively few cases, golf courses over the last twenty years, let's say, have been built to try to achieve a bottom line.  Municipal, resort, semi-private, and daily-fee courses, especially, have to make financial sense for the owner.  That means bringing in revenue, which means turning rounds (the more people playing-- the more $).  This has had a tremendous influence on how modern courses are designed.  Designers in today's world need to understand as much about golf demographics for a particular site as they do the topography.
 
Player/Designers are particularly affected by this because most of the projects they are involved with are going to be just these types of courses.  Mr. Palmer should be given credit for understanding the "business" of golf and for putting what's best for the client ahead of his own design ego.  

John

[Matt_Ward]

J Mackenzie said:

"Mr. Palmer should be given credit for understanding the "business" of golf and for putting what's best for the client ahead of his own design ego."

That's a great way to "spin" the argument but let's be a bit more grounded in long term consequence -- way too many of AP golf designs are really pro forma courses that have little meaningful qualities to them.

Can you please outline any AP designed courses that really are worthy of a visit? I can only name a few with Musgrove Mill (Clinton, SC) being at or near the top of the listing.

Arnold was great at selling himself and I don't doubt for a NY minute his personal appeal and contributions as a player to the game. But, from an architectural aspect the quality of his work is far from the charismatic approach he branded so brillantly as a fearless charger -- his overall impact in course design is really lite and will likely have little, if any, long term influence. The "brand" of AP simply does not carry over to the courses that carry his name. The Palmer name may have been successful at selling real estate for deep-pocket developers, however, they have no real architectural appeal and are akin to the idea that fast food is really a meal of consequence.

[Joe Perches]

Can you please outline any AP designed courses that really are worthy of a visit?

I think Aviara in Carlsbad is well done though a bit over the top with plantings and water.  It seems like April is an explosion of color.  The 'dozer artists (Sukut?) did an exceptional job of fairway shaping.  The green contouring there is not as good as the fairways.

[J_McKenzie]

My intention was not to defend Mr. Palmer's design work, per se, but to put into context the dilemma that modern designers now face.  Golf course development is now a big business and today's designers have to design courses that fit the developer/owner's needs.  If he doesn't, and he builds course after course that fail because the owner can't make them work financially (even if they are great designs), he won't stay in the business for long.  

I can't speak directly to Palmer's design goals, but if it has been to create a legacy of award-winning, highly regarded architectural masterpieces, then perhaps he has underachieved; but if his goal has been to design courses that allowed an owner to operate successfully as a business and/or a developer to sell houses, then in my mind he is a success.

Can you outline any AP designed courses that closed because no one would play them?    

[Matt_Ward]

J Mackenzie:

One of the neat tricks in any debate is to avoid the direct question and then question the other person. It's great tactic but clearly transparent.

The AP "brand" is nothing more than mass production of what / who Arnold Palmer is. This is the same approach that AP took to endorsing dry cleaner's, Penzoil, etc, etc. I've played likely 40-50 AP designed courses over the years and few, if any, elicited any real strong desire to return. Yes, I have enjoyed a few of them -- Musgrove Mill, Runny Y (OR) and Oasis (NV) are some that come to mind, but no one in his right mind would equate what AP has designed to that of his long time rival Jack Nicklaus.

I don't equate making money with long term influence in the design world. Like I said Arnold is a helluva guy and he is the man responsible for why golf took off in the 60's and extending that through to this day.

But, from a design perspective the "brand" of AP designed golf courses is really labeling for mass consumption -- I only wished AP had followed-up on what he hinted at in the Golf Magazine business. Clearly, Arnold could have easily said no a few times and been able to leave a lasting impact comparable to that of his stature he created as a player. The difference between AP the golfer and AP the designer is nearly as wide as the Grand Canyon IMHO.

To answer your question -- I don't doubt people may play his courses but that's like saying people who buy McDonald's understand cuisine for food. Not likely.

[JSlonis]

Matt,

Without discussing the overdone housing...what do you think of Palmer's work at Laurel Creek?  I worked at Laurel Creek the first summer it opened with no clubhouse to speak of and only the golf course to enjoy.

[Matt_Ward]

JSlonis:

Hats off in mentioning Laurel Creek -- I also played the layout quite a few times when it first opened and when the proliferation of houses was still more of a concept than a reality.
 
When I played the layout the first hole was the par-3 8th and you finished with the stellar long uphill par-4 7th!

Laurel Creek is clearly one of the better AP designs but even there you find a fairly predictable bunkering pattern and when I played the course two years ago I thought the original course had been compromised by the rush to develop each and every space around the layout.

Here's a layout that in its original day if allowed to have native grass growth (similar to that of a Crooked Stick or Garden City GC) could have really taken off beyond being just a prop to a plethora of MacMansions lining up each and every hole.

I have nothing against AP as a player but as someone who may have wanted to have a real impact from the design side I don't see much of what he has designed as being anywhere near the very best courses in the last 40 years.

When I read how AP laments in not really designing what he wanted to do I just find it hard to believe AP could really underplay the kind of influence he could have exerted if he really wanted to. What I get from AP designed layouts is a formula -- sort of like a Hampton Inn. It gives you a better stay than Motel 6 and a number of other middle to botton chains that exist -- but you won't EVER confuse Hampton Inn with a Hyatt or Ritz-Carlton or Intercontinenal.

[JSlonis]

Matt,

Thanks for the reply.

I agree...it's a shame that the housing couldn't have forever stayed in the concept department.  During the first year at the club, if a person was dropped on the first tee without knowing where they were, I don't think Southern NJ would have been their first guess.

[Matt_Ward]

You're absolutely right -- the land Laurel Creek occupies first looked like a farm field from Indiana -- the only aspect that gave you a different impression was the top half of the navy destroyer you see just south of the property.

What could have been something really neat becomes the pro forma housing tract. Unless one played the course from the earliest days you could not tell what it might have been with less clusters of houses after houses ad naseum.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Matt and Jamie
I think the same could be said about Commonwealth National in Horsham, Pa that you both said about Laurel Creek. Both were built about the same time. Laurel Creek was a treat to play when it first opened. The course played fast and firm and there was a good variety of holes. I played there last fall for the first time since all the houses were built. They just spoiled a good golf course. Commonwealth was similar. Now there are office buildings there instead of the houses at LC. Commonwealth rarely plays fast and firm. Seay came back a few years for a visit and stated that he was pleased with his work there except for some minor stuff and the cart paths. He said he doesn't design cart paths just tees,fairways, bunkers and greens.Commonwealth was designed to be a more difficult course at the owners request. The owners got what they asked for.
Steve

[Paul Richards]

A quick plug for Luke.

He is one real class act and I wish him a ton of success on the PGA Tour!

Go NU!!!!

 

[A.G._Crockett]

Matt Ward
I won't claim to have played a lot of Palmer courses, but River's Edge in Shallote, NC is excellent and generally well-regarded.  Here in Atlanta, Eagle Watch and Cherokee Run are both considered to be among the better daily fee layouts around in the metro area.  

None of these will ever make a Top 100 list (for whatever that's worth) but they are well above the "McDonald's" analogy.  I don't consider the fact that Palmer courses tend to be built for the masses as any sort of valid indictment of the courses themselves.  In fact, would it be fair to say that Palmer course are much more restrained in budget than Nicklaus courses?  Might that account for the difference in acclaim given to the two design firms?

[Jlyon]

I've played Kings Challenge in Northern Michigan (public) ....forgetable, poorly conditioned (soft everywhere).  And I've played Tartan Fields (private) in Dublin, OH.  Not bad, fairly firm. Too may forced carries with few ground game options given the firm playing conditions.

One point regarding AP's design philosophy and big business.  AP doesn't need the money, as one of the richest people in golf. He did not get to this position by running his business as a charity.  He has employees and senior managment who are rewarded for turning a profit.   Arnold (nor would most owners) would not want to put the livelihood of a hundred of his employees at risk to satisfy the wishes of CGA members.  His business plan may result in mostly bland designs with his name to help sell more houses.   It may be an investment with a more certain future but it ain't art.

[Tony_Chapman]

Palmer's course in Nebraska City (Arbor Links) is not too bad. Some really good holes in fact. It may have the third best finishing hole in the state.


The 18th at Arbor Links


Sorry, I am drawing a blank on which hole this is. It may be 14.

From their website
Imagine. Playing a golf course in its “natural state.” No houses. No Crowds. Just peace, quiet, and fun with your friends. 18 holes of perfectly manicured bent grass tees, fairways, and greens. An abundance of trees, rolling hills, glistening savannahs, wildlife, and native terrain.

ArborLinks Golf Course,designed by PGA Tour Legend Arnold Palmer, is the first course of its kind to offer players the chance to enjoy 18 holes of world-class golf carefully laid out over 300 acres of environmentally protected habitat.

In addition, they are one of the first courses in the state to start a caddie program and it has been very well received.

Sorry if the pics are too big and slow you down.

[Ken Fry]

Along the lines of Luke Donald's test of 1959 clubs, Charles Howell was quoted recently that he has never hit a persimmon driver in his life.  Sad to think some of the world's greatest players will never know the feeling of a solid shot with persimmon.  (It wasn't that long ago these clubs were mainstream, was it???)    

[Matt_Ward]

A.G.:

I likened the AP "brand" to a Hampton Inn type hotel. You get a certain outcome, however, if you're expecting something to knock your socks off don't hold your breath.

The layouts are fairly conventional and although "practical" they are rarely, if ever, engaging from a desire to go back at your next available moment.

The AP line of courses are mostly functional -- NOT INSPIRATIONAL!!! I don't play golf simply to play formulaic courses -- I play golf to be inspired ... to see the next hole -- to make my next return to play that particular course.

The AP "brand" is about expanding a business empire -- the cookie-cutter approach to golf design is really just a cog in that large engine of cash collection IMHO.

P.S. There are exceptions (Musgrove Mill being one right at the top) but the desire to be an artist has been chucked out the window simply to expand the AP Empire. It's ironic that only now AP admits in the GM interview something he should have thought about years ago because $$$ was never going to be an issue for him that would have prevented him from really applying the TLC in his design efforts.

John L:

Puhleeeeeeze -- nuff about the business plan ... how about the long term impact of AP designed courses? Since AP has the $$$$ how bout just going ahead and designing courses that would have some serious architectural heft to be thought of as meaningful contributions rather than just another "brand" name layout that maxes out the AP empire and botton line?

I don't doubt that AP has made $$$$ for himself and his business partners and others. The issue is about course quality and long term impact.

AP even mentions in his interview with GM how he wishes he could have done it differently. What was he waiting on? AP could easily have designed layouts that go beyond the drab and ho-hum pro forma happy meal #3 version that too often dot the landscape.

The AP "branding" is about taking his name, likeness and self and attaching it to broaden the value of a developer's investment. Frankly, if that's his success so be it. However, from the standpoint of layouts of serious quality the Palmer "brand" is nothing more than formulaic at best. When people speak about AP in the years ahead and when he departs from the scene it will likely include a mere footnote that he was also in the golf design business.

Steve:

Commonwealth was never in the same league as a golf layout as Laurel Creek IMHO. You have inane forced carried on a number of holes on the back side at Commonwealth that only the top player can successfully negotiate. I do agree with you that the desire to max out building as simply engulfed both properties and made the golf really nothing more than an addendum of little consequence.

[A.G._Crockett]

Matt,

Is it possible that you are painting Palmer courses with too broad a brush?  Given the vast number of courses that his design firm has done, is it fair to characterize all of them as cookie cutter golf courses?

It seems to me that what the Palmer architecture business lacks is exactly what Arnold essentially said in the interview himself; there is no masterpiece in the portfolio.  There are, however, courses of quality and distinction, as well as courses that are average.

[Robert Thompson]

Gents: There are two that I've really enjoyed -- one is the previously mentioned Rivers Edge, in NC. The design has interesting land, though I think the 9th, an unusual par 5, could have been great. Instead, it is just odd.

I also really liked Bay Creek near Virginia Beach -- solid all the way through the houses weren't in place when I was there....

Robert

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()