[Chris_Clouser]

This was inspired by the thread started by Tommy with his cut/paste shot of the course in San Diego.  So often we hear how an architect/designer could have done a better job of routing a course.  I wonder, how many people have seen a course that was routed really well, but still seemed to not be that good.  What else can a designer do with what is given to him if he designs it well and then still produces a dud?  Should he start to manufacture something?

I would think so, but that seems to be the opposite of what many on here want, so where would you stand on that issue?

Lastly, what are some courses you think are routed well, but not necessarily the cat's meow in terms of interest?  

[Kyle Harris]

Chris,

The routing at Lookaway GC in Buckingham, PA fits this bill perfectly. The first three holes on each side are a bit disjointed and linger around the clubhouse area, but then a series of long holes throws you away from the clubhouse and into some pretty interesting terrain on both sides.

The front nine is seperated by a public road and holes 3-8 are in their own little world and are routed around the high points of the course. Par fives at 3 and 8 give you the sense of seperation from everything else and holes 4 through 7 double loop around the high points about a creek valley and interestingly take a pole line out of play.

Holes 10 and 11 play around the Superintendent's House and Maintanence Yard and then 12-15 are pure core golf, close to, but still away from the clubhouse. Holes 16 and 17 are seperated from the course by about a half mile and the walk may seem tedious at first, but it crosses a bridge through some old growth forest and the walk isn't noticeable at all and provides a nice respite (I've schlepped two bags over that thing for three summers daily). Hole 18 is in the "12-15" core and is accessed from the same bridge used to get to 16 and 17.

However, the greens, bunkering and features such as the fake pond to the left of the first hole and overuse of mounding leave something to be desired.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Boring, unimaginative, nonstrategic, and/or repetitive, bunkering can deflate a good routing.

Flat, boring greens, too.

Cart paths in play everywhere.

[Matt_Ward]

Chris:

It's hard for me to conceive of a candidate that possesses a solid routing -- defined by maximixing all the elements of the given site -- and then provide for a poor course. If an architect were to provide for a good routing that would ultimately mean he / she has used all the unique topographical elements that make that given site special to start with at the outset.

It would then mean he / she simply created repetitive bunkering styles, green sites and likely hole distances.

As Scott indicated it's possible that a good routing may mean a heavy emphasis on the use of carts paths to transport players to different locations on the site.

I find routing to be the element where the skill of an architect is the real deal. If an architect has provided for a solid and good routing I would find it very hard to imagine that a "poor" course is the net result.

[THuckaby2]

I was puzzling over this and well... on the surface I agree with Matt Ward.  It seems difficult for me to believe that an architect skillful enough to come up with a good routing could then also botch it enough to make it a boring course.  Routing does seem to me (as a player only, knowing nothing about this really) to be the toughest part of the job.

But then... the thought occurred to me that here in CA we have some VERY tortured sites on which these guys are asked to create golf courses... sites that never should be developed...

And on these, man I see some genius in making at least some sort of lemonade out of the lemons given, at least in terms of the routing.  Oh, we're talking land so awful that there's no way it's ever going to be a very good golf course... but the fact that they created one at all and give it at least some sort of flow means it's a "good" routing, or at the very least some brilliance was shown.

I'm thinking of the beleaguered course in San Jose known as THE RANCH, which has it's own thread going now... Oh, it is one awful golf course, let me tell ya.  And I'd never call the routing "good" in a general sense, or relative to any other golf course.  BUT... poor Casey O'Callaghan was given the pointed top of a mountain on which to craft a golf course.  The fact he succeeded at all - and needed mile long cart rides, several double-backs where one plays a hole and then rides backward to get to the next, etc. - to me shows a different form of routing genius.  I remain amazed he was able to get a golf course on there at all.  In an odd way he is to be praised for this....

Another one like this is Eagle Ridge, in Gilroy CA.. not as horrible land as THE RANCH, but not the greatest either, and it is meant to wind through the expensive homes it helped to sell... all that being said, it is a pretty neat routing... only the greens and bunkering are so severe as to make the course unenjoyable.  So in a different way, the designers here succeeded in routing over a difficult site... but the course does leave something to be desired.

Very interesting topic....

TH

[Kyle Harris]

I think it's possible to have a very solid routing and a poor course otherwise. Imagine a tree lined course with little to no bunkering or hazards that takes you through some very interesting ground and you have what I consider to be a good routing and a poor course.

A litmus test for this is "How well does a stick and ball routing diagram represent the nature of golf on the course?" I can think of a few courses in the Poconos/Coal Region of PA that fit this bill.

And no Mr. Cirba, they don't have six words in their name...  

[George Pazin]

My home course fits the bill here, I think. It is a wonderful walk in the park - literally, as it sits in a very large county owned park north of Pittsburgh. The holes traverse interesting terrain, the greensites are solid, and the holes generally make pretty interesting use of the terrain.

However, the bunkering, in virtually all respects (placement, difficulty, aesthetically, whatever) is mundane and underwhelming. Couple this with conditioning that you would expect at a cheap muni and you have a course that I would be hard pressed for anyone to rate it higher than a 3 on the Doak or Golfweek scales. I'd never call it poor - I personally love it - but I don't think there are many raters that would understand or like it.

[Mike_Cirba]

A litmus test for this is "How well does a stick and ball routing diagram represent the nature of golf on the course?" I can think of a few courses in the Poconos/Coal Region of PA that fit this bill.

And no Mr. Cirba, they don't have six words in their name...  

Kyle,

Now you're talking my language.  Offer up a few to jog my failing memory.

p.s. Sorry I missed your private message last week.  I wouldn't have been able to make it, but appreciate your contacting me.  

[Kyle Harris]

Mike,

Three Ponds Golf Club in Elysburg comes to mind (Near Knoebels). Five Ponds is on that list too. Tillie's Shawnee I put in this category, though the course isn't "poor" just not up to his later work.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Oak Creek is simply over-wrought with repetition and a lot of just really un-interesting strategies, yet the footprint of the routing is really good. One most also remember that there was not one speck of great architectural feature which to build from. No interesting natural knobs, hills or dales. No interesting wavvy landforms, just built on a pretty much flat site, an old flat orange grove.  

They created interest by cutting into the lines of old yucalyptus trees that served as wind breaks during its life as a orange grove. Its was the one nautral feature retained.

The routing features 6 holes that start or end near a wonderful CalMex/Spanish-style clubhouse. A fake but effective creek (THE Oak Creek) was built separating many of the holes; adding a buffer while providing some strategy for the back nine. The course actually is bisected by a rail line, and a lot of cost was spent in building a bridge that spans that crossing. I would imagine for litigious reasoning, they needed to keep the golfer's  away from live trains. Still, it works.

The course is VERY walkable; Maybe the most walkable Fazio course ever built. They utilized an excellent plan of landscaping, on the border of over-kill, but good enough that one time, while there with someone in the know claimed that the course reminded him of many of the great Australian landscapes for golf he had come to know in his lifetime.

The only thing missing from the golf course is interesting strategies. Instead its amass in repetitive ones, and the same green after green after green throughout the course. The place has a lot of possibilites if they could get the designer back in there to create something different on a few holes. I think it would improve the course dramatically. I just don't ever see that happening.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

Three Ponds Golf Club in Elysburg comes to mind (Near Knoebels). Five Ponds is on that list too. Tillie's Shawnee I put in this category, though the course isn't "poor" just not up to his later work.

Ahh...good one's Kyle, although Shawnee shouldn't really qualify as reflective on Tilly.

Only about 3-4 holes and a handful of other greensites are his, the rest got destroyed when the course went from 18 holes to 27.

Three Ponds was the site of my best start to a round of golf ever, when I birdied the first three holes (three back and forth par fours) back in my college days.

[Kyle Harris]

I give Three Ponds credit there, the climax on the front nine is quite thrilling. Switchbacking up the hill (what a view) and then a dramatic downhill par three followed by a neatly placed par five. All works well for me. One of those courses I'd love to get my hands on and rework the bunkers and greens and tee sites. The skeleton is there, just needs someone with an eye for the other parts of a golf course.

Way to birdie three holes that are essentially the same, just a little higher than the other.  

That is somewhat relieving to hear about Shawnee though, I'd go back in a heartbeat, but the course wasn't up to my image of Tillie.

Thinking on it now, I'd be Jeffersonville in this category too, at least before Prichard got his hands on it.

[Mike_Cirba]

Kyle,

Can you guess which holes at Shawnee are Tillie?  Possibly an unfair question, but since you dissed my 3-birdie feat at Three Ponds, I thought I'd be a prick.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Oh, and one other thing........

Oak Creek is a perfect example of the Anti-strategy School of Golf Course Architecture. I wonder who came-up with that term?

(If it was a Bush-thing, the architect of record would be called a Anti-stratageriest....)

[Joe Hancock]

Anti-stratageriest....)

Tommy,

Is that pronounced "anti-"like the the famous violin maker""?

Quit fiddling with the English language!

Joe

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh, and one other thing........

Oak Creek is a perfect example of the Anti-strategy School of Golf Course Architecture. I wonder who came-up with that term?

(If it was a Bush-thing, the architect of record would be called a Anti-stratageriest....)

Tommy,

I haven't come up with much original in my life, but Tom Fazio definitely inspired   me and I'm taking FULL credit for the terminology.    

So, are you talking to me these days?

[Kyle Harris]

Mike,

I really couldn't tell you, played Shawnee in 1999 and don't remember too much other than it being my first "island green" played.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tommy,

Is that pronounced "anti-"like the the famous violin maker""?

Quit fiddling with the English language!

Joe

Joe,
It's pronounced, "Ahh-na-tay slang in the negative, or con of in respect of principles or good taste.

Mike,
What the Hell are you talking about? TALK? Do you want to talk? The phone works on both ends!  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()