[Steve Lapper]

Thought everyone here might like to see this. From today's www.thestreet.com:

http://www.thestreet.com/_htmlrmm/funds/goodlife/10310457.html

Nice piece

[Joel_Stewart]

Pretty basic but interesting article.  If you have ever talked to Kyle, he is very talkative, very passionate.

I like this quote;
"If a site has been blessed with perfect natural landforms, then the minimalist approach is a good approach.

However, the majority of sites available today lack natural landforms for golf. If this is the case, then more creativity is required in order to give the site a natural appearance and produce the best golf experience."


Looks like his predicition for the winning score at the Grove might hold up.

[Tom_Doak]

We love being subtly dissed as "uncreative".  It keeps us motivated.

If the majority of sites today lack natural landforms for golf, maybe he should be looking at other sites!

[Dave_Miller]

Thought everyone here might like to see this. From today's www.thestreet.com:

http://www.thestreet.com/_htmlrmm/funds/goodlife/10310457.html

Nice piece

Steve:
Good article thanks for posting this.
Hope all is well
Best
Dave

[Garland Bayley]

We love being subtly dissed as "uncreative".  It keeps us motivated.

If the majority of sites today lack natural landforms for golf, maybe he should be looking at other sites!

You know this got me thinking about the fractals thread and the illustration JVB posted there. The hairbrained idea I came up with is to generate a randomized fractal landscape, go to a perfectly flat piece of ground in the plains, move earth to build the fractal landscape, and design and build a golf course there.

Pay for it? You want someone to pay for it? Dang!

Make it a public course. Raise the gas tax enough to start driving people to hybrid cars (aka the rescue Ford program) and build such courses from gas tax revenue.

[Tom_Doak]

Garland:

We've discussed doing a project like that somewhere, someday ... just turn a bunch of creative shapers loose moving dirt around in cool formations, and then come back and lay out a course over the top of it.  If people weren't tied into certain yardages as being preferred lengths for holes, it would work great.

[jeffwarne]

Tom Doak
Can you elaborate on people being tied to certain lengths of holes.
Meaning can you site examples of holes out of the conventional yargage range you've enjoyed or any you have designed?
(sorry for the threadjack)
I thought of this as I played the third hole at Quogue Field Club Monday (what a great hole it was at 270 yards)

I surmised it was a great hole with no real par-a hole where most higher handicap amateurs would have a chance to employ meaningful strategy (not just hope for 2 good shots)
and a chance for a good player to separate himself

I hate the term driveable par 4 because that boxes you into certain yardages as well (no modern architect would max out a level par 4 hole with a heroic (narrow) runup option at only 270 yards.
The hole is way too long and protected to be a Par three (by so called modern,fair standards) and besides it would have 7 tee boxes if it was a par 3 to keep it "fair"

Many of the great par threes I've played in Scotland and in Ireland (but also some older layouts in the US)are virtually the same length from all tees, yet provide shelves or areas to position the tee shot so the shorter hitter is playing an interesting hole the same length but with an entirely different strategy (as opposed to a really short tee to allow the player to reach the green in "regulation")

clearly this is why I enjoy playing in Scotland more,their lack of ability or desire to move dirt forced them to incorporate features where they were and site the next tee logically nearby (what a concept) although when most of these courses were built they were probably considered "modern"

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:  I was referring to the same thing you are.

If you contoured a property at random, as in nature, you might well find that to use a certain green site you only had 270 yards from one corner of the property ... or 360 yards, but the green site called for a run-up shot, and good players aren't going to run one up from there.  

A modern architect would want to move the world again and replicate that green site further away from the property line, and would lament that the randomness of the landform wound up being a waste of money.  An old Scotsman would just build the green on the right spot and figure out some sort of hole that worked well, even though it wasn't the best length for the 2-handicap critic.

[Garland Bayley]

Tom,

Or the +5 handicap critic, who might not find any "great shots" in the hole.

Of course, a 20 handicapper might find his tee shot leaving him in a place where a "great shot" is necessary to recover.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()