John Low's Design Principles

« **on:** December 08, 2006, 03:13:32 AM »

The Woking thread made me look up John Low, and I found his 11 design principles to be very interesting. Much less anodyne than Mackenzie's "13 ways to make GCA seem bland."

Many are in conflict with principles oft expressed on this site. My totally unbiased precis follows:

1. A golf course should provide both entertainment and a test
2. GCA should reward skill rather than trechnology
3. Centerlines should be fraught with danger
4. On good GCA, the ground will dictate play
4a. GCA should force golfers to think one or two shots ahead
5. Fairway and green orientations should be integrated
6. Bunkers should be used sparingly
7. Putting greens should be low and narrow
7a. Putting greens should tilt away from the player
7ai.No green should be higher at the back than the front
8. The element of chance is the very essence of the game
9. No one should attempt to copy a great golf hole
10. Undulations in the putting surfaces should be minimalized
10a.Simple tilts in the surface are sufficient
11. Committees should leave well enough alone

Any comments and/or thoughts?

« **Reply #1 on:** December 08, 2006, 06:49:02 AM »

Well, he got 15 points out of 11 ... very economical of him.

I haven't seen this for many years, so thanks to Rich. The one point which has always stuck in my mind is 7.a.i. "No green should be higher at the back than at the front", which is a remarkably different view than anyone else I've read.

Perhaps I should use these for the next TPC course, but they'd all want to kill me.

« **Reply #2 on:** December 08, 2006, 07:03:06 AM »

One of Low's favorite phrases to describe his strategic philosophy: "a contest of risks". Another favorite, often quoted by his contemporaries: "there is hardly such a thing as an unfair bunker."

What is interesting about #9 is that Macdonald relied heavily on Low and Hutchinson's opinions when figuring out which holes to replicate at the NGLA (and Merion).

« **Reply #3 on:** December 08, 2006, 07:43:01 AM »

Did he ever play his own greens at Woking? If yes, how was his eyesight?

« **Reply #4 on:** December 08, 2006, 07:52:29 AM »

Sean

I gave up channeling when Mackenzie told me to bugger off....

Tom D

One's 1st TPC course is always one's best. Ask Pete. Try it!

Tom M

Thanks for confirming that CB was an arrogant and illiterate twit!

Marc

Just because he re-designed Woking, doesn't mean that he liked what he did. What a man!

« **Reply #5 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:02:28 AM »

Regarding Woking Low did make a number of suggestions but from what I understand (according to Darwin) Paton deserves most of the credit for perfecting that course.

« **Reply #6 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:05:31 AM »

Tom

Don't put too much faith in Darwin. Haven't you heard of "Intelligent Design?"

Rich

« **Reply #7 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:06:38 AM »

Keep'm coming Shecky.

« **Reply #8 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:13:02 AM »

Tom

Neither I nor Shecky, ever needed a straight man. Keep auditioning, however, if you so wish. It amuses us.

« **Reply #9 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:27:49 AM »

As Rich searches for his rim-shot icon let us drift back to Johnny Low.

For a guy who was so influencial on golf architecture and golf architecture theory its unfortunate he never designed a golf course. Darwin wrote (in his obituary) that if his friends had one disapointment, it was that he didn't use his extraordinary talents more often.

« **Reply #10 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:53:09 AM »

I've always taken note of how well Cornish and Whitten treated Paton and Low's notable contributions to the remodel of Woking and the effect that apparently had golf architecture of the time and particularly on architecture to come;

"But in the early twentieth century, Woking was remodeled by two of the club's most domineering members, Stuart Paton and John L. Low.....They set about to pattern Woking after the Old Course. In doing so, they had sense enough not to try to imitate it but rather to recreate certain playing strategies presented by the Old Course."

« **Reply #11 on:** December 08, 2006, 09:09:02 AM »

A very interesting list.

MacKenzie's writings often dominate the airways around here. But seeing Low's list makes MacK sound a little less original.

Bob

« **Reply #12 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:12:30 AM »

I agree with Marc, although Woking does have 2 admirable examples of greens which slope away from the golfer, the famous 4th and the 17th, the other 16 certainly are sloped back to front.

« **Reply #13 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:24:09 AM »

Just a couple of thoughts about that marvelous list:

#3 - I wish more architects followed that dictate about centerline danger; what could be more fun than standing on the tee and trying to figure out where the hell to try to hit the tee shot? Thinking here of #2 and #3 at Pacific Dunes, #4 and #12 at Talking Stick North, most tee shots at The Old Course....

#7 - greens should tilt away...it's really fun to play a course that does have several front to back sloping greens. Variety is the spice of life. Don't most of the greens at The Old Course have some reverse slope given that you can play the thing backwards?

« **Reply #14 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:25:46 AM »

I think Hunter also expressed a strong preference for flat greens. I wonder if there is a context for those opinions (such as maintenence conditions, improved technology making tee to green play less difficult or greens that existed at the time with wild contours) that would explain the difference in view between then and many on this site.

« **Reply #15 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:34:42 AM »

Jason,

In my recollection, there are some extremely undulating greens at Woking, some so much so that there was scalping from the greens mower on the 13th. The severly undulated greens seemed to be reconstructed; they certainly seemed to me to be a way to introduce strategy to the course; positioning in the fairway was extremely crucial to attacking certain hole locations.

« **Reply #16 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:41:38 AM »

Quote from: Rich Goodale on December 08, 2006, 03:13:32 AM

2. GCA should reward skill rather than technology
8. The element of chance is the very essence of the game

Perhaps not, but I detect a bit of schizophrenia in those two points. Not that I disagree, however.

« **Reply #17 on:** December 08, 2006, 11:36:04 PM »

Quote from: BCrosby on December 08, 2006, 09:09:02 AM

A very interesting list.

MacKenzie's writings often dominate the airways around here. But seeing Low's list makes MacK sound a little less original.

Bob

Bedridden, as I am, well, not completely anymore, but I'm rereading MacK right now and he quotes Low, and couldn't speak (write, that is) highly enough of Woking.

« **Reply #18 on:** December 09, 2006, 10:41:05 AM »

Geoff Shackelford in Golden Age of Golf design states William Langford was influenced by John Low. Does anyone know the basis for this conclusion?

« **Reply #19 on:** December 09, 2006, 11:16:09 AM »

Dan:

I do not know why that would've been but I have a sneaking suspicion it may have something to do with some connections with a man by the name of Robert D. Pryde. He was the golf coach pre 1910 at Yale when a number of those innovative early architects were playing golf for Yale---ie Langford, Behr et al. Pryde was from Fife Scotland, emigrated to Conn. Eventually became a golf architect and an occasional globe trotting golf journalist as was Low who obviously knew and loved TOC, where Pryde came from. That may've been langford's connection to Low.

« **Reply #20 on:** December 09, 2006, 12:04:49 PM »

Tom,

When John Low wrote his book Concerning Golf in 1904 there were no other books with reference to design. Even Braid's book Advanced Golf came out afterwards in 1908. The Book of Links came out in 1912.

The influence would probably have just been the book. The bunkering that Low and co. put in on the fourth at Woking is classed as one of the most important bunkers in the history of British golf course design because of the implications of actually 'creating' strategy on purpose. So that would also have been talked about.

I have copies of all three books and you are of course more than welcome to borrow any of them.

Brian

« **Reply #21 on:** December 09, 2006, 12:08:48 PM »

And course being at Yale he would have been well read and Low's "Concerning Golf" was just written around that time. I assume Langford also knew Travis having played the Intercollegiate Championship at Garden City and surely crossed paths with Macdonald.

« **Reply #22 on:** December 09, 2006, 12:08:54 PM »

Quote from: TEPaul on December 09, 2006, 11:16:09 AM

Dan:

I do not know why that would've been but I have a sneaking suspicion it may have something to do with some connections with a man by the name of Robert D. Pryde. He was the golf coach pre 1910 at Yale when a number of those innovative early architects were playing golf for Yale---ie Langford, Behr et al. Pryde was from Fife Scotland, emigrated to Conn. Eventually became a golf architect and an occasional globe trotting golf journalist as was Low who obviously knew and loved TOC, where Pryde came from. That may've been langford's connection to Low.

RD Pryde is credited with the first 9 holes at Penn State. Willie Park obviously thought much of the man as he retained the routing of those 9 holes when he expanded the course to 18 in 1922.

I am lead to believe based on their location that the Pryde holes are the ones that still exist on the course, however, from what I've seen only the routing is correctly credited to Pryde as Park rebuilt all the greens and hazards.

« **Reply #23 on:** December 09, 2006, 12:28:45 PM »

Quote from: Kyle Harris on December 09, 2006, 12:08:54 PM

Quote from: TEPaul on December 09, 2006, 11:16:09 AM
Dan:

I do not know why that would've been but I have a sneaking suspicion it may have something to do with some connections with a man by the name of Robert D. Pryde. He was the golf coach pre 1910 at Yale when a number of those innovative early architects were playing golf for Yale---ie Langford, Behr et al. Pryde was from Fife Scotland, emigrated to Conn. Eventually became a golf architect and an occasional globe trotting golf journalist as was Low who obviously knew and loved TOC, where Pryde came from. That may've been langford's connection to Low.

RD Pryde is credited with the first 9 holes at Penn State. Willie Park obviously thought much of the man as he retained the routing of those 9 holes when he expanded the course to 18 in 1922.

I am lead to believe based on their location that the Pryde holes are the ones that still exist on the course, however, from what I've seen only the routing is correctly credited to Pryde as Park rebuilt all the greens and hazards.

Slight aside - Pryde also designed Wyantenuck GC in Gt Barrington - one of the best courses in W. MA.

« **Reply #24 on:** December 09, 2006, 01:25:09 PM »

Langford mentioned Low in an article on placing hazards:

"John Low has said that no hazard is unfair wherever placed, and while this is true, a hazard is obviously the wrong place to play one's shot, yet the proper placing of hazards will bring about very much more interesting golf than a haphazard arrangement of them is apt to do."

Brian
Fred Hawtree wrote that the first book that dealt with golf architecture was Willie Park's in 1896, followed by Garden Smith (1898) and JH Taylor (1902) and then Low.

News:

ForkaB

Tom_Doak

T_MacWood

Marc Haring

ForkaB

T_MacWood

ForkaB

T_MacWood

ForkaB

T_MacWood

TEPaul

BCrosby

Pete Lavallee

Bill_McBride

Jason Topp

Pete Lavallee

henrye

Lloyd_Cole

Dan Moore

TEPaul

Brian Phillips

Dan Moore

Kyle Harris

Lloyd_Cole

T_MacWood