[Scott Cannon]

I looked back on old treads to make sure I wasn't throwing a retread on an old post. This subject has probably been talked about in the past.

Is it just me or has Pete found the formula to challenge the best in the world? They all seem to have great things to say about the course, and it does present the golfers and the viewers with some cool looks. I haven't played the course so my comments don't mean much, but I have played several of his courses around the country and they are cool, quirky and thoughtful designs.

[TEPaul]

"Is it just me or has Pete found the formula to challenge the best in the world?"

There's no question Pete Dye found ONE WAY, one formula or maybe even a couple of variatons of One Formula to challenge the best in the world. That's been pretty obvious for a long time now and he pretty much came up with it on his own, that's for sure.

In my mind, that kind of design really does work to challenge that type of player but I'll never get that comfortable with the unique "look" of Pete Dye architecture.

His strategies and shot values are pretty exclusively aerial with very low margin for error juxtapositions all over the place. Plus Pete's courses are most always super intimidating looking.

The thing I really do wonder with Pete's courses and his style and look is how well its popularity and reputation will endure over the long haul.

Will it be looked upon someday like the "Modern" residential architecture style is now or will it endure like the Macdonald/Raynor style (which Pete has always been a big fan of)?

But one thing about it always will be undeniable----that it can and does challenge the elite player really well.

Now and again in his architectural writing Max Behr talked about "pressure points" in architecture. In my opinion, Pete Dye courses have a giant's ton of "pressure points" and they are some of the most effective in the history of architecture.

[Garland Bayley]

If you judge a course by it getting nice things said about it by the pros, then no Pete doesn't have it right. When he finished the course, the pros hated it. That is typical of his designs. He actually thinks he got it right if the pros hate it (see Bury Me in a Pot Bunker by Pete and Alice).

For many of the posters here, if the pros hate it means Pete got it right. Abstractly I tend to lean that way, but I am a Pete Dye virgin.

[Scott Cannon]

"Is it just me or has Pete found the formula to challenge the best in the world?"

His strategies and shot values are pretty exclusively aerial with very low margin for error juxtapositions all over the place.

Is that just the way the top pros choose to attack his courses, or is that the only way to play them? I am not sure that just because the pro play basically and or exclusively and aerial game, that excludes the more creative bump and run...sans 17 ..although I do know some 17 hdcpers that could give it a good topspin miss and skip it across!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Scott,

Pete has mentioned, in conversations, that one of his goals is to challenge the best players in the world.

That's provided that the owner/developer seeks that goal as well.

[TEPaul]

Scott:

Of the Pete Dye courses I know the aerial shot values are pretty demanding but if one really wanted to play the available ground game approach options they'd need to be quite a lot more accurate than they would with the aerial options.  

Pat:

When you ask Pete about the top players in the world he generally doesn't say he wants to "challenge" them---he generally says he'd prefer to "torture" them.  

[Scott Cannon]

It looks to me at TPC, and it is my experience with the PD courses that I have played, Pete allows you to hit the club you want (i.e., driver at the 18th), but you better hit a high quality shot. I saw the competitors in the last group choose to hit 3 woods at the larger part of the fairway.
From the blimp cam, it looked as if the green would except a cool little low carving cut where a bounce or two on the ground wouldn't be to penal.

[Matt Kardash]

How is his architecture not condusive to the ground game? He rarely bunkers the front of the green. His greens are at fairway level or very slightly elevated. The only thing I can see is that he does offset his greens a lot. Therefore, if you wanted to bounce it onto the back of the green that would be a little trickier.

[Ron Farris]

From my experience on Pete Dye golf courses (playing and building) it is all about ball placement.  The angle or lines that are created act as a ruler. If 1 is the tee location and 12 is the landing area one simply chooses a number to shoot over.
Aim at 10 on the ruler and you are going to shorten the next shot.  Aim at 5 and you are likely to put the ground game in play.  By that I mean you may have to run up your three wood to a green that is otherwise out of reach.  I say this in respect to back tee play.  Take into account the different angles created with numerous tees and the angle/ruler scenario does not apply.  Aerial play is quite prevelant on Pete's courses as angles typically cause one to have a hazard to contend with, water, sand, etc.

When working with Dye Designs I did a line and angle analysis of PGA West to help new shapers understand what we were trying to do so that Pete & Perry could comment on the LINES.

[Dan Herrmann]

Let me push this discussion?  Is Pete Dye the greatest living golf course architect?

[ChrisHervochon]

We must remember that Alister Mackenzie said that he always expected a new course to be criticized, much like Dye.  

Dan,
  There are too many good architects still living, for any one of them to be considered unique, IMHO.  Architects such as Doak, C&C, Kidd, Fazio, and Weiskopf are all still alive, and I am sure there are certain aspects of their work (at some point, or in some way, shape or form) that SOMEBODY could make a strong argument for them being the best.

[Dan Herrmann]

Chris - I was just proposing the position that Dye is the best to encourage thought and discussion.

From what I've seen of Sawgrass this week, I think he's got the formula to be the top, and I honestly don't know who would be better.  Guys like Doak, Hanse, C&C, etc just need more time.  I have no doubt that the others will reach the pinnacle, but today, that pinnacle seems to be Pete's.

Heck - ask youreslf.  Which course generates better golf - AGNC or Sawgrass?   I really think Sawgrass tops AGNC, especially after Augusta's renovations in the last 10 years or so.

[ChrisHervochon]

Dan,
  In that context I think you're 100% right.  Actually, I think I would go so far as to say that even Harbour Town and Whistling Straits produce better golf than ANGC, or some of the Open courses for that matter.  PGA West is often criticized, but, TOUR pros hate it, and isn't that really what most architects who produce "championship" layouts are after?

[Andy Troeger]

I'd have to say he got it right. Sawgrass seems to provide a compelling dramatic tournament every year, and I'm very much hoping to go play it after the renovation.

I also love some of his other designs, they're challenging but still great fun to play IMO...Blackwolf Run-River, Harbour Town, Long Cove, and others are all excellent as well!

Out of the 10-11 of his courses I've played, I think there was only one I didn't "like," and there's others I still hope to see!

[Tom_Doak]

You guys are mostly very young.  When the TPC at Sawgrass first opened the players LINED UP to criticize the design.  (Seriously -- a couple of players even asked to borrow one of my old books on design to find a quote they could use in critique of the course.)  They hated it because they thought it made them look bad.

Pete's idea was just the opposite, that only on a super-hard course can the spectator appreciate just how good these players really are.  At the TPC you see players making spectacular recovery shots all day long, though you also see them occasionally dump one in a water hazard, which they would seldom do anywhere else.

Still, the consensus opinion on Tour is that Pete's courses (except for Harbour Town) are generally skewed in favor of the long hitters, so some players are begging for someone else to design a TPC for a change.

I do have great respect for Pete's design and he is the one architect who has consistently managed to account for PGA Tour level players and what they can do.  All you needed for proof was to watch those three guys in the playoff for the PGA try to attack the tenth hole at Whistling Straits in '04.  However, 99% of golfers can't reach that 25 yard landing area at the 305 mark off the tee, and probably more than 50% of golfers can't even see it clearly with their glasses on!

Designing for the Tour players has become just an entirely different animal, and I'm starting to wonder if it really has anything to do with great architecture anymore.

[Todd Kuspira]

Tour Players are a completely different animal.  Tom, you had the opportunity to play with Ian Baker-Finch at Crystal Downs and you commented on how Tour players play shortish par 4's.  They almost all have the ability to drive the ball 300 yards which makes almost all par 4's a drive and a short to middle iron.  A long par 4 virtually does not exist in Tour golf anymore.  If the Tour players had to hit long irons into par 4's instead of par 5's they average winning score would be considerably higher.  I think the changes at Augusta, although disappointing to me, are totally warranted to keep up with the Tour player.  Very few people can enjoy the game from where the Tour player plays from and how they can still get the ball in the hole from poor positions around the green.  An average player would shoot in the triple digits if they had to play under Tour conditions all of the time.  I would like to see more courses designed for the Good "club level" player and not have the owner of the course wanting to host a Tour event.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Tom,
  In your statements in regards to when TPC open and how the players felt like it made them look bad, isn't that some of the reason that they no longer play at PGA WEST?
 I think Mr. Dye is our modern day Raynor-Sharp angles, bold contours, deep bunkers...Take some of his designs-TPC, Long Cove, The Golf Club, Blackwolf Run, Harbour Town, Whistling Straits, The Honors, The Ocean Course, Crooked Stick and Pete Dye Club-All are Top 100 Course, are have held Top Tournaments from Mid-Ams to PGA Championships and Ryder Cup-Mr. Dyes courses seem to have tremendous flexability-resort course, private and public, but yet all can and have been (except for The Golf Club) set up for major events. How many of the courses maney above had had to go through major renovation prior to hosting a tournament? Other than growing the rough up and tightening the fairways, no that I can think of. So many of the courses that we deem as gold, are redo this and redoing that, deeping this, tighten that...Mr. Dye got it right-He has built courses a head of their time-i.e.- The Ocean Course with tees near 8,000 yards-He is as good as they come and he's doesn't worry if the pros criticize his stuff....it's seems to make his smile, plus, they're PROS!

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[Tom_Doak]

Anthony:

All of what you say is true, because Mr. Dye's focus is on Tour players.  (Long Cove is one of his rare courses where he put the members first.)

However what I was saying is that some of those courses are so focused on the pros that they really aren't that much fun for you and me from the middle tees.  They're way too hard if we're hitting long irons into the greens -- and (like the pro game itself) they're fairly boring to play if we move up far enough to hit short irons and wedges into every green like they do.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Anthony,
Although I doubt the pros are huge fans of PGA West Stadium, the #1 reason I've heard for no longer holding the Hope there is the amateurs can't play the course. Remember, at the Hope a pro plays with amateurs for 4 days, then the top 72 pros play the last round at the host course. At the Stadium course the amateurs couldn't finish in less then 6 hours.

[ChipOat]

Tom Doak:

Although most people will never see it so, perhaps, it doesn't really count, but wouldn't you say Pete Dye had the members in mind when he did The Golf Club?

For what it's worth, didn't he do TGC before Harbour Town?

[Brent Hutto]

The only Pete Dye course I've played is the Ocean Course at Kiawah. Watching the Players Championship, the TPC Sawgrass seems much more claustrophobic with water everywhere and a real need to work the ball this way and that.

So if you set them both up at the same yardage, is the Ocean Course easier for Tour players than TPC Sawgrass? Perhaps at Kiawah you might expect more wind on average so let's just discuss equal winds, too. How about for a 10-handicap amateur player, is the Ocean Course easier?

Absent any significant wind (let's say 15mph or less) I know from my own experience that even a worse-than-bogey golfer can move up to the shorter tees and have a very enjoyable round at the Ocean Course although you'll have to make some tough putts to shoot a decent score. I take it from this discussion that TPC Sawgrass is pretty brutal on the weaker player even if he plays it from 6,400 yards on a day with a less than 15mph breeze.

Personally, I think that if Pete Dye has design only TPC Sawgrass, the Ocean Course, Whistling Straits (plus whatever part of Harbour Town he gets credit for) along with a couple dozen Doak 3's and 4's he would be a great architect.

[Tom_Doak]

Don M.:  The pros voted almost unanimously not to play the Hope on the Stadium Course at PGA West after the first year's event.  They said because of the 4-site format, if you drew the Stadium Course on the windiest day of the first four, you were screwed because it was so much harder than the other courses in the rotation back then.  

That was probably true, but Lanny Wadkins, who was one of the few not to vote against playing the Stadium, said (a bit more colorfully than I am quoting him) that the players were just scared of the course and he wished they would play it because he would kick their butts around it.

Chip:  Certainly Mr. Dye had the membership in mind when designing Crooked Stick in its original form, and likewise The Golf Club, though both Nicklaus and Weiskopf visited The Golf Club while it was under construction and both offered their opinions of the layout.  It wasn't really until the TPC at Sawgrass that Mr. Dye started thinking more about the pros than about the members -- but then that's what most of his clients asked him to do in that period.

Brent:  Don't misunderstand me, I think Pete Dye is a great designer and I personally owe my career to him as well.  In fact I can tell you that in my opinion, the courses you cite as career-defining don't even include what I consider his top three; he's got a very long and strong resume.

[Tim Liddy]

I am tired but wanted to contribute.  I hope this makes sense.

Although PGA players will publicly not talk negatively about the golf course, many of the long hitters (even some that live there) do not like the golf course. They hit it through the doglegs. They do not like having to curve their shots.

The look of this golf course will be timeless.  It is so unique and original, bold and demanding. Dye’s work is way above any other modern work of this style (that has been poorly copied by others).  His attention to detail and mental mind games brought golf course design to a new level.

Unfortunately many golf course owners feel they must be “Tournament” golf courses and are unplayable for the average golfer. The result is the majority of new golf courses built today are too hard, not fun and contribute to the shrinking of golfers. We need to loudly separate the rest of golf course architecture from tournament golf. Does someone want to talk about how TV has contributed to this?

[Garland Bayley]

Let me push this discussion?  Is Pete Dye the greatest living golf course architect?

There is no such thing as the greatest living golf course architect, because the greatest golf course achitect for me is not the same as the greatest golf course architect for you. The greatest golf course architect for the pros is not the same as the greatest golf course architect for the club members. Etc.

[Jim Nugent]

Still, the consensus opinion on Tour is that Pete's courses (except for Harbour Town) are generally skewed in favor of the long hitters.

Lots of short hitters have won at Sawgrass.  Since 1988: Tom Kite, Fred Funk, Justin Leonard and Craig Perks.  This year's winner is currently 84th in driving distance, and finished last year in 122nd.  A number of other medium hitters have won over the past 18 years: Lee Janzen, Hal Sutton, Jodie Mudd, Mark McCumber.  

It's not just one guy breaking through, either.  Runner up also has often gone to short or medium-length guys:  Mike Reid, Chip Beck, Bernhard Langer (twice), Ian Baker Finch, Scott VerPlank, Stephen Ames, Tom Lehman, Jay Haas, Glen Day, Scott Gump.  

So seems like the pro's may be wrong about Sawgrass favoring longer hitters.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()