An architect's dilema

[Patrick_Mucci]

Can an architect design a golf course for every level of player today ?

Has the spectrum of golfers become so broad as to present a Herculian task, difficult if not impossible to meet ?

PGA TOUR Players
Top professionals
Top amateurs
Men handicaps 4-36
Women LPGA players
Women top professionals
Top Women amateurs
Women handicaps 8-36
Seniors
Juniors
Beginners

Is the challeng overwhelming, and can a course be designed to be both fun and competitive for every one of these levels ?

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Patrick,

Of course.  The contributing architects of GCA do it every day!  

[ian]

Patrick,

I'll say this till I'm blue in the face, Pinehurst #2 is near perfect because it is a course for every level of player.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
Imagine all those different types at one course. That would be a club with one hell of a membership  

I believe the youngest or frailest player would enjoy the hardest course if starting from the correct place. Four or five tee boxes should be enough for the 11 categories you cite but........
My overriding belief is that the number of courses needed to span such a diverse group is small, probably less than 5% of starts per year.

[Dave_Miller]

Patrick:

Doesn't almost every course do this.  

Golf and Golf Courses are adaptable.  Which is one of the things that makes it great.

There may be hard courses, there may be easy courses, there are good courses and there may be bad courses.  Yet, I still haven't met one I don't like.l

Best,
Dave

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave Miller,

It seemed to me that the gap had widened to such a degree that PGA Tour players needed an especially long course in order to present a challenge.

We see courses going to 7,400+ yards for these fellows.

Can the architecture on one course serve all levels equally, or at least similarly ?

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Patrick,

PGA Tour players do not require a 7,400 yard course to be presented with a challenge.  The trouble is, we equate challenge with the difficulty of shooting par.

Ignore par, and an interesting 5,400-yard, 6,400-yard, or 7,400-yard course would challenge everyone from PGA Tour pro to beginner.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeremy Glenn,

Nobody wants to see PGA TOUR players demolish a 5,400 yard golf course.

People like train wrecks.

The want to see birdies and eagles, but they also want to see their share of pars, bogies and disasters.

There is something special about the Tin Cup syndrome.

[TEPaul]

Of course designers can build courses for every level of player today.

They did it years ago and they can do it now. All they have to do is apply the same basic principles they did back then and just factor in how the game has changed from then to now. And by that I mean that golfers do hit the ball farther than back then.

But architects also need to deal with the perception changes that have occured from then to now and that doesn't really involve architectural changes just changes in golfers perceptions and expectations.

Things like the expectation of GIR amongst some levels has got to change back to somewhat what it once was. And for the higher handicapper or the very wild player, the architect doesn't really have to do that much in design for them the same way they didn't design for them years ago. Back then they just figured that the games of golfers like that are problems and solutions enough in and of itself!

In a way golf design became somewhat scientific (not necessarily formulaic) for most levels starting in the beginning of the golden age and it can do that again!

[Tyler Kearns]

Pat,
      As you stated, longer and longer courses are being designed or remodelled to challenge the best of the best. At the end of the day, distance just doesn't do it. Look at the scores we see on the PGA Tour week in and week out. To me, the great defense of a golf course lies in the greens, and this corresponds to your recent thread on "green speeds". I too believe that they have become ridiculous and out of hand, but maybe for one week a year they can scalp 'em. A 6,500 yard track with fast, severe greens could ceretainly do the trick. Getting back on topic, the 6,500 yard course helps eliminate the overbearing distance burden that alienates many golfers and avoids the use of 6 sets of tees.
         Can an architect design for every level of player? I think it depends on the attitude of the players. If people have reasonable expectations of their ability, and truely love the game, the course will have to answer to the level of enjoyment of the players. Is golf about shooting par, or having a great time?

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Patrick

Your taxonomy should be adjusted to read:

.....
Top Amateurs
Men 1-36
......

As Johnnie C (and Yossarian) have said:

"If you can't play to scratch, you're crap, and there ain't no catch!"

[Eric Pevoto]

I agree with you TKearns re: attitude.  In the discussion of the definition of par on another thread, it struck me that the meaning of par has become lost on today's golfers.  Rather than something that is reachable by the expert golfer, doesn't everyone expect to have a chance at par?  Where is the sport in that?

[TEPaul]

Eric:

In your last two sentences you just can't imagine how much you said about today's golfers!!

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Eric/Tom

My take is a little different.  Isn't one of the beauties of golf the fact that ANYBODY (outside of rank beginners and little non-Eldrick children) can make "par" on any hole on any course in the world?

One of my most memorable golfing moments was when a friend of mine at Stanford birdied the all-world (even with its "stupid trees") 470 yard 12th with:

1.  High pop-up drive to the right, just carrying the barranca
2.  Smothered 3-wood under all the tree branches to the left side of the fairway
3.  Nicely executed "ground game" 5-iron that disappeared into the cup.

This was 35 years ago.

What's wrong with a game that allows everone not only a "chance" at par, but maybe even "birdie"?

[TEPaul]

Rich:

That's very true that one of the beauties is anyone can make par. But then a handicap golfer should also realize that's not  normal for him and expect something about design where he expects that should become normal for him (not unless he makes himself into a scratch golfer).

The actual definition of par is what an expert player is expected to make with errorless play. That's not the definition of par on a hole for the handicap golfer.

[Eric Pevoto]

You're right Rich, one of the charms or draws of golf is that anyone might make a par or less.  I wouldn't have much business (as a teacher) if it were otherwise.  In a sense, I understand that is the sport.

But it bothers me that architects feel the need to soften or limit the strategy because a portion of golfers expect to write a bunch of fours on their card.  

I'm not talking about penal architecture.  I'm talking about the golfer having to "put up" somewhere in the course of a hole.  In my opinion, the greatest holes allow the golfer to decide when they want to take the challenge.  

[Lou Duran]

It is nearly impossible to build a course that can be all things to all people.  About the only way that I can see doing it is on an expansive piece of land with very wide corridors, and few natural obstructions (wetlands, lakes, rivers, canyons, large hills, etc.) and a bunch of money.  But why build such a course, when 90%+ of all golfers wouldn't appreciate it?

One of the current trends in architecture that I think is very positive is that many designers/architects are building fun, interesting, but very "payable" courses.  These do not compare to the PVs or NGLAs of the world; they were not designed to, but serve their intended purpose quite well.  Personally, there are enough ball-busters out there that should satisfy the Tigers of the world.  Given the preference of playing Kiawah Ocean every day from the tips, or Cassique and River which would most people play?  I think that the members are very happy with their courses.
    

[George Pazin]

Patrick,

PGA Tour players do not require a 7,400 yard course to be presented with a challenge.  The trouble is, we equate challenge with the difficulty of shooting par.

Ignore par, and an interesting 5,400-yard, 6,400-yard, or 7,400-yard course would challenge everyone from PGA Tour pro to beginner.

Well said, Jeremy. Consider me a member in your army for the war on par.

[Jeremy Glenn,]

Patrick,

So I've made up a course of fascinating holes that could be used for an Open Championship:

10 Riviera                  310
13 Augusta National    485
14 Royal Dornoch       450
8  Royal Troon           130
12 St Andrew            320
4 Bethpage Black        520
16 Carnoustie             250
17 St Andrews           465
18 Pebble Beach         545

10 Belfry                    300
7 Pebble Beach            105
14 St Andrews             570
12 Augusta National      155
5 Pinehurst                 480
7 Sand Hills                 285
17 TPC Sawgrass        130
17 Baltusrol                630
16 Cypress Point         240

TOTAL:                    6370

Obviously, I'm not trying to create a "short" course.  Just one that would challenge everyone.

That would be one hell of an Open.

And what's the par?  Who gives a ...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeremy,

Getting the Pacific to meet the Firth of Forth/Clyde is a little bit of a stretch as is the fantasy 18.

It may look nice on paper, but it just won't work in the real world.

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Jeremy/Patrick

Here's a "real world" option.

Play the Open at Dornoch, from the Ladies Tees.  About 6000 yards.  Probably a "par" 65.  3 "par" 3's in the 280-320 range (1, 5, 15).  Starts off with one of these brutes--280 yards, reachable with a mid iron down wind, but hard to get there with a driver if the wind is in your face.  A slightly mishit drive and you will be scrambling for a 3.  Badly mishit drive and you are looking at 5 or worse.  Always the option of hitting 7-iron off the tee, but who wants to look like a complete wuss on the opening hole of a major champtionship?

On this course, more than one of the "these guys are good" brigade could shoot 58, if the pin positions are gentle, but more than a few will struggle to break 75, particularly if there is any wind.  Wind plus "Sunday" pin positions will see some scores in the 80's.

I'd love to see the definition of a "train wreck" expanded to include (imagine Peter Allis commentating):

"Oh dear!  Tiger's 2-iron has plugged in the left front bunker on the 320-yard 5th.  He just overcooked it a bit, but that's golf.  It's a particularly nasty lie.  Yes, he's had to take an unplayable in the bunker.  The recovery shot looks good but it just trickles off the right side of the green into that horrid little hollow.  Now he has the most delicate of chips off a very tight lie to a tightly tucked pin.  Oh no! he fluffed it and it's come back to his feet!  Now he has the putter out, and it's up, but oh! it's steamy!  Now the 8-foot downhiller for his 6 on this "par" 3.  He must know that Vijay got his cast-iron 2 on this hole just a few minutes earlier...........

I'd not be bored by such a spectacle.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

If PGA Tour players are going to shoot 75 on that 6,000 yard ladies course, what do the ladies play it in ?

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Patrick

The ladies course record is 72 (and there have been a lots of VERY good ladies who have played there).  Olazabal shot 85 from about 600 yards back, in his only bite at the cherry, when he was defending British Amateur champion.

I was, in any case talking about SOME pros.  Maybe Hartmann.  I'm sure Parnevick could break 75.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

I've always wanted to play that course and a few other northern courses.

What makes the course so resistant to scoring ?

I'm playing with Parnevik and Hartmann this winter in sunny south Florida, and will take all the action this site can muster, provided that I can hold the cash.  I've made Debbie an attractive offer and she'll be coming to visit south Florida, working part time at Rachel's at night and golfing with Ran,
TEPaul, Gib and I during the day, and,
I have sent her boyfriend to visit you, to check out the beach at Dornoch.  We'll send you some pictures provided you don't post them, have fun with hairy Harry.  He's a lefty, boasts a 45 handicap, and is extremely methodical (read super slow)
Let us know if you finish any rounds.

[Rich Goodale (Guest)]

Patrick

Dornoch is hard for ladies because it requires lots of spin to get the ball near the pin on many greens, and has some holes which require difficult carries if you hit the ball less than 250 off the tee.  The top amateur ladies love it, however, becuase it is such a good and fair challenge.

That being said, it can be had by top men players.  In fact, I don't think it can be set up (within reason) to resist a very good player who is on his game and doesn't make any stupid mistakes.  If there were some sort of tournament there for the top pros, there would be some scores in the low 60's, but also some in the high 70's too, because the margin for error on many holes is very slim, particularly if you are trying to hit it close!  The recovery shots which are required if you miss are at least as demanding as those required at the Pinehurst Open.  If you miss the green on 2,5,6,10,11,14,and 18, for example, par will normally require a 10 foot putt and a bogey can be a good score if you are wrongsided.

Rich

PS--So how many shots is TE Paul going to get from Hartmann?