[Jeff_Brauer]

Before going back to work, I thought of this topic, aimed mostly at those of you who are golden age fans, but not necessarily.  I can here the snide answers (from Tommy N - "nothing!" and others (spend money!, Route cart paths!, Get on TV!)

Is there any design area where any of you think modern designers do better than the golden age guys, as a general rule?

To start off, I would say:

Drainage and most technical aspects are far better.
Building courses on difficult sites.
Considering all levels of player
Control Personal Alcohol Consumption!

I have more, but don't want to influence the discussion too much!

[Scott Witter]

Jeff:

Drainage...maybe yes in the manner that they/we are forced to consider/use drainage at a different scale and level of detail with permitting issues, etc. but I think the golden guys understood drainage quite well and perhaps much better at the surface level than many modern guys, you excluded of course  The golden approach, as we find so often used the natural contour so well for surface drainage in all types of situations from tee to green and they simply didn't turn to the subsurface approach so quickly as a design feature, or as an escape as it is done nowadays, and not for the better IMHO.

Technical aspects...here again I guess so, but that isn't to say that the engineer (architects) during that time period who in fact did understand these aspects quite well I believe, but maybe didn't have the budgets, and of course the flexibility of materials of which to solve certain technical issues.

I am no where near as personally experienced as many here with regard to actually seeing all of the great tracks from the golden period, but I have seen a bunch and read about a whole bunch more and I am not so certain they really had too many difficult sites to work on, by that I mean topographically challenging with steep slope and ravines, etc.  Now, don't everyone jump all over me, I'm sure those sites are of course out there, but generally speaking, is it fair to say that during more modern times, architects have been faced with considerably more challenging sites on many levels.

Consideration of all Players...I think you may be right, but isn't it incredible in so many instances that just about anyone can walk up to one of those great golden classics and play the course and be challenged, have a whole-lotta fun and never get bored...guess those old guys knew somethin inherent about many golfers.  That is why so many stand the test of time...excluding the great wisdom the PGA and USGA have frought over the past 25 years with "improvements"

Alcohol consumption...well now this is getting personal, but based on original documents I have seen of Thompson, Tillinghast, Emmett and a few others, you may be on to something...perhaps they were more creative as a result (or the secret we have all been looking for) and I should change my future approach with a stop to the local liquor store before my presentation next week

[Brad Klein]

They are much better at meetings.

Also, I'd say their PowerPoint skills are considerably better.

I've seen some of the old sales presentations that Ross did; the color was never very clear.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

They are much better at meetings.

Also, I'd say their PowerPoint skills are considerably better.

I've seen some of the old sales presentations that Ross did; the color was never very clear.  

Brad,

I would like to discuss that idea further.....I'll have my people call your people.......

[Gary Slatter]

Jeff, I think your 4th point is also the #1 difference between modern pros and the previous lot - better control of alcohol.
Considering all levels of play: I agree but is it for the betterment of the game? Not so long ago if you couldn't get down to a 24 handicap you tried another sport, now our  average handicap is around 24 (when you include players without handicaps).
I think drainage is considered more now because of the use of more difficult sites, and excess irrigation.
They do better commercials (RTJ2).
They make reproductions better.  What is the best modern course?  What course can someone in the year 2100 say is the best example of our modern period (2000era) design?

[Mike_Young]

Attention to ingress and egress from green sites whether it be walking or riding
better tee surfaces
And Cart paths.....

[Paul Payne]

I would agree with drainage and add to that turf selections. I guess this is attributed to technological advances but most good courses these days have grass types that suit their environments well.

[Dan Kelly]

They drive golf carts better.

Oh. Wait. Never mind...

[RDecker]

Signature holes.

[JSlonis]

If we have to have a smart a$$ answer, I would say:

Framing &
Containment mounding.

For a serious answer, I'd say I agree with Jeff:

Drainage
Dealing with tougher sites/environmental issues

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I'd say, adapt and modify their designs in the face of permitting and environmental constraints.

I don't know that the old guys would have had the patience for that.

[Tim Copeland]

Moving massive amounts of dirt

Changes.....Changes...Changes

[Mike_Young]

better site visits

[Patrick_Mucci]

Moving massive amounts of dirt

Changes.....Changes...Changes

Tim,

Yale ?

Lido ?

NGLA ?

CBM, SR & CB ?

Those old guys moved a lot of dirt in their day.

[ward peyronnin]

Jeff

Not to play to many cards at once i would sudmit the new guys are much better at  all practice areas.

[Jim Sweeney]

If the old archies had todays building equipment and market demands, wouldn't they:

be able to build on more difficult sites?

build better practice facilities?

get to their projects more often? (would a modern architect dream of doing 400+ courses if he had to travel by train and or hours by car over unimproved roads?)

be better at drainage? (isn't a lot of the poor drainage we see on old courses due to antiquated drain systems?

What today's GCAs might do better is land planning and working to meet all the neds of the owner/developer.

[Adam Clayman]

be better at drainage? (isn't a lot of the poor drainage we see on old courses due to antiquated drain systems?

Or, Over-used irrigation systems?

[Tim Copeland]

Moving massive amounts of dirt

Changes.....Changes...Changes

Tim,
Yale ?
Lido ?
NGLA ?
CBM, SR & CB ?
Those old guys moved a lot of dirt in their day.

sure they moved alot of dirt....but that was not the question..........

[Mike_Cirba]

They are simply better at overcoming the inherent limitations of any given site, and placing golf courses that may or may not be congruent with natural surroundings virtually anywhere.

Yes, there were the courses like Lido and Yale we consider engineering wonders, but we see much more of that today; so much so that we don't even blink when a faux Scottish design ends up being built in the Vegas desert.

The engineering techniques are more advanced and sophisticated today, and even if we don't always like the unnatural appearance of the end result, I'm always somewhat impressed when I see a course like, say, Bear Trap Dunes in southern Delaware, where Rick Jacobson built something approximating wind swept sandy features on a former dead flat soybean farm.

Because those examples are much more routine today, I think it's fair to say that today's architects are more adept and frankly better at it than the Golden Age architects.

[Gary Slatter]

Jeff

Not to play to many cards at once i would sudmit the new guys are much better at  all practice areas.

I agree about the practice areas, modern golfers are better practicers but can't play the game which should be learned on the course.

[paul cowley]

I feel the biggest difference between the older and newer courses is in the course maturity and continual improvements that have occurred over the years to the best survivors of the earlier period. I think in many cases this maturity period is why we feel these selected courses are as good as they are now [ANGC]. I feel that many of our current 'greats' would be somewhat unfamiliar to their designers if they could come back today and inspect them. I know that when I was re building the fallen down sand splashed built up bunker faces at Pebble in the early seventies, that this was not the way they were first built.....but were instead a product of the courses use and evolution....and it wasn't until my seeing the early photos of the course at a later date that my thoughts were confirmed.....and when I looked at these early photos I thought how primitive the course looked, with its big flat greens with low bunker faces, and its obvious attempt to create faux dunes where none had previously existed [if you are going to do anything natually fake, you better be sure you make it believable...and Pebbles original attempts fell far short of that standard].

And I don't doubt that this scenario applies to many of the other 'greats'.

Jeff, I think alot of us do it every bit as good as the Golden Agers.....and when they grade our paper in 80 to 100 years from now, I'm sure they'll agree.

[John Foley]

Draw artistic plans. The old guy's talents might of been there, but their artistic flair was severly lacking.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I'm going to get great joy answering this one when I get back from the driving range later tonight...... (First time I've swung a golf club in over two months! YIKES!)

[John_Conley]

They are much better at meetings.

Also, I'd say their PowerPoint skills are considerably better.

I've seen some of the old sales presentations that Ross did; the color was never very clear.  

Jeff, I'm trying to digest this... it sure seems like one of the smart comments you knew were bound to come!!  Who thought you'd get one from Dr. Klein?!

I'll offer this:  Modern designers are better at sharing.  Look at how many times they have to split credit with touring professionals!!!!

[Jason Topp]

Is there any design area where any of you think modern designers do better than the golden age guys, as a general rule?

To start off, I would say:

Drainage and most technical aspects are far better.
Building courses on difficult sites.
Considering all levels of player
Control Personal Alcohol Consumption!

I have more, but don't want to influence the discussion too much!

I thought about this last night, and, unfortunately, the best answer I can come up with is - nothing.  The most lauded recent efforts are great, but I think it is because they emulate rather than improve upon what golden age architects did.

Of the Jeff's list, drainage and difficult sites are probably due to technology rather than better architecture.

I really disagree with the "considering all levels of player" item.  In my experience, very few of the golden age courses cannot be played by the beginner.  Many modern ones cannot.  

Controlling alcohol consumption I consider neutral at best.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()