News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« on: April 14, 2008, 11:12:50 AM »

Yesterday I played a very good golf course In Philly that was renovated recently,...the architect did a fine job and built some excellent holes with lots of imagination, some nice bunkering and interesting greens / chipping challenges....but .....the use of water as a hazard left me a little cold...it was  too overt for me ...

I submit that perhaps the use of water as a feature...hazard  is the Achilles Heel of great architecture....what say you
« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 05:41:19 PM by archie_struthers »
Logged

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2008, 11:23:30 AM »
Zero points in 6 slot on the road is a disqualification from architectural criticism...

I don't love the par 5 either, although I don't mind the tough par 4 around the pond (maybe 13 or 14)...
Logged

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2008, 11:47:40 AM »
 ;D 8) ::)


JES I didn't play particularly well...which is my norm these days...but I think we won 11-0  (5-6) and I 'm pretty sure I threw the shut-out LOL!
« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 05:49:57 PM by archie_struthers »
Logged

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2008, 11:48:51 AM »
Did I pick the holes you were thinking of?
Logged

TEPaul

Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2008, 12:01:34 PM »
Archie:

You know that really is a good question of yours particularly if one begins to think a little deeper into the subject of what he personally likes or doesn't like about water hazards.

And so, having done that because of your questtion (because I never really have before ;) ) I'd say I like water hazards where there is no question they are the real thing and pre-existed the golf course naturally.

WHs where you obviously get the sense didn't do that sort of leave me a little cold, I guess, even though I haven't ever thought that much about the subject.

Again, good question, you old "thinking" man. Next time I see a WH that doesn't look like it naturally pre-existed the golf course, I will not hesitate to write the architect and tell him I think he sucks bigtime and that Archie Struthers taught me why!
Logged

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2008, 12:10:31 PM »
 8) 8) 8)


Sully .....I was trying to make the point without specifically mentioning White Manor ...where I think Bobby Weed did a very nice job.. the members should be commended with their decision to let him take some chances...


I think the par 3 ...number eight....and the  par five 17th are just OK...for me the weakest holes on the course...although this won't be reflected in the scoring averages

The dogleg # 13 is rather good....the correct play ( I think) is to lay-up at the corner with an iron....then hit that same iron (rescue) to the green
Logged

TEPaul

Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2008, 12:15:48 PM »
Archie:

Let me make a minor suggestion to you.

You are such a "thinking" man in golf and architecture now, with a pretty good bit of fascinating experience under your belt, you've become an important and significant person and authority in the entire sweep of golf course architecture, and for that reason I suggest you begin to capitalize the first letter of your first and last name on this website, if not just capitalize the whole thing!

You are definitely no longer the little archie struthers you may've thought you were some decades ago. At this point you have reached a level of prominence in golf achitecture from which you can actually tell the likes of an icon like Tom Doak, publicly, that he is full of CaCa on some minor point of architectural concept or philosophy and it will get serious attention and consideration from the important people in this business.
Logged

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #7 on: April 14, 2008, 12:16:35 PM »
I know, but the truth is, White Manor is a very good course so there is no need to feel bad about one and a half criticisms...

I hadn't played the first version so I take people's word that it is a big step up. I like it and think he did a nice job, but #17 is a bit much...
Logged

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2008, 12:30:50 PM »
Archie

Would you include the first at Machrihanish Golf Course the Achilles Heel of Old Tom? I find it most enjoyable and have been advise that its one of the best first Tee shots around.

But I do take your point on ponds near the green
Logged

TEPaul

Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2008, 02:51:06 PM »
Sully:

Why do you think #17 is a bit much?
Logged

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2008, 03:06:54 PM »
I don't know, I just do...
Logged

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2008, 04:15:03 PM »
 8) 8) 8)

From ARCHIE   LOL!  thanks TEP

to Melvin .....I have only seen pictures of Machrihanish and read of it's delights. This being said, the first hole looks fabulous and fun!

Take Augusta #13.......the water is all around yet not there, a fabulous example of what I am hinting at.  For most mortals the  tee shot is fairly benign , with ample room to hit it. 

For the expert player, who is thinking of attacking the green in two, the tee shot is anything but easy, as you have to  aggressively attack the left side...and escape the creek which meanders alongside

The green ,  massive and inviting to the eye , is surrounded by danger. But the creek is  seamlessly integrated into the landscape  The creek wouldn't be so fearsome if not for the doppelganger of a swale to the left of the green, which is always in the head of the expert players. The AVERAGE JOE, no disrespect intended, fears the water far more than the swale, hence it isn't as intuitively difficult....and therein lies the brilliance of #13



Contrast this to a green surrounded by water on three sides, ...and lots of it .....there is just way too much hazard....it's overt!

without pandering to TEP ..who certainly gets it....the water at Machrihinish pre-existed the topography...actually it created it! So although I've not had the pleasure, Melvyn, I'm quite sure I would love it!

Sully as to 17 at White Manor, the water is the preeminent feature, from tee to green....it's too much in your face, , I wouldn't ever be tempted to go at in in two from much more than 200 yards, as the risk doesn't match the reward. The wedge shot in is too easy....
« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 09:20:41 PM by archie_struthers »
Logged

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2008, 04:39:44 PM »
Arcie,

Water on the 5th at Mid Ocean or the some of the courses here on the Monterey Peninsula seems just right, however when I look at the 17th hole at Sawgrass it looks like an abomination.

Bob
Logged

Jason Mandel

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2008, 04:57:17 PM »
Archie,

First you guys kick our butt, and now you start with the architecture! :)

Just kidding around with you.

We had a discussion last year about 17 after the Philly Am, and I think Sully's main complaint was the at the green.  To be honest, that hole hasn't changed much from the original hole, the only significant difference is at the green.

For me (15 handicap), its a drive, 7 iron, wedge.  I've seen a few club championships decided by the decision to go for it, or not go for it on 17, and for that reason I think it fits well as a 17th hole.  If one were to criticize, I would agree that the green really isn't built to accept a long iron/fairway wood.

I also don't think 8 is one of the best holes on the course.  It is very, very penal and many members think the bunker on the right is borderline unfair.  However, it does tip out at 165.

13 is the hardest hole on the course, and one of the best.  It's controversial only in the green being so hard.

Glad you enjoyed the day, take solice in the fact that 5 of our best players couldn't make it :) , including 2 division 1 golfers!

Jason
« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 05:05:46 PM by Jason Mandel »
Logged
You learn more about a man on a golf course than anywhere else

contact info: jasonymandel@gmail.com

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2008, 06:16:59 PM »
Archie,
Water has its place in golf architecture.  At the same time, it can be over used just like any other design feature.  These days it is unfortunately one of the few hazards that instills fear and commands respect.  I played Harbour Town Golf Links a few weeks ago and the sand is so nicely maintained that it is hardly a hazard.  Yes water all but eliminates the recovery shot (which I love) but it has other atributes that make up for that.  I mentioned a few in a different thread. 

I've walked sites with Gil Hanse and recall him telling me he wouldn't build a pond unless he had to.  But at the same time, if water features are present on the site, he won't just avoid them.  If you think through some of the greatest courses out there, not all of them, but many feature some form of water hazard.  How the architect incorporates the water certainly determines how effective it is. 

I might throw trees into the mix before I'd suggest water is the "Achilles Heel". 
Mark
Logged

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #15 on: April 14, 2008, 06:33:24 PM »
 8) 8) 8)

Mark

I'm real comfortable saying poor use of water as a hazard/ aesthetic element of design has undone some great attempts.

It requires some real talent to use it correctly , to blend it into the landscape. Note Mr. Hanse's desire to tread carefully here.  TEPaul opinesd that natural liquid hazards are far superior , for a myriad of reasons...but ....most design needs water for drainage augmentation ...how to accomplish this remains the issue....


Trees are easily removed...and as Mr. Ross clearly elucidated  (in plain verbage)     "if there is any doubt as to a trees necessity  ..break out the chainsaw...lol....

Water use/misuse as a feature is much harder to fix ...so the decision as to water hazards/ features in architecture is far more complex and difficult to master....
« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 06:37:10 PM by archie_struthers »
Logged

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #16 on: April 14, 2008, 06:53:27 PM »
Archie,
If you think trees are "easily removed", you haven't been doing many master plans lately and meeting with grounds committees and club memberships  ;D  Heck on some courses it might be easier to build (or fill in a lake) then take down a few trees  ;)  And trust me, it is even tougher to take down trees when they have plaques on them :(

We're not far off on agreement about water, but it does have its place. 
Mark
Logged

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2008, 07:43:33 PM »
 Archie,

   How about your use of water at Twisted Dune ?
Logged
AKA Mayday

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2008, 08:49:52 PM »
 ;) 8) ;)


Mark ... you've missed my point...my original contention was that the misuse of water as a feature has kept some pretty darn good efforts from achieving classic or special "status" in golf

I'm not interested in convincing someone that doesn't
 get it that they have to remove a tree...I doubt I'll ever be renumerated  for my opinion by same....or ever care...

although Twisted Dune as my seminal work would be greatly disappointing....meaning I don't get another shot... how many guys have been as lucky as me 

I greatly enjoy interesting conversation about golf and architecture ..it's a purely selfish pleasure

Michael....as to Twisted Dune and it's water features....they're not too bad.. innocuous enough so as not to distract...instinctively too safe perhaps

....#9 as originally designed (long par 4) was rather good... as it would have been a pretty dicey second shot ...akin to #5 at Merion  ....I do like #13




« Last Edit: April 14, 2008, 09:23:34 PM by archie_struthers »
Logged

TEPaul

Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2008, 09:27:27 AM »
Hey ARCHIE, I hesitate to bring this up on here, particularly after you've apparently thought rather deeply into this subject of water on a golf course in the form of a WH.

But, at this point, I'd like to ask you----have you ever looked into some of the other ramifcations of water, such as in a psychological sense or a Freudian sense?

Well, if you haven't you should, particularly a "deep thinking" man like yourself.

In a psychological or Freudian sense, even if quite sublimal, water is SEXUAL!
Logged

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2008, 10:15:30 AM »
 I agree with #13 at TD as a good use of water. It angles into the right side of the green. There is a bunker on the left that makes a front pin a daunting shot. But the size of the green allows for ample bailout, leaving one with a challenging putt. It is one of my favorite holes. Also, the hole is a change from the other par threes that have no water.

   #9 has the water by the green that catches a bad shot and #14 can be avoided easily.


   If one compares #13 at TD to #8 at WM you see the difference between challenge with bailout options versus a forced carry with little bailout.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2008, 10:20:31 AM by michael_malone »
Logged
AKA Mayday

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2008, 10:22:33 AM »
 :) 8) :)


TEPaul

Certainly the Lady of the Lake entered my consciousness early in life, and perhaps her mysterious beauty left it's mark.

Maybe that's why overt....in your face water features leave me cold!

stay cool

RJS
Logged

Jason Mandel

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2008, 10:32:42 AM »
Quote from: michael_malone on April 15, 2008, 10:15:30 AM
   If one compares #13 at TD to #8 at WM you see the difference between challenge with bailout options versus a forced carry with little bailout.

Mayday,

The difference is #13 at TD is 198 yards, whereas the 8th at WM is 165 max.  Does there need to be a bailout option for a short par 3?  While the 8th is different from the old 8th, it was shortened about 20 yards to compensate for the demanding tee shot.

Jason

Logged
You learn more about a man on a golf course than anywhere else

contact info: jasonymandel@gmail.com

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #23 on: April 15, 2008, 10:42:16 AM »
 Jason,

    I think that when you consider all classes of golfers that forced carries over water to greens with a penal pinching bunker are just not fun.
Logged
AKA Mayday

Jason Mandel

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is the use of water the "Achilles Heel " of most almost great architecture
« Reply #24 on: April 15, 2008, 11:01:33 AM »
Mayday,

Is the 17th at Sawgrass not fun?

Funny thing is if you took a vote of ALL the members, I bet you 8 would rank right up there as one of their top 3 favorite holes.

It is penal, but I think it is FUN to have to get up there and hit a green every once in a while.

Jason

Logged
You learn more about a man on a golf course than anywhere else

contact info: jasonymandel@gmail.com
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up