JC…to get the ball rolling regarding finding an answer to your question;
Please tell me how you or anyone knows whether a course a) got the most out of the land or b) added to the greatness of golf (whatever that may mean)?
Let’s start with Tom Doak’s statement,
"my fundamental belief is that the greatness of a golf course is NOT a matter of ticking boxes off someone's list, but more a matter of getting the most out of a piece of property, and adding to the collective greatness of golf."
“greatness of a golf course is NOT a matter of ticking boxes off someone's list” Right away, we need to get away from the notion that this is definable in a way that is easily understandable like mathematics or science. It isn’t simply 2+2=4. It isn’t water freezes at 32 degrees farenheit. Frankly, I think it is more akin to what I do for a living…making investment decisions. Stock X and Stock Y might both trade for a P/E multiple of 5, but one is cheap and a value and the other is going out of business. The trick is sorting through the rubbish to find the answers regarding why.
“greatness of a golf course is NOT a matter of ticking boxes off someone's list” George Pazin responded with this in regards to Tom’s answer…
“I think JC just wants something a little more specific - indeed, it seems to be the point of the thread.
As I said on the other thread, I've never been a fan of "I know it when I see it" type of definitions - a bit too egocentric for me, and it implies a lack of fleshed out thinking, imho.
I can accept it when Tom says a course adds to the greatness of golf, but I'd rather hear how…”
George, I don’t think you are going to get it. That is, something more specific. St. Andrews is great and it is links golf with massive double greens. Harbour Town is great with tight tree lined corridors and teeny-tiny greens. It isn’t a matter of ticking off boxes on a list. If it was, everyone would be making great courses.
So, where do we go next? Well, Mr. Doak says it is “a matter of getting the most out of a piece of property, and adding to the collective greatness of golf."
Let’s take a pause here. This definition is based on what Tom Doak says. Why do we value what Tom Doak has to say? I’d argue it is two things. The first is his resume regarding building great golf courses. On the list I keep of “Unanimous Gems” (courses ranked by each and every major golf course rating entity as one of the greatest in the world), he has 3 courses, Pacific Dunes, Cape Kidnappers, and Barnbougle Dunes, second most of any living architect, behind only Pete Dye with 6 and tied with Jack Nicklaus. And frankly, Sebonack, Ballyneal, and Rock Creek Cattle just might make that list very soon. Regardless, his work is very good. The second is his resume of courses visited. I’ve done reading and researching and a little traveling and playing in my 3 years being involved with golf and thus far I’ve played something like 70 courses. However, Mr. Doak has seen many, many more than that. Therefore, the context in which he can place things is at an elite level. Furthermore, he has written some books on golf, which adds to his credibility…but so have others, so I don’t place this at as high a level as the other two.
Given this resume he has developed serious credibility, so we value his opinion. So, when he says things we listen. And he says that the greatness of a golf course is “a matter of getting the most out of a piece of property, and adding to the collective greatness of golf."
Let’s start with the easier one first…”adding to the collective greatness of golf.”
To look at this let’s rewind to the beginning, St. Andrews Old Course; The home of golf. This is where it all started. A land so perfectly suited for the game of golf that very little had to be done to it for people to begin playing on it for centuries. Huge greens, wide open fairways, crazy undulations, links land, windy, and great soil for golf. So, obviously this course added to the greatness of golf as it started it all.
NGLA…CBM, schooled in the greatness of a golf course at St. Andrews, returns to America to find not a single golf course worthy of the name. And after a period of time, he builds the ideal golf course. Since this is a watershed moment in American golf history, it added to the collective greatness of golf.
Oakmont, Pine Valley…I think I’ve got these courses right and there may be more. But in response to Bob Crosby’s “Joshua Crane” article, Tom Macwood wrote a reply. In that reply he discussed the battle of British vs. American golfers. At that time, the British were dominating the golfing scene. American’s wanting to gain dominance over the sport built more demanding and difficult golf courses. After the completion of these courses and after ample “practice” time on them, Americans began to dominate golfing competitions. This competitive/training ground style of golf course added to the collective greatness of golf.
Harbour Town…in contrast to the “bigness” of many of the courses (including St. Andrews) this course was tight and narrow with very small greens.
Sunningdale Old…Heathland golf, rather than links, a massive breakthrough at the time.
Hirono…greatness in Japan.
Sand Hills…wide open prairie golf, natural, minimalistic.
I think I could drone on and on and go course by course, but perhaps you all get the point.
The next point, “getting the most out of a piece of property,” to me is the routing of a course. Plain and simple. In a well routed course, you make the best use of the land the course in on, you take great advantage of natural green site, you open up strategic options, and you use natural hazards and strategically place man-made hazards. To me it all comes down to routing.
In fact, I just reviewed a section in Brad Klein’s book “Rough Mediations” entitled “Routing Is Destiny”. It is a quick read and is quite enlightening, but a bit brief. But perhaps being brief is all that you can do with being overly verbose and without having a specific piece of property to route.
Another great read regarding routing is CBM’s “Scotland’s Gift”. The chapter entitled “Architecture” is amazing. Here are a few snippets…
“Wind, I consider is the finest asset in golf”
“In designing a course try to lay out your holes so that they vary in direction.”
“There should be every variety of hazard."
“Diversity in nature is universal. Let your golf course architecture mirror it.”
“Paths and roads…should never be part of the course”
Frankly, on this chapter I could go on and on and on…it is fabulous. But on the whole, I think it touches on routing directly and indirectly and is vital to understand and comprehend.
George Thomas’ “Golf Architecture in America” has chapter called “The General Plan for the Property”, which I think takes routing even a step further. Placement of club house, privacy of the holes, and the quote of the chapter to me, “Don’t strive for length when you sacrifice character.”
And the last example I will use is “The Spirit of St. Andrews.” Chapter 2 lists the 13 general principles for a golf course. Apply them all for a well-routed course.
But going back to Brad Klein’s book, I think he hits on two of the most important points regarding routing. #1…”The most important rule of all is to keep the land interesting.” And #2…”there is nothing worse than a formula or cookie cutter program.”
So, for all you who want a list; check out Mackenzie’s general principles. But I think this is more of an art thing than a scientific thing. So simply applying all of his 13 principles might not yield a great course if they don’t fit the land.
Here is a quick list of some of the best routed courses I’ve seen and, therefore, examples of some places where I think the architect got the most out of the land.
Seminole…really this land isn’t great. It is right by the beach, so you’ve got the wind. But it just has one big dune. And the way Ross took the course up and down that dune is quite something.
Canterbury…I think this course is severely under-rated. It only has 146 acres and it has a club house in the middle, but Strong did a masterful job in my opinion. Short holes, long holes, sunken greens, elevated greens. In the end, this is routing.
Grandfather…this may not be the best course in the world because this mountainous land isn’t ideal for golf. But Maples strung together 18 holes in a magnificent manner making it walk-able with extreme variety.
Holston Hills…Simply superb. Perhaps the land is boring. Kind of a wide open field. No ocean. Not much going on. But Ross takes you up some hills, round a few bends, and to some excellent green sites.
Harbour Town…I LOVE this routing. In fact, I think “pacing” might be a better fit here. It starts out tight and narrow and almost makes the golfer claustrophobic, but gradually gets wider and more open. 16 almost opens totally up, but one tree sits right in the middle of the fairway. The par 3 17th finally takes you to the waterway and the opening up of the land is amazing…almost a liberating feeling. And the 18th is the widest fairway on the PGA Tour. It is an amazing feeling to finally be free.
Poorly routed courses and/instances where the architect didn’t get the most out of the land are…
Classic Club…Palm Springs course former PGA Tour stop. It seemed like every darn hole was a dogleg hole with water on the dogleg side of the hole and many of them had the fairways sloping into that water. Boring, monotonous, frustrating.
Cougar Point…the routing takes you over roads, bike paths, and right next to homes. Tee boxes are right by busy streets, busy bike paths are right by greens and tee boxes…you get no sense of privacy or intimacy. Is it poor land for golf? Maybe. But the routing simply isn’t good either.
I also think “greatness” will yield timeless entertainment and I said this on another thread and I believe Ben Sims said the same thing on this thread. Take a well routed course that adds a little bit to the collective greatness of the game and you’ve got a timeless gem. And you know what; from time to time these great courses are overlooked for a period of time. Crystal Downs was overlooked for years. NGLA sort of hung around in mild obscurity for some time. And right now, I believe Canterbury is getting overlooked. Another course that I have great interest in checking out is Kingsley. Is it a great timeless gem? I don’t know, but time will tell. (and for the record I have yet to play Kingsley).
Also from time to time courses are the flavor of the month, or the decade. For example, when I went to Champions Retreat with Mark Pritchett the cabin we stayed in had the Top 100 courses from 1983 (or something like that). There were tons of RTJ and Dick Wilson courses. Some are still ranked and regarded highly, while others have faded away. Are they great? Maybe. Maybe they will resurface. Or maybe they we overrated back then. Again, time will tell.
Check out the courses on the list Tom Macwood posted from 1939. If the courses on that list are still regarded as Top 100, they are great for some reason. No doubt about it.
Oh my God this is long. My apologies! But with such a long and complex topic I did my best. There is a million more things to talk about, but I really do think Tom Doak pretty much nailed it. As did CBM in Scotland’s Gift.