Separation In Golf

[Sean_A]

I was just listening to State of the Game 8.  The most interesting thing which came up was the idea of clearing trees to create views opposed to trees creating isolation.  Included amongst the comments was that almost all the great courses have an open quality to them.  I think Pine Valley was mentioned as an obvious example which doesn't fit the bill.  In any case, I was quite surprised by this opinion.  I would have thought that many of the great classic courses are largely defined by a parkland setting which usually means trees isolating holes.  In terms of heathland courses, there are very few which are truly open.

Other than for playing and growing considerations, is it desirable to create open interior views on courses? 

Do folks like playing in isolation amongst trees?

Is it actually true that most great courses are of the more open type?

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

If we take the original premise that all golf courses are supposed to be modeled upon links courses then you have your answer.

My opinion for what it is worth and I believe supported by the history of GCA, is that inland courses were indeed a duplication of links courses. My argument for that being the utilization of bunkers, they are nearly alien and not normally found inland. Then in the early days the construction of turf dykes to compliment the undulations of a links course, plus the actual cutting away of trees from fairway/rough areas of the fairways.

I am also a great believer in wide fairways allowing the golfer a choice subject to his/her skill levels to decide their approach to the Hole. Larger fairways require the designer to use his cunning by clever placement of traps and hazards (some un-seek until too late) to give all skill levels a mental workout. Trees have never been high on my list of likes when on a golf course.

I must say there is a lot to be said about playing on an open course, of being under large expanse of open sky, perhaps more noticeable when just coming from the office to unwind with a relaxing game. That feeling of being stressed and pressured is not helped by having a semi claustrophobic feeling that the trees are closing in. If golf is anything then it must be about observation and understanding the terrain, of embracing that which your senses can get to grips with thus giving the inner eye and mind that tranquility needed by the thinking golfer. Today time to think may not be at the forefront of many a players mind preferring to rely upon technology in the form of equipment (clubs, ball, mobility and distance aids), so observing the course is well down a modern players listings of priorities.

I love trees, but alas not on a golf courses for the many reasons mentioned in the past, but the main one being the unpredictability of influence on the original and future GCA of the course and so how the Hole may be forced to be played.

It’s a getting back to basics, a getting back to the future for the game. As you know I believe that many things from the past are more applicable today than some of the modern trends (rather than calling them ideas).

Open golf courses, you would think that a novel idea, well that is until you discover the pure pleasure of Links Golf.

Melvyn     

[Bill_McBride]

What percentage of courses on the planet are links courses?  1%?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Bill

It does not matter how many because the Links is the Adam & Eve of all our modern golf courses.

The inland courses were originally just a mirror of the Links courses, that being my point not their number.

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

The heathland courses were wide open to begin with -- if you'd just left the sheep out there, they still would be.

Most of my better courses [even in places like Montana and Philadelphia] are very open landscapes with lots of views, sometimes of other golf and sometimes of the surroundings.  I think that's one reason people like them so much.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill

It does not matter how many because the Links is the Adam & Eve of all our modern golf courses.

The inland courses were originally just a mirror of the Links courses, that being my point not their number.

Do you think inland parkland courses shouldn't be built if cut from a forest primeval?   I think it's a matter of tree management and wide corridors. 

[Adrian_Stiff]

Seperation and division by trees is important to most golfers, by the same token most golf courses dont have the great landscapes beyond the course itself, so its a case of working out if BEST VIEW is the short one or the distance once. To a degree creating an infinity landscape can be achieved by both methods.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Bill

I never said that, I just made the comment that open is better than closed in - IMHO.

If inland courses are to be built then trees are a part of the design, I just do not think trees should be on the fairway or even the rough, but most of all I was replying to Sean' post re the State of the Game 8. Golf for me is better when the land is open and the sky is large. Trees drink large amounts of water and can affect the surrounding area if in a dry spell causing damage to the ground by faster drying out - it’s an additional problem not to mention maintenance expense and IHMO not worth the effort, just remove them to out of the play area. Build causes in the middle of whatever forest but just clear the trees; however I still feel that closed in feeling unless the land is well shaped and not flat.

[Tom_Doak]

Seperation and division by trees is important to most golfers

Adrian:

I have found that to be a false assumption.  In the 1980's architects were putting mounds alongside fairways on open sites on that premise, but when I stopped building mounds, no one cared ... just like no one cared that the Golden Age courses didn't have mounds [or, in the old days, trees] between the holes.

However, I do think that most of the time, people prefer a hole with a strong visual backdrop or terminus, whether it is a mound right behind the green or a view ten miles behind the green.  If they have something to focus on, they tend to ignore what's going on to the sides of the hole.

[Tom Kelly]

Sean,

As with most things in life I personally think variety is best. Most of my favourite courses have a mixture of isolated holes, whether they be set down in dunes or lined by trees and wide open vistas both of the rest of the course and of the surrounding land.

I was fortunate enough to play Sunningdale New recently and loved how you went from being surrounded by golf holes at the start, then out into the open heath round 5, 6 and 7 with some fantastic views both of the holes (5 and 6 are two of the best looking holes in golf) and the open landscape. Then you head back into the thicker trees and the isolation of 9, 10, 11 and 12 before finally you emerge back out into the maze of golf holes surrounding you on almost all sides. I thought that aspect of the routing and design was fantastic.

I can't think of many courses that I like that are totally open or completely isolated on every hole.

[Neil White]

Sean,

From looking at the old photo's of courses discussed a great length on this forum from years gone by, then many have gradually been suffocated - too strong a term? - from years of mis-management of self setters or worse still additional planting sanctioned by those who through self belief have the courses best interest at heart.

I have recently played two courses, Burton-upon-Trent and Lindrick, which are at opposing ends of the spectrum with respect to how trees have been managed on the course.

Whilst I enjoyed Burton there were instances whereby recent (~40 years) of planting had narrowed corridors, nullified strategic bunkering and changed a holes layout altogether.  The opposite was true of Lindrick, which by my reckoning had just about sorted out the woods from the trees; leaving wide corridors with specimens left in semi / tertiary rough.  These though had a feeling of being at one with the course and whilst more than likely not a part of the original scheme didn't impose themselves upon it unnecessarily.

Unfortunately most golfers like trees, maybe not as an obstacle but as something to aesthetically improve a hole / course.  I have played with a number of golfers who remonstrate about a particular tree or trees but are aghast at my suggestion that they cut them all down and return the courses to how they were when initially laid out.  Some go as far to say that the trees protect the par of the course, and this may be so, but they didn't when they weren't there.......... I am fairly certain most golfers can fudge up a hole without trees.

Neil.




 

[Peter Pallotta]

Sean - I've used these terms before: "expansive isolation" (for courses like Ballyneal) and "focused isolation" (for courses like Pine Valley).  But setting aside the great courses and/or settings, I think the issue in the vast majority of cases is actually not trees in and of themselve, but the use of trees to frame golf holes instead of framing vistas.  I think that many of the parkland courses that are appealing to look at and enjoyable to play do in fact have lots of trees, but they have them set well back from the playing corridors and from green sites, and thus give the impression not so much of identifying the golf hole as of defining the landscape.  It's a kind of perfect blend of the focused isolation of Pine Valley with (because of the framing/defining of a much broader landscape instead of just the golf course) a sense of expansive isolation.

Peter

[Tim Gavrich]

I have always thought it curious when courses tout themselves as consisting of 18 holes that offer the players complete seclusion from the rest.  I have always preferred a measure of intimacy on golf courses, where over the course of 18 holes you can see a bunch of other groups on a bunch of other holes a handful of different times, with a couple brief crossovers that afford you the opportunity to interact with another group somewhere--even in brief passing--or even run into someone you know.  I think a sort of "tavern culture" is a tangible part of what makes the avid golf community so enthusiastic and tight-knit.  Golf courses about which marketers boast, "You wont see another group all day!" promote a sense of insularity and serenity that is cool every now and then, but as for me, I rather like the feeling of collective human energy I would detect on a Saturday or Sunday morning at Hartford Golf Club last summer, when I could stand next to the snack bar (a welcome brief respite during the morning's loop) and be able to see a half dozen or more other groups plodding along, heading away from or toward us.

Now of course there are exceptions, e.g. Yale, where that sense of enclosure on many holes combines with the adventuresomeness of the terrain to create a sense of splendid isolation.  But then again, there are a small handful of times when you'll see other golfers anyway, which is always cool and brings you out of that jungle mentality for a moment and you remember that, yes, this is still a golf course and other people are enjoying it along with my group.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Tom - We can only agree to disagree on what we think others think, personally I like the same as you but I am thinking Mr Average golfer rather than the architecurally learned and everyone is going to have different likes dislikes. Ofcourse if you look at most UK courses every bloody gap between every fairway seems to get filled in with trees. You need a big landscape for your courses, its unlikely we are going to get a good Doak course on 95 acres with a motorway flanking one side and a steel factory on the other.

[Eric Smith]

Didn't Pine Valley earn its reputation as being great whilst being somewhat open?

2


3


10



*I snagged these from the GCA Facebook page.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom - We can only agree to disagree on what we think others think, personally I like the same as you but I am thinking Mr Average golfer rather than the architecurally learned and everyone is going to have different likes dislikes. Ofcourse if you look at most UK courses every bloody gap between every fairway seems to get filled in with trees. You need a big landscape for your courses, its unlikely we are going to get a good Doak course on 95 acres with a motorway flanking one side and a steel factory on the other.

Ian:

There's a motorway running right through the middle of Lost Dunes, and an old concrete factory floor under the mounds on the third hole.  But it's on a lot more than 95 acres.

[Ben Sims]

 Comfort is such a basic and subconscious human component to enjoyment.  Extreme sports only appeal to a thin minority for this reason.  Being comfortable and at ease in an environment is what many individuals associate with enjoyment.  The majority of American golfers become accustomed to tree lined layouts and visual seperation between holes.  I think this is one of theprimary reasons why tree-lined layouts seem to enjoy popularlity, despite their obvious playing deficiencies and turf issues. 

I also think gradual change tends to cement a certain aesthetic into people's minds.  An old guy at Pine Valley gradually becomes comfortable with the aesthetics he's seen over the last 3-4 decades and is resistant to do anything that would change it.  Even though 4 decades ago the course looked very different from today.

[David_Tepper]

Isn't Royal County Down an example of a links course that has both openness and separation? While there are no trees, the dune ridges that separate many of the holes do create playing corridors that give a sense of isolation. It is only when you stand on many of the elevated tees that you take in the "big picture" of the course.   

[George Pazin]

The majority of American golfers become accustomed to tree lined layouts and visual seperation between holes.  I think this is one of the primary reasons why tree-lined layouts seem to enjoy popularlity, despite their obvious playing deficiencies and turf issues. 

I think it depends largely on the type of course when you spent your formative golfing years. The course I've played the most is a parkland muni, but it is very open - i.e. it has trees, but the fairways aren't tree-lined, the trees tend to be on the periphery of the course. There is nothing I enjoy more than walking a round there and running into friends on other holes. I am not at all a fan of isolation.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Look at the web site http://www.scotaviaimages.co.uk/gallery/index.cgi?mode=search&searchstring=golf for aerial photos of golf courses. Note how many give an open display even those with some trees and I am not talking about Links courses.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sean,

In theory you can look at what WAS built, and WHY it was built, no?

The links land was actually used mostly because it was deemed unfit for other development purposes, no?  Similarly, open inland sites were valued in many cases to avoid the cost of heavy clearing.  Only later did tech allow golf to be built on wooded sites.  IMHO, golf is adaptable with the proper technology, and agree that variation is the spice of life, and of golf courses.  There is no right way or right site, although those "unsuited" ocean sites were certainly a god send to golf.

It would appear, as TD says, that golfers prefer some connection to nature, though.  And, in abscence of water, trees appear to be the next best thing.  IMHO, they also generally prefer some separation between holes, unless anyone can give a reason all those open courses were planted so heavily over the years.

It might have been for safety or other reason.  However, people do enjoy being in "confined or defined" spaces.  Hence the routing in dunes land mostly in the valleys.  It so happens that the space of one hole makes for a nicely and humanly scaled defined space, also used so often by the Enlgish Estates - the open meadow with a defined end..

But, its not universal either - broad vistas can easily trump enclosed spaces, so if the vista is broad enough, its probably more satisfying to most than the defined space.  Also, I have used the old landscape architecture trick of designing views "around the corner" or "peep hole" views that give a combo of defined space vs connection to the rest of the world.

[David_Tepper]

Jeff B. -

Very interesting comments. One of the things that makes Castle Stuart so appealing visually is that it combines defined playing corridors with "infinity" vistas. The best of both, so to speak.

DT

[Kyle Harris]

Separation and isolation achieved by scale and not barriers is a very keen measure on the quality of the architecture.

[DMoriarty]

The links land was actually used mostly because it was deemed unfit for other development purposes, no?

No.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Quote from: Jeff_Brauer on Today at 02:09:21 PM
The links land was actually used mostly because it was deemed unfit for other development purposes, no?

Quote from: DMoriarty
No.

The Farmer and his :-