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.


Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #125 on: March 22, 2013, 11:21:03 PM »
Simply awesome, Jim.

For any newbies who may not have seen this, I bring you this brief musical interlude

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A899MJ6NXBA

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #126 on: March 23, 2013, 10:17:56 AM »
Topic of the day: coolest greens

Jeb Bearer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #127 on: March 23, 2013, 10:33:35 AM »
Define "cool": greensites (ie routing), bunkering, etc.?

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #128 on: March 23, 2013, 11:01:23 AM »
Jeb,

 I was intentionally vague. You don't need me to define it for you.

Don_Mahaffey

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #129 on: March 23, 2013, 11:10:39 AM »
One note about green sites from a greenkeeper point of view.
The site has to drain.
Even though it doesn't rain a lot in the Sand Hills, when it does, it comes in buckets. I see  greens set down in holes or up against big slopes. IMO, it is OK to do this a bit, but you need to be careful. No matter how cool the green site, it has to function, and I don't think it is all that cool if you have to ring the green with basins when you are building in pure sand.

Storm water run off matters, and you don't want it running across your greens.

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #130 on: March 23, 2013, 11:44:32 AM »
Don,

  For our edification, can you point out a few examples of 'red light' greensites that one might want to reconsider? Not trying to call anybody out, but rather learn about greensiting from a practical standpoint.

Don_Mahaffey

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #131 on: March 23, 2013, 11:51:52 AM »
Jim, I'd rather not as I don't want to single anyone out.

But, I did see a number of greens sitting down in what appeared to be low areas. Punch bowls are cool but need to handled carefully.

Another thing to look for is greens hard up against a big slope. Smaller slope with small water shed, no big deal as long it's not done course wide.

Green up against big slope where a lot of water gets moving fast, not a good idea.

I think you'll see it appears that is done sometimes, but upon closer review you'll often see the architect added a small swale between the slope and green to direct water away

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #132 on: March 23, 2013, 12:02:54 PM »
Don,

 That is helpful. Thank you.

 It's funny that you mention punchbowl, because one hole that I 'found' and lamented not being able to use was this natural punchbowl in the northern part of the map. Turns out nobody ended up using it. I thought you could build a pretty cool green that gave you a peek from the left side (require flirting with that swale in the fairway). Something like this:


Jeb Bearer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #133 on: March 23, 2013, 08:50:23 PM »
Alright favorite greens...

Entry 1 - Hole 2
2-4
3-12
4-14
5-7
6-6
7-11
8-16
9-4
10-16
11-18
12-15
13-10
14-11
15-10
16-3
17-5
18-8
19-16
20-17
21-10
22-12
23-5
24-12
25-10

One thing I noticed was that many people used a lot of the same green sites in very different ways, each finding a way to fit a certain natural green into his routing.

Brett_Morrissy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #134 on: March 24, 2013, 01:59:32 AM »
Firstly, Jim, thank you for all the spaghetti maps and the google earth flyovers - I really loved seeing my submission 'come to life' in 3D.

I realised though, that I had always in my mind, the initial image that Alex loaded up of the sand hills countryside, so I suppose I always had a site with more severe movement, than what we were given with the reduced contour lines. I still tried as much as possible, rightly or wrongly, to make the most of the more severe sections or features, or that was at least my aim. The flyover helped highlight where I missed the mark a little, and another couple of holes where I am most pleased with the result.

In finding the routing, choosing the par 3's was important for me, as I am a big fan of par 3's and they are often the highlights of a course for me.
I began with 4 distances that I wanted to find - at one end of the scale, a tee shot that required a driver or 3 wood with option for the ball to run onto the green and the other end was a wedge or short iron - i also had a short list in my head of great par 3's that i wanted to use as inspiration, and feel i got close to a couple. Next I wanted to find them routed to the four points of the compass if possible(I got to three), and thirdly where they occurred in the routing, trying to achieve the correct balance I was looking for.

I think there are more opportunities on a site like this for interesting short holes as you have two things in your favour, you can dictate exactly where you want your golfer to play his shot from, and you can use features that are sometimes not appropriate for longer holes, because you can also control the distance and hence the club required.

Overall, I didn't have any issues in finding the holes and using the features I wanted - where I hit problems, were when I add a group of holes, say a 3-4 hole stretch, that didn't hook up to the next hole or holes. Also, things that were further down my list of priorities, par of opening/finishing holes, direction of the finishing holes, etc - as I also planned, for a site of this size, that I should have been able to further balance the entire routing around the points of the compass, especially with the two large hills on the site.

I have found it harder to indentify cool greens, as without a lot of detail on most of the submissions, it is difficult to know the intention of the design. I think most of the cool sites for greens, were used by one or more designs.

Jim, in your testing of those flyover models, did you do any with full scale, not reduced ? Was there a massive difference in the visual?
@theflatsticker

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #135 on: March 24, 2013, 10:03:27 AM »
 8) 

cool greens... are they receptive for the shots or like par 3's, do they demand true "accuracy tests" or allow several degrees of freedom, fooling one into being "onboard" but with no real hope of scoring well?

i routed each one shotter in different ~true N, S, E, W directions and picked them sometimes out of par 4 & 5 test routings...  not trying to force them into the routing if possible or use them for transition, that seems a weak excuse, demeaning their value..

p.s. is there a link to all the 3-d flyovers?
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #136 on: March 24, 2013, 10:43:50 AM »
Steve,

Most of them are up, but not all. http://golfaac.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard I believe 9-25 are up. Just click on the course and the embedded video will show up.

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #137 on: March 24, 2013, 11:32:19 AM »
Who's hungry for spaghetti (par 5's)?


Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #138 on: March 24, 2013, 12:10:58 PM »
Guys,

Just want to let you know I appreciate the 300 word descriptions/responses that are flowing in. Depending on how they fit they will either be added as  a description on the blog and flickr or into the original post.


Also if you can identify your favorite
par 3
short par 4 (<350)
mid par 4 (350-450)
long par 4 (>450)
par 5

and post some nominations for a poll we can hold to identify some standout holes it would be much appreciated!

Anders Rytter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #139 on: March 24, 2013, 12:48:21 PM »
Some of the par fives that looks fun to me

3-9
5-7
16-1
17-16
18-6
20-8
22-3
25-7

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #140 on: March 24, 2013, 01:01:14 PM »
Some of the par fives that looks fun to me

3-9
5-7
16-1
17-16
18-6
20-8
22-3
25-7

I'll add

7-11
20-11

I should also note 22-3 is actually a long par 4. :)

Anders Rytter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #141 on: March 24, 2013, 01:35:04 PM »
Sorry, ment to write 22-13

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here!
« Reply #142 on: March 24, 2013, 02:39:43 PM »
Alex, what has been decided re the 300 words intro, has that been approved for everyone to submit this - or are we leaving the rules as originally delivered?

I heard positive feedback and think it would be a good idea. I like the idea that people will have the opportunity to answer some question rather than leave people without information.

Addendum APPROVED. Please provide no more than 300 words by Sunday evening 11:59 pm EST. This will give voters a week to review entries with any questions answered (or as much as possible in 300 words).

Alex,

DONE.... just emailed to you.
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #143 on: March 24, 2013, 02:58:02 PM »
Steve,

I haven't received it yet...

I have words for courses 3, 6, 12, 16, 20, 24

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #144 on: March 24, 2013, 03:06:34 PM »
 8)  just resent so ... you should see 2 emails from me now...  ::) :o
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Jim Colton

Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #145 on: March 24, 2013, 04:12:38 PM »
Placeholder for my nominations:

par 3: 6-14, 16-4,

short par 4 (<350): 13-10, 18-12,

mid par 4 (350-450): 3-15, 4-11, 10-13, 21-12, 25-10,

long par 4 (>450)

par 5: 13-16, 18-6, 25-7
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 10:19:59 AM by Jim Colton »

Cameron DeVries

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #146 on: March 24, 2013, 05:06:29 PM »
par 3: 3-8

short par 4 (<350): 23-2

mid par 4 (350-450): 21-15

long par 4 (>450): 7-8

par 5: 4-2
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their mind cannot change anything."  -George Bernard Shaw

Jeb Bearer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #147 on: March 24, 2013, 05:50:48 PM »
Sent mine in.

Brian Ross

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #148 on: March 24, 2013, 08:07:40 PM »
Email sent.  I haven't been as active in this discussion as I'd like so far, but should be able to get more involved this week and will begin providing individual feedback to all entrants (hopefully). 
Time is but the stream I go a-fishing in.

http://www.rossgolfarchitects.com

Matthew Essig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: AAC III- Public Voting is here! (update in reply #93)
« Reply #149 on: March 24, 2013, 10:42:19 PM »
What is supposed to be in the 300 words?
"Good GCA should offer an interesting golfing challenge to the golfer not a difficult golfing challenge." Jon Wiggett