All Star Snub!!!! AA3 # (25)

[Steve Lang]

  David,

In my reviews I was only interested in the holes' outline, yardage (both for length and landing zone widths), and the topo features involved along the way from tee to green to be able to figure out how it could be played (or short circuited) by big and small hitters and the pitfalls and opportunities presented.   

I liked #25 the best, perhaps because i still use paper and pencil a lot too    

p.s. why did you not draw greens?

[David Minogue]

Steve,

 

I enjoyed perusing the other armchair architects routing's and I felt the system of not voting for your own entry is fair as it would be a biased decision. I for not one moment claim that my routing should be the winner I just feel that I could have been a contender top 5 possibly.

 

Your idea for the polo area sounds great could be a real revenue spinner!!!!

 

To be honest I did not consider leaving room for another 18 but i might give it a bash seen as you brought it up.

 

 

Dieter,

 

I did not mean to offend anyone by making remarks about the use of visual aids, but people react to that hot chick with the short skirt or that nice sleek looking Ferrari!!!!

 

I did not feel the need to draw greens bunkers or any other items as I felt that the green sites I chose were interesting and could be seen better with the stick routing.

 

The same could be said about landing areas if you noticed the lines I took off the tees on numerous holes I tried to make use all the land and I guess I probably did leave myself and other people off to their imagination a bit too much!!!

[Ally Mcintosh]

Undoubtedly people are heavily skewed by how pretty a master plan looks when judging a GCA competition. In theory this should reduce in proportion to an increase in knowledge about architecture. But I have yet to meet someone who isn’t influenced by graphics to at least some extent – if only because there can be an underlying (and wrong) opinion that creativity with software must equal creativity with the actual design and build.

However, no matter how bad your drawing / computer skills are, there should still be a minimum of information given on any routing / master plan prepared for presentation. This should include outline green shapes and a bunker plan, even if things eventually change somewhat in the field.

I don’t know any architect who presents a stick routing up to be judged. Stick routings are merely the tool used whilst going through the process.

[Garland Bayley]

...
- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. ...

Only for those that play more than 100 holes in a day. The rest of us like to have lunch between rounds, and have no problem with this feature.
Heck, we even like to have dinner or high tea before going out for the 3rd round of the day.

Wait, so you're saying that nobody other than a select few would have an issue with +/- 250-yard walk to both the first tee and back to the house?

I didn't measure. I just figured Mr. 100+ was complaining about for what would be for him a green to tee transition, whereas, it would not be for anyone else.

Besides, any course could provide a shuttle if needed like Chambers Bay does.

[Alex Miller]

...
- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. ...

Only for those that play more than 100 holes in a day. The rest of us like to have lunch between rounds, and have no problem with this feature.
Heck, we even like to have dinner or high tea before going out for the 3rd round of the day.

Wait, so you're saying that nobody other than a select few would have an issue with +/- 250-yard walk to both the first tee and back to the house?

I didn't measure. I just figured Mr. 100+ was complaining about for what would be for him a green to tee transition, whereas, it would not be for anyone else.

Besides, any course could provide a shuttle if needed like Chambers Bay does.

In contrast, entry 17 had its first tee mowed into hole 18's surrounds. I thought that was neat, but I did not ding David for the 18-1 transition.

[Jim Colton]

...
- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. ...

Only for those that play more than 100 holes in a day. The rest of us like to have lunch between rounds, and have no problem with this feature.
Heck, we even like to have dinner or high tea before going out for the 3rd round of the day.

Wait, so you're saying that nobody other than a select few would have an issue with +/- 250-yard walk to both the first tee and back to the house?

I didn't measure. I just figured Mr. 100+ was complaining about for what would be for him a green to tee transition, whereas, it would not be for anyone else.

Besides, any course could provide a shuttle if needed like Chambers Bay does.

Weren't you the same guy railing against #4's green-to-tee transitions?  Plus, it's 25-feet uphill back up to the clubhouse. Get the carts ready!

[Mike Nuzzo]

I don't like the 6 holes stringing out then 4 stringing back in generally the same directions.
For that reason I'm out.

I did not vote during the first round.
Cheers

[Alex Miller]

I don't like the 6 holes stringing out then 4 stringing back in generally the same directions.
For that reason I'm out.

I did not vote during the first round.
Cheers

I think 15-18 is excusable, especially since 18 comes south a bit. 3-8 could seem like much of the same, depending on that day's wind. 3, 5, and 8 are all par 3's that play generally the same direction too...

Can someone who's played Sand Hills comment on the back 9? If I recall it is very out and back.

[Garland Bayley]

...
- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. ...

Only for those that play more than 100 holes in a day. The rest of us like to have lunch between rounds, and have no problem with this feature.
Heck, we even like to have dinner or high tea before going out for the 3rd round of the day.

Wait, so you're saying that nobody other than a select few would have an issue with +/- 250-yard walk to both the first tee and back to the house?

I didn't measure. I just figured Mr. 100+ was complaining about for what would be for him a green to tee transition, whereas, it would not be for anyone else.

Besides, any course could provide a shuttle if needed like Chambers Bay does.

Weren't you the same guy railing against #4's green-to-tee transitions?  Plus, it's 25-feet uphill back up to the clubhouse. Get the carts ready!

I'm sorry, but #18 to #1 is not a green-to-tee transition.
If you are downgrading him for a 25 foot, 250 yard walk back to the clubhouse, that's OK, but IMNSHO you have no business downgrading for a #18 to #1 transition.

[Jim Colton]

Garland,

 I don't know where his clubhouse is really, so all I can do is average the distance between 1 & 18, which is about 540 yards. His clubhouse could be right next to the 18th green or right next to the first tee. Either way, one or both are going to be lengthy walks. As I pointed out, it could probably be avoided with a change to 18 that wouldn't compromise the course.

 There has been a lot of debate either for or against the transitions. Maybe we are making a big deal about it because it's easily observable, but I think as part of the design you have to constantly ask yourself if there's a better way. Having a mix of lengths is fine in my opinion, but I'd want to make sure the longer walks were worth the extra effort.

[Bill Brightly]

I'd want to make sure the longer walks were worth the extra effort.

+1

Short walks are nice. But if golfers are going to Nebraska, there better be plenty of GREAT holes. All else is whip cream.

[Daryn_Soldan]

Bill, great point! It would be interesting to gauge where the green to tee walks are prioritized among cliental of this type of operation. With that size of the site and the tamed-down topography there's a lot of relatively open ground. The longer walks aren't a perfect solution but I also had issue with a couple routings that used a lot of "connector" holes to get around to the interesting parts of the site. I'm not sure that works in this setting with the competition nearby. Of course, the genius is making the connector holes interesting and functional pieces of the whole!

- Daryn

[Matthew Sander]

Daryn,

Your point is well taken, but doesn't the charm of this region lie not only in the bold larger scale landforms, but also the amount of micro movement that exists in the less bold stretches? These smaller scale features that may not present themselves on the topo provided for the contest are sometimes responsible for outstanding golf holes. At least that is what we often discuss here.

That said, there is really no way to account for these types of features in this contest, and therefore the voters primarily have to assess the way the contestant used the landforms large enough to show on the topo. Not really disagreeing with you, just thinking out loud...

[Brett_Morrissy]

I want to firstly say that IMHO entry #23 would be the ideal benchmark for a future contest - with the addition of a scorecard, yardages etc - but the drawing of the actual golf course elements of tees, fairways, bunkers and greens was the clearest and easiest to understand of all the entries - I dont know who #23 is.

David,
I would think that ALL of the entrants thought their routing was good enough to make the top 5 - human nature - but it doesn't mean they will.

I based my voting a bunch of different criteria, giving each of these elements a mark out of five - importantly, I also included all the elements that were detailed in the brief provided by Alex.

The HAT I chose to wear, when reviewing all the entries, was that of the golf course owner(s) that we as contestants were doing the routing for. So my first criticism of your routing, is that you assumed that these "people" who had to go and assess 25 proposals - in a one pager format - would have the imagination that you had when designing your course. Although it may sound harsh, I felt your routing was rushed, as there was little detail provided, whether that is the case or not, is not really the point. I can only vote on what  was presented and what I think is the right way - rightly or wrongly - and I may well be wrong, and that is fine, and thankfully there were plenty of voters, to spread the low scores and the high scores. I am not trying to be mean-spirited, but let you know none of us think the same way - or assess things the same way - and as the commnets above can attest, we can assume that is what it is actually like in the real world.

I marked the routing poorly for bunkering (none provided), sunset routing (didnt present - even after comments above, I want the sunset holes to be near the clubhouse, bar and food). On that, I think the travel is too far from the clubhouse (personally) to the accomodation - there is plenty of space, why put it over there? Only one short hole provided in the routing, lot of points off for that. I think it is also unrealistic to expect us to imagine the great greens you had, without at least an outline - big/small, angles, long, wide, etc
Generally, for mine, the course is way too long even after taking into consideration the changes in elevation, and using the scale provided on your routing, many of the holes bare no resemblance to your score card yardages. I used the scale to measure most of the holes, and was disappointed with the length, I dont see a lot of fun holes out there.
Apart from the middle section of holes on the West hill, I think with such a large property to work with, there should have been more change in direction, it is not enough to rely on ground contours for variety, imho.
Finally, with the course set out at a 7221 yard par 71 it is just too long for me, that is not my cup of tea - sorry.

As Col said, well done for putting yourself out there for feedback.

David, I apologise for being so blunt, but I see no benefit in telling you it was all rosy from my point of view.

I know you will let me have it when the time comes, as mine is cherry ripe for tearing apart!

[Daryn_Soldan]

Matthew,

Good points on the micro-contours and I totally agree on the charm of smaller land movement. Wildhorse is a great example, a couple macro features but also a lot of great golf over less interesting (on a large scale) land.

I just think that on a site like this, with the competition nearby, utilization of the bolder landforms is almost a necessity. It would be very easy to follow the contour lines or use the bolder features as backdrops. However we wouldn't have much up, down or over mixed in. It also allows for more variety of backdrops, the importance of which cannot be overlooked out here where there's sky and horizon... without much in between. The contrast within a routing of intimate settings (think 7 green at Ballyneal) with the long sweeping vistas we associate with the sand hills is just plain cool. I think the best way to achieve those contrasts is to interact with major features in a variety of ways.

- Daryn

[Don_Mahaffey]

Daryn,

Your point is well taken, but doesn't the charm of this region lie not only in the bold larger scale landforms, but also the amount of micro movement that exists in the less bold stretches? These smaller scale features that may not present themselves on the topo provided for the contest are sometimes responsible for outstanding golf holes. At least that is what we often discuss here.

That said, there is really no way to account for these types of features in this contest, and therefore the voters primarily have to assess the way the contestant used the landforms large enough to show on the topo. Not really disagreeing with you, just thinking out loud...

Matthew, exactly right!
I've heard some criticisms for using "flat" areas. I spent two summers in the sand hills and the "flat" areas are often pretty damn good for golf because they are full of 3-6ft wrinkles. The topo and the flyover (not a fan) flatten everything out and so most contestants were drawn to using the more severe potions of the property. Fact is, in real life, that may mean significant earth work to make the holes work. In the initial post of this contest, you had a photo showing the land you would be working with. take that photo and throw in 30-40 foot elevation changes and you better be damn good at routing or your going to be moving a lot of earth to make the holes playable. One other note, there is noting wrong with using some "quiet" parts of the course. Given the local, you can bet that some of the "quiet" areas would in fact have some of the coolest ground for golf.

[Ronald Montesano]

- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. Given this is a national destination club with probably very little else to do than play 36 holes or more in a day, this could be an issue. Perhaps having the 18th play more easterly, say to the 'Area' in Short Game area, could've been a good option. It would utilize that cool feature just west of the plateau on the 2nd and 3rd shot.

To whit, "It will be quite interesting to determine and we can do so this June. One super neat and appealing aspect of the new course is that it finishes ~600 yards from where it starts (the architect wasn’t burdened by a routing requirement to begin and end at the clubhouse)."

This latter quote, from this very site's founder, on a soon-to-open course.

[Alex Miller]

- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. Given this is a national destination club with probably very little else to do than play 36 holes or more in a day, this could be an issue. Perhaps having the 18th play more easterly, say to the 'Area' in Short Game area, could've been a good option. It would utilize that cool feature just west of the plateau on the 2nd and 3rd shot.

To whit, "It will be quite interesting to determine and we can do so this June. One super neat and appealing aspect of the new course is that it finishes ~600 yards from where it starts (the architect wasn’t burdened by a routing requirement to begin and end at the clubhouse)."

This latter quote, from this very site's founder, on a soon-to-open course.

To Jim's point though, I think this "feature" can be easily fixed. And in this case there was no "green light" given to the architect. The architect is trying to present their best routing/plan to the owners.

I don't necessarily think it's as big of an issue as Jim does, but I don't think it's a decision that's validated just because Ran liked it on a completely different site that already has another course (so 18 Nicklaus to 1 Doak is theoretically not a long walk). I don't know if you were trying to imply that, but I think context to that quote might help.

[Jim Colton]

- The only other potential negative I see is the 500+ yard gap from the 18th green to the 1st tee, which could be a drawback for some. Given this is a national destination club with probably very little else to do than play 36 holes or more in a day, this could be an issue. Perhaps having the 18th play more easterly, say to the 'Area' in Short Game area, could've been a good option. It would utilize that cool feature just west of the plateau on the 2nd and 3rd shot.

To whit, "It will be quite interesting to determine and we can do so this June. One super neat and appealing aspect of the new course is that it finishes ~600 yards from where it starts (the architect wasn’t burdened by a routing requirement to begin and end at the clubhouse)."

This latter quote, from this very site's founder, on a soon-to-open course.

And a couple quotes from that course's designer:

"Since all the land close to the clubhouse is committed to cabins and founder's lots, it was inevitable that any new course would have a remote start and finish.  But, I figured it wasn't essential for those two points to be in the same place -- so I had the freedom of coming up with a routing plan that starts in one place and finishes in another."

And

"But it's very uncommon, because it does create logistical issues, and we'd always rather finish close to the clubhouse if we could."

Tom was freed up on the DR site because of the land tied up as mentioned above and the fact that DR Jack starts away from the house and players are zipping around on carts from the second they are on property. So with those constraints, I'm quite certain the find the best 18 hole approach, start/end be damned was the best approach. But there has to be a limit, right? I doubt Tom would've gotten to the 12th at Dismal and just kept going northeast.

But on an open site with no such constraints? I think it matters. You could try the "well, I just tried to find the best 18 holes" argument, but it doesn't carry much weight when others have excellent routings that finish close to the house and I pointed out a reasonable alternative.

Considering most if not all of the world's best courses finish where they started, would you say they left something on the table by being held to such a silly constraint?

[Ronald Montesano]

I don't necessarily think it's as big of an issue as Jim does, but I don't think it's a decision that's validated just because Ran liked it on a completely different site that already has another course (so 18 Nicklaus to 1 Doak is theoretically not a long walk). I don't know if you were trying to imply that, but I think context to that quote might help.

As to your first 13 words, good.

As to the rest, I'm confused. Ran's opinion validates it as much as does anyone's on this site. Will there be a lot of traffic from 18 to 1? The quote needed to be out of context, as it seems silly to imply that one guy can do it and one cannot. Pat's recent thread on those garish good'n plentys behind the par three green at Streamsong (I think it was Pat's thread, and maybe it dealt with the hole as a whole) is in the same spirit as my reference. Are people in such a hurry that they can't drive back to the clubhouse? Walkers won't care, as they love to walk. My thinking is that the club would find a way (perhaps a bag cleaning drop near the 18th green, after which you take your cart back, get your car and claim your clubs) to minimize its importance.

[Alex Miller]

I don't see why you needed to note that Ran's opinion is just as valid as anyone else's on this site (if not more), as I was only trying to say that it was still an opinion in the same way that Jim has a differing one. I was also saying that it was a completely different situation which doesn't necessarily mean he would have the same opinion on this one. Jim makes other very good points and I will let those stand on their own.