News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Howard Riefs

  • Karma: +0/-0
« Last Edit: September 30, 2015, 02:42:34 PM by Howard Riefs »
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2015, 03:20:56 PM »
Cool stuff.


I love Old Macdonald. I could play it every day for the rest of my golfing life and be perfectly content. Pretty easily my favorite course at Bandon.
H.P.S.

K Rafkin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2015, 03:39:39 PM »
Whats the preferred terminology for a course like Old Mac?  Is a template course, a tribute course, or something else?


Either way, despite the use of template holes and inspiration from other courses around the world I still find it to be one of the most unique courses I've ever played.

Emile Bonfiglio

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2015, 04:09:41 PM »
Cool stuff.


I love Old Macdonald. I could play it every day for the rest of my golfing life and be perfectly content. Pretty easily my favorite course at Bandon.


I agree, because even on my bad days I can still play the course with a great level of fun. Not so with the other 3.
You can follow me on twitter @luxhomemagpdx or instagram @option720

Philip Hensley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2015, 04:30:41 PM »
Would also recommend the dvd on the making of Old Mac.

Peter Pallotta

Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2015, 06:35:52 PM »
Thanks much for posting that, Howard. Besides the value of Tom's descriptions/comments, I found the simplified topo map the only one I've ever be able to (almost) "read". It is still shocking to me how bad I am at understanding what those kinds of maps are trying to tell me. I keep staring at them hoping the lines and squiggles will turn into letters and words.

Pat -I only know Tom's work from photos and descriptions, but from that (limited) perspective my mind has decided that I'd put Ballyneal and OM as my 1 and 2, and neck and neck. They both seem to have such scale and sweep and sturdy drama (the gca equivalent of Mt Rushmore) that I don't even notice the complete and partial (respectively) absence of ocean views.

Peter   
« Last Edit: September 24, 2015, 06:40:55 PM by PPallotta »

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2015, 06:58:22 PM »
Pete,
 
That's a conceptual map, I'm not seeing any topo lines on that one!  :D
 
P.S.  I've played Ballyneal, Rock Creek, and PacDunes, and for me Ballyneal comes in at #3 of those 3.  RCCC and PacDunes are that good.  I'd love to get back to Bandon to try out Old Mac and the other courses...

Peter Pallotta

Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2015, 07:14:49 PM »
 :-[


Thanks, Kalen; ah geez, I'm even worse at reading topos than thought!


Yes, I think Shivas might call RCCC his favourite, and of course I've read nothing but the highest praise for Pacific; I defer to you guys (having played none of them myself), but there is something about BN and OM, well, there is something.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2015, 07:17:14 PM »
I can also vouch for RCCC...it just may have the finest set of collection of par 4s I've ever played....
 
(14-16 are out of this world good and completely different from each other)
 
 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2015, 08:32:35 PM »
It's weird that the description I wrote just prior to the opening of the course is just now being published online.  They sent it to me out of the blue a couple of weeks ago, to ask if I wanted to change anything; there was just one line that seemed off.


Peter, the lines on the map shown here just illustrated which areas were covered by vegetation [gorse] and which were open.  Several of them DID follow the topo however, like the semicircle shape to the left of #13 green, which the line of the gorse also traces the base of the small hill that was [and still is] over there.  So you've got a good imagination.


Interestingly, the only topo we had for Old Macdonald had a five-foot contour interval rather than two feet.  It was good enough to show features like the plateau that's now the 2nd green, or the ridge that runs right of #7 fairway to #8 green; but there were lots of smaller features that didn't show up well on the map.  Since we were looking for places to fit the various templates, we figured we didn't need to know some of the smaller details.  We didn't find some of them until the gorse was cleared away, but we wound up leaving a lot of those small features in the ground unless they really clashed with the idea of the hole.


The process of designing and building Old Mac [with so many others involved, credited and not credited] was different enough from my other projects that I never really knew how to feel about it.  I do think we avoided becoming trapped in the genre of a "replica" course and built something more special than that, but I don't quite take the same pride in it than I do in some of my more original designs ... Ballyneal and Rock Creek and Pacific Dunes all being very high on my personal list.

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2015, 11:02:54 PM »
Tom:


Curious as to what line you changed.


For what's its worth, they've had the write-up available in the proshop for anyone playing the course, and the descriptions are in the yardage books. 


Still haven't seen a back right pin on 1 or front pin on 8.


Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2015, 09:44:12 AM »
Tom:


Curious as to what line you changed.


Sven:


The correction was in regard to the history of the Biarritz hole, which I learned here   :)

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2015, 10:06:16 AM »
I do think we avoided becoming trapped in the genre of a "replica" course and built something more special than that, but I don't quite take the same pride in it than I do in some of my more original designs ... Ballyneal and Rock Creek and Pacific Dunes all being very high on my personal list.


To be fair, I have played Rock Creek and I think it is absolutely fantastic. In fact, I like it more than Pacific Dunes. Kalen is spot on when he says 14-16 is all-world good.


Obviously, deciding which course among the ones listed above is "best" is splitting hairs to a large degree. They are all great, Old Macdonald just fits my eye and hits a lot of my personal sweet spots.
H.P.S.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2015, 11:45:01 AM »
Obviously, deciding which course among the ones listed above is "best" is splitting hairs to a large degree. They are all great, Old Macdonald just fits my eye and hits a lot of my personal sweet spots.


I'm not trying to identify which of them are "best," either.  That's probably not for me to decide, though sometimes I express an opinion.  I was just talking about my personal feelings about those mentioned on this thread.

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2015, 11:51:02 AM »
Obviously, deciding which course among the ones listed above is "best" is splitting hairs to a large degree. They are all great, Old Macdonald just fits my eye and hits a lot of my personal sweet spots.


I'm not trying to identify which of them are "best," either.  That's probably not for me to decide, though sometimes I express an opinion.  I was just talking about my personal feelings about those mentioned on this thread.


Sorry, didn't mean to say that you were.
H.P.S.

Aaron Marks

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2015, 12:46:37 PM »
Tom - A little off topic, where do you find topo maps with a 2ft contour interval?  I use the USGS 7.5 minute maps for backcountry adventures, and those have a (pretty impressive) 20ft interval.  I've heard of 1.5m contour intervals (maybe the 5ft interval you had for Old Mac?), but 2ft, that's just awesome. 
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 12:48:46 PM by Aaron Marks »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2015, 01:01:18 PM »
Tom - A little off topic, where do you find topo maps with a 2ft contour interval?  I use the USGS 7.5 minute maps for backcountry adventures, and those have a (pretty impressive) 20ft interval.  I've heard of 1.5m contour intervals (maybe the 5ft interval you had for Old Mac?), but 2ft, that's just awesome.


Aaron:


We used to have to get the clients to have an aerial survey flown specially for their site.  It's pretty expensive -- $5000 or even $10k depending on how much land you were using.  Plus, it would take two or three months to get a map in hand.


My understanding is that there are some technologies available now to acquire the same maps much faster and cheaper, in some locations anyway.  I don't really understand how they are being made; I've heard references to drones, LIDAR, and lots of different ideas.


Yes, a two-foot contour map is excellent ... it shows a lot of the small features that you'd like to incorporate around greens, if you understand what you are looking at.  I really learned all that from having a great map for High Pointe, and having a few months before construction started to wander the site with the map in hand, and see how the little features on the ground looked on the map.  However, some of the smallest features may or may not show up, it just depends whether the top of them is 82.5 feet high [you'll see them] or 81.5 [they're probably invisible on the map].


People have often sent me the 20-foot interval USGS maps, but they only help in a general sense of showing whether the majority of the land is too steep or not.

Joshua Pettit

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2015, 01:02:20 PM »
Tom,

I just finally played Old Mac for the first time on Tuesday.  Last time I saw it you'd just begun the clearing process and Ken drove me around the dunes in his truck.  Needless to say I barely recognized the property.

I remember years ago Jim showed me a topo map with a routing that was thought to be finalized at the time, but then he said you guys discovered a new piece of gorse covered land that was really interesting and you decided to change the routing one last time to use that land.  Do you know which part of the golf course I'm referring to, and can you explain what holes changed because of the new land?

By the way, the fire helped a bit with some gorse removal.  I'm sure next spring those areas will be on fire with new vegetation.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 01:04:11 PM by Joshua Pettit »
"The greatest and fairest of things are done by nature, and the lesser by art."

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2015, 01:09:21 PM »
Tom,


I just finally played Old Mac for the first time on Tuesday.  Last time I saw it you'd just begun the clearing process and Ken drove me around the dunes in his truck.  Needless to say I barely recognized the property.


I remember years ago Jim showed me a topo map with a routing that was thought to be finalized at the time, but then he said you guys discovered a new piece of gorse covered land that was really interesting and you decided to change the routing one last time to use that land.  Do you know which part of the golf course I'm referring to, and can you explain what holes changed because of the new land?


By the way, the fire helped a bit with some gorse removal.  I'm sure next spring those areas will be on fire with new vegetation.


Josh:


The "new land" that Jim was referring to was the site for #16 green.  The big bowl that's there wasn't so obvious until the gorse burned years ago.  [It also wasn't as much of a bowl ... we built most of the hill that makes the 2nd shot blind from the left side.]  And we realized how much the big dune ridge tapered down behind that green, and how much easier it would be to go back over the big dune ridge there, than further to the south.


Before that, you would have gone from #7 out toward a green by #15 tee [ledged into the side of the hill], then looped back inside with another hole before the current #10.  The routing was going to go back over the big ridge where #14 just goes up the hill now, and then we would have played north into the corner by #17 tee, and come back out of there with the last two holes.  So, there was really only the one little piece of ground that was added to the plan, but it wound up affecting the whole sequence of the course after #7, and today's #14, 15 and 16 are entirely different than what we had originally planned.

Howard Riefs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Tom Doak's Hole-By-Hole Description of Old Macdonald"
« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2015, 02:43:32 PM »
Back nine now posted above and here.
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back