"The course was created in the days when course design was governed by......

[Thomas Dai]

"The course was created in the days when course design was governed by the natural lie of the land and not the mechanical earth mover."


I read this sentence on the website of a club/course sometimes highlighted herein and its wording appealed to me.


Thoughts and comments?


Bonus point if you can name the club/course.


Atb

[Steve Lang]

  Could be Reddish Vale or I imagine any of several hundred courses in the UK...

[Niall C]

Steve is correct. Up until the 1920's courses were still being built in the UK by manual labour and the use of horse drawn scoops. Difficult to redesign the landscape if that is all you have at your disposal.


Niall

[Peter Pallotta]

Thomas - it's a fine sentence, with strong words: "governed" is my favourite. It suggests a prevailing law/natural order that was much more solid and substantive than the ever-changing whims/ideas of developers hoping to hit the jackpot and architects hoping to make a name for themselves.     

[Thomas Dai]

Steve is correct. Up until the 1920's courses were still being built in the UK by manual labour and the use of horse drawn scoops. Difficult to redesign the landscape if that is all you have at your disposal.
Niall

I don't disagree.


But is the outcome from aspects such as playability/fun/interest etc preferable when less earth is moved?


Is moving a bunch of earth necessary for good design or does moving earth, especially fairway related, cover up a lack of design imagination in comparison to working with what's there already?


Atb

[Garland Bayley]

Steve is correct. Up until the 1920's courses were still being built in the UK by manual labour and the use of horse drawn scoops. Difficult to redesign the landscape if that is all you have at your disposal.


Niall

Guess that would apply to Crail when they started up in 1786.

[Duncan Cheslett]

A hundred years ago and more, sites for golf courses were chosen specifically for their suitability and interest of terrain. With such land, course design amounted to routing the course making best use of the natural features, and then adding greens, tees, and bunkers.


Alister MacKenzie described the site at Reddish Vale as being "Agreeably undulating without being too hilly". This description could be applied just as easily to much of the English countryside, offering up many natural sites for golf courses.


In those days too, of course, availability of land was less of a problem. If money could be found to acquire the property from the local farmer or landowner, a golf course could be built. There was little if any need to attempt to build golf courses on dull, flat, featureless terrain, given the relatively abundant supply of undulating land better suited to the purpose.


The aftermath of the second world war however, brought much tighter planning restrictions, competition for land with house builders, and the ability to shift earth with heavy machinery. Courses built in recent times are likely to be more remote from centres of population, and on farmland which needs to be shaped to give real interest.


I am reliably informed by one of his long-time associates that Tom Fazio's ideal site for a golf course would be a 200 acre parking lot.


How times change...

[Sean_A]

Duncan


A ton of old courses were built on terrible sites if drainage is at all a consideration.  To top it off, many holes were designed to retain water rather than shed water.  Some of the old courses are very good, many are not terribly special. 


Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Good point. Once-upon-a-time farming in GB and thus good farming land, was extremely important. Not sure it is these days though what with population, international transportation etc etc.
Atb

[Jon Wiggett]

FYI, generally golf courses up to the 1930's were built on sites which were poor arable land not good. It was only really when location was the overriding priority that good arable land was used due to cost. The reason why some courses chose to 'dew pond' their greens (prevent water from draining from the deeper soil profile) was because a) they did not have irrigation systems therefor it was a good idea to allow the lower soil profile to retain water and b) they were not played on much in the winter.


Looked at from the outside it appears very stupid to over drain an area of land to the extent that you have to irrigate it. Whether this is a result of lab coats over engineering construction techniques or maybe GCA's being to unimaginative to develop a construction system that is both affordable and works is perhaps a subject for a separate thread but it is surprising how little green construction has advanced in the last 65 years or so.


Jon