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.


Kyle Harris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #25 on: February 13, 2017, 02:32:03 PM »
Tom Doak usually seems to have the flag from another green in view behind the 8th green.  ;)


That's funny.  I can think of at least four courses where it's true:  Streamsong, Tara Iti, Old Macdonald, and The Loop (Black).  There are probably more where those came from.

Beechtree was one. *tear*

This was quite the topic of discussion with the New Zealand contingent this past weekend. Sublime round of golf.
http://kylewharris.com

Constantly blamed by 8-handicaps for their 7 missed 12-footers each round.

Thank you for changing the font of your posts. It makes them easier to scroll past.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2017, 03:19:02 PM »
I have noticed that pretty much every C&C course includes a short par 4 with a front and center bunker and two winged green like a Lion's Mouth.  #8 at Sand Hills, #5 at Streamsong....and the knob in place of the bunker at Friar's Head.   I don't see any template holes like that on Tom Doak's courses. 

Bob Montle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2017, 03:22:04 PM »
Tom D's courses have been a little "harder to play than the visuals dictate". 

Only in the past 5 to 10 years have I been fortunate to play "good" courses by "name" architects, and I have yet to learn enough to identify traits.   That is a big reason why I joined GCA, for the education.

Last summer I was excited to play my first Doak course, Dismal Red.

You may find amusing MY initial reactions.
Of course I noticed the wide fairways and the wonderfully fun to play greens.
But what I told everyone was my amazement at how he used (or so it seemed to me) visual intimidation to make the course appear much more difficult than it actually plays.  That is what struck me the most at first glance.
Despite the large landing zones, I remember thinking that my shots appeared to require a long carry to a tiny spot.

Visually intimidating.
"If you're the swearing type, golf will give you plenty to swear about.  If you're the type to get down on yourself, you'll have ample opportunities to get depressed.  If you like to stop and smell the roses, here's your chance.  Golf never judges; it just brings out who you are."

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #28 on: February 13, 2017, 03:37:14 PM »
I have noticed that pretty much every C&C course includes a short par 4 with a front and center bunker and two winged green like a Lion's Mouth.  #8 at Sand Hills, #5 at Streamsong....and the knob in place of the bunker at Friar's Head.   I don't see any template holes like that on Tom Doak's courses.
The 14th hole at Bandon Trails and the 14th hole Dormie are similar very short par 4's.
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #29 on: February 13, 2017, 07:24:05 PM »
Carl ...... It probably depends on from what height you were dropped!   :D
« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 09:50:26 AM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2017, 07:35:12 PM »
The one thing I have noticed with these 3 are the courses are usually perfectly shaped and constructed.  The mounding and drainage are very natural.  Attention to detail unlike many other American architects.

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #31 on: February 13, 2017, 09:42:15 PM »
I think there are distinct differences between all three.

As TD says regarding GH, he is a little of a mix between "minimalism and modern.  He takes advantage of the equipment and seems to have a good flow to his greens with many of the features starting outside the greens and flowing thru the green.  CC seem to have more , smaller internal contours that never make it to the outside of the greens in many cases and TD seems to have greens where one contour is dependent on the other contour when it comes to putting sometimes.  By this I there may be several routes on the green to the hole.  I'm not sure I'm saying that correctly.  Anyway, I can play any of their courses and enjoy them from what I have seen.  These just happen to be the differences I see as it pertains to the greens.  I also have seen significant differences in bunker construction but I haven't seen enough to know if it is course specific or standard.  Using Cusco as an example I see a lot of undercutting with the bucket in the faces of some of the bunkers and I see water moving into the bunkers much more than on the TD and GN courses....JMO
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2017, 09:43:31 PM »
Would or could C & C or Gil  build a course like Old MacDonald?


Bingo. That is the right question. 


Bob

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #33 on: February 13, 2017, 10:08:14 PM »
My experience with these is only from having played at Bandon. So I don't have my own ideas to report. However, I played with a traveled golfer at Bandon Trails who said the 240 yard par 3 is a common feature to C&C courses.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Matt MacIver

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #34 on: February 14, 2017, 06:42:25 AM »
I think you could see the 9th flag and probably 18 from the 8th green at NLE Charlotte GL. 


Echoing the comment about Tom including more visual intimidation on his courses: if dropped on a course and asked to choose between the two (excluding Hanse) I would guess Doak if it had "more than average" pimples/chocolate drops/mounds, whether they looked natural or not.  Probably too wild and general a speculation but having to take a stab that's what I might go with. 

Peter Pratt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #35 on: February 14, 2017, 08:36:28 AM »
I'm just excited that behavioral economics has invaded gca!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #36 on: February 14, 2017, 08:48:54 AM »
I would guess Doak if it had "more than average" pimples/chocolate drops/mounds, whether they looked natural or not.


That's weird.  When I built High Pointe one of my mantras was not to build any mounds at all ... as a counterpoint to The Bear at Grand Traverse Resort.  The only thing resembling a mound on the whole course was a feature we built to set a bunker, on the right of the 6th green.


Of course none of my present associates worked with me back then [although Eric did help his brother put in the irrigation at High Pointe].  Maybe I need to get back to where I started?  Those greens were still plenty tough.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #37 on: February 14, 2017, 10:20:39 AM »

Forrest,


Sounds like Haley was made for that role, given she grew up with an architect father!  I can imagine she aced that audition......


While I haven't played there yet, Stream Song is the obvious place to make comparisons of those three styles.  You can learn some from the web site photos.


As to distinctions, in the 80's there was probably Pete Dye (who you left off the list) and everyone else.  Without railroad ties and long strip bunkers, most of the rest were pretty much the same, even to me.  JN had the steep banks, which stood out for a while.  Maybe copied from Pete, but always cleaner edge.


Otherwise, the traditional RTJ/Wilson style carried on for most architects in that era, modified only slightly by each practitioner.  The differences would be interesting for some grad student to study.  Dick Nugent said he could always tell the designs of the different associates in his office, and declared the difference to be "wrist radius", or how broad the free form lines were drawn, not out of any conscious decision, but because that's just how long the arm was. 


If you could tell a Faz, it was only because the details, landscaping, etc. were all done up more than others.
IMHO, Hills and Palmer had the rep of churning out housing courses of similar styles, and to a degree (obviously each had a few stout successes) they deserved it, because they chose to tackle the housing market, and design for the particular needs of that genre.  Nothing wrong with that.  Most architects over time take as many projects as they can, and consider 1-3 to be "lifetime" opportunities.


Of course, that looks backwards, which is always easier.  As to the current group.....hate to comment without full benefit of hindsight, and having played a limited sample size, but have some random observations.


I saw High Point, and realized TD was really trying to do something different than the rest, so that always stuck out in my mind. And, perhaps as a result of that, I still think his style is the best among those three. Conceptually, really trying to use the land is "purer" than trying to copy the early American designers,(CC) or mimicking your mentor, but with enough twists to make it your own style (GH)  and I think that underlying design philosophy shows up in the finished product.


At places like TT, TD mimicked the bunker style of MacKenzie, which were different in form (mostly skinnier) than a typical RTJ/Wilson copy bunker.  I associate CC with rough edged "sweet potato" shaped bunkers, as opposed to cape and bay style of RTJ (or even Mac).  However, when I saw TD's Hainan course, I noted he used simpler shapes, albeit, with jagged edges.  (I saw it with only six holes shaped) Can't say if it is a trend or a one off........


Both TD and CC seem to be great at randomness. Comparing Sand Hills to JN's nearby Dismal River course, you can see Nicklaus tries to put more "organization" in his design, and his holes fit the topo more like a typical course would fit man made mounds, i.e.. going around them with some sense of design purpose, which doesn't work quite as well as CC style at Sand Hills.  Have heard some in the biz say CC was probably the only architect who could have gotten those results at SH, and I agree.  Most others probably would have thought more traditionally, and ended up with something similar to Torrey Pines - a standard course in an exceptional setting.


Haven't played a Hanse, but from pictures, Gil's style leans more to the JN organized style and is the least rugged of the three, and in my mind, ruggedness is one of the hall marks of the current style.  That said, Pete went from rugged to refined over the years, and probably all three of the current guys will end up with projects going that way, too.  After all, most high end jobs end up getting high end maintenance, so it sort of follows.  Not every project can be Bandon or Streamsong.  Will be interesting to see how they adapt their style, or clients adapt their maintenance to a more typical in town country club........and Gil may end up being the architect of choice for those.


As to strategy, well, all three pay homage to the past masters, which would seem to limit differences between them.  As always, must MHO.  And, these were typed quickly, with emphasis on the word random......call back tomorrow, and I may have more or different thoughts.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 10:24:20 AM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #38 on: February 14, 2017, 10:59:01 AM »
TD courses seem to have more collection areas in the fairways where divots can become predominant, like the one they filed in at the Old Course
It's all about the golf!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #39 on: February 14, 2017, 11:23:44 AM »
TD courses seem to have more collection areas in the fairways where divots can become predominant, like the one they filed in at the Old Course


That's because I often don't re-shape the contours of the fairways ... like The Old Course !

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #40 on: February 14, 2017, 11:31:52 AM »
TD courses seem to have more collection areas in the fairways where divots can become predominant, like the one they filed in at the Old Course

That's because I often don't re-shape the contours of the fairways ... like The Old Course !

so I would say that would be a correct distinction, yet not necessarily a good one, :)
It's all about the golf!

Ian Andrew

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #41 on: February 14, 2017, 12:31:20 PM »



It’s tremendously hard to generalize on this. And for every example I could think of, I found a contradiction to what I thought about. I’ve seen quite a few courses from each and even visited each of these architects work in construction. I thought I might try … and likely fail miserably. But here are a few reflective thoughts on minor differences

(Alphabetically)

Bill Coore

He loves to begin with opposite cants where available
His unique routing skill is understanding how to traverse over the top of a diagonal ridge
The diagonals off the tee are reminiscent of earlier works of Pete Dye
Uses the half par hole extensively at times
Most likely to present a dropping side green edge with nothing to contain that miss
Uniquely gifted at using the subtle internal contour
Not afraid of a large gnarly obstacle in the green itself
Often transitions a tier with a knoll to disguise the tier (really cool technique)

Largest influence: Maxwell on detail and Dye off (my guesses, never thought to ask)

Tom Doak

Very good at uphill holes
Most green centric in the routing phase (my impression)
Least conventional when it comes to par
Provides the most flexibility for the player (distinct difference from other two)
Most likely to find a moment to go decidedly understated
Most aggressive with green contouring when in the mood
Least defined definition between green contouring and surrounding contours (favourite thing)
Prefers to tie in into up slopes
Least reliance on bunkering at the green

Largest influence: Mackenzie (my assumption)

Gil Hanse

Quite willing to slide with a cross slope (unusual and interesting)
More likely to present an epic carry
Expect a few more green sites up on plateaus than the other two
Willingness to move a little more or create a little more
Places large emphasis on decision making on second shots on par fives
Willingness to work more directly with water is a big difference
Has penchant for blind punchbowl holes (love each one) and the Sahara Hazard
Likes very large splashes on the canvas
Enjoys multiple compartments in greens
Likes steep pin areas on edges that run out and onto to run away slopes

Largest influence Tillinghast (my assumption, scale and little of his audacity)

« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 12:39:27 PM by Ian Andrew »
With every golf development bubble, the end was unexpected and brutal....

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #42 on: February 14, 2017, 12:37:00 PM »
TD courses seem to have more collection areas in the fairways where divots can become predominant, like the one they filed in at the Old Course

That's because I often don't re-shape the contours of the fairways ... like The Old Course !

so I would say that would be a correct distinction, yet not necessarily a good one, :)


Not necessarily so bad.  I actually looked at fixing a couple of those at Pacific Dunes when I was there two weeks ago.  Ken and Jeff didn't think it was worth bothering.  To them, the main issue is having so many golfers in the winters when the divots won't heal, regardless of how they're spread out there are still tons to fix.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #43 on: February 14, 2017, 12:52:48 PM »



It’s tremendously hard to generalize on this. And for every example I could think of, I found a contradiction to what I thought about. I’ve seen quite a few courses from each and even visited each of these architects work in construction. I thought I might try … and likely fail miserably. But here are a few reflective thoughts on minor differences

(Alphabetically)

Bill Coore

He loves to begin with opposite cants where available
His unique routing skill is understanding how to traverse over the top of a diagonal ridge
The diagonals off the tee are reminiscent of earlier works of Pete Dye
Uses the half par hole extensively at times
Most likely to present a dropping side green edge with nothing to contain that miss
Uniquely gifted at using the subtle internal contour
Not afraid of a large gnarly obstacle in the green itself
Often transitions a tier with a knoll to disguise the tier (really cool technique)

Largest influence: Maxwell on detail and Dye off (my guesses, never thought to ask)

Tom Doak

Very good at uphill holes
Most green centric in the routing phase (my impression)
Least conventional when it comes to par
Provides the most flexibility for the player (distinct difference from other two)
Most likely to find a moment to go decidedly understated
Most aggressive with green contouring when in the mood
Least defined definition between green contouring and surrounding contours (favourite thing)
Prefers to tie in into up slopes
Least reliance on bunkering at the green

Largest influence: Mackenzie (my assumption)

Gil Hanse

Quite willing to slide with a cross slope (unusual and interesting)
More likely to present an epic carry
Expect a few more green sites up on plateaus than the other two
Willingness to move a little more or create a little more
Places large emphasis on decision making on second shots on par fives
Willingness to work more directly with water is a big difference
Has penchant for blind punchbowl holes (love each one) and the Sahara Hazard
Likes very large splashes on the canvas
Enjoys multiple compartments in greens
Likes steep pin areas on edges that run out and onto to run away slopes

Largest influence Tillinghast (my assumption, scale and little of his audacity)




This is all quite good observation ... as I would have expected.


I think all of us use the half-par hole quite extensively; not sure that is any more stressed by Bill.


I thought I was least reliant on bunkering at the green, and more prone to only bunker one side of the green, but when I looked at a few courses of mine and of Bill's on Google Earth, the difference was not apparent.


When you say that I "prefer to tie into up slopes," what do you mean by that?  At the green?  I think that boils down to something else, which I've observed before ... that I tend to create things by cutting, whereas Bill tends to use fill to build his greens.  Some of that is attributable to the fact that I've been fortunate to work on sand more than the other two, and did so right from the beginning of my career, which allows one to take advantage of different shapes and different drainage tools.


Ian Andrew

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #44 on: February 14, 2017, 01:01:50 PM »

I think all of us use the half-par hole quite extensively; not sure that is any more stressed by Bill.


In hindsight, I meant the 4 1/2 - with a par of four

With every golf development bubble, the end was unexpected and brutal....

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #45 on: February 14, 2017, 01:04:47 PM »

I saw High Point, and realized TD was really trying to do something different than the rest, so that always stuck out in my mind. And, perhaps as a result of that, I still think his style is the best among those three. Conceptually, really trying to use the land is "purer" than trying to copy the early American designers,(CC) or mimicking your mentor, but with enough twists to make it your own style (GH)  and I think that underlying design philosophy shows up in the finished product.


At places like TT, TD mimicked the bunker style of MacKenzie, which were different in form (mostly skinnier) than a typical RTJ/Wilson copy bunker.  I associate CC with rough edged "sweet potato" shaped bunkers, as opposed to cape and bay style of RTJ (or even Mac).  However, when I saw TD's Hainan course, I noted he used simpler shapes, albeit, with jagged edges.  (I saw it with only six holes shaped) Can't say if it is a trend or a one off........


Both TD and CC seem to be great at randomness.




Jeff:  Aw, shucks, thanks for the compliment.


We were concerned about wind erosion at The Rawls Course, so we tried to model the bunkers after water erosion ... narrower troughs.  I don't know if it's helped keep the sand loss down or not; it's been a long time since I was back there, and the original superintendent we worked with is long gone.


In general, our bunker shaping varies quite a bit, because I deliberately avoid having a "bunker guy," and I've had so many different guys work on them over the years.  A couple of them are working for Gil now, so it wouldn't be a shock if his bunkering looks like mine sometimes.  And, of course, Gil was one of the first of those guys himself:  we built all of those bunkers at Black Forest and Stonewall with a small bulldozer !  They're a lot easier with excavators.  Bill, in contrast, has had Jeff Bradley building the bunkers for 2/3 or 3/4 of his projects in the past 15 years, so the style is a bit tighter, even if Jeff himself is very creative.


But I think the differences in our styles are more about other things than the bunker styling [or even the bumpy greens] that Rees and Jack seem to think it's about when they talk about our work.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #46 on: February 14, 2017, 01:08:39 PM »

I think all of us use the half-par hole quite extensively; not sure that is any more stressed by Bill.


In hindsight, I meant the 4 1/2 - with a par of four


I thought about that, but I think we all do that a lot, too.  Gil and I have both built holes I can think of which people complain about, because they were right on the cusp, and we called them par-4's instead of 5's.  Pacific Dunes doesn't have one, directly, because I let it depend on where the wind was in your face there, but Streamsong has the 4th and 11th and 18th, and Old Macdonald [which I just played] has like four of them.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #47 on: February 14, 2017, 02:35:58 PM »
Maybe, as my playing partner observed, Bill builds more par 3 1/2 holes where the par is 3 not 4. ;)

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #48 on: February 14, 2017, 02:40:30 PM »
Maybe, as my playing partner observed, Bill builds more par 3 1/2 holes where the par is 3 not 4. ;)


I would say that is true.  I have built some 230+ yard par-3 holes, but not many are personal favorites. 


Bill has managed to build a couple that I really liked ... but also some I did not.  I think that goes back to him being more concerned about "balance," and me being more about having as many cool holes as possible.

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Distinctiveness Among C&C, Doak and Hanse
« Reply #49 on: February 14, 2017, 02:49:37 PM »



It’s tremendously hard to generalize on this. And for every example I could think of, I found a contradiction to what I thought about. I’ve seen quite a few courses from each and even visited each of these architects work in construction. I thought I might try … and likely fail miserably. But here are a few reflective thoughts on minor differences

(Alphabetically)

Bill Coore

He loves to begin with opposite cants where available
His unique routing skill is understanding how to traverse over the top of a diagonal ridge
The diagonals off the tee are reminiscent of earlier works of Pete Dye
Uses the half par hole extensively at times
Most likely to present a dropping side green edge with nothing to contain that miss
Uniquely gifted at using the subtle internal contour
Not afraid of a large gnarly obstacle in the green itself
Often transitions a tier with a knoll to disguise the tier (really cool technique)

Largest influence: Maxwell on detail and Dye off (my guesses, never thought to ask)

Tom Doak

Very good at uphill holes
Most green centric in the routing phase (my impression)
Least conventional when it comes to par
Provides the most flexibility for the player (distinct difference from other two)
Most likely to find a moment to go decidedly understated
Most aggressive with green contouring when in the mood
Least defined definition between green contouring and surrounding contours (favourite thing)
Prefers to tie in into up slopes
Least reliance on bunkering at the green

Largest influence: Mackenzie (my assumption)

Gil Hanse

Quite willing to slide with a cross slope (unusual and interesting)
More likely to present an epic carry
Expect a few more green sites up on plateaus than the other two
Willingness to move a little more or create a little more
Places large emphasis on decision making on second shots on par fives
Willingness to work more directly with water is a big difference
Has penchant for blind punchbowl holes (love each one) and the Sahara Hazard
Likes very large splashes on the canvas
Enjoys multiple compartments in greens
Likes steep pin areas on edges that run out and onto to run away slopes

Largest influence Tillinghast (my assumption, scale and little of his audacity)


This is so well thought out (unsurprisingly) and it makes sense that a fellow architect was able to identify these features so clearly.


Only thing I'd add is that Gil might be most inspired by C.B. Macdonald as I see a striking similarity in their green contours and sahara/punchbowl/short holes.


I'd like to think I could correctly identify their courses when playing blind - only one I would definitely have had trouble with would be Dismal Red of the ones I've played. I would likely have guessed Doak for the top 8 and second-guessed the decision on the bottom 10.