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.


Tim Gallant

  • Karma: +0/-0
What's more important playability or intent?
« on: June 19, 2019, 03:17:48 PM »
The other day I saw a few photos that someone had posted on Pine Valley. The course looked great, but one thing I noticed was that the sandy waste areas seemed much more manicured than in years past. No doubt that this will help playability for the mid and high handicap player, but it does come at a price - mainly that it goes against the original intent of why the course was set-up: to be the most challenging course for very very good players.


Indeed, this kind-of touches on what Nick was getting at on the Bethpage thread (albeit in a slightly different manner), but I am curious as to what is more important: that a course follows the principle that a great course should provide maximum pleasure for the maximum amount of golfers, or, that it stays true to the original intent of why it was built?


The two are not always mutually exclusive, but my question relates specifically to courses that was historically set-up for one or two types of players, vs. overall enjoyment for the masses.


Caveat: This isn't just about PV, but courses in general. PV is one of my favourite courses in the world, and I still think it's tough as nails even with more manicured waste areas.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2019, 03:19:44 PM by Tim Gallant »

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2019, 04:15:31 PM »
Trying to set up an old course today in a manner that captures the ODG's intent is a very dicey proposition. The ODG could not possibly imagine greens that stimp at 10-14, right? The ODG never planned on tree line to tree line irrigation, and advances in agronomy that allow for plush rough outlining every fairway. He probably would be stunned to see his bunkers filled with perfectly groomed sand that plays in the "consistent" manner that players demand and expect...


If we are talking about parkland courses in the US, I'd say many of the shot demands remain true to the architect's intent, but the playing surface is completely different. I wouldn't worry about PV's periodic attempts to beat back the forest! Far more significant changes have happened to to the course, to all courses.


I'd say these changes are for the better but these were driven by what is possible from an agronomy standpoint, not the ODG's intent.

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2019, 05:22:36 PM »
 8)  Have to imagine, unless the ODG or any gca still kicking actually wrote something down regarding the intent, its become obvious and the superintendent has lots of choices everyday on what to tweak or maintenance items to work on... things likely more related to playability. 


I trust the supers have an agenda, and suspect playability is most important. 
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 Sherma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2019, 05:33:35 PM »

This of course assumes that the super is a golfer who understands what constitutes a superior playing surface. Unfortunately this is not always the case. Then the intent, whatever it is, tends not to service either intent nor playability.

8)  Have to imagine, unless the ODG or any gca still kicking actually wrote something down regarding the intent, its become obvious and the superintendent has lots of choices everyday on what to tweak or maintenance items to work on... things likely more related to playability. 


I trust the supers have an agenda, and suspect playability is most important.

Peter Pallotta

Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2019, 06:26:22 PM »
Call me superficial, but I'd settle for the original aesthetic!

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2019, 07:14:27 PM »
The architect does not own the course. Sometimes the architect's intent is at odds with what the club wants. Sometimes the architect just gets it wrong.
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2019, 08:00:36 PM »
And sometime times just change...

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2019, 08:07:06 PM »
The hardest thing in golf maint is not overdoing it. No one gets rewarded for doing less. 

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #8 on: June 19, 2019, 08:24:45 PM »
 8) ;)




As to the early pictures of Pine Valley you have to remember that for years they have grown grass in some early waste areas to stabilize the ground. The big thunderstorms that occasionally roar up the Delaware used to completely destroy some play areas on a somewhat regular basis. An example of this is the 17th hole which was actually in danger of being undermined by some of the erosion from water. I liked the old look  but the grass stabilized the area around the green.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2019, 08:48:38 PM »
Ultimately, every course is at the mercy of its members or owner.


For many years, Pine Valley left its waste areas as John Arthur Brown and then Ernie Ransome thought George Crump wanted it to be.  But as the membership got bigger and getting visitors around the course on a busy summer day became tougher, concessions were made by subsequent club presidents.  And of course Tom Fazio is very influential there, and has his own ideas about the lack of importance of original intent.


I am not of the opinion that a place like Pine Valley should change and be more playable for visitors.  They can be whatever they want to be . . . but then they have to live with my opinion that it doesn't make them the best course on the planet.  Sometimes it seems these memberships [or guys like Nick] want it both ways . . . they want it the way they want it, but then they need you to agree that their opinion is superior.


Nope.  Sorry.


The Renaissance Club will be on TV in three weeks.  It's about half as wide now, because they wanted to attract a big tournament, and now they've got one.  We always understood the intent to host an event, we just didn't think it had to be that narrow to be taken seriously.  But I guess I don't get to see if that would have worked!

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2019, 08:50:31 PM »
Arch - But they are doing a good bit more maintenance within the sand...I can see some people disagreeing with it, but the amount of play they get makes it a tough argument.


Still no rakes, I believe...




Seeing Toms post now...agree!

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2019, 09:12:06 PM »
 8)  How many rounds a year does PV get?
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"

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2019, 09:23:14 PM »
 8) ;D   


Not saying I like it but that is one of the reasons you see less sand.  When I first started caddying there Eb Steniger was the superintendent, yep that long ago,  ::)  There was a real chance that you could not just hit it into the DA (bad bunker) on ten you could easily putt into it. Dick Bator later put a brow there to keep water out of the bunker which got destroyed every time a big storm rolled thru. It stopped the water but wasn't great architecturally. By the way Bator was a genius at his profession, in spite of this lol


sometimes its just hard to fight mother nature

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2019, 09:38:00 PM »
8)  How many rounds a year does PV get?


Not sure, but during the golf season they run a full slate Tuesday - Saturday...

Peter Pallotta

Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2019, 10:01:34 PM »
Geez - and there's people who *still* can't get on? They must either be the worst access hounds ever or just very very unlikable..
But an aside: if PV is more popular than ever, does it mean Tom Fazio really *does* know what he's doing? 
(Me, I have no stake: while I assume it is indeed one of the greatest courses ever, I've never been particularly drawn to playing it -- not since I saw Gene Littler get massacred there against Lord Byron, not by Nelson but by the course!)

Tim Gallant

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #15 on: June 20, 2019, 03:50:45 AM »
The architect does not own the course. Sometimes the architect's intent is at odds with what the club wants. Sometimes the architect just gets it wrong.


Tommy,


Good points. On the first comment - I think it's safe to say that the intent at the time of build should be close to what the club wants/wanted. I take your point that this can change over time - maybe a club wants to be more family friendly as the game evolves! And I suppose that's ok, but with a lot of golf courses lacking an identity, could the original intent not be the foundation for that identity?


On your second point, I absolutely believe this can be the case. The tricky point is who gets to say whether they got it wrong? In my mind, it comes back to the brief and as a club / municipality, looking at what's on the ground and asking if it matches up with what was asked for. They are the customer, and ultimately, they are the one that should be happy!

Tim Gallant

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #16 on: June 20, 2019, 03:56:23 AM »
8) ;)




As to the early pictures of Pine Valley you have to remember that for years they have grown grass in some early waste areas to stabilize the ground. The big thunderstorms that occasionally roar up the Delaware used to completely destroy some play areas on a somewhat regular basis. An example of this is the 17th hole which was actually in danger of being undermined by some of the erosion from water. I liked the old look  but the grass stabilized the area around the green.


Thanks Archie!


Specific to PV, not to long ago I read this very humorous book (if anyone can tell me the name of the book, I'll be forever in your debt!) of a young guy who lied to his boss that he was a single-figure handicap, not expecting to get called on it. A few months went by and apparently the boss came flying into his cubical and said he would be partnering with him at a member/guest at PV. I was in an airport or something so only finished 10 or so pages, but during the practice round, he shot a huge number and could not get his ball out of the very heavy sand around the course.


I believe the story was from the 80s or 90s, so not too long ago. I know things have changed since those aerials we see from the 30s, etc, but there does seem to have been a conscious decision to make the waste areas less penalising.


But as Bill rightly points out, back then greens didn't stimp 10, so PV is just difficult in other ways now - it doesn't necessarily need that type of sand. When I look at the Crump Cup scores, no one is exactly lighting the place up - even if the wind is calm.

Tim Gallant

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #17 on: June 20, 2019, 04:21:32 AM »
I think Tom brings up a good point, and interesting to think about the Renaissance because it goes against the either / or option. Mainly, if the Renaissance went back to the original intent of the designer, it would be more playable. Looking on objectively, I think we would all stand in favour of seeing that happen. But as Tom says, it's up to the membership.


The other example I had in mind was Tom's stated want to build a course specifically for women. This would potentially cater more for one particular golfer, so the intent is established, but in the future, if the course was seen as a success, and they wanted it to play for all levels of golfers by moving bunkers / tees, then it would make it more playable for all, but would no longer play as originally intended.

archie_struthers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #18 on: June 20, 2019, 08:03:50 AM »
 8) :D


I'm in agreement with Tom Doak's opinion that Pine Valley doesn't need to change much if at all, it was and is that good. The two examples I gave were surely a maintenance aid that worked and eliminated some hand work that was always necessary after a big storm. The work on ten should be redone IMHO and the eyebrow removed. For most really good golfers its the easiest hole on the course, without it it isn't!


Everyone might not understand how fast mother nature can reclaim her land without constant vigilance, hence plantings often stabilize or prevent unwanted weed and growths that are unseemly. Twisted Dune which we built almost twenty years ago is an example of how much can grow without a constant fight. It is in really good shape running faster than it has in years but I'm startled how many small pine trees et al grew over the years.


Back to Pine Valley...I previously mentioned Dick Bator and would be remiss if he wasn't singled out as one of the main reasons Pine Valley has spectacular playing conditions to this day. He exposed acres of sand that had been overgrown and I specifically remember him wielding a scythe and a rake with a ferocity you would not believe on the 13 th hole in the long waste bunker leading to the green. I was afraid to talk to him for a while after watching this! lol


I didn't like the new bunkers on the top of the hill on #4 and to the right of the fairway on #9 ...still don't. Though beautifully integrated they took away two great angles of attack to the greens and a chance for a little luck on the tee shot. They specifically benefit the better player/straighter hitter though which may have been the intent. :-X


No more today....as you all know I love that place




JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #19 on: June 20, 2019, 09:15:49 AM »
Tim,


Maybe an answer to this question would be hose courses that have had their original architect/designer present for extended periods after opening. Pinehurst and Oakmont are certainly two examples but there must be dozens (hundreds) more. How have these courses evolved with the original architect's evolving ideas?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #20 on: June 20, 2019, 09:16:29 AM »
Merion and Augusta if you give Wilson and Jones at least partial credit for the original...

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #21 on: June 20, 2019, 09:30:15 AM »
Both intent and playability are quite subjective, and mean different things to different people.


The other issue is how often do those get lost in aesthetics and conditioning which may alter both
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #22 on: June 20, 2019, 10:27:32 AM »
Practicalities are important.
Given appropriate finance being consistently available can firstly, the design intent be accurately constructed, secondly can what's been constructed be playable by various levels of player and thirdly can what's been constructed be consistently maintained. There's probably a fourth, fifth, sixth etc etc as well.
atb

David Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2019, 01:42:16 PM »



The Renaissance Club will be on TV in three weeks.  It's about half as wide now, because they wanted to attract a big tournament, and now they've got one.  We always understood the intent to host an event, we just didn't think it had to be that narrow to be taken seriously.  But I guess I don't get to see if that would have worked!


Without drifting too far OT, the players could be in for a bit of a shock at The Renaissance  in three weeks time. It has been the wettest June here in East Lothian for a long time and I lost balls at Archerfield last weekend and Gullane 3 this morning in places I wouldn’t have imagined possible me. The rough is deep, succulent and unforgiving this year. The contrast to last year’s drought conditions couldn’t be greater....

Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's more important playability or intent?
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2019, 07:14:14 AM »
....


Everyone might not understand how fast mother nature can reclaim her land without constant vigilance, hence plantings often stabilize or prevent unwanted weed and growths that are unseemly. Twisted Dune which we built almost twenty years ago is an example of how much can grow without a constant fight. It is in really good shape running faster than it has in years but I'm startled how many small pine trees et al grew over the years.


Back to Pine Valley...I previously mentioned Dick Bator and would be remiss if he wasn't singled out as one of the main reasons Pine Valley has spectacular playing conditions to this day. He exposed acres of sand that had been overgrown and I specifically remember him wielding a scythe and a rake with a ferocity you would not believe on the 13 th hole in the long waste bunker leading to the green. I was afraid to talk to him for a while after watching this! lol

....




Since PV had such a large place in my life and I love it as much as Archie I wanted add a few more thoughts on this since PV was specifically mentioned in the original post - which I don't agree with it being used as an example.


Like all courses it ebbs and flows with Mother Natures hand and maybe at PV it happens more due to the amount of natural type areas where she can move quickly as she can't be kept in check as much as manicured areas. When I took over the Short Course it had become pretty overgrown even though it was only 7 years old and I spent the first few months reclaiming it from Mother Nature. The same goes for the main course and any stroll though the woods reveals dips and shapes that may have been bunkers or just deposits/holes left from construction....


As Archie mentioned the reduction of erosion was a priority which is why the islands etc popped up mainly in the 30s and 40s. Even with them in place heavy storms can wreak havoc on the sand. Over the last few years the trend has been to remove these and make it look closer (within reason) to the original pictures from the teens and 20s).


Saying that lets face it - the fact that the waste areas are machine raked more than once a week does not make those features or the course any easier - a little fairer maybe, by reducing the risk of a bad lie in the sand, but not easier. They may look fluffier (and if that makes you think it's more inviting more power to you) and there is less chance of landing in a footprint but the severity of the elevations etc hasn't changed and therefore the shot is still extremely challenging - and I ask why would anyone would want to have a more difficult shot hitting from a footprint. As for original design intent on raking bunkers there. I think had they had the ability to efficiently rake them back then they would - it's just with that amount of sand it was unpractical until the Sandpro was invented.


Lastly the superintendent Rick Christian has been there for over 30 years and along with the membership and staff are custodians of everything Pine Valley. They know who and what they are and no decision that may change that is taken likely, so while it's fun to be critical here, PV will always remain number 1 as those in charge know and care about it makes it special.
Golf construction & maintenance are like creating a masterpiece; Da Vinci didn't paint the Mona Lisa's eyes first..... You start with the backdrop, layer on the detail and fine tune the finished product into a masterpiece

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back