Why Aesthetics is my #1 Criterion for ranking courses!

[Mark_Fine]

I will start by saying the obvious, just because a hole is "pretty" doesn't mean it is any good.  However, if a hole looks like crap it probably plays like crap as well!  Let’s face reality, how many ugly golf holes/ugly golf courses have we played that we would rate a Doak 10?  The answer is ZERO.  Let’s also be clear that great aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder.  Some people for example think the aesthetic of Oakmont was much better with the thousands of Pin Oak trees that lined every golf hole.  It is their opinion and they are entitled to it.  I completely beg to differ.  The point, however, is we are both focused on aesthetics.  Some people would love to see a links course lush and green and meticulously maintained.  Good for them.  I would probably walk off as I want to see a true links course firm and fast and browned out and rough around the edges.  Again, we are both talking about aesthetics.  Some people like flower beds and fancy landscaping scattered around the design.  I say keep that for around the clubhouse.  To me (at least on a great golf course) that is kind of like putting too much make-up and jewelry on what is already a beautiful woman.  It can make her look much less attractive and artificial. But once again, to each his own as we are talking about aesthetics.  I love a beautifully bunkered golf course.  I also love the aesthetic of a course like Royal Ashdown Forest that has none.  I love playing along an ocean or meandering through high sand dunes or negotiating my way around tall Redwoods or Cypress trees.  I thoroughly enjoy playing in a desert canyon and/or skirting alongside mountains.  It is also surreal for me to play golf on an island with vistas of surrounding turquoise colored water.  Moreover, there is nothing better than staring at a formidable hazard that needs to be dealt with.  To me the greatest holes/courses always have some unique and/or distinctive features that make them memorable.  I can’t think of a single hole that I love that doesn’t have such a feature (and I can’t think of any of those features that are not aesthetically pleasing in some way).  That feature could be an amazing bunker, a deep hollow, a wild green contour, a unique tree, a daunting chasm, a beautiful body of water, a winding brook, a rumpled fairway, a panoramic view, a dramatic forced carry,..,… The bottomline is that there are no great courses that have overall poor aesthetics.  As such, that is why at the end of the day, aesthetics it is my #1 criterion for ranking golf courses.   

[Tom_Doak]

It is for most people, which is why I hire people who are really good at aesthetics, instead of good golfers.

[Peter Pallotta]

I wouldn't disagree, Mark.
I mentioned on another thread that a course Ian Andrew designed on a flat featureless site was a favourite of a group of us, who back then knew next to nothing about gca. It was in large part because of the wonderful greens he designed. Neither flashy nor overly contoured, and yet even our untutored eyes 'saw' that they made 'great sense', strategically and interest-wise. We had no language for it, but we 'knew' that this was high quality work -- and we kept going back. In the same way, I think a wonderful aesthetic can -- though not necessarily -- make 'great sense', ie it can express, in ways that a golfer 'sees' and 'knows', a high quality melding of form and function, each supporting the other to best overall effect and playability.
I put words like 'see' and 'know' in quotations because, as with Ian's course, I doubt my untutored eyes could actually/literally see how it all worked, and doubt too that my language would be able to express it. But there is a 'feeling' that 'great sense and 'rightness' produces in a golfer, and this feeling is, I think, akin to seeing and knowing. When the aesthetics give me that feeling, I can be pretty sure that the golf hole is a very good one indeed.
P     

[Tim_Weiman]

Mark,


The highest rated course that I know very well has never struck me as being strong on aesthetics: Ballybunion. What’s more, I always found #6 very interesting to play, complete with the trailer park in view.


Ballybunion always was about shot making - and enjoying friends - not eye candy.


Yale has a similar quality, IMO. It is really not pretty, but it is loaded with interesting and challenging shots.


Then, too, even Shinnecock was not that pleasing to my eye. Again, it is about the shots rather than the view.

[Tom_Doak]

Tim:


It used to bug Mark Parsinen to no end that he had tried so diligently to get the shot values and grass and playing conditions at Kingsbarns to play like a true links, and yet the locals still described it as "American".


It was because he had also tried to make it beautiful (and succeeded), and the Scots don't care about that, so it sticks out like a sore thumb.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tim, Tom -
to me, what you describe at Kingsbarn (and not at Ballybunion) is more akin to 'golfer-friendly maintenance' than what I think of as aesthetics -- or, to use the German word for my broader concept, Ästhetik.
There are photos I've seen of Ballyneal or Pacific Dunes where I can't tell where the strategy & shot-making & options end and where the aesthetic begins.
And that seamless integration of the two suggests to me that one is supporting and making better the other, and vice versa: a wonderful Ästhetik

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
You state some good examples where opinions on aesthetics vary.  I personally love the aesthetics of Ballybunion.  Some of the off property aesthetics are typical and expected for what you will find at many of the great links designs.  They don't bother me.  The dunes there are just amazing.  Another of my favorites is Royal Dornoch which has a traitor park at the one end of the property.  It really doesn't bother me as it has limited impact on most of the off property aesthetics.  And I am sorry but standing at the clubhouse and overlooking Shinnecock Hills gives me goosebumps just thinking about it.  It is an amazing piece of property.  I have always felt Ballybunion was a Doak 8 and the other two are 10's!  I also would not call Yale ugly by any means.  Some people don't care for that style/aesthetic of architecture but I find it unique and enjoyable.  Some of those massive bunkers are visually very stimulating.  What do you find ugly?


Tom,
Interesting that you bring up Kingsbarns.  I got to know the super there (we played The Old Course at St. Andrews together a number of years ago).  He was in remission for cancer at the time and I have lost touch.  I am not sure his status but I hope he is doing well.  I enjoy Kingsbarns but I also describe it as more American.  I also wouldn't say they nailed the aesthetic.  A number of the holes don't look or play like a true links course. 

[Ally Mcintosh]

There are two types of aesthetics though:


- The macro scale, off site views, drama, wow.


- And the micro scale, the detail of everything, making sure the green looks right as approaching, making sure the bunkers sit perfectly (probably asymmetrically) and have a non-awkward shape. The kind of detail that if nothing annoys you as an architect, you know it’s a good job.


Both are important in to how the course is perceived. But the first one has - in recent times - become slightly more important than it should be. It has also led to a tendency for architects to build too many features.

[Sean_A]

The Road Hole may be uglier than Ballybunion's 6th! Woking's 4th is no beauty. We can find tons of wonderful holes which aren't lookers. But as Ally points out, all the above get the playing aesthetics right. For those that care, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Happy Thanksgiving

[Ira Fishman]

Except for Holes 4-5 and maybe 16, I do not think the aesthetics at PH2 are particularly special. And I agree with Sean about Woking. The Island Club may be another example even though the dunes rival Ballybunion. Even at Brora, for most of the actual golfing, the setting by the sea is not a major feature of the course.


Ira

[Sean_A]

Except for Holes 4-5 and maybe 16, I do not think the aesthetics at PH2 are particularly special. And I agree with Sean about Woking. The Island Club may be another example even though the dunes rival Ballybunion. Even at Brora, for most of the actual golfing, the setting by the sea is not a major feature of the course.

Ira

Ira

I would disagree about PH2 simply because the course is now certainly of its place.  Prior to the renovation PH2 was a course out of place...it could have been practically anywhere in the south.  C&C rectified this very successfully. PH2 may be the best example of a course renovation recreating the location roots of a course. 

Happy Thanksgiving

[Tim Martin]

Except for Holes 4-5 and maybe 16, I do not think the aesthetics at PH2 are particularly special. And I agree with Sean about Woking. The Island Club may be another example even though the dunes rival Ballybunion. Even at Brora, for most of the actual golfing, the setting by the sea is not a major feature of the course.

Ira

Ira

I would disagree about PH2 simply because the course is now certainly of its place.  Prior to the renovation PH2 was a course out of place...it could have been practically anywhere in the south.  C&C rectified this very successfully. PH2 may be the best example of a course renovation recreating the location roots of a course. 

Happy Thanksgiving

Sean-I think C&C was able to do the same thing at Maidstone. Lots of clearing to expose dunes land that had been obscured with overgrowth.

[Ira Fishman]

Except for Holes 4-5 and maybe 16, I do not think the aesthetics at PH2 are particularly special. And I agree with Sean about Woking. The Island Club may be another example even though the dunes rival Ballybunion. Even at Brora, for most of the actual golfing, the setting by the sea is not a major feature of the course.

Ira

Ira

I would disagree about PH2 simply because the course is now certainly of its place.  Prior to the renovation PH2 was a course out of place...it could have been practically anywhere in the south.  C&C rectified this very successfully. PH2 may be the best example of a course renovation recreating the location roots of a course. 

Happy Thanksgiving

Sean, in the thread about Originality, I name PH2 as one of four courses that left me with a transcendent sense of place, but it was more the incredible cohesion and coherence of the course in that place than the aesthetics themselves. I cannot comment on the relative quality of the renovation because I have not played enough other renovated courses, but I am enormously grateful that my wife made us go back because pre-renovation, PH2 did not do much for me.


Ira

[Mark_Fine]

What C&C did at Maidstone is all part of enhancing the aesthetics.  I loved it.  I played it after the work was done with the club’s historian and we had a great discussion.  It is yet another example of why aesthetics is the most important aspect of ranking golf courses.  And it is not just the pretty views of the water 

[Kalen Braley]

Only a few responses in and we're already discovering the problems with trying to evaluate asthetics.  In short its basically a problem of "one mans trash heap is another mans castle."  And while everyone has varying opinions on just about every terrain type, almost everyone loves the water, so when in doubt....


P.S.  Mark I had to mention that at least we know where they live when bad stuff happens! 

Another of my favorites is Royal Dornoch which has a traitor park at the one end of the property.  It really doesn't bother me as it has limited impact on most of the off property aesthetics. 

[Mark_Fine]

Kalen,
Opinions on aesthetics will run the gamut.  But the point is that aesthetics (regardless of what you like or dislike) have a huge impact on the ranking of golf courses as well they should.  Yes there will always be a few exceptions of a hole or two that are considered great but not considered aesthetically pleasing but they are few and very far between.  NEVER will a whole course that is considered exceptional be viewed that way. 
Mark

[Kalen Braley]

Mark,

Certainly that is the case, I was only trying to point out the level of subjectivity for this criteria as opposed to things like:

Variety in Hole length
Variety in where the holes appear in the routing
Design techniques: Penal vs strategic
Cart paths or walking paths
Originality
Etc..

Perhaps it'd be an interesting exercise to categorize the types of aesthetics the top 50 courses share to find common winning elements...

[Tim_Weiman]

Tim,
You state some good examples where opinions on aesthetics vary.  I personally love the aesthetics of Ballybunion.  Some of the off property aesthetics are typical and expected for what you will find at many of the great links designs.  They don't bother me.  The dunes there are just amazing.  Another of my favorites is Royal Dornoch which has a traitor park at the one end of the property.  It really doesn't bother me as it has limited impact on most of the off property aesthetics.  And I am sorry but standing at the clubhouse and overlooking Shinnecock Hills gives me goosebumps just thinking about it.  It is an amazing piece of property.  I have always felt Ballybunion was a Doak 8 and the other two are 10's!  I also would not call Yale ugly by any means.  Some people don't care for that style/aesthetic of architecture but I find it unique and enjoyable.  Some of those massive bunkers are visually very stimulating.  What do you find ugly?


Mark,


How many holes at Shinnecock are played from the clubhouse view overlooking the property?

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
The view from the clubhouse at Shinnecock and from the 1st tee of the panoramic view of the golf course is simply stunning. If that doesn’t get a golfer excited for what lies ahead, they should take up tennis    I get the same kind of feeling there as I do from the clubhouse at Oakmont or Crystal Downs.
I guess to each his own. 
Mark

[Tim_Weiman]

Tim,
The view from the clubhouse at Shinnecock and from the 1st tee of the panoramic view of the golf course is simply stunning. If that doesn’t get a golfer excited for what lies ahead, they should take up tennis    I get the same kind of feeling there as I do from the clubhouse at Oakmont or Crystal Downs.
I guess to each his own. 
Mark

Mark,


I understand the panoramic view from the 1st tee, but that seems like a small part of the golf course or should I say, a small part of playing the golf course.


I just feel like Shinnecock is about playing golf (at a high level) not aesthetics, though I will acknowledge the view looking up at the clubhouse (rather than down from it) is pretty sweet.


Just so you understand my taste, I think Prestwick is a delight to play, but I remember first seeing it and I wasn’t exactly thrilled with the view.

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
You can’t be saying Shinnecock is not an aesthetically pleasing golf course, especially with all the tree removal.  When the fescue is up the course has a heartbeat as the wind sweeps across.  The only hole that has always been awkward in appearance to me is #7 but it has grown on me the more I play it. 


Prestwick is so quirky that some will love it and some just won’t get it.  Many who have not played a lot of British Isles links golf will be bothered right from start by the train tracks.  They might also be totally confused by the third hole and the famous Cardinal bunker wondering how the heck do I play this hole.  It can be sensory overload but I love this course and all it’s unique holes and blind shots.  I can see however why you might think that way the first time around.  I thought the same the first time I played Hoylake.  It looked a bit like moonscape to me.  It was my first introduction to links golf.  I will probably never love the first hole with the cop lining the OB of the practice ground to the right but I learned links golf on that course and how different and special it is vs the aerial game I had played back home.  The aesthetics grew on me as I understood what real golf was all about. 

[Tom_Doak]

I will probably never love the first hole with the cop lining the OB of the practice ground to the right

You hit it O.B. didn't you?

[Thomas Dai]

I will probably never love the first hole with the cop lining the OB of the practice ground to the right

You hit it O.B. didn't you?

Ref 1st at Hoylake.
Given the distance the guys we see on TV hit the ball with modern equipment what about moving the tee up and making the hole a risk-reward par-4 across the OB angle and the cop?
Atb

[Tom_Doak]

Ref 1st at Hoylake.
Given the distance the guys we see on TV hit the ball with modern equipment what about moving the tee up and making the hole a risk-reward par-4 across the OB angle and the cop?

That would be cool . . . the tee would be pretty much right in front of the clubhouse.


But, it would probably slow down play a bit, unless they could convince players to wave up the next group before putting out.

[Thomas Dai]

Ref 1st at Hoylake.
Given the distance the guys we see on TV hit the ball with modern equipment what about moving the tee up and making the hole a risk-reward par-4 across the OB angle and the cop?

That would be cool . . . the tee would be pretty much right in front of the clubhouse.
But, it would probably slow down play a bit, unless they could convince players to wave up the next group before putting out.

+1
Maybe they should have appointed 2 x TD’s to revise their course instead of M&E!!!!!!
Atb