[Ben Hollerbach]

A World class set of greens can make for a great course, despite the rest property. But can a course be world class despite their greens?


What needs to happen on the rest of the property to overcome bland and boring greens? What examples are there of courses that are considered great even though they have poor greens?




When trying to improve a course if the routing is troubled but the greens are great, is that a better place to start than having bland greens and a fairly sound routing?

[Eric LeFante]

Bethpage Black is Exhibit A. I believe it has by far the most bland greens of any top 100 US course. What's ironic is that during the 2002 US Open Tiger 3 putted 4 times in the last 27 holes and he famously did not 3 putt once in his 1997 Masters win.

[Tim Gallant]

Woodhall Spa is a course that comes to mind - depending on your definition of world class, it sits up there, and I would definitely characterise the greens as more on the flat side, though there is some subtle interest in them. I'll let Tom D, Clyde or Angela describe why the course is world class

[Tom_Doak]

At least half the great courses in the UK have bland greens, or at least bland greens contours!  But a lot of them have windy conditions, which makes the approach shots and recovery shots interesting by bringing features around the green into play, even for a good player.  You can't afford to miss on the upwind side of a green, even if it's relatively flat, as long as there is some sort of obstacle on that side that you have to pitch over.[size=78%] [/size]

[Brett Meyer]

Sunningdale's Old Course, West Sussex, Swinley Forest, and any of the other London heathland courses that you'd think are world class. Unless you think that Woking is world class.

[Ben Hollerbach]

At least half the great courses in the UK have bland greens, or at least bland greens contours!  But a lot of them have windy conditions, which makes the approach shots and recovery shots interesting by bringing features around the green into play, even for a good player.  You can't afford to miss on the upwind side of a green, even if it's relatively flat, as long as there is some sort of obstacle on that side that you have to pitch over.

Tom,


While green speed would have a large impact on the practical contours as well, what level of correlation is there between the amount of wind a site gets and the complexity of contours the greens can effectively have?


If the site is inherently windy, does the amount and variability of the wind help to offset a lack in green contour?

[Jeff_Brauer]

A World class set of greens can make for a great course, despite the rest property. But can a course be world class despite their greens?


What needs to happen on the rest of the property to overcome bland and boring greens? What examples are there of courses that are considered great even though they have poor greens?




When trying to improve a course if the routing is troubled but the greens are great, is that a better place to start than having bland greens and a fairly sound routing?

Hard to tell without seeing what you are seeing on the ground, of course.  However, I believe there may be great courses without great greens, but I am hard pressed to think of a great course with a poor routing.  Sight unseen, I am thinking you should fix the routing, at least all that is reasonable to do, since you can always build greens in the same, similar, or perhaps slightly more contoured style to give some more variety, which usually makes for a better course.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,


While green speed would have a large impact on the practical contours as well, what level of correlation is there between the amount of wind a site gets and the complexity of contours the greens can effectively have?


If the site is inherently windy, does the amount and variability of the wind help to offset a lack in green contour?

Ben:


It depends!  Part of the equation is not just how windy it is, but how exposed the greens are to that wind.  Barnbougle is the windiest place I have ever worked and the greens there have a ton of contour, but most of them sit in bowls so they are somewhat protected, and there is a backstop you can use to your advantage on difficult shots.  The 7th hole is famous in part because that's one of the few greens that sits up on a knob, where it's at the full mercy of the wind.


We would not have put as much contour into those greens if we expected them to be fast, but between the fescue, and being in Tasmania, and it being 17 years ago, we were not too concerned they would get fast.


The effect of the wind on a green is really the same as the effect of tilt . . . it's harder to control shots from one side of the hole than from the other.  But the wind varies from day to day, so its effect is harder to factor in.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

[Thomas Dai]

Sometimes less is more. What is more challenging to play?
Big contour vrs subtle contour. Big breaks vrs minuscule breaks. Mind games too.
And does ‘greens’ mean just the putting surface or the surrounds or even the areas where the approach shot is being played from as well? All the way back to the tee maybe.
Atb

[Ben Hollerbach]

The effect of the wind on a green is really the same as the effect of tilt . . . it's harder to control shots from one side of the hole than from the other.  But the wind varies from day to day, so its effect is harder to factor in.

Tom,


This to me sounds like there needs to be a good balance between the construction team and the greenkeeping team to maximized the uncontrolled that is the wind. I'd imagine that over the period of construction you'll have the opportunity to get a good feel of the wind tendencies across a site and as you build a green you develop pinnable locations based upon their wind exposure and frequency. At the time of handoff to the greenskeeping staff do you talk with them about pin locations that were designed to be played under certain conditions, thus allowing them to dictate hole locations for a certain day based up wind activity?


I could see that may be easier to do in certain situations vs. others. the potential for certain pin positions to interact with certain wind conditions is a rather interesting proposition.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Sometimes less is more. What is more challenging to play?
Big contour vrs subtle contour. Big breaks vrs minuscule breaks. Mind games too.
And does ‘greens’ mean just the putting surface or the surrounds or even the areas where the approach shot is being played from as well? All the way back to the tee maybe.
Atb

For this particular question I was speaking mostly of the putting surface and their immediate surrounds. The area where an approach shot is being played from would fall more into the rest of the property or routing classification.

[Tim Gallant]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

Ally,


I'd agree with this, and think there can be many factors that play into a great green - ie orientation, slope, and even position in the round. I love the 11th green at North Berwick - it has hardly any internal contours, but follows the slope of the dune from back left to front right, and is oriented at about a 30 degree angle from play, so that shots from the right and much easier than from the left of the hole.


Curious what courses you think have great greens but not big contour.

[Thomas Dai]

Sometimes less is more. What is more challenging to play?
Big contour vrs subtle contour. Big breaks vrs minuscule breaks. Mind games too.
And does ‘greens’ mean just the putting surface or the surrounds or even the areas where the approach shot is being played from as well? All the way back to the tee maybe.
Atb

For this particular question I was speaking mostly of the putting surface and their immediate surrounds. The area where an approach shot is being played from would fall more into the rest of the property or routing classification.

Surely holes should be looked at more as complete entities?
Does not the position of the hole/pin on any given day in relation to the contours of the putting surface amongst a few other factors effect the intended positioning of a players approach shot and thus the intending positioning of the tee shot etc?
I also recall comments from the past along the lines of have a challenging green on the end of a easy hole and have an easy green on the end of a challenging hole?
And par-3’s with multiple tees set at different angles can play very differently into the same green.
And then there many others aspects like the seasonal weather conditions, the prevailing/non-prevailing wind and its strength, the softness/firmness of the putting surfaces and the approaches, height of cut etc etc to consider too.
Atb

[Sean_A]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

Ally,


I'd agree with this, and think there can be many factors that play into a great green - ie orientation, slope, and even position in the round. I love the 11th green at North Berwick - it has hardly any internal contours, but follows the slope of the dune from back left to front right, and is oriented at about a 30 degree angle from play, so that shots from the right and much easier than from the left of the hole.


Curious what courses you think have great greens but not big contour.

I guess the first place to start is naming the great green sets on GB&I courses. I honestly can't think of many. Most are adequate rather than a real boon for the designs.

Ciao

[Tim Gallant]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

Ally,


I'd agree with this, and think there can be many factors that play into a great green - ie orientation, slope, and even position in the round. I love the 11th green at North Berwick - it has hardly any internal contours, but follows the slope of the dune from back left to front right, and is oriented at about a 30 degree angle from play, so that shots from the right and much easier than from the left of the hole.


Curious what courses you think have great greens but not big contour.

I guess the first place to start is naming and the great green sets on GB&I courses. I honestly can't think of many. Most are adequate rather than a real boon for the designs.

Ciao

Add St Patricks to the list of great green sets.

[David Jones]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

Ally,


I'd agree with this, and think there can be many factors that play into a great green - ie orientation, slope, and even position in the round. I love the 11th green at North Berwick - it has hardly any internal contours, but follows the slope of the dune from back left to front right, and is oriented at about a 30 degree angle from play, so that shots from the right and much easier than from the left of the hole.


Curious what courses you think have great greens but not big contour.

I guess the first place to start is naming and the great green sets on GB&I courses. I honestly can't think of many. Most are adequate rather than a real boon for the designs.

Ciao

I’ve only been there once, but Prestwick struck me as a place where the greens surpass the merely adequate.

[PCCraig]

The first course that came to my mind was Brookline. The greens there aren't overly complicated from a contours perspective, then again they aren't really big enough (on the whole) to have any?! 

[Sven Nilsen]

Pebble

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think there’s a risk in associating great greens only with significant contour.


Tom is right that many great courses in the UK have very little internal contour. But some of those courses can justifiably be said to have a great set of greens. And some of them can’t.


I like big contour but I know a great set when I see them and they are sometimes far more subtle.

Ally,


I'd agree with this, and think there can be many factors that play into a great green - ie orientation, slope, and even position in the round. I love the 11th green at North Berwick - it has hardly any internal contours, but follows the slope of the dune from back left to front right, and is oriented at about a 30 degree angle from play, so that shots from the right and much easier than from the left of the hole.


Curious what courses you think have great greens but not big contour.

The best set of greens in Ireland (with the possible exception of Portrush) are to be found at Portmarnock. For now, we will exclude St. Patrick’s from the discussion.


One of the best sets of greens in England (from those I have seen) are to be found at Ganton.


One of the best sets of greens in Scotland can be found at Glasgow Gailes.


All three of those examples - at first glance - have little internal contour; but in truth have a whole lot going on - both within the greens and outside - that affects play back to the tee.


They are all “great” by any sensible measure of the word.


On the other hand, a course like Irvine Bogside tries to be great but doesn’t quite get there because its greens are indeed bland. In fact, I’ve argued before that a lot of James Braid’s work is really interesting for individual quirky features but really quite average in some of the design detail such as green shapes.

[Sean_A]

A World class set of greens can make for a great course, despite the rest property. But can a course be world class despite their greens?

What needs to happen on the rest of the property to overcome bland and boring greens? What examples are there of courses that are considered great even though they have poor greens?

When trying to improve a course if the routing is troubled but the greens are great, is that a better place to start than having bland greens and a fairly sound routing?

I don't think I have ever played a great course with poor greens.

Ciao

[Jeff Schley]

I guess the first place to start is naming the great green sets on GB&I courses. I honestly can't think of many. Most are adequate rather than a real boon for the designs.

Ciao

If Sean can't think of many I doubt many of us will find many more. Rely on his view for much of GB/I.

[Sean_A]

I guess the first place to start is naming the great green sets on GB&I courses. I honestly can't think of many. Most are adequate rather than a real boon for the designs.

Ciao

If Sean can't think of many I doubt many of us will find many more. Rely on his view for much of GB/I.

It's usually a case of a handful of cool greens and the remainder being nothing special. Of course everybody has a different idea of great. Using Burnham for instance, which I think has one of the better sets of greens in GB&I. Maybe 3, 7, 9, 11, 15 and 16 are great greens. Is that enough to be a great set? I never thought so. Certainly not in the class of Deal, but perhaps Deal has a very great set of greens.

This is really an each is own question. Wind is often used as an excuse for average links greens, but Deal demonstrates what is possible. For the most part I think the wind argument is heavily over-played.

A handful of the some of the best GB&I greens which come to mind are

Deal
TOC
Beau Desert
Pennard
Leckford Old
Sacred 9
Dornoch
Sandwich

Are they world class? Don't know. But I can't think of any great course candidates with poor greens.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Sean,


In the case of Burnham, if those 6 greens are noticeably “better” than the other 12, then no, it’s not enough to call it a great set. But what makes them that much better?


Are they cool only because they have movement and look cool? Or do those 6 affect play and the other 12 don’t?


Deal’s greens definitely have a bunch of cool movement. Couldn’t tell you off hand whether that adds to the approach play or just adds to the fun of putting on them…. I do agree that wind is overplayed in general though. Once you are building gathering slopes as opposed to a bunch of fast, shedding crowns, you can design good undulating links greens even for 25mph winds.


To the original question, I think there are quite a few south-east England heathlands that approach world class whilst having an average set of greens.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

In the case of Burnham, if those 6 greens are noticeably “better” than the other 12, then no, it’s not enough to call it a great set. But what makes them that much better?

Are they cool only because they have movement and look cool? Or do those 6 affect play and the other 12 don’t?

Deal’s greens definitely have a bunch of cool movement. Couldn’t tell you off hand whether that adds to the approach play or just adds to the fun of putting on them…. I do agree that wind is overplayed in general though. Once you are building gathering slopes as opposed to a bunch of fast, shedding crowns, you can design good undulating links greens even for 25mph winds.

Ally

It's hard for me to imagine a great green which doesn't effect approach play. Hell, tons of OK greens achieve this.

In the case of Burnham

3 is a classic punchbowl with the added twist of two mini punchbowls short of the green which make it difficult to trundle balls onto the green.

7 has a well disguised ridge running thru the green which completely dominates shot making.

9 is a cool plateau green with a false front, lower back right bowl protected by sand and higher flat areas left protected by sand. Choices depend on how aggressive you want to be, knowing that playing safe will likely leave a difficult two putt.

11 is basically an extension of the fairway with a few subtle tiers. It's easy to be left with long putts because the trouble is left and right.

15 is on of the best greens I have ever seen. It is a bit crazy with multiple movements, kind of mimics the fairway. Very, very unusual sunken green.

16 has three bold tiers with a spine running through the middle tier which fades away toward the rear. Because the the wall separating the 1st and 2nd tiers is so high, you have to decide the ball flight or if you want want the approach to get much higher than 10 feet off the ground. Plenty of space to rear which is often not a bad place to be...a difficult choice for many to make.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()