Wrinkly Ground - the most important overlooked feature on a golf course?

[John Challenger]

In 1933 Alister MacKenenzie said about St. Andrews TOC, "I doubt if even in a hundred years' time a course will be made which has such interesting strategic problems and which creates such enduring and increasing pleasurable excitement and varied shots." We have a decade left to prove him wrong.

Is it possible that this undulating, wrinkled, rumpled, crumpled land is THE key element, especially on inland courses, and that when this essential subtle ingredient is missing, courses can be too flat and dull and uninspiring? MacKenzie said that these undulations on fairways and greens are the key to variety and variety is everything. Maybe in our ham-handed modern machined way, we have been making them, as Tom points out, too big and dramatic and clunky.

If making wrinkled land throughout the entire course is either too boring for a shaper, equally as or even more complicated to get right then shaping a bunker or a green, too expensive, too easily wrecked by maintenance equipment, etc., no wonder we don't see it much except on courses where it's natural or in a sacred places like St. Andrews where it has been left alone.

What if it really were to be much, much more complicated than it looks to get it right?  Leaving it to a random throw of marbles is an interesting solution but perhaps the wrong way to recreate natural random links ground made by wind and rain and the elements. Just leaving it to a crewmember works if it's really not too hard to accomplish.

Maybe the answer, at least for the time being until we learn to do it inexpensively, is to use 3d printers and automated vehicles to recreate the folded micropatterns from ideal course land. CBMacdonald would also probably like to know we are still trying to recreate ideal landforms and a "wrinkle in time" 100 years later.

[Tom_Doak]

St. Patricks was built perfectly. A fair amount of construction work happened but it was all in the right, necessary places. It shows the skill of Tom and his team. As a counter - and only because he gets close to mentioning it - I always thought the photos of Tara Iti made it look a little over-shaped. I understand that due to the tree clearance the whole site needed re-grading so some shaping was necessary.

Ally:


You know a lot more about St Patrick’s than you do about Tara Iti, which was 3x more work to build, because every square inch of it had to be put back together, and every edge considered. Maybe there are some places with too much micro contour for your tastes, but there is a good balance of fairways like the 8th and 9th that have a lot of gentle movement.  (I suspect that’s why some people think it’s my best work.)


By the same token, we had a much tighter budget to build St Patrick’s, and it was a conscious decision to do less shaping and leave more things alone (although maybe Eric and I should have reminded Clyde and Angela about that a bit more often).  We were properly wary of tearing up too much ground, because the growing season in Ireland is so short that you can’t be sure you’ll be able to get turf established on a lot of open sand.  It was a very different process to Tara Iti or Pacific Dunes or Ballyneal.

[Tom_Doak]

Is it possible that this undulating, wrinkled, rumpled, crumpled land is THE key element, especially on inland courses, that have made them too flat and dull and uninspiring. MacKenzie said that these undulations on fairways and greens are the key to variety and variety is everything. Maybe in our ham-handed modern way, we have been making them, as Tom points out, too big and dramatic and clunky.

. . .

Maybe the answer, at least for the time being until we learn to do it, is to use 3d printers and technology to recreate the folded micropatterns from ideal course land. CBMacdonald would also probably like to know we are trying to recreate ideal landforms and a "wrinkle in time" 100 years later.

An important part of this discussion that’s been skipped is, are there really many places where it’s appropriate to try and create the wrinkly contours of a great links?  I’m lucky enough to have worked in a few such locations, but let’s agree that it made more sense for  Macdonald to try it next to the ocean on Long Island than it did for us to do recreations of the same shapes in Wisconsin or Thailand!


And as several posters here have teased, it’s equally as easy to overdo the shaping as it is to overdo the design.  For example, I think we could copy even those wild contours of the sixth fairway at Westward Ho! that Tommy posted, but most would agree that would be overkill on most any other site.  (And a lot of holes at Westward Ho! are actually pretty flat.). But the reason I can’t imagine anyone rebuilding that hole is that architects would not be content to build it without over-strategizing and trying to combine the best elements of the Redan and the Bottle holes. 

[Thomas Dai]

Wouldn’t wrinkles, especially hollows, on non free-draining soil like that usually found on inland parkland courses, as Tom mentioned in response to my tongue in cheek post above, likely be problematical unless decent drainage is installed, which then raises other issues like £$€?
Also, whereas hollows get damp and wet, humps, even minor ones, dry out and look bald of grass and scruffy and unsightly, which then attracts negative comments about course conditioning etc,
Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

I recall a pamphlet from Langrod regarding the Chicago District. I think he actually considered no bunkers because there were no natural sand blowouts in the Chicago area (save the Indiana Dunes in the SE corner).  So, I understand the concept of not using rumples as a design feature if they aren't natural to the area.  Others have posited that built contours should never exceed twice the natural slopes in an area if you want the course to fit the natural landscape, a good rule of thumb perhaps, if not applied too strictly.


That said, rolling fw like no. 8 at Prarie Dunes seems to come out of nowhere after relatively flat fw on the front nine, so I suppose a gca could surmise that a small area of dunes on an inland site might have existed somewhere, so why not imagine it happens here?  Let's face it, many designs are almost totally artificial.



Also, as mentioned, both drainage problems and mowing quality (important to many, i.e., avoiding the scalped spots) can be problems, maybe even more so on clay soils.  Not to mention that the more finicky the ripples, the more diverse the lies.  While that is great for challenging better players, like any other hazard, it probably kills average golfers much more.  So, the type of course might dictate their use.

[Don Mahaffey]

 

I don't think wrinkled ground is overlooked or some sort of revelation.


I do think much depends on soil conditions, whether carts will be used as primary way to get around, and if too many "experts" with "expert" equipment is used. Wrinkled ground is imperfect.  You don't make $1,000 day being imperfect.


I believe it is completely possible to create wrinkled ground without needing to map old courses and use GPS controlled dozer blades to recreate.

Hey Don:


While I agree with your last point, it’s possible, but there aren’t a lot of successes that jump to mind.


Also, I’m guessing you make more than any shapers I know, so you should probably not cast stones about what anyone is getting paid.

Tom,
I wasn't casting stones but I can see why you took it that way. Good shapers, like your guys, and others out there, are worth every penny+. That wasn't my point. My point is wrinkly ground, the kind I've seen on links courses overseas, would often not be acceptable finish work here in the states.


It's not a shaper issue, I believe it to be an "acceptance" issue by golf architects, clients, supts and the golf world in general. And maybe that's because it is difficult and its a lot of hand work or small machine work. I'm trying to perform some now wrinkled ground work now. I guess we'll see how we do when it's played on in a year or so.

[George Pazin]

It's not a shaper issue, I believe it to be an "acceptance" issue by golf architects, clients, supts and the golf world in general.

Indeed.


Tommy W, you might enjoy this: I used google images to find where your photo was from, and got a listing of just about every UK course....except the answer.


I love roly poly land (that's what I call it). I don't see it nearly enough in modern courses (well, the few I've played). I think Don't probably correct on why. It frustrates golfers like few other things, and the game is hard enough for most of us that we don't like to be frustrated in such a way. Kinda sad, doesn't speak well of us golfers......

[jeffwarne]

Love the crumpled eiderdowns.




It's been said before but modern cutting heights work against this. More balls run to the low points, so you don't get the hanging lie, and consequently divots are more and more of a thing. It used to be said that links golf was at its best in winter but if the grass won't grow some spots are becoming very sorry looking by spring, or for the first time we've had to introduce drop zones and mats.




I'd love to see some areas of fairway cut much higher. It would make these areas more fun.  Start with Deal's 3 and 15 between approx 100 yards out to 50.  At those points the land is more stormy seas than gentle ripple and in the troughs , divots cluster like ships dashed on a reef!  (Apologies it's the kids creative writing class today😆)

For this to become a thing it would have to start  with TOC. 12 would be good place to start....But I fear will only ever see this as I nestle under my duvet...
[/quote

Bingo. Current modern turf HOC concentrates balls and neuters strategy as all balls go to the same places(then the fairway flatteners arrive-yes i just witnessed it at a hundred year old well heeled club where I suggested merely raising the mower cut).
 Amazingly the shorter tighter lies are done to placate the elite players, the very ones who are best able to hit the sidehill, flier, and unpredictable lies that would result from slightly longer grass. An additional benefit, besides cost and strategy, would be that the average player would have a much easier time hitting the middle of the face, rather than the bottom groove or bottoming out behind the ball from too tight of fairways.
The tighter the turf the more divots as well, as longer grass creates less need for trapping action to compress the ball, to say nothing of the concentration of divots Tony references. Slightly longer often results in no divots for many players.


I recently played the Tree Farm, and the new Tahoma bermuda isn't being cut or verticut frequently due to both their newness and not being open yet. The fairways have some substance, aren't super tight, but are dry and firm and produce the crispest feel of any non links turf I've ever  played. In short, perfect turf.
Bump and runs are completely possible and satisfying, but there's enough turf yet firmness to hit any shot you want around the green, and one actually can attempt the multiple trajectory options presented, rather than being forced into a hybrid or putter which has become such an obligatory staple on modern HOC turf.

[Tommy Williamsen]

It's not a shaper issue, I believe it to be an "acceptance" issue by golf architects, clients, supts and the golf world in general.

Indeed.


Tommy W, you might enjoy this: I used google images to find where your photo was from, and got a listing of just about every UK course....except the answer.


I love roly poly land (that's what I call it). I don't see it nearly enough in modern courses (well, the few I've played). I think Don't probably correct on why. It frustrates golfers like few other things, and the game is hard enough for most of us that we don't like to be frustrated in such a way. Kinda sad, doesn't speak well of us golfers......

That’s funny. It is Six at Westward Ho!

[Tom_Doak]

Tommy W, you might enjoy this: I used google images to find where your photo was from, and got a listing of just about every UK course....except the answer.

I am much faster than Google at golf photos.

[Ally Mcintosh]

St. Patricks was built perfectly. A fair amount of construction work happened but it was all in the right, necessary places. It shows the skill of Tom and his team. As a counter - and only because he gets close to mentioning it - I always thought the photos of Tara Iti made it look a little over-shaped. I understand that due to the tree clearance the whole site needed re-grading so some shaping was necessary.

Ally:


You know a lot more about St Patrick’s than you do about Tara Iti, which was 3x more work to build, because every square inch of it had to be put back together, and every edge considered. Maybe there are some places with too much micro contour for your tastes, but there is a good balance of fairways like the 8th and 9th that have a lot of gentle movement.  (I suspect that’s why some people think it’s my best work.)


By the same token, we had a much tighter budget to build St Patrick’s, and it was a conscious decision to do less shaping and leave more things alone (although maybe Eric and I should have reminded Clyde and Angela about that a bit more often).  We were properly wary of tearing up too much ground, because the growing season in Ireland is so short that you can’t be sure you’ll be able to get turf established on a lot of open sand.  It was a very different process to Tara Iti or Pacific Dunes or Ballyneal.

I understand the two courses had a completely different process. Perhaps that is the crux of it: Nothing beats a course on a good site where much of the landscape can be left as nature provides. A wholly constructed course always looks like it has been constructed, however skilfully


Looking at Padraig Dooley’s photos of Tara Iti, I only see one or two holes where the micro-contour looks very wrinkled. In a holistic sense, I love that. I just don’t know if I’m so on board when it’s built rather than found. Or maybe it’s more the partial uniformity in peak and trough height and spacing. Possibly it’s the amount of shaped sand it ties to rather than a stabilised dune system.


But don’t mind me. The place looks amazing and I hope to visit it one day.

[John Challenger]

It may be that Alister MacKenzie's thoughts on this are not relevant today, but he said:

"An almost equally common delusion is that fairways should be flat....there are few things more monotonous  than playing every short shot from a dead flat fairway. The unobservant player never seems to realize the one of the chief charms of the best seaside links is the undulating fairways...where one never has the same shot to play twice over."

"In this connection I would point out that constructors should be careful not to make hillocks so high in the direct line to the hole that they block out the view..."

"The greatest compliment to the constructor is for players to think his artificial work is natural. On Alwoodley and Moortown practically every green and every hummock has been artificially made, yet it is difficult to convince a stranger that this is so. I remember the chairman of a green committee...telling me that it would be impossible to make their course anything like Alwoodley, as there we had such a wealth of natural hollows, hillocks, and undulations. It was only with great difficulty that I was able to persuade him that...these natural features which he so much admired had all been created artificially."

If seems that if the roly poly fairway wrinkles are small and varied enough and flowing in the right way for drainage and play, the balls will hang on them and they won't all run to the same spots. Can I get a patent on the little tesla roomba undulator machine? We could sell it to every constructor and greenskeeper: "The Wrinkly Undulator" or "The Crumpling Rumpler."