Why are we obsessed with templates?

[Ben Sims]

1) The playability and strategic elements are just THAT good.


2) Humans require characterization and categorization to simplify their experience.


Pick a side and argue for it.

[Jim Sherma]

…
3) it’s a rather low hurdle to a shared vocabulary where you can believe you have a more nuanced understanding of GCA than you really do.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Oh, it’s definitely 2 and 3, no question.

[Sean_A]

Is that the royal we?

All three I spose. #1 has a Biarritz exclusion for me. I don't care for the concept. 🤷

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Is that the royal we?

All three I spose. #1 has a Biarritz exclusion for me. I don't care for the concept. 🤷

Ciao

Redan I will give you even though most play nothing like the original.


The only thing original about Short is the thumb-print and this often isn’t used.


Eden is a great hole. But bunker left and bunker short right by itself does not a great concept make.


The GCA world is wholly obsessed with the history, aesthetic and relatability of these holes before the fantastically original playing strategies.


Ironically, Biarritz is probably the most original concept of the four (if not the best for the modern game).

[Adrian_Stiff]

Hardly anyone in the real world likes the 'Redan' concept.


I am certainly not obsessed with templates, if I am copying it will be a part, although almost all holes are going to be structural mirrors of basic decent golf design.

[Tim Martin]

Hardly anyone in the real world likes the 'Redan' concept.

Adrian-I would be interested in having you develop this assertion a bit more as I don’t remember seeing any polling regarding same. “Hardly anyone” casts a pretty wide net. If I’m a bettor I would wager there are no shortage of GCA members that are fans of the concept and revere many of subject holes which are not only limited to Mac/Raynor/Banks interpretations.

[Steve Lang]

   !, 2, & 3 it'd be... but they're really more like guidelines to me, to see them or to give a nod to them lurking about celebrates some good stuff in gca but we're human and there's no coronations in golf, puttt it out and count yer score daddy.

[ChipRoyce]

Obsessed seems like a strong word.

I think templates have an interest as there are only so many types of golf homes and Raynor/MacDonald happened to execute template GCA really well.
Why do golfers / GCA fans like templates? I'll draw a comparison to classic French dishes.
Onion Soup Gratinee, Coq Au Vin,  Bouillabaisse

You've had them before. You know pretty much what you're going to get.

They're all really good if just done competently.

And when done by an expert, you know you're in for a treat.

[Steve Lang]

   Oui, I'll take the Onion Soup si vous plait...

[Ira Fishman]

Is that the royal we?

All three I spose. #1 has a Biarritz exclusion for me. I don't care for the concept. 🤷

Ciao

Redan I will give you even though most play nothing like the original.


The only thing original about Short is the thumb-print and this often isn’t used.


Eden is a great hole. But bunker left and bunker short right by itself does not a great concept make.


The GCA world is wholly obsessed with the history, aesthetic and relatability of these holes before the fantastically original playing strategies.


Ironically, Biarritz is probably the most original concept of the four (if not the best for the modern game).

I am far from obsessed with template holes, but when well executed, they generally are interesting and fun to play.


Alps, Cape, Road, Punchbowl have not even been mentioned.


Ally, I do not think that Macdonald claimed originality as the calling card for templates. Quite the opposite I think. He was consciously imitating what he thought were the best hole designs.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

2) Humans require characterization and categorization to simplify their experience.

I think it's mostly (2), but it's not that it simplifies things for the person who becomes obsessed . . . it's that it gives them a bunch of jargon to show off that they are some sort of expert on the topic.

[Tim Martin]

Is that the royal we?

All three I spose. #1 has a Biarritz exclusion for me. I don't care for the concept. 🤷

Ciao

Redan I will give you even though most play nothing like the original.


The only thing original about Short is the thumb-print and this often isn’t used.


Eden is a great hole. But bunker left and bunker short right by itself does not a great concept make.


The GCA world is wholly obsessed with the history, aesthetic and relatability of these holes before the fantastically original playing strategies.


Ironically, Biarritz is probably the most original concept of the four (if not the best for the modern game).

I am far from obsessed with template holes, but when well executed, they generally are interesting and fun to play.


Alps, Cape, Road, Punchbowl have not even been mentioned.


Ally, I do not think that Macdonald claimed originality as the calling card for templates. Quite the opposite I think. He was consciously imitating what he thought were the best hole designs.


Ira

The obsession seems to come from the camp of the detractors as well as the fans. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery why the angst over the question of originality? Despite how many of the “template” courses find their way onto the top 100 lists the detractors persist. Are Fishers Island and Yale as two prominent examples not worthy of the almost universal praise they receive undeserving of the accolades because they followed a formula? Finally Raynor has his share of terrific free form holes that are rarely referenced.

[Joe Hancock]

I’m not sure we can fairly judge most template holes based on modern maintenance and equipment (sticks and balls) standards. If only there was a way to experience these old ideas under what would have been the presentation and playing equipment of their time.

[Matt Schoolfield]

A template hole is effectively a local’s hole, but part of the cultural cannon.


We can all discuss the road hole, but if I try to bring up the nuance of #8 at Gleneagles SF, nobody would know what I’m talking about.


It’s only reasonable that folks want access to the cannon, even if they live far away.

[Mike_Young]

I'm not obsessed with "Template" holes.  Actually I think there are only about 25 golf greens/holes out there and they are done over and over in some form.  "Template" is just a cool word that is often used to sell to committees.  I'm at  club where right now a sales job is being done of Ross Template greens on a Rodney Dangerfield routing...

[Thomas Dai]

“Inspired by ……..”
Atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

Is that the royal we?

All three I spose. #1 has a Biarritz exclusion for me. I don't care for the concept. 🤷

Ciao

Redan I will give you even though most play nothing like the original.


The only thing original about Short is the thumb-print and this often isn’t used.


Eden is a great hole. But bunker left and bunker short right by itself does not a great concept make.


The GCA world is wholly obsessed with the history, aesthetic and relatability of these holes before the fantastically original playing strategies.


Ironically, Biarritz is probably the most original concept of the four (if not the best for the modern game).

I am far from obsessed with template holes, but when well executed, they generally are interesting and fun to play.


Alps, Cape, Road, Punchbowl have not even been mentioned.


Ally, I do not think that Macdonald claimed originality as the calling card for templates. Quite the opposite I think. He was consciously imitating what he thought were the best hole designs.


Ira

Agreed Ira,


They are generally fun to play. But it’s only the fact that they are repeated on every course that makes people talk about them more than any number of great non-template holes.


When I mentioned originality, what I meant is that the hole / template has characteristics that are vastly different / individual to other holes that do not get given the template’s name. For example, Short is in essence a forced carry par-3 with trouble all around. Thousands of those holes have been designed without the designer ever utilising the need to reference a template.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Hardly anyone in the real world likes the 'Redan' concept.

Adrian-I would be interested in having you develop this assertion a bit more as I don’t remember seeing any polling regarding same. “Hardly anyone” casts a pretty wide net. If I’m a bettor I would wager there are no shortage of GCA members that are fans of the concept and revere many of subject holes which are not only limited to Mac/Raynor/Banks interpretations.

Real word  = the normal person that plays golf. They don't like front to back greens where a ball is swished away to hollows or bunkers.
GCA = is wicky wacky people that like obscure stuff like sheep shit, howling winds, slopes going the wrong way, balls lying in divots, playing golf in the rain, driving 500 miles past 50 other courses to play golf on unirrigated turf....that sort of thing

[Tim Martin]

Hardly anyone in the real world likes the 'Redan' concept.

Adrian-I would be interested in having you develop this assertion a bit more as I don’t remember seeing any polling regarding same. “Hardly anyone” casts a pretty wide net. If I’m a bettor I would wager there are no shortage of GCA members that are fans of the concept and revere many of subject holes which are not only limited to Mac/Raynor/Banks interpretations.

Real word  = the normal person that plays golf. They don't like back to front greens where a ball is swished away to hollows or bunkers.
GCA = is wicky wacky people that like obscure stuff like sheep shit, howling winds, slopes going the wrong way, balls lying in divots, playing golf in the rain, driving 500 miles past 50 other courses to play golf on unirrigated turf....that sort of thing

You purport to know what everyone in the “real world” likes? I’m not a fan of any of the credentials you list above to get inducted into the “wicky wacky people” fraternity but I like the redan concept so go figure. The vast majority of greens in my playing experience slope from back to front and I’m not sure that I know what a slope going the wrong way is.

[Thomas Dai]

GCA = is wicky wacky people that like obscure stuff like sheep shit, howling winds, slopes going the wrong way, balls lying in divots, playing golf in the rain, driving 500 miles past 50 other courses to play golf on unirrigated turf....that sort of thing

Sounds divine .. plus playing from forward tees with retro clubs and a rolled-back ball!!!

Atb

[Adam Uttley]

It’s definitely (2).  I guess templates have a higher likelihood of being good strategic holes than the general population of golf holes but their quality depends on their interpretation when built and their conditions when played.  I’ve played a handful of Macdonald / Raynor courses and a soft Redan isn’t very strategic regardless of how close to the original it is.  At Yale, the 4th purports to be a Road hole but the deep front green side bunker is on the wrong side of the green to replicate the strategic intent.  You are rewarded for hitting away from the pond (in lieu of the hotel) rather than flirting with it.  I found it being called a road hole template a distraction and much preferred the holes that I don’t recognise / realise were “templates” as a result.

[Tim Martin]

It’s definitely (2).  I guess templates have a higher likelihood of being good strategic holes than the general population of golf holes but their quality depends on their interpretation when built and their conditions when played.  I’ve played a handful of Macdonald / Raynor courses and a soft Redan isn’t very strategic regardless of how close to the original it is.  At Yale, the 4th purports to be a Road hole but the deep front green side bunker is on the wrong side of the green to replicate the strategic intent.  You are rewarded for hitting away from the pond (in lieu of the hotel) rather than flirting with it.  I found it being called a road hole template a distraction and much preferred the holes that I don’t recognise / realise were “templates” as a result.

Adam-The closer your tee shot is to the pond the shorter the approach into the hole and even more so if you take it over the corner. The bombers may choose to fly it directly over. The intent of the green side bunker on the right is to challenge the player that played as close to or over the pond on the tee shot. Depending on how far right the tee shot is and the pin location the bunker can function as a lion’s mouth.

[Adam Uttley]

It’s definitely (2).  I guess templates have a higher likelihood of being good strategic holes than the general population of golf holes but their quality depends on their interpretation when built and their conditions when played.  I’ve played a handful of Macdonald / Raynor courses and a soft Redan isn’t very strategic regardless of how close to the original it is.  At Yale, the 4th purports to be a Road hole but the deep front green side bunker is on the wrong side of the green to replicate the strategic intent.  You are rewarded for hitting away from the pond (in lieu of the hotel) rather than flirting with it.  I found it being called a road hole template a distraction and much preferred the holes that I don’t recognise / realise were “templates” as a result.

Adam-The closer your tee shot is to the pond the shorter the approach into the hole and even more so if you take it over the corner. The bombers may choose to fly it directly over. The intent of the green side bunker on the right is to challenge the player that played as close to or over the pond on the tee shot. Depending on how far right the tee shot is and the pin location the bunker can function as a lion’s mouth.

The shortening of the hole is minimal from hugging the pond; the dogleg angle would have to be more severe for that.  If you (can) bomb it over the corner you might have a shorter approach but only because you’d otherwise run into trees on the right.  I played mine very close to the pond and had an awful approach.  I then walked to the safer, left side of the fairway and the approach was much easier.  [size=78%]There’s certainly strategy in the hole but it’s not the same strategy as the Road hole.[/size]

[Ronald Montesano]

I've not played the North Berwick REDAN hole, so I cannot comment on how it compares to others. I do love a good kickplate, which I believe is an element of the original, and all of its NickCannon-esque offspring.

I wonder how many of the Template holes offer opportunity for all levels of golfer. Are template holes the great equalizers? If they are, then I've ended this discussion. We love template holes because they allow the intelligent golfer to outsmart the opponent, and win the day.

Another thought is this: we all want to be rich aristocrats from the early 20th century, so wealthy and aloof/aloft that we can disinherit someone when he drives the green of our beloved first hole at our beloved NGLA (so the legend goes.)

Which matters more in golf course architecture, originality or excellence? Find a hole that is unlike any other in the world, and write a profound, cogent thread on it. I'll read it with zeal. I'm all in for template holes, but I also love to read about the unicorns.