[John Challenger]

It's not surprising that the C.B. Macdonald ranked "Perfection in undulations and hillocks" with a value of 22, the second highest of all essential golf course features, just one away from "Nature of the Soil." Bobby Jones and Alister MacKenzie agreed. Undulations is the most critical feature in terms of dictating strategy, even more important than hazards. They are hazards in that they can be something to be avoided, but they can also be something to find.

"The more i studied the Old Course at St. Andrews, the more I loved it, and the more I loved it, the more I studied it."

Robert Tyre (Bobby) Jones, Jr.


"If the members of the Royal and Ancient care a damn what the critics thought, all these fascinating undulations would have been shaved off and the world would have been deprived of the only golf course on real links land that has not been defaced by the hand of man.

There is probably not a quarter of the bunker area at St. Andrews that there is on other well-known courses: the course is made by its undulations.  Even after years of study of the course, I am always discovering fresh and better methods of playing the holes."

Alister MacKenzie

[John Connolly]

John,


Interesting topic. I'll start with a question. When does a ripple become an undulation? Or when does rumpled terrain become large enough area to be classified as undulatory? Because if undulations are to be strategic, they would have to be large enough to gauge from a distance. Asked another way, is the rumpled and rippled nature of links fairways a smaller-scale version of undulations?

[David_Tepper]

One potential problem with undulations/swales is that, if they are in a place where they collect a lot of golf balls, the bottom of the area can become a "divot farm" as hundreds and hundreds of shots are played over the course of a season from a relatively small area.

I don't know whether or not there are collection areas like that at TOC, but I have seem them on other links courses.

[John Challenger]

David, in regard to divot farms, I would think that digital topographics could help to prevent this by working out more complex undulation solutions. Perhaps, Old Tom Morris and Allan Robertson and Alister MacKenzie worked out the solutions to these problems in their heads or by experimentation, and put a pot in only when there was no other solution possible.

In regard to ripples and rumpled terrain, I think, John Connolly, you are right. They are the same as undulations, although perhaps a sub-class of smaller- or subtler-shaped undulations.

Part of getting to know how to play a course is to understand where opportunities and hazards lie even though we are blind to them from the tee. By definition, there is some degree of "blindness" on every course. Some of that blindness is real, in other words we really can't see a speed slot that on later rounds, we know is there. At St. Andrews, there might be some flat ground with a good view of a particular pin position that we are trying to find. Some blindness is deceptive and camouflaged, and created by the architect.

[BCrosby]

A main theme in MacK's Spirit of St Andrews is the importance of undulations in golf architecture.


Bob

[Matt Schoolfield]

John,


Interesting topic. I'll start with a question. When does a ripple become an undulation? Or when does rumpled terrain become large enough area to be classified as undulatory? Because if undulations are to be strategic, they would have to be large enough to gauge from a distance. Asked another way, is the rumpled and rippled nature of links fairways a smaller-scale version of undulations?

I would say this would have to do with running shots, at least historically. An undulation would be land movement that deflects a stinger an amount that requires the player to compensate. A ripple might deflect a shot, but it if it’s not going to materially affect the outcome, I wouldn’t call it an undulation.

[Ally Mcintosh]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

[Matt Schoolfield]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

Hashing out effectively arbitrary classification systems is an entertaining bit of casual philosophy. J.L. Austin actually suggested a rigorous version of dictionary creation by sending out surveys with questions like these, and it probably would have happened if he hadn’t passed away at an early age.

I agree with you that the distinction doesn’t really matter, but jargon refinement is fun and potentially helpful.

[John Connolly]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

My interest in the distinction between terms stems from this quote from Mr. Challenger's initial question: "Undulations is the most critical feature in terms of dictating strategy.."

My point was simply this: If ground movement is too small, e.g. a "ripple," can it really be considered a strategic element? It is texture, surely, but not the big swale or mound that you would target intentionally as a strategic play. So the ubiquitous rippling that brings such pleasure to links golf is an important distinction from its larger cousin, undulations - which is the landform it would seem CBM is referring to.

[Charlie Goerges]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

My interest in the distinction between terms stems from this quote from Mr. Challenger's initial question: "Undulations is the most critical feature in terms of dictating strategy.."

My point was simply this: If ground movement is too small, e.g. a "ripple," can it really be considered a strategic element? It is texture, surely, but not the big swale or mound that you would target intentionally as a strategic play. So the ubiquitous rippling that brings such pleasure to links golf is an important distinction from its larger cousin, undulations - which is the landform it would seem CBM is referring to.

If they are small enough, they may not affect the player’s ball much, but they can affect the stance or swing. As such, you may want to avoid that area for strategic reasons (i.e. you don’t want the ball above/below your feet etc.)

[John Connolly]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

My interest in the distinction between terms stems from this quote from Mr. Challenger's initial question: "Undulations is the most critical feature in terms of dictating strategy.."

My point was simply this: If ground movement is too small, e.g. a "ripple," can it really be considered a strategic element? It is texture, surely, but not the big swale or mound that you would target intentionally as a strategic play. So the ubiquitous rippling that brings such pleasure to links golf is an important distinction from its larger cousin, undulations - which is the landform it would seem CBM is referring to.

If they are small enough, they may not affect the player’s ball much, but they can affect the stance or swing. As such, you may want to avoid that area for strategic reasons (i.e. you don’t want the ball above/below your feet etc.)

Yes, absolutely you'd like to avoid them - but my entire point is if they're small and a ubiquitous part of the terrain, they cannot be strategically avoided - especially from 200 yards away! As opposed to what I think John Challenger and CBM were getting at which is that the larger ripples, or "undulations," can be registered at a distance and would indeed require a decision calculus.

[Sean_A]

This thread is really quite strange to me.


When you live and breathe links golf, ripples and undulations and swales and mounds and ridges and moguls and fall-offs and flash-ups and humps are all one and the same thing… some are larger, some are smaller. But once they are on short grass and mowable, they are all undulations.

My interest in the distinction between terms stems from this quote from Mr. Challenger's initial question: "Undulations is the most critical feature in terms of dictating strategy.."

My point was simply this: If ground movement is too small, e.g. a "ripple," can it really be considered a strategic element? It is texture, surely, but not the big swale or mound that you would target intentionally as a strategic play. So the ubiquitous rippling that brings such pleasure to links golf is an important distinction from its larger cousin, undulations - which is the landform it would seem CBM is referring to.

If they are small enough, they may not affect the player’s ball much, but they can affect the stance or swing. As such, you may want to avoid that area for strategic reasons (i.e. you don’t want the ball above/below your feet etc.)

Yes, absolutely you'd like to avoid them - but my entire point is if they're small and a ubiquitous part of the terrain, they cannot be strategically avoided - especially from 200 yards away! As opposed to what I think John Challenger and CBM were getting at which is that the larger ripples, or "undulations," can be registered at a distance and would indeed require a decision calculus.

Micro undulations may be an area which is avoidable. In any case, the undulations at TOC run the gambit of penal to highly strategic.

Land movement, which is what undulations are, is the soul of golf.

Ciao

[Niall C]

Undulations are overrated whereas overlations are underrated. It's one of the great ironies of golf.


Niall

[Tom_Doak]

As insane as it sounds, I was inspecting the undulations of the approach to the 2nd at The Old Course last week in Florida, where we are employing a mirror-image version of them for our par-5 8th hole. 


The first people to see it have all remarked that the size of the contours is smaller than the real version, but it is not -- we have the exact measurements courtesy of LIDAR.  What I've found from analyzing the fairway contours of various famous links is that American designers and shapers generally over-egg the pudding, whereas the authentic versions have somewhat smaller heights, and somewhat less reliable surface drainage!  This all makes sense when you consider that if the difference between your feet and an intervening contour is more than five feet [your approximate eye level], you can't see much of anything on the other side of the contour, and usually on a links course the visibility is a little better than that.


Next month we will dig into a very close copy of the Eden hole . . . I've tried to imitate it before but felt like I never quite got it right, so I'm curious to see what the LIDAR version looks like.

[Jaeger Kovich]

As insane as it sounds, I was inspecting the undulations of the approach to the 2nd at The Old Course last week in Florida, where we are employing a mirror-image version of them for our par-5 8th hole. 


The first people to see it have all remarked that the size of the contours is smaller than the real version, but it is not -- we have the exact measurements courtesy of LIDAR.  What I've found from analyzing the fairway contours of various famous links is that American designers and shapers generally over-egg the pudding, whereas the authentic versions have somewhat smaller heights, and somewhat less reliable surface drainage!  This all makes sense when you consider that if the difference between your feet and an intervening contour is more than five feet [your approximate eye level], you can't see much of anything on the other side of the contour, and usually on a links course the visibility is a little better than that.


Next month we will dig into a very close copy of the Eden hole . . . I've tried to imitate it before but felt like I never quite got it right, so I'm curious to see what the LIDAR version looks like.

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 

[Tom_Doak]

Next month we will dig into a very close copy of the Eden hole . . . I've tried to imitate it before but felt like I never quite got it right, so I'm curious to see what the LIDAR version looks like.

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 

We used the current version [because our green speeds will be faster than St. Andrews], but this time I have the editor's pen!

[John Challenger]

Tom, Using the LIDAR land shaping in this way is another innovation in landscape and golf course design. Reminds me of sampling in music. "In sound and music, sampling is the reuse of a portion (or sample of a sound recording in another record." Very creative. What better place to sample than St. Andrews because it is the touchstone. Interesting that most homages have been "overegged."

Visibility, even to the other side of an undulation, is essential to golf course design because seeing big swaths of the entire playing ground is so visually compelling and freeing. We want to see the land, including where we have walked and where we are going. What the land looks like in all directions.The golfer wants to see and think about where to land the ball. Who doesn't love witnessing a powerful drive bound down a hard and fast fairway or a cleanly hit iron shot land close to the hole.

Pockets of blindness, which create "reveals" and opportunities for acquired course knowledge, are an essential element in golf design too. Employed sparingly and subtly, they create surprise and strategy.

An interesting parallel between St. Andrews and the Lido is the "blindness" a golfer experiences playing them for the first time. The golf courses are wide open.  The visual cues marking the fairway and green are difficult to find. The more one plays these two golf courses and studies where to hit the ball, the more the shape of the holes emerge, and the more complex the shot decisions become in terms of where to land the ball based on the wind, the pin position and the shape and undulations in the fairway and on the greens.

It is like music. My favorite songs are the ones that take many listens before one begins to understand and appreciate the patterns.

[John Challenger]

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 



What does the Pre-Dawson version refer to?


I was wondering whose 20th century hands are on St. Andrews? Even though it "just growed," I know Colt worked on it early in the century, but not sure who else.

[Charlie Goerges]

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 



What does the Pre-Dawson version refer to?


I was wondering whose 20th century hands are on St. Andrews? Even though it "just growed," I know Colt worked on it early in the century, but not sure who else.

They somewhat flattened the Eden green (11th) a few years back.

[Adam Lawrence]

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 

What does the Pre-Dawson version refer to?

I was wondering whose 20th century hands are on St. Andrews? Even though it "just growed," I know Colt worked on it early in the century, but not sure who else.

Colt only advised on how to solve the problem of the condition of the Old Course, which had become very bad after a drought in 1912. The R&A's Green Committee, of which his friend Johnny Low was a member, asked him to report on the course, which he did in August 1912, waiving his fee as he was a club member. He never, so far as I am aware, did any actual architectural work on the course.


The major architectural change of the twentieth century was the addition of bunkers on the right side of the front nine in the early 1900s, for which, I believe, Low was largely responsible. Bob Crosby will doubtless say if he had found anything to the contrary.

[Niall C]

Did Hawtree not stick in a couple of bunkers to the right of the 2nd (?) green at roughly the same time that the work was done to the Eden green ? Or did they get taken out ?


Niall

[John Challenger]

Can you get the Pre-Dawson version or just post changes on Lidar?! 

What does the Pre-Dawson version refer to?

I was wondering whose 20th century hands are on St. Andrews? Even though it "just growed," I know Colt worked on it early in the century, but not sure who else.

Colt only advised on how to solve the problem of the condition of the Old Course, which had become very bad after a drought in 1912. The R&A's Green Committee, of which his friend Johnny Low was a member, asked him to report on the course, which he did in August 1912, waiving his fee as he was a club member. He never, so far as I am aware, did any actual architectural work on the course.


The major architectural change of the twentieth century was the addition of bunkers on the right side of the front nine in the early 1900s, for which, I believe, Low was largely responsible. Bob Crosby will doubtless say if he had found anything to the contrary.

Adam, Is Colt's 1912 report still available and did he address any architectural issues?

[Adam Lawrence]

I don't have it, but I suspect I know where it might be found. Watch this space!

Adam

[BCrosby]

"Colt only advised on how to solve the problem of the condition of the Old Course, which had become very bad after a drought in 1912. The R&A's Green Committee, of which his friend Johnny Low was a member, asked him to report on the course, which he did in August 1912, waiving his fee as he was a club member. He never, so far as I am aware, did any actual architectural work on the course.

The major architectural change of the twentieth century was the addition of bunkers on the right side of the front nine in the early 1900s, for which, I believe, Low was largely responsible. Bob Crosby will doubtless say if he had found anything to the contrary." Adam

John Low was involved in two rounds of bunker additions on TOC. The first was over the winter of 1899/1900 when 22 bunkers were added to the right side of several outward holes. The second round was over the winter of 1904/05 when about 42 bunkers were added, most of them also on the right side of the outward holes. Low's close friend Freddie Tait was on the committee with Low that did the planning for the 1899/1900 bunkers. Herbert Fowler assisted Low with some of the planning in 04/05. Those new bunkers mark the last time any significant change was made to TOC, until Dawson that is.

I have not come across anything to indicate that Colt was involved in that bunker work.

Bob

[Adam Lawrence]

"Colt only advised on how to solve the problem of the condition of the Old Course, which had become very bad after a drought in 1912. The R&A's Green Committee, of which his friend Johnny Low was a member, asked him to report on the course, which he did in August 1912, waiving his fee as he was a club member. He never, so far as I am aware, did any actual architectural work on the course.

The major architectural change of the twentieth century was the addition of bunkers on the right side of the front nine in the early 1900s, for which, I believe, Low was largely responsible. Bob Crosby will doubtless say if he had found anything to the contrary." Adam

John Low was involved in two rounds of bunker additions on TOC. The first was over the winter of 1899/1900 when 22 bunkers were added to the right side of several outward holes. The second round was over the winter of 1904/05 when about 42 bunkers were added, most of them also on the right side of the outward holes. Low's close friend Freddie Tait was on the committee with Low that did the planning for the 1899/1900 bunkers. Herbert Fowler assisted Low with some of the planning in 04/05. Those new bunkers mark the last time any significant change was made to TOC, until Dawson that is.

I have not come across anything to indicate that Colt was involved in that bunker work.

Bob

Colt wasn't practising as an architect at the time, so it would be a big surprise if he was.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()