News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #25 on: March 11, 2024, 04:49:58 PM »
I think it is an interesting question that like everything about course preferences/rankings is subjective. For me, setting means little in assessing the quality of a course. But a golf course is pretty much the only place that I go outdoors that does not have concrete under my feet.

Accordingly, I am not as keen on Bandon Dunes, Kapalua Plantation, Castle Stuart, and Kingsbarns as those who contribute to the rankings.



Bandon Dunes is a good study in Design v Setting.  A couple of the oceanfront holes [5, 16] really bring the cliff edge into play as a feature of the hole, but others do not, leaving the impression they were trying to have as many holes "touch" the ocean for visual purposes as possible, while NOT having it in play.


Pacific Dunes, by contrast, has only four holes that touch the ocean, and all six full shots on those holes have the cliff in play.  [I didn't think it was on play on #10 when we laid it out, but I have since seen plenty of double-crossed tee shots go over the 11th tee and out of play, into a north wind.]


Both courses highlight the views that are available from the course -- you'd be a fool not to -- but there are some holes where the ocean is integral to the golf, and others where it is not.  The idea of putting up a wall around the 16th at Cypress Point is kind of absurd.


Tom,


You have explained why I have such a difficult time with Bandon Dunes, Kingsbarns, and Castle Stuart. Great views are great, but if the “edge” does not affect play/strategy, I don’t really care. Designers of old time links courses may not have thought about the view, but they did understand how the “edge” could come into play even on shorter courses such as Kilspindie and Crail Balcomie.


Of course, no one would put a wall around 16 at CPC (or 17 either), but the setting directly affects the play dramatically and not just the aesthetic.


Ira

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #26 on: March 12, 2024, 09:44:03 AM »
Ira,


Regarding the influence of setting on play at #16 and 17 at CPC, is it wind that you have in mind?
Tim Weiman

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #27 on: March 12, 2024, 05:28:39 PM »
Tim,


Lol although certainly the wind affects how the Pacific Ocean or its inlets come into play. But even a confirmed concrete dweller like myself cannot but help be influenced by the setting. CPC, although it is not my favorite course, did/does make me appreciate/feel the awe of nature.


Ira

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #28 on: March 12, 2024, 08:45:52 PM »
Tim,


Lol although certainly the wind affects how the Pacific Ocean or its inlets come into play. But even a confirmed concrete dweller like myself cannot but help be influenced by the setting. CPC, although it is not my favorite course, did/does make me appreciate/feel the awe of nature.


Ira


Ira,


Thanks. I had a feeling that you had something in mind besides just wind. As for “awe of nature”, I experienced that at Old Head in a very thick fog. I was afraid of falling off a cliff, but not sure that’s good golf!
Tim Weiman

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #29 on: March 13, 2024, 06:24:27 AM »
There will always be debate about what is or is not “part of the design” and how important it is.  A true purist might argue the hole is the hole and anything outside the playing corridor doesn’t matter because it is outside of the architect’s control.  To some extent that is true. However, architects are not stupid.  They know how important aesthetics and visuals are to most golfers.  I always remember working at Cherry Hills and discovering how Flynn purposefully laid out several of his holes to line up with various mountain backdrops.  Unfortunately cottonwood trees got planted impacting some of those views but after much education some of those long range views were restored.  As such, Flynn did have some control over what he wanted the golfer to see beyond the corridors of the golf hole. To me that IS part of the design. 


Getting back to locations like Sand Hills Bandon, Pebble, … The Old Course at St. Andrews, anyone who doesn’t think the setting is important to the design and quality of the golf course isn’t really human :)

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Design vs Setting
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2024, 12:13:33 PM »



Thanks. I had a feeling that you had something in mind besides just wind. As for “awe of nature”, I experienced that at Old Head in a very thick fog. I was afraid of falling off a cliff, but not sure that’s good golf!





Same experience here. When they tell you that if the fog starts rolling in, just stop and we'll come get you, that's really not conducive to scoring well.