[Joe Hancock]

Notice how the original discussion is on International courses  ? .

And 6 years on , its about America ? .

Without meaning to step on anyones toes , isnt this how the board has changed lately ? .

Sadly IMHO .

Brian

Brian,

Sadly, I am one of the industry guys who has yet to make it across the pond. I would love to expand my knowledge and discussion ability by seeing what you are blessed with over there. You do have a valid point.

Joe

[ed_getka]

Classics: NGLA, Cypress, Crystal Downs, Dornoch, TOC, North Berwick.
 
Modern: Sand Hills, Pacific Dunes, Kingsley Club, Barona Creek, Rustic Canyon.

I prefer fun courses over "championship"/brutally hard   courses, thus the bias of my choices. The common thread is the great greens which is the sine quo non of golf in my mind.

[henrye]

Some of you have mentioned Mayacama as one of the modern courses deserving study.  Can you please elaborate why?

While I also see Swinley as a wonderful club, I can't see the merit as one of the 10 most worthy of study.  As for Sunningdale Old -  how can it remain off anyone's list?  The place is a masterpiece and isn't it one of the first great inland heath courses?

[Wayne Freeman]

It just seems to me that you could take pretty much everyone's top 50 list in the country or the world and find pretty much everything you could want to study on golf courses. All the greats are there for a reason-  and they are there because they are great works of art for generations to enjoy and marvel over......... With regard to Prairie Dunes,  I think Maxwell's work there is awesome-  you're driving along in Kansas on land flat as a pancake and all of a sudden you think you're in Scotland and the golf course is just an absolute gem- and always in fantastic condition.  Couple that with a visit to his relatively near Southern Hills, and you can't ask for much more.  

[ed_getka]

Sean,
   Thats a good point about what aspects to study. Not being a strong golfer, I don't generally list courses that are really tough for me, because I am just trying to survive and hope I don't have a headache when I am done. So there are plenty of courses that I am sure are worth studying that I don't list, because I don't particularly enjoy them. That doesn't mean they aren't worth studying though.
    Which reminds me of what one of the most invaluable aspects of this site is; which is that as I have come to know many of you guys and know your likes and dislikes, it helps me to find courses to seek out, knowing whose tastes are similar to mine.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I would always start with TOC, Prestwick, Royal Dornoch, Lahinch, Royal County Down for what have taught those that came after them. I would add Augusta, Cypress Point and National Golf Links for the same reasons. Pacific dunes and Sand Hills are the two modern courses I have been lucky enough to see that one should study. I want to ponder the Pine Valley, SFGC, Merian etc to find the right balance along with the Sunningdale and Royal Melbornes of the world.

[Joel_Stewart]

Some of you have mentioned Mayacama as one of the modern courses deserving study.  Can you please elaborate why?

There is no reason to study Mayacama, it's an aboration from the Nicklaus team which is the unique feature of the course.  Same as The Preserve in Carmel which Tom Fazio was called in at the last moment.  When Nicklaus or Fazio do something close to minimilistic it raises questions and false hope.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Sean I cannot think of anything those course bring to the table over any of the classic links courses except to show routing and design mistakes.

[TEPaul]

Although I've never even seen it, the top ten courses to study in my opinion would be to study TOC from about ten different perspectives!

The reason I say that is because so many of the great architects have declared that TOC is the prototype of all golf course architecture on the one hand, while on the other hand, most of the best of those architects who were fascinated by TOC also admitted there was also so much about TOC that no architect in his right mind would dream of copying anywhere else.

Is that not perhaps the largest and most complete enigma of all in the entire subject of studying golf course architecture?

[TEPaul]

Another interesting example I can think of regarding studying architecture is what Bob Crosby may do soon or perhaps is doing right now. And that is to really study the original concept of ANGC to try to determine if there are some previously unrecognized ways and means that that course may have been a truly unique experiment in golf architecture that for whatever reasons may've gone almost completely unrecognized.

In some ways that experimental concept may've been the best effort to unravel some of the enigmas of TOC, to understand better its essences and to apply them more completely to another course or other courses in the future  

[ed_getka]

Tom Paul,
   Good points. When I played there last spring I had a great time and found the course fascinating, especially 100 yards and in. The down side was there were so many things going on I was sort of distressed that I'll never get to see the course the 100+ times I figure it would take to start to really "know" the course.

[TEPaul]

ed;

Yours is a good point too. One of the things I've never understood about some architects is why they say that golf architecture should be almost completely obvious as to what to do for the first time player.

To me that's completely lacking in fascination. That to me is basically no more than a thoughtless presentation of a straight demand of golfer skill. In that sense the extrapolation would be that golf and golf architecture would eventually become something as standard as a tennis court without an opponent on the other side.

You say there was so much going on with TOC that you regretted you couldn't play and study it 100+ times. What could be a better reason to keep going back to a golf course than that?  

[T_MacWood]

It would be a sad day to be limited to studying only ten courses...the better question might be what are the ten architects you'd recommend studying.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

Personally, I don't agree with that at all. Just studying the courses that people assume to be the best architects is when too many get into simply glorifying architects and their golf courses or their golf architecture just because a famous name is attached to it. A far more honest and valid way of studying interesting architecture, in my opinion, if it were possible to do, is to study interesting architecture and various aspects of it for whatever reason one thinks it is that, and then ask who it was who did it.

[peter_p]

Australia - Kingston Heath. Yarra Yarra for its greens.

Pete Dye Courses - Which one? La Romana, Kiawah, Whistling Straits Sawgrass or something else?

[mark chalfant]

Kawana  excellent bunkering over a dramatic site

Lawsonia  wonderful strategy  and character over modest land

Kennemer  fine  Holland  links

NCR   superb  routing and greens over lovely rolling land

South  Fork  in   Amagansett, ny  charming 9 holer on 38 acres

Ashdown  Forest


St.  Georges, Toronto  wonderful balance of inspired bunkering,  ferocity, and charm

[Mike_Sweeney]

South  Fork  in   Amagansett, ny  charming 9 holer on 38 acres

Mark,

Now 18 holes with the second 9 by Gil Hanse, isn't it? Which 9 are you talking about?

[Ian Andrew]

If your looking for modern additions to Ran's nearly flawless list, shouldn't we be looking at the influences to future trends.

The Golf Club would be my one offereing. A good representative early Dye that influenced the future (poorly named) "minimalist" movement. Dye lead us to Coore, Doak and other talented yound designers that have shunned Trent Jones version of golf design.

The Fazio's, Nicklaus and others are still in the camp of meodern design, and do not represent an important movement away from the trend.

There may be a modern course built recently that represents an important movement, but that is up to history and a little hindsight to tell us (rather than speculating on the influence of a course so young as a Kingsbarns or Sand Hills).

Just my opinion.

[Dan Herrmann]

Notice how the original discussion is on International courses  ? .

And 6 years on , its about America ? .

Without meaning to step on anyones toes , isnt this how the board has changed lately ? .

Sadly IMHO .

Brian

Brian,
Fair enough...  What are your choices for the list?

[mark chalfant]

Mike Sweeney:  I was referring to the second nine designed by Gil Hanse around  1999 or 2000. its  3,100 yards of fun

[Matt_Ward]

Mike S:

As much as I enjoy Lakota Canyon -- your retort to Cary was indeed priceless -- simply one of your best. I am still laughing at it.

P.S. To Cary -- don't let the bus ride roughshod over the New Castle CO layout partner but frankly it's out of its league with the heavyweights mentioned thus far on this post.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()