It's so much easier to create these kind of "extension of fairway" greens on links courses because usually you're not dealing with 18" of sub-grade building for USGA recommendation style greens... and often you have to worry less about shedding water off in as many directions as possible...
I'm not so convinced that in older courses it was always an example of good minimalist design although in the examples Sean gives, I'm sure it was. Oft-times it could well have been an example of virtually no design at all.
That said the best links greens should be a mixture of all sorts... Plateaux, heavy undulating, punchbowls / dells, etc.. etc... As long as they all work with the land. It's really frustrating for me to see greens forced on links land with extra shaping around the sides that isn't the best fit...
Ally -
Most edifying for me about these photo tours of UK courses (many of them new to me) is the extent to which the courses rely on contour for architectural interest. Here in the US contour rarely plays such a central role. So sometimes my first reaction to these photo tours is that "there is no design at all" - as in where are the yawning sand bunkers, gurgling creeks, lakes, overhanging oaks and elevation changes? At first blush, the courses can appears to an American eye quite bland.
I understand and agree that the good ones aren't. I also understand the work that contour alone can do. But it is usually less than obvious in a photo and takes several plays to fully appreciate in person.
Specifically, what strikes me in these photo tours is how fundamentally different courses can look and play depending on the emphasis given to contour. If a course in the US looked like, say. New Zealand or Littlestone, it would likely be criticized as "not being designed at all" or one that couldn't afford to build proper sand bunkers, etc.
My point being that these UK photo tours highlight for me the dramatic differences in how contour is used in the US and UK. It's two different architectural worlds created by the different weight given to contouring.
Which makes the success of Doak and C&C in the US all the more impressive. They were able to walk a fine line between the usual American preferences for big, dramatic features while slipping into the mix much more use of non-flashy contouring.
On a related note, rereading MacK's
Spirit of SA recently I was struck by the emphasis he put on contour as an architectural tool. It's a theme that runs through paragraph after paragraph. The irony is that so many of MacK's courses in the US are famous for their big dramatic white sand bunkers.
Bob