[John Kavanaugh]

If you had to make a hundred foot of putts on both Bandon Dunes and Bandon Trails which would obviously be done quicker....Bandon Dunes..real word, real example..case closed.

And that's what golf is all about

Thanks for the reality check John.

It's not all about playing as fast as possible...but it is getting there.

[Peter Pallotta]

details of the discussion aside for a moment, I'm always impressed by the sheer generosity of Jeff B's posts on this board: the time and effort he puts in, and the details he provides, says a lot about him. It says, IMO, that the decisons he makes vis-a-vis his golf course designs are likely equally thoughtful and well-considered.
Peter

[John Kavanaugh]

Just to make it clear...my personal goal in golf is to play only as fast as I want to..

[John Kavanaugh]

details of the discussion aside for a moment, I'm always impressed by the sheer generosity of Jeff B's posts on this board: the time and effort he puts in, and the details he provides, says a lot about him. It says, IMO, that the decisons he makes vis-a-vis his golf course designs are likely equally thoughtful and well-considered.
Peter

Peter,

It's spelled JakaB..

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes, and then there's JakaB  

[RJ_Daley]

Barney, going back to the one green you cite (St Louis 5th, a punchbowl restored by Silva and the Super Litvay, on the end of a par 5, 505yarder) I see your comparison with the natural setting of the Sahara that you pointed out reminds you of that form of nature in the picture I posted.  Yet, in looking at that green picture in the write-up, I see a distinct hump or roll in the middle of the green.  Is that cottage cheese or ricotta?  I see the hump creating some putts with at least a double break.  


Now, I see a dunes setting even more distinctly in the St LCC 12 (Crater Hole)

This photo reminds me very much of the punchbowl setting that is found at Blue Mound CC 8th hole.  

I know you have played StLCC, so you are familiar with it and I am not.  I can only go by photos, but with the double plateau, and all the other genre of greens from the C.B./ SR repetoire, how can you say that those are not your cottage cheese in terms of many double and triple breaking, busy putts?  the joint is full of them.  They are not naturally occuring, as many of C&Cs are lay of the land humps and bumps.  They are manufactured.  Not natural wind and water erosion.  JK, are you just being difficult and contrarian to C&Cs work, or do you like or dislike busy greens?  How about more examples of real world greens you say are not cottage cheese but are emulations of wind and water erosion?

[John Kavanaugh]

RJ,

I seriously doubt if I am going to have a problem with any bump you can see in a photograph...What I would guess I am not a fan of is microundulations on top of undulations.  I remember a par three at Cuscowilla with a huge crazy hump in the green....I liked that.  It was the 11th and what Ran called the most severe green on the course..go figure.

[Dan Kelly]

JakaB --

I note your preference for "pudding" over "cottage cheese."

I wonder: Could you have stumbled upon the definitive evidence of golf's origins not in Scotland, and not in the Netherlands, and not in China -- but in dear old Ireland?

"If ye wan' me, lassie, ye'll fin' me over at the pudding green.... "

Dan

[redanman]

To answer the original question

I just have to say that some of their greens are very repetitive in the silly little buried snakes and eggs that make putting tedious and annoying.  I for one do not consider them "world-class" as some here do.

They also build too many of this kind at too many places.  Those who drink the kool-aid call me a heretic, but I am entitled to my opinion.  I think their work suffers from this and their bunkers are a bit repetitive and forced onto the land as well.  Not really very "naturalist", is it?

It also slows play when you are stuck with three players who grind out every putt on these stupid things (only happened to me once).  Anything that slows play is bad in and of itself, but these greens that I don't care for nor respect as "great" are not good for the game of golf in a myriad of ways, either.

p.s. I did not read a post on this thread.

[TEPaul]

BillV aka redanman;

That post of yours is the biggest pile of garbage I've ever read on here.

Furthermore, what in the Hell makes YOU think you're ENTITLED to YOUR OWN OPINION on here?? With remarks like that you are ENTITLED to zero, zip, ziltch when it comes to YOUR OPINION.

When it comes to opinions on Coore and Crenshaw on here the only opinion you're entitled to is MINE!!

[George Pazin]

John, please tell me where all these horrible bumpy greens are so I can have the fun you are avoiding.

I haven't had the pleasure of either of your C&C courses - yet - but I have played HC, and the greens are not at all cottage cheese bumpy. What they are is fun.

Tom's greens at The Rawls Course were probably as undulating as anything I've played, and I loved 'em.

Then again, we've been all over this topic before, when you posited your theory that bumpy greens are only a conspiracy to help lesser golfers against better golfers. Now it's that they're not interesting and they slow down play. It might be time to just admit it, you like bland greens because that is what you play best on.

P.S. to redanman - grinders are grinders, no matter how simple or difficult the putt. (smiley for Bill, not for JakaB, no fair enjoying it John)

[Jeff_Brauer]

details of the discussion aside for a moment, I'm always impressed by the sheer generosity of Jeff B's posts on this board: the time and effort he puts in, and the details he provides, says a lot about him. It says, IMO, that the decisons he makes vis-a-vis his golf course designs are likely equally thoughtful and well-considered.
Peter

Peter,

Thanks for the nice comments.  I may have said this before, but one reason I do participate is that I like to see if I can clarify my own thoughts on design. There really are a lot od designers out there - and I count myself as formerly one of those - who don't know why they do things. Perhaps some never think about it past the fact that their old boss did them that way.

My late father used to tell me that if you can't describe something succinctly, you probably don't really know what you are thinking.  Worse yet, it probably isn't a very good idea!  So, golf club atlas is kind of like yoga for the mind........

Seriously, I think one problem on this site, which may never be solved is when a basic idea - are little contours in greens good ideas - get a name attached to it, whether with a course or gca favorite like C and C, or a non favorite, like a Fazio, the discussion turns to something other than architectural idea.  

Jaka B would have better served the board by leaving C and C out of the title, even if including their name does conjour up the image of what he is talking about for many of us here.  Real world examples are easier to grasp than esoteric concepts, for sure.

Why can't we discuss whether (or in reality to what degree) greens with internal bumps are appropriate for golf courses?

[John Kavanaugh]

George,

I never said this type of green is uninteresting or not fun...I just said I hate em..

[John Kavanaugh]

To answer the original question

I just have to say that some of their greens are very repetitive in the silly little buried snakes and eggs that make putting tedious and annoying.  I for one do not consider them "world-class" as some here do.

They also build too many of this kind at too many places.  Those who drink the kool-aid call me a heretic, but I am entitled to my opinion.  I think their work suffers from this and their bunkers are a bit repetitive and forced onto the land as well.  Not really very "naturalist", is it?

It also slows play when you are stuck with three players who grind out every putt on these stupid things (only happened to me once).  Anything that slows play is bad in and of itself, but these greens that I don't care for nor respect as "great" are not good for the game of golf in a myriad of ways, either.

p.s. I did not read a post on this thread.

I like the buried snakes and eggs description...One question I have tried to have answered in the past is...Is there any basis in history for this type of green and if not,  how did we let this pass for great.

[john_stiles]

I have played Cuscowilla and Chechessee Creek many times and still enjoy the greens and their contouring.

Do not think these greens slow down the game a bit, unless you walk around too much and then are not ready when it is your turn.

Played in the Cuscowilla Invitational with the young 'men' that eventually won last year.  The fearless young just got up and putted and never held up the old guys (me).  And the old guys never held up the young guys.

Play at Chechessee Creek is never slow.

I find 'them' fun, interesting, and love them.

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

In all fairness I didn't see the snakes and eggs Bill speaks of at Cuscowilla like I did at Bandon Trails...

[TEPaul]

JohnK:

BillV aka redanman's remark about snakes and eggs shows a man with a very unstable mind. But in all seriousness, do you think an attitude about golf and architecture like yours is the worst thing that every happened to the game and its playing fields?



But the good news is your attitude about golf and architecture completely confirms my "Big World" theory and your attitude about golf and architecture also completely justifies the work and career of Tom Fazio.  

[John Kavanaugh]

JohnK:

BillV aka redanman's remark about snakes and eggs shows a man with a very unstable mind. But in all seriousness, do you think an attitude about golf and architecture like yours is the worst thing that every happened to the game and its playing fields?

Somebody has to say what I say or it won't get said...

[TEPaul]

"Somebody has to say what I say or it won't get said..."

Right on! I completely believe in my "Big World" theory. I think it makes the art form more interesting because the spectrum is so wide---due to the vast differences in types and styles.

[John Kavanaugh]

"Somebody has to say what I say or it won't get said..."

Right on! I completely believe in my "Big World" theory. I think it makes the art form more interesting because the spectrum is so wide---due to the vast differences in types and styles.

Honestly Tom...If I believed in the "Big World" theory I'd probably play more public tracts...On a side note:  Is the world really big enough to have Bobby Clampett building a course in Branson, Mo..

[George Pazin]

George,

I never said this type of green is uninteresting or not fun...I just said I hate em..

This is almost as revealing as Rich Goodale's slip that he was an English major at Stanford.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()