[Wade Schueneman]

Absent extreme toporaphy it seems to me that many parkland courses could be built to be played forward and backward.  I know that more trees would have to be eliminated, but that may not be a bad thing.  So, why not spend a bit more money and get 2 courses for the price of one (although admittedly one would probably be inferior).  Plus, would it not create more playing options going in each direction?

I am not suggesting that this really affect the best routing.  I am suggesting finding the best routing and then seeing if it cannot be tweaked to be play backward.

Thoughts?

[Andy Troeger]

If one direction is likely to be inferior to the other anyway, why should an architect or owner make any concessions to the original (better) course just to create a reversable routing. I can't imagine on most properties that its really that easy to make both worthwhile. How many people would really want to play the second version?

[RSLivingston_III]

Interesting to think about the possabilities.
Some aspects of TOC might need to be copied depending on how you want to use existing fairways and especially for not having to create extra greens and tees. As much as I would like to see parallel fairways, I would bet that not a practical consideration, if this exercise continues. I wonder what the opinions are on using double greens.

[William_G]

Wade: I like the idea in that you would have a second course within the main course. The most fun we have every year at an invitational is the cross country event where we go from random tees to random greens... It would even be more fun if there was a plan from the architecture, love it!

[Adrian_Stiff]

Think about your home course, then thinkit backwards, some holes work okay then all of a sudden its *^&(%$  so theres the reason. It probably needs a blank canvas to start with if you wanna do a reversable.

[Phil_the_Author]

I honetly don't get it. What is this love affair with playing a course backward? Can som eone please explain WHY playing a good course the way it is laid out is not enough?

[Philippe Binette]

I Think there might be more future in a course where with a couple of tees from different angle, you could turn a short par 4 in a long 3, a par 5 in a long 4 etc... if you have that on 4 or 5 holes, then it would be possible to transform the course a bit everyday.

I think LA Country Club had set of tees like that...

[Chris Buie]

The idea is not without merit for variety if nothing else.  Perhaps they could just reverse the holes that naturally lend themselves to this.  It wouldn't necessarily have to be 18. 
I would think this could especially apply to an area where there aren't many other worthwhile courses around.  One could find it somewhat redundant playing the same course over and over.
I typed it in Google and there are some courses like this.  Here is one of them:
http://www.realnd.com/dakotawindsindex.htm

[Patrick_Mucci]

Absent extreme toporaphy it seems to me that many parkland courses could be built to be played forward and backward.  I know that more trees would have to be eliminated, but that may not be a bad thing.  So, why not spend a bit more money and get 2 courses for the price of one (although admittedly one would probably be inferior).  Plus, would it not create more playing options going in each direction?

I am not suggesting that this really affect the best routing.  I am suggesting finding the best routing and then seeing if it cannot be tweaked to be play backward.

Thoughts?

Wade,

I think it's difficult enough trying to design a conventional golf course.
The skill set for a reversible course would seem to be rare indeed.

I like the idea, but, putting it into practice is something else.

Phil Young, I can see the desire.

Clubs like Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Olympic have 36 holes.

This would be a 36 hole layout on the cheap

[David_Tepper]

As it turns, fellow GCA-er Jon Wiggett is currently in the process of building a 9-hole course (outside of Dingwall, Scotland, north of Inverness) that will, in fact, be reversible. It will be a very natural course and Jon is doing virtually all the work on the course by himself.
He expects to be open for play next spring.

Hopefully, Jon will see this thread and have time to share his thoughts on the project. In the meantime, you can read his blog at:

http://brahangolfbuild.blogspot.com/2010_09_01_archive.html

[Adam_Messix]

Flynn did an excellent reversible course for the Rockefeller family at Pocantico Hills in Westchester County, New York.  The course started at the playhouse and worked it's way around the Kykuit home and then reversed course back around to a long par three finish.  The greens were tiny but the place still had a reasonably amount of Flynn flair.  I think it played around 5600 yards but seemed longer because there are several REALLY uphill holes. 

[David Schofield]

There was thread about reversible courses a few years ago.  There's a few in the upper midwest: 

One in New Richmond, WI: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=new+richmond,+wi&oe=&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+Richmond,+St+Croix,+Wisconsin&gl=us&ei=JsCUTObJDYTjnAfwmvmhBw&ved=0CB0Q8gEwAA&ll=45.120545,-92.573193&spn=0.005511,0.016469&t=h&z=17

One near Eagle Bend, MN: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=double+eagle,+eagle+bend,+mn&sll=46.18506,-94.974403&sspn=0.173041,0.527&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=double+eagle,&hnear=Eagle+Bend,+Todd,+Minnesota&ll=46.090436,-95.036212&spn=0.005417,0.016469&t=h&z=17

[John Moore II]

The only thing with a course that could be reversed is that it would have to be very contained. Tees would have to be fairly close to the greens and basically parallel with them. I mean, there is no way you could do something like play from the first tee to the 17th green and then walk/ride 20+ yards back into the line of play in order to play your next tee shot. And it would also be a complicated build because now, rather than one landing area or one set of hazards or even one set of green contours, you must have two of each and the greens must be equally approachable from all angles. Not to mention the clubhouse could not have the holes playing out from it like many do, it would have to be fairly set off from the course. This could be done, to be sure, but it would be incredibly difficult to pull off well.

[RSLivingston_III]

This would be a good idea just from the standpoint of giving the fairways some relief and allowing them to heal.
It does create another interesting dilema as the greens would be played to from different directions, so the contouring when designed would need to reflect that intent.

[Jon Wiggett]

As David Tepper has said, I am building a reversable course in the Scottish Highlands. It does require the right sort of land but is more than possible. My decision to do this was based on several factors.

1. I felt it would add variety to the course and by switching the playing direction every other day.
2. I feel it will encourage players to stay and play the course two days in a row rather than just one.
3. It helps to spread the wear and tear on the course.

In addition to these points, because my greens are generally large I will be having to flags on each green. This will be combined with two sets of tees which will not only alter the angle of play but also the length/par on a majority of the holes in either direction it will be like playing 18 holes both ways. This means there are 36 holes on one piece of ground. From the front tees it will play about 4'400 yards and 6'600 from the backs in both directions with the par between 66 and 76.

I do agree that with many courses there would be a strong and weak variation if they were to do this but this does not have to be the case. It is also not always the case that a course playing in one direction has no weak holes. The challenge for the GCA is to be able to produce a well balanced combination.

The piece of ground is about 60 acres and so it would have been possible to put 14/15 holes on to it. I decided however that rather than this it would be preferable to have 9 really solid holes with enough room between them.

I keep meaning to post a longer thread about the project but just don't seem to have the time at the moment.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jon,

Aren't shared greens almost a must ?

It would seem that TOC's reversible course is better accomodated by having shared greens on many holes.

Do you have any on your course ?

[Jon Wiggett]

Hello Patrick,

I don't have any shared greens on my course as it does not work with my concept. This is partly to do with safety and keeping the players apart and also to do with the fact that I have two flags on each green as it is so the player has a different hole location on each of his two rounds (2 x 9 holes). If I were to have a double green on top this would have to be massive and would have four flags. Players would not know which one to play for.

However, on an 18 hole course or normal nine hole course why not. For the classic out and back it may be very practical.

Jon

[Jim Nugent]

Jon, how different/alike are the holes when you reverse them?  Also, any routings you can show us?  Sound real interesting. 

[Jon Wiggett]

Hi Jim,

I am just at the grow-in stage so have not actually played them as of yet. It is my impression that the character of the hole/green does change significantly and pin positions that are easily accessable from one angle are sometimes very inaccessable from another. At the moment I only have a routing plan done in one direction which was used for the planning permission. I hope to have the time to post more on the project soon, though I have thought this for quite a while now and haven't found time .

Follow the link in David Tepper's post and a routing is shown in one of the first few posts.

Jon

[George Smith]

As this is my maiden post on this forum, please be kind.

The concept of a course featuring one or more reversible holes is intriguing from several aspects. Wouldn't such a layout require a reduction in the number of groups on the course at one time? This limitation would seem to limit such a design to a very restrictive, private club. In the current economy, that would seem to be a more significant barrier than any architectural considerations.

Thank you for the opportunity to paricipate in the discussion.

[Stan Dodd]

The course would be reversible by the day.
Monday you play clockwise, Tuesday counter clockwise.

[George Smith]

Of course you are right.

Even my grasp of the obvious can, at times, be very tenuous.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()