News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2011, 09:58:41 AM »
Rye.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2011, 10:21:56 AM »
Ian,

Great list.  The other issue with 18 being the toughest test is that in match play the game is often over before the final hole.  I agree in theory about the opening par 5 as I prefer to ease into the round, but if that's the best routing available I wouldn't skirt it.  The first at Kingsley is a tough par 5, but it's also one of the best holes on the course and makes perfect sense in the routing...  

Jud - you are correct, it's the strokeplay mentality that considers a super tough 18th hole as essential... which is, of course, the game that dominates in America. Even our junior golf programs are mostly now based on stroke play. This is too bad because we have raised generation of golfers who focus on numbers instead of the game.

Michael,

I agree completely.  Probably the main reason my son has tired of competitive junior golf.  Ten year olds grinding over two footers.  Ridiculous, but probably the subject for another thread...
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 10:23:28 AM by Jud Tigerman »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Peter Pallotta

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2011, 10:23:25 AM »
Thanks much, Ian.

The world could certainly use another Garden City -- an example of reframing a list of 10 DON'Ts into a list of 10 DOs on the ground.

Peter  

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #28 on: January 30, 2011, 10:42:47 AM »

  My old course had an opening par 5 and the play was like molasses at the start.The stronger players had to wait for the green to clear before the hit their second shot.Seemed like forever on the first tee.Are there any top 100 courses that start with a par 5?

 Anthony


[Cough]

Just off the top of my head:  Riviera, Sand Hills, Los Angeles CC (North), Olympic (Lake).

Co Down & St Enodoc

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Fraserburgh, Hankley Common, Ashridge, Gog Magog Old & Cruden Bay St Olaf

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2011, 11:01:33 AM »
Ian:

I very nice list, thank you for taking the time to put it together.

I have to admit, many of the courses I grew up playing here in Chicago from the Nugent/Killian/Packard, etc... school of GCA featured most if not all of your 10. :D
H.P.S.

Buck Wolter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2011, 11:18:17 AM »
Ian
I seem to remember you had  a Top 10 of things you like to incorporate in a design on your website some time ago.

That would be an interesting counterpoint.


Buck
Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience -- CS Lewis

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #31 on: January 30, 2011, 11:22:33 AM »
Ian,

Well done, indeed.  This is a quick, handy and articulate list of "please-don'ts" of golf course architecture.  Just the sort of "preaching to the choir" that I love hereabouts!
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #32 on: January 30, 2011, 11:27:39 AM »

  My old course had an opening par 5 and the play was like molasses at the start.The stronger players had to wait for the green to clear before the hit their second shot.Seemed like forever on the first tee.Are there any top 100 courses that start with a par 5?

 Anthony


[Cough]

Just off the top of my head:  Riviera, Sand Hills, Los Angeles CC (North), Olympic (Lake).

You have to forgive Anthony. He doesn't get out much.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #33 on: January 30, 2011, 11:31:29 AM »
Ian,
Good list and it probably makes up the intangibles that so many can't identify when they know they like a course but can't say why....
I think so often today that even as one strives to complete such a list, there are just so many places where it can't be done...especially with fairway shaping/drainage etc....
The one sting you mention that stands out so often on a few of the "signature " courses is the different bunker looks ...I know of two highly regarded courses in my state where you can see that one shaper shaped the back nine and another the front....
Hope you come this way in April....
Mike
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Carl Rogers

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #34 on: January 30, 2011, 11:33:16 AM »
Mr. Andrew & others reading this thread,
Item No. 4  ... variety of bunker styles
Example:  10th Hole at ANGC
Is this hole's bunkering represent a problem?  Should the Mackenzie be removed or altered?  Or should the bunker at the green site be altered?
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 11:36:26 AM by Carl Rogers »

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #35 on: January 30, 2011, 11:41:18 AM »

...

6. Artificial Ponds

...



Ian,

I love you!

;D
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #36 on: January 30, 2011, 11:58:21 AM »
Ian,

This is terrific.  Thanks.  Somebody call the bat phone upstairs to apply the sticky label to this thread.  Should be required reading.

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #37 on: January 30, 2011, 12:11:02 PM »
Is the best thing about containment mounding that it hides cart paths from view?

Some are better at disguising it than others....

Jim Johnson

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #38 on: January 30, 2011, 12:16:43 PM »
Great thoughts, Ian.

Your comments re: contrasting bunker styles brings to mind one of Canada's "Best New Course" award winners from a previous year - Dakota Dunes, near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Fantastic land to work with, but they came up with at least two contrasting bunker styles, using "natural" blowouts and round saucer-shaped bunkers, which look totally out of place.

I absolutely agree with your comment regarding the 18th hole. I've always thought, both from a course operator's point of view and from a golfer's point of view, that the most fun to be had on an 18th hole comes from a short par-5 hole, producing a legitimate chance at par for the average Joe and a realistic chance at birdie (or better) for the low-handicapper. Great for a golfer, leaving a nice taste in his/her mouth walking off the 18th green, eager for another chance to play the course, and thus great for the course operator, resulting in even more repeat play. The last thing I want to play, as a golfer, is a tough-as-nails long par-4 18th hole with water alongside the fairway and/or green.

Mike Cirba

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #39 on: January 30, 2011, 12:43:25 PM »
Ian,

Terrific list...thanks for sharing.

Another pet peeve of mine I'd add is..."Green Complex".


Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #40 on: January 30, 2011, 12:48:32 PM »

Another pet peeve of mine I'd add is..."Green Complex".


Ron Prichard would agree with you on this one.
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

Richard Choi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #41 on: January 30, 2011, 12:56:55 PM »
Let me continue the love fest and say that this was one of the best post I have ever read here. Really fantastic stuff and I agree wholeheartedly.

One thing I would like to bring up is, everyone is talking about par 5's as a starter hole, but what about par 3's? I always wondered why more people don't build a par 3 as the first hole. There are many advantages as I see it.

1. Many don't have enough time to hit a few balls at the range. Asking that player to hit a 7 iron off the tee is much better proposition than a driver.

2. Par 3 on a course is usually a choke point for a slow play - especially when it is right after a par 5. Getting the par 3 over with on the first hole makes it easier to properly space group apart and get rid of one possible choke point on the course.

3. There is a better chance to hit the green and get your round off to a good start.

Greg Murphy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #42 on: January 30, 2011, 01:09:39 PM »
Ian,

I have no quarrel with anything on your list, save the starting par 5 which I think can work quite well—it allows one to half miss the drive or second shot and still have a good opportunity to ease into the round with a two putt par. On the other hand, as you've noted, the best par 5's typically have a risk reward element that may be tough to engage straight out of the gate. I also think a vertical hazard (tree or rock outcropping) in the middle of a (wide) fairway can work really well when presented on the second shot of a par 5.

While I have little quarrel with anything on your list, I do find myself asking, "Why do we so often find see these DON'Ts?" Why are they so common? They don't come about purely by accident. Do they come about by design intention (some people actually like the effect)? Inattention (ignorance)? Are they an unavoidable consequence of some other design intention (collateral damage)?

Let's start with containment mounds. They are clearly there through design intention. The design intent? To create visual separation. This conflict—separation vs connection—is one of the most significant differences in the experience golfers seek. Some want to be connected with the entirety of the course and all those on it, like fishermen on a stormy sea—separate but somehow in a struggle together. Others are looking for a trail experience. Though each party of adventure might cross paths with another party along the way, each is on its own quest and the experience is rooted in an individual sense of exploration, adventure and discovery as the story unfolds from hole to hole. Some courses might actually appeal to both. Seeing pictures of beautiful prairie courses like Sand Hills and Ballyneal make me think they got both. As open as they are, I imagine they present a very distinct trail based experience.

If I had to guess, I would say golfers, like the population in general, are attracted to winding trails more than amorphous wide open spaces. Just take a look at where people travel for outdoor experiences. In the Canadian National Parks system, places like Banff and Jasper get millions of visitors every year. Grasslands National Park, more like hundreds.

From your work in Saskatoon, I know you must be familiar with a course across the street that is containment mound lunacy. The goal of creating separation may be very badly done. But wouldn't you agree many golfers would take such botched attempts over a flat, featureless field?

Anthony Gray

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #43 on: January 30, 2011, 01:26:11 PM »

  My old course had an opening par 5 and the play was like molasses at the start.The stronger players had to wait for the green to clear before the hit their second shot.Seemed like forever on the first tee.Are there any top 100 courses that start with a par 5?

 Anthony


[Cough]

Just off the top of my head:  Riviera, Sand Hills, Los Angeles CC (North), Olympic (Lake).

  [Cough]

 Forgot about those.Used to play those routinely when I lived in LA.

  Anthony


Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #44 on: January 30, 2011, 01:29:22 PM »
Let me continue the love fest and say that this was one of the best post I have ever read here. Really fantastic stuff and I agree wholeheartedly.

One thing I would like to bring up is, everyone is talking about par 5's as a starter hole, but what about par 3's? I always wondered why more people don't build a par 3 as the first hole. There are many advantages as I see it.

1. Many don't have enough time to hit a few balls at the range. Asking that player to hit a 7 iron off the tee is much better proposition than a driver.

2. Par 3 on a course is usually a choke point for a slow play - especially when it is right after a par 5. Getting the par 3 over with on the first hole makes it easier to properly space group apart and get rid of one possible choke point on the course.

3. There is a better chance to hit the green and get your round off to a good start.

I've always assumed that a big reason (perhaps the primary reason) for not starting with a par 3 is that you couldn't space times at 7/8/ maybe even 10-minute intervals, and you'd almost certainly run a backup on the first tee.  

Also, I don't agree that "Asking that player to hit a 7 iron off the tee is much better proposition than a driver."  On a not-too-hard par 4 opener, you give players two chances to hit the green -- even if your tee shot isn't great, you can recover with a good second. On a par 3, you get one shot only.  (This is a similar point to the one made by Greg Murphy about why a par 5 can be a good opener.)

Morgan Clawson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #45 on: January 30, 2011, 01:46:14 PM »
Ian,

Love the list!  Well written. 

It would be fun to see a few of us post some "worst offenders" photos.

One design feature that I really dislike and didn't make your list is the long forced carry. What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks again for the quality content.

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #46 on: January 30, 2011, 03:06:00 PM »
I love the list as well, I don't agree with all of it...but that is the idea of the discussion group, right?

And Morgan, I like your idea of posting pictures detailing some of the Top 10 items Ian pointed out.

Here is a photo of Clyde Johnston's approach to #10 at Old South.  Tree blocking the avenue of approach to the green.  I totally love it!  The land the hole is one really doesn't have much to work with, so Clyde put/left a tree to contend with.  Like I said, I personally liked it a lot.  You could go over, under, or around it...you just had to think about it on the tee.



And here is a tree at Longshadow.  It blocks your second shot into a par 5 with a teeny tiny green which is fronted by a meandering creek.  Again, I love it.  But Mike said he hates the tree.  His larger point, which makes a ton of sense, is that the concept of the hole needs to work without the tree.  Makes total sense.  If the tree dies and is removed, the hole still needs to have some interest. 



And Pete Dye's Harbour Town.  Again, I LOVE this course...trees and all.



I'll try to find pics of some of Ian's other points.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #47 on: January 30, 2011, 03:22:52 PM »
I am totally with Ian on the pond stuff.  If used correctly, they can be okay.

The next two are photos of punds that I generally like.  Ponds off to the side.

This is Sawgrass.  Pretty cool finisher.




And this is two at St. Ives.  Really cool hole, IMO.  Long hitters can take it right over the pond, but it requires at least 280 carry.  Short hitters like me can go off to the right and come in with a reasonable approach.




And the par 3 heroic pond carry, I generally dislike.  I don't have a photo of it, but the worst offender of out of character forced water carry par 3 that I have seen is 8 at Sebonack.  Links style course, with tremendous hole after tremendous hole and then UGH!!!  WTF is this doing here.  And then right back to tremendous holes.

But here is your stereotypical par 3 pond carry.  #11 at St. Ives.




But this type of stuff, a par 3 at The Standard Club is Atlanta done my Mike Riley, is pretty cool.  Your still punished for not hitting the green...and you may lose your ball in the long grass...but you very likey will have a recovery shot.  It will be difficult...but it isn't fatal.



Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Ian Andrew

Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #48 on: January 30, 2011, 03:26:39 PM »
“What do you think is the best course that violates several of these principles?”

Carl,

Augusta National springs to mind. It’s why it’s not in my top 10.

 Interestingly none of your top ten focus on green contours or surrounds.  Why do you think this is?  Are greens so difficult to design well that there are no simple mistakes?  What would be your top irritation about green designs and its impact on the short game portion of the game?

Mike T,

Concepts are harder to identify. I’m not a fan of the even stair step tier. I also get frustrated when I see shapes that are all uniform because the green stands out for all the wrong reasons.


Is it possible to show a picture of your "Target Bunker" example. I did not really understand it.

Mike S,




I seem to remember you had  a Top 10 of things you like to incorporate in a design on your website some time ago.  That would be an interesting counterpoint.

Buck,

That’s a much harder list because I don’t think I can narrow that down to 10 things. I learnt that when I played with that idea on the old blog.

Is this hole's bunkering represent a problem?  Should the Mackenzie be removed or altered?  Or should the bunker at the green site be altered?

Carl,

I find it odd, but I wouldn’t remove it. Then again I’m not a fan of the rest of the bunkering at Augusta National.

Your comments re: contrasting bunker styles brings to mind one of Canada's "Best New Course" award winners from a previous year - Dakota Dunes, near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Jim,

The blowouts were so cool, the round saucers look so out of place in comparison. I was never quite sure why they didn’t make them all blowouts.

While I have little quarrel with anything on your list, I do find myself asking, "Why do we so often find see these DON'Ts?" Why are they so common?

Greg,

These are my don’ts. Not everyone agrees and when you look at golf architecture as a whole, more do not agree with me than do. As Tom Paul would say in his big world theory that its probably a good thing they don’t. Terry is right, this is a little like preaching to the choir, but as Sean said there are exceptions to what I have suggested. Although, I still feel there is no excuse for Island Greens.

One design feature that I really dislike and didn't make your list is the long forced carry. What are your thoughts on this?

Morgan,

I believe that it’s such a given for every single architect that it almost does not need to be listed.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 03:32:50 PM by Ian Andrew »

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 10 Things I Don’t Like in Design – Ian Andrew’s List
« Reply #49 on: January 30, 2011, 04:18:07 PM »
Ian,

Your list was such a great read.  Cynicism is rampant over here and seeing some idealistic (though realistically achievable) tenets about my favorite subject was pretty cool.  I would only switch out one of your 10.  I would replace #10 Predictable Finish with my own pet peeve and general accusation of laziness to the offending archie, long green to tee transfers.  There is nothing more jarring and uncomfortable than to have "18 different experiences" on a golf course.  Cohesiveness and fluidity are very important to me.  Embracing grandeur and intimacy while remaining fluid is so very important.  Ballyneal is so good at this.

C&C are also masters of this tenet.  Though 13-14 at Bandon Trails gets derided.  Justly, I think.  Maybe they were a bit too inclusive of Mr. Keiser's "a-ha" spot on the property.  Maybe they just liked 14 a lot.  Who knows.  But it did "jar" me when I played there.  Crystal Downs 11-12 is another long transfer that is spoken about.  But it is close to the only blemish on that golf course.  

I hate ponds too.  And I hate drop shot par three's over ponds.  Nice imagination.  Oh look, water, and a target!  Hit it or die.  Not even the 14th at Pine Valley gets a pass and PV is as close to perfect as I've seen in golf.  

I hate that pine tree on the 4th at Longshadow that Mac highlights.  I told Mike he needs to hire a "tree hitman".  The only--and I mean only--tree I've ever seen inside a fairway line that added to a hole is Nuzzo's 14th at Wolf Point.  Big texas live oak that divides a 110 yards wide fairway.  Pick a side based on where the hole is cut, you still have 40 yard gaps on either side of it.

But like I said Ian, great list.  More designers would do well to strive to eliminate these features.  Just maybe get the next tee as close to the previous green as well?
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 04:21:14 PM by Ben Sims »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back