News:

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


Peter Pallotta

Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« on: March 15, 2014, 10:26:58 AM »
Off the mysterious golf course thread, a question: what contributes more to a golf course's 'mystery', the broad theories/philosophies that underpin an architect's basic approach to design and that he has adhered to right from the start of his career, or the specific and practical skills (e.g. tying-in greens with surrounds, blending away mowing lines etc) that they architect has learned over many years and that he now helps his associates/construction crew make manifest?

The list of courses mentioned in the mystery thread run the gamut from old and new and from here and there, and are the creations of many different architects: Royal County Down, Walton Heath, Portrush, Dismal-Doak, Sleepy Hollow, Ballyneal, NGLA, TOC, North Berwick, Royal Cinque Ports. What is more responsible for all these courses sharing the element of mystery - the ideas or the execution, the philosophy or the technique?

Peter

« Last Edit: March 15, 2014, 10:28:56 AM by PPallotta »

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2014, 10:59:11 AM »
Peter

Here's a question - what makes those courses more mysterious than any other course ?

Niall

Neil White

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2014, 12:25:25 PM »
Quite simply their aura.
Courses played 2020 - ................!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2014, 12:50:40 PM »
Peter:

Well, it's a combination of the two.

I would have said that you have to have the philosophy, first, so that's more important ... but there are several links courses on your list where it would be hard to identify WHOSE philosophy you were even referring to.  [Or, for that matter, WHOSE execution.] 

However, I think that the modern courses that are there are built with the philosophy of the old links -- that it is perfectly fine and even preferred to leave a lot of the terrain untouched -- so they do all share a philosophy.  [Except for Sleepy Hollow, not sure why someone nominated it for this list.]

I do believe that certain architects tend to favor mystery more than others.  I'd put Tom Simpson and Herbert Fowler in the mystery camp, Harry Colt not so much.

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2014, 03:05:16 PM »
Tom:

I think "mystery" means different things to different people, and as TP noted in his ancient post, it can be either the look or the play of a course that can be elusive.  This thread seems to be focusing on the play.

I noted Sleepy Hollow in the other thread, and stated it was probably a very personal choice.  It was my first CBM/SR course.  I think the sense of mystery had a lot to do with what that experience would lead to, as it was really the beginning of my journey into GCA.

There are aspects of the course that provide some mystery in how it is played, including the redan and the punchbowl, but I would agree that it is not as multi-dimensional a course as many of the more linksy places noted in the list.

Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Charlie_Bell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2014, 06:17:21 PM »
Sleepy Hollow has an aura that has little to do with golf architecture and everything to do with Washington Irving.

....From the listless repose of the place, this sequestered glen has long been known by the name of Sleepy Hollow. Some say that the place was bewitched during the early days of the Dutch settlement; others, that an old Indian chief, the wizard of his tribe, held his powwows there before the country was discovered by Master Hendrick Hudson. Certain it is, the place still continues under the sway of some witching power that holds a spell over the minds of the descendants of the original settlers. They are given to all kinds of marvelous beliefs, are subject to trances and visions, and frequently hear music and voices in the air. The whole neighborhood abounds with local tales, haunted spots, and twilight superstitions.

However the legend arose, its aura lingers.

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2014, 08:34:17 PM »
Forget aura; it's an artificial construct for people that struggle with independent thought.

Mystery, on the other hand, is surely all about unpredictability. To that end, Tom's point about Colt vs Simpson rings true to me. I'm a huge Colt fan but his courses aren't necessarily mysterious because you can quickly get a feel for how the man operated. Conversely, I'm a member of a Simpson course and it's a place which tends to leave the first timer far more confused than anything else. Even now I find the penny still drops from time to time as I realise I've missed something.
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Charlie_Bell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2014, 09:27:41 PM »
Thank you, Paul, for having the courtesy to suggest that I "struggle with independent thought" rather than just saying I'm not very bright.

Lacking the capacity for independent thought, I am forced to lean on the crutch of third-party opinion, to wit, a Webster's online definition of the word aura.  According to this undoubtedly suspect source, aura denotes "a special quality or feeling that seems to come from a person, place, or thing."  In definition 1b, "a distinctive atmosphere surrounding a given source," the dictionary cites as an example <the place had an aura of mystery>.

While I suppose -- with my limited analytical skills, needless to say, it's just a hunch -- that one may construct a dismissive argument surrounding the dictionary's choice of the noodle-soft word seems, I meekly raise the hope that people wiser and more thoughtful than I might entertain the possibility that Washington Irving's fictional narrative has insinuated itself into popular consciousness to such an extent that the aura of legend may color one's experience of this charming corner of the Hudson River Valley.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2014, 09:30:46 PM by Charlie_Bell »

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2014, 06:47:32 PM »
Is it possible that mystery is a figment of a member's or course aplogist's imagination?  Perhaps a subjective criterion by which a course's reputation and ranking can be elevated?

Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2014, 11:23:41 PM »
Bogey,

I'll say 'no' to your question.  There are certainly courses that have mystery within their design and that is a fact.  The mystery comes about if option for how to play the hole exist.  The options exist if width is inherent in the design, greens are either big or wide, and these options are enhanced by firm turf.  Add an element of blindness to the mix and, I believe, you could have full blown mystery. 

And to go a step further add in odd lengths of holes.  To use Dismal Doak as an example, the par 3 5th is a long par 3.  Sometimes driver for me, maybe a 3 wood.... heck if the wind is up, maybe 3 iron.  But what is ideal for me given wind conditions?  I don't know yet. 

Also, Dismal Doak 14. Odd length par 4. Fairway mound and green side mound.  What's the best play for my game?  not sure yet.  Ive tried a few different ways to play it, haven't settled on what is best. Ditto for 15.


Heard a lot of mystery exists at Royal County Down, checking that out soon will report back.

However, id say that most courses don't have too much mystery... and that's a shame. I can think of many courses I've played where after one or two rounds, I've got the ideal way to play the holes figured out.  No mystery.... just simply hit it there... rinse, repeat.  But for me, when I find one of these courses that is of interest intellectually, as well as physically in terms of execution, that is ideal golf.  Personally, I think we need to highlight those courses and talk about them.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it the philosophy or the technique?
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2014, 03:17:06 AM »
Mac

Often times I think of mystery in terms of recovery shots.  I can't think of any courses where after a few plays I can't figure out the best places for ME to hit it.  There are some holes I can't figure out, but courses as a whole - none I can think of.  Its the recoveries which create most thought because I don't envision being stuck in a nasty spot, unless I have been there before - which of course will usually mean I will get stuck in a nasty spot the other side of the green or fairway trying to avoid the known nasty spot  ;D

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

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back