[Ben Stephens]

With his permission please see David Minogue's entry into the competition.


Soft par-5, with risk/reward option off the tee, tough par-3 and a potentially drivable par-4 finisher.



David is currently in France working on the new Gil Hanse layout at Les Bordes.

Thank you Neil - it seems that some of Gil Hanse's philosophy can be seen in David's work. His loop is similar to Matt Cohn and Dylan Emms. David has done similar to what Ally has said what he would do with the 16th and his 17th is so clearly visible and the tees have been contoured.

[Ben Stephens]

Here was my proposal. I wanted to explore different things which I knew was higher risk like Marmite - some will like it and other not.


- Try to do something different out of the norm - Golf Course Design has become a bit monotonous (too many designers producing similar designs) in my view so explored outside GCA using natural and influences from other designers. 
- There is some heavy shaping work - nothing in the brief that states only subtle shaping so explored different contours and tying it with the land.
- Tried to get most out of the land available and flexibility (4 greens instead of one)
- Make the course harder for the pros and easier for the amateurs
- Test new 3D CAD system and new render software
- There is some semi blindness which adds to the quirk
- A long walk from 15 to 16 for the pros as part of the experience of walking into the final arena/3 holes like a football player entering the stadium. So that they are pumped to play.


It was a great challenge and i have enjoyed doing this exercise.   

First Image

[Ben Stephens]

Second image

[Ally Mcintosh]

I like David’s 16th hole a lot. The last 100 yards is blind from his right hand side “safe” line but I’m sure that was a deliberate choice. However, it’s also the reason I would have pulled the green back on that exact line to the top of the ridge.


David’s 17th green is placed up high. Perhaps that’s the best option or you could pull it back 20 yards and build it in to the dell quite naturally. I actually looked at pulling it back another 30 yards, to the same point that Matt had (but further right, slightly higher and using the hill more). The reason I did this was that I just couldn’t see my 18th tees working on the far side of the trees, where David has his. So I had mine closer to where both Dylan and Matt have theirs.


Anyway, I just put a 10 minute sketch together for my own fun. My back tee on 17 was blind as well, Ben - that was just a mistake as I was working quickly and concentrating on hole separation. Also, it would have been sorted out as soon as I visited the site for the first time so it wouldn’t have bothered me.


P.S. Just crossed posts with you there, Ben. Looks like you had a lot of fun with it. I wish I could use computer software like you can. I’m still a bit too old-school in that department.

[Ben Stephens]

I like David’s 16th hole a lot. The last 100 yards is blind from his right hand side “safe” line but I’m sure that was a deliberate choice. However, it’s also the reason I would have pulled the green back on that exact line to the top of the ridge.


David’s 17th green is placed up high. Perhaps that’s the best option or you could pull it back 20 yards and build it in to the dell quite naturally. I actually looked at pulling it back another 30 yards, to the same point that Matt had (but further right, slightly higher and using the hill more). The reason I did this was that I just couldn’t see my 18th tees working on the far side of the trees, where David has his. So I had mine closer to where both Dylan and Matt have theirs.


Anyway, I just put a 10 minute sketch together for my own fun. My back tee on 17 was blind as well, Ben - that was just a mistake as I was working quickly and concentrating on hole separation. Also, it would have been sorted out as soon as I visited the site for the first time so it wouldn’t have bothered me.


P.S. Just crossed posts with you there, Ben. Looks like you had a lot of fun with it. I wish I could use computer software like you can. I’m still a bit too old-school in that department.

Hi Ally,


You are never too old for anything and thank you for your honesty regarding the 17th tee. I was able to see this in the 3D model as you can easily position cameras in the exact location plus height to check when I was exploring the existing model for holes - there were so many different hole options.


It was nice to do a bit of BIM training during the lockdown not just golf courses but buildings as well combining the two together. Its a mesh tool that can be using to shape the landscape around the building or to create golf courses.


BIM helps to eliminate mistakes much earlier on as it allows you to see things can explore. Like the section I produce earlier on this thread which is a cut through of the 3D model I created which saves lot of time. I can honestly say that the software is not cheap it is quite expensive but worth it. Also it helps to calculate how much materials you require in an instant which is scary I have not got there yet as there is so much still to learn and this software evolves and updated quite regularly so need to be on top of it.


Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

I like David’s 16th hole a lot. The last 100 yards is blind from his right hand side “safe” line but I’m sure that was a deliberate choice. However, it’s also the reason I would have pulled the green back on that exact line to the top of the ridge.


David’s 17th green is placed up high. Perhaps that’s the best option or you could pull it back 20 yards and build it in to the dell quite naturally. I actually looked at pulling it back another 30 yards, to the same point that Matt had (but further right, slightly higher and using the hill more). The reason I did this was that I just couldn’t see my 18th tees working on the far side of the trees, where David has his. So I had mine closer to where both Dylan and Matt have theirs.


Anyway, I just put a 10 minute sketch together for my own fun. My back tee on 17 was blind as well, Ben - that was just a mistake as I was working quickly and concentrating on hole separation. Also, it would have been sorted out as soon as I visited the site for the first time so it wouldn’t have bothered me.


P.S. Just crossed posts with you there, Ben. Looks like you had a lot of fun with it. I wish I could use computer software like you can. I’m still a bit too old-school in that department.

Agree what you have said about Davids proposal - I am not a fan of blindness off the tee however don't mind it towards the green.


A bit of shaping on site on golf courses sorts out most issues however it is a different story with buildings    so I might be more risk averse earlier


Regarding COVID 19 and possible future pandemics which can put restrictions on site visits - the computer modelling is another option to help designers to have a closer look and more hours checking things which helps

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()