[Jerry Kluger]

I watched quite a bit of the golf and I still believe that a course which has thick rough plays more difficult that a course which has trees to catch wayward shots.  At AGNC I just didn't see the trees as a major obstacle and so too with Harbor Town. 

[Mark_Fine]

From William Flynn:


“The old idea was to have golf courses as free from trees as possible.  This notion, no doubt, was imported from Scotland because when golf was first taken up in the United States we knew very little about the game and modeled our courses on those of the Scotch which were, for the most part, built along the seashore where there were no trees.[/size]It is impossible to conceive that the ‘Canny Scots’ would have denuded their courses of trees if there had been any there originally.  As a race they are entirely too thrifty for any such waste as that.Today the old ideas have been discarded and the prevailing belief is that trees, most emphatically, have a fixed place on a golf course.  This is true for many reasons:First-Because there are few, if any, sites available that are devoid of trees and it is a costly operation to cut them down and remove them.Second-Trees add beauty to a course forming picturesque backgrounds and delightful vistas.Third-Their shade is most refreshing on a hot summer day.Fourth-They are of great practical value in segregating the various holes.”[/color]

[Tim Gavrich]

Harbour Town is the golf course I've seen that is most like a Frank Lloyd Wright house, about which people would say it is "of" its environment, rather than "in" its environment.


The economy of features is extremely refreshing when compared with the heavily sculpted courses of that era and this one.


The small greens place a premium on accurate iron play.


The trees encourage and inspire shot-shaping, keeping the golf course relevant and challenging as the golf ball spins less than ever before. Also, as others have observed, the course isn't as narrow as it initially appears because the high canopy of the pines leaves plenty of room to hit shots beneath.


It is the only golf course where I've noticed an architect mixing both visible and hidden bunkers around the same green (3, 11). I think that's genius.


The course is easily walkable.


It's routed through a planned housing development, but homes almost never feel like they are what's causing the narrowness/intimacy.


It has several terrific individual holes: the four par 3s, 9 (!), 13 (!!), 18.


Unless you just dismiss trees on golf courses out of hand, I'm hard-pressed to see how Harbour Town is not one of the best flat golf courses anywhere. I think golf would benefit from more courses that are inspired by its lower-key approach.

[A.G._Crockett]

Harbour Town is the golf course I've seen that is most like a Frank Lloyd Wright house, about which people would say it is "of" its environment, rather than "in" its environment.


The economy of features is extremely refreshing when compared with the heavily sculpted courses of that era and this one.


The small greens place a premium on accurate iron play.


The trees encourage and inspire shot-shaping, keeping the golf course relevant and challenging as the golf ball spins less than ever before. Also, as others have observed, the course isn't as narrow as it initially appears because the high canopy of the pines leaves plenty of room to hit shots beneath.


It is the only golf course where I've noticed an architect mixing both visible and hidden bunkers around the same green (3, 11). I think that's genius.


The course is easily walkable.


It's routed through a planned housing development, but homes almost never feel like they are what's causing the narrowness/intimacy.


It has several terrific individual holes: the four par 3s, 9 (!), 13 (!!), 18.


Unless you just dismiss trees on golf courses out of hand, I'm hard-pressed to see how Harbour Town is not one of the best flat golf courses anywhere. I think golf would benefit from more courses that are inspired by its lower-key approach.

Great post; I agree on all counts.
I wrote this earlier in the thread, but it got lost in some other quotes, so here's food for thought about the trees on Harbour Town.
While I don't know what the regulations were at the time the course was built, live oaks are heavily protected in SC.  You typically can't even prune them without permitting, and cutting an old growth live oak down is difficult to get approved unless there is structural damage to a home and there is no other way to mitigate. 

Not only that, but live oaks are one of nature's true wonders.  If you've never seen the Angel Oak in Charleston, make it a point to do so. Live oaks are majestic, ancient, and irreplaceable, and if they somehow impinge on a golf course, which I do NOT believe to be the case here, then so be it.

I played Harbour Town twice, and while I'm sure I MUST have hit a tree at some point in the 36 holes, I think it's fair to say that if I did, it was a pretty poor shot.  Can you be in the fairway and have to factor a tree into the shape of your next shot?  Of course, and that's how it should be at a course in the SC low country.  Being critical of that would be somewhat similar, at least in my mind, to complaining about the Pacific Ocean at Pebble Beach, or the winds at the Old Course, or sand pretty much anywhere in the world. 

If your criticism of Harbour Town is about trees, and that's it, then you don't really have a criticism at all.  Just one man's opinion.

[Ben Hollerbach]

FWIW: The hole corridors at Harbour Town average ~55 yards wide, Augusta National averages ~62 yards wide.

*Measured at 300 yards from the back edge of the farthest back tee box. Width measured from tree canopy edge to opposite tree canopy edge or hazard edge.

[Ian Mackenzie]

From William Flynn:


“The old idea was to have golf courses as free from trees as possible.  This notion, no doubt, was imported from Scotland because when golf was first taken up in the United States we knew very little about the game and modeled our courses on those of the Scotch which were, for the most part, built along the seashore where there were no trees.It is impossible to conceive that the ‘Canny Scots’ would have denuded their courses of trees if there had been any there originally.  As a race they are entirely too thrifty for any such waste as that.Today the old ideas have been discarded and the prevailing belief is that trees, most emphatically, have a fixed place on a golf course.  This is true for many reasons:First-Because there are few, if any, sites available that are devoid of trees and it is a costly operation to cut them down and remove them.Second-Trees add beauty to a course forming picturesque backgrounds and delightful vistas.Third-Their shade is most refreshing on a hot summer day.Fourth-They are of great practical value in segregating the various holes.”

My home course is a Flynn and we have all of his quotes....;-)


He hates trees when they are a factor in any given shot on any given hole.
He loves trees as a framing element, but despises them if they impose on strategy.


He specifically rants against trees whose branches overhang in a fairway dictating to the player shot shape or other strategic option.

[Mark_Fine]

Ian,
There are some great old threads on this topic from back in 2007.  Wayne Morrison and I and others talk a lot about Flynn and trees. 
Best,
Mark

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()