We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Golf course architecture appreciation

Girardcorp

Girardcorp

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
11,004
Reaction score
98
Location
Appleton,WI
Handicap
16.1
Who else truly appreciates good golf course design. For me I'm going to try to play a few Donald Ross courses this year and fingers crossed a Seth Raynor design. Love the old ways and how they made the most out of pieces of land.
 
Lot of Donald Ross courses around my way. I try to play them when I get a chance, except when they don't cooperate with an out-of-towner needing to rent clubs (I'm looking at you Triggs Memorial Golf Course, in Providence RI).
 
I definitely like playing different types of architecture, and trying to see what the designer was aiming for.
 
I really nerd out on golf course architecture and design. I love the golden age stuff you mentioned, and am lucky to live in an area with several to play. I also feel that we are truly in a new golden age of golf course design. The guys doing minimalist work right now are leaving wonderful legacies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I always enjoy a course that's been laid out over an area that uses a lot of the actual terrain. I'm a big fan of minimalist work to that degree. There are times when I'm driving and I see some land out my window (happens a LOT in the middle of Kansas) and I can see a course layout in my minds eye.
 
I'm happy to see I'm not the only one who geekily is into course design.
 
I like Walter Travis and AJ Tillinghast designs. At the other end are guys who designed one course and that was it. A lot of those are locally commissioned or someone who wanted to build and run a course, but one of the more famous one-offs is Oakmont.
 
Last edited:
I'm an avid course architecture guy. I like the characteristics being emphasized in courses nowadays and that a lot of places are making an effort to restore back to original design.
 
Reframmellator said:
I like Walter Travis and AJ Tillinghast designs. At the other end are guys who designed one course and that was it. A lot of those are locally commissioned or saomeone who I've never played a Tillinghast or Travis, there is a Tillinghast close I need to check out.
Click to expand...
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
I'm an avid course architecture guy. I like the characteristics being emphasized in courses nowadays and that a lot of places are making an effort to restore back to original design.
Click to expand...

I think we are really living in a time that is the best of both worlds for gca nerds. There are the Raynor/Mac guys our there fighting to get their stuff restored, using technology to do it as well as possible. Then you have Doak/DeVries/Coore Crenshaw/Hanse ect. I can't imagine a better time to be a golf course nerd.
 
I have some favorite architects and will actively seek out their work. Tom Doak is a modern day favorite of mine and i'll go out of my way to play his courses. Tillinghast is a classical favorite. I like some of Ross' work, mostly the Pinehurst designs but his work is usually better when improved upon or "restored" by modern day architects. Some designers I just don't care for their work and when you play enough of their courses you can see how they repeat themselves.
 
NoLine said:
I have some favorite architects and will actively seek out their work. Tom Doak is a modern day favorite of mine and i'll go out of my way to play his courses. Tillinghast is a classical favorite. I like some of Ross' work, mostly the Pinehurst designs but his work is usually better when improved upon or "restored" by modern day architects. Some designers I just don't care for their work and when you play enough of their courses you can see how they repeat themselves.
Click to expand...

How do you feel about the work of golden age designers using template holes? I always hear the "architects repeat themselves" argument, usually in reference to Pete Dye's work. But the same person might glow about Seth Raynor.

I guess I could make the argument that the templates might be applied aptly across the natural landscape make for a varied and interesting course. Where as Dye tends to copy complete holes on blank landscapes.

Interested to hear your thoughts.
 
LordByron said:
How do you feel about the work of golden age designers using template holes? I always hear the "architects repeat themselves" argument, usually in reference to Pete Dye's work. But the same person might glow about Seth Raynor.

I guess I could make the argument that the templates might be applied aptly across the natural landscape make for a varied and interesting course. Where as Dye tends to copy complete holes on blank landscapes.

Interested to hear your thoughts.
Click to expand...

It's a great question, what disturb's me is when they think they developed a great hole and go looking for ways to do it again, like Dye employs. I've noted on this site in the past that 3 courses he designed in the 90's all essentially have the same finishing hole - #18 at Bulle Rock, Pete Dye GC and Mystic Rock are the same hole. It gets called out moreso because it's the closing hole. Mike Stranz' limited portfolio employed it as well with holes at Tobacco Road, Tot Hill and Royal New Kent showing up on each course. In both Dye and Stranz' case they were met with similar land characteristics so they just pulled a golden oldie out for a replay.

Looking to the classic architects I think it's harder to call out. Many parkland courses can easily run together if the clubs haven't done a good job of "deforesting". As a result it's hard to see the pattern develop because every hole becomes a pattern. Tillinghast, having played many of his storied designs, doesn't have a repetitive feel to his work. I think he worked with what the land gave him and made the most of it, usually that was pretty good. I just laughed because Pete Dye likes to say he worked with what the land gave him, I hope he said that tongue in check because he worked with what a front end loader could manipulate.
 
NoLine said:
It's a great question, what disturb's me is when they think they developed a great hole and go looking for ways to do it again, like Dye employs. I've noted on this site in the past that 3 courses he designed in the 90's all essentially have the same finishing hole - #18 at Bulle Rock, Pete Dye GC and Mystic Rock are the same hole. It gets called out moreso because it's the closing hole. Mike Stranz' limited portfolio employed it as well with holes at Tobacco Road, Tot Hill and Royal New Kent showing up on each course. In both Dye and Stranz' case they were met with similar land characteristics so they just pulled a golden oldie out for a replay.

Looking to the classic architects I think it's harder to call out. Many parkland courses can easily run together if the clubs haven't done a good job of "deforesting". As a result it's hard to see the pattern develop because every hole becomes a pattern. Tillinghast, having played many of his storied designs, doesn't have a repetitive feel to his work. I think he worked with what the land gave him and made the most of it, usually that was pretty good. I just laughed because Pete Dye likes to say he worked with what the land gave him, I hope he said that tongue in check because he worked with what a front end loader could manipulate.
Click to expand...

18 on Black Wolf Run (River) is the same hole as well by Dye. The long Par 3 with water right is done over and over by him as well Kiawah 17, 4 at Black Wolf Run (River). That being said I have really enjoyed every Dye course I have ever played. I do understand the gripes people have. He has had some strange opportunities to build from whole cloth.

It is interesting to hear Doak talk about working for P.D. and how much he influenced him....you sure cant tell in the work.
 
LordByron said:
18 on Black Wolf Run (River) is the same hole as well by Dye. The long Par 3 with water right is done over and over by him as well Kiawah 17, 4 at Black Wolf Run (River). That being said I have really enjoyed every Dye course I have ever played. I do understand the gripes people have. He has had some strange opportunities to build from whole cloth.

It is interesting to hear Doak talk about working for P.D. and how much he influenced him....you sure cant tell in the work.
Click to expand...

I'm actually a Dye fan, having rarely not enjoyed one of his courses when he was "allowed" to do his job. That is funny that Doak praises him, they couldn't be more polar opposite in their work product.
 
I love browsing the course reviews on golf club atlas
 
Love me some Don Ross. Pete Dye is good for getting kicked in the teeth. Cornish Silva and Mungeam do some fantastic New England courses.
 
Love course design. Just always love looking at some holes and just saying "wow how did they come up with this?" Truly appreciate it
 
Am I the only guy who doesnt get a hard on with Pete Dye tracks? being hard for the sake of being hard doesnt appeal to me.

Maybe I just love courses that appear to be natural and take the landscape into consideration.
 
Reframmellator said:
I like Walter Travis and AJ Tillinghast designs. At the other end are guys who designed one course and that was it. A lot of those are locally commissioned or someone who wanted to build and run a course, but one of the more famous one-offs is Oakmont.
Click to expand...

Ya know that nagging feeling something is wrong when your brain is idling? I've had it for about a day now, and it just hit me. It's AW Tillinghast.
 
Girardcorp said:
Who else truly appreciates good golf course design. For me I'm going to try to play a few Donald Ross courses this year and fingers crossed a Seth Raynor design. Love the old ways and how they made the most out of pieces of land.
Click to expand...

On new courses especially, I really love thinking out how the architects worked out what to do. I'm really excited for a book coming out on 5 of the most famous Stanley Thompson courses. He made many of his courses as make work programs during the Great Depression. I've played 3 and all are amazing. Nothing spectacular, they just seem like the grass was mown and hazards deepened and play away. https://www.facebook.com/ian.andrew.9847
 
Reframmellator said:
I like Walter Travis and AJ Tillinghast designs. At the other end are guys who designed one course and that was it. A lot of those are locally commissioned or someone who wanted to build and run a course, but one of the more famous one-offs is Oakmont.
Click to expand...
Cool reference. I had to go look up Tillinghast - it sounded very familiar but I couldn't quite place it. I play at Claremont Country Club's member guest each year (Oakland, CA). That course reminds me great deal of a local country club I was invited to play once, Waverly. Turns out Tillinghast designed Waverly and did modifications to Claremont (a MacKenzie design). I really enjoy them both a good deal.
 
fupresti said:
Am I the only guy who doesnt get a hard on with Pete Dye tracks? being hard for the sake of being hard doesnt appeal to me.

Maybe I just love courses that appear to be natural and take the landscape into consideration.
Click to expand...
You are most definitely not alone. I am not a Dye fan at all, for the same reasons you state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top