1920-1930 - Part 1- Architects Venture to Other Lands

The 7th at Hirono by Charles Alison

Through the twenties Harry Colt remained a major influence to all, but now his protégée’s are also becoming prominent too. Charles Alison began to work all over the world on Colt’s behalf. He was to eventually push Colt’s influence into many countries including America. His greatest influence would be in Japan where his work in 1930 at Hirono is still revered and looked up to by all current Japanese architects. Alison was one of the first architects to travel the world to design courses.

Mackenzie's Royal Melbourne

One of Colt’s other protégé was Alister Mackenzie, and while the relationship was not as close as it was with Alison, Mackenzie’s was equally as skilled an architect. Mackenzie would also travel, but in case on his own behalf after he left the short partnership with Colt. He would also have the same mythical influence on a country, and in Mackenzie’s case it would be Australia. Royal Melbourne would have been enough alone, but his visit brought a series of great courses that influenced everything that followed. His work is so prominent in that country that his architectural style and aesthetic reflects in what is still built today. I think it would be fair to say he also have a massive impact on golf architecture in America as well – which I will touch on tomorrow.

Tom Simpson was a very prominent architect in the United Kingdom, and his impact was stretch into mainland Europe where he and Colt built many of the finest courses found there today. He played a particularly important part is design most of France’s finest courses and would be considered their most influential architect – must have been the cape or the beret! Simpson was also responsible for many changes to famous links courses where he continued to introduce strategic architecture anywhere he could. The 14th at Baltray remains a persona favourite of mine.

The Dixie course at Royal Montreal by Willie Park Jr.

Other architects continued to seek greater opportunities abroad like Willie Park Jr. who would end up working extensively in Canada and the United States planning a series of prominent courses before in his case eventually having to head home due to health issues. Golf was expanding quickly and so were the architects who had opportunity to work further and further from home. Some choose to stay close to home, but most couldn’t resist the chance to have a great impact on the golf in a new country.

Thompson's Devil's Cauldren - under construction - without bunkers

There were also a few architects who were homegrown themselves including Canada’s Stanley Thompson. Thompson began his long and illustrious career in 1920 at Muskoka Lakes and by the end of the decade had built many of his greatest courses including Banff and Jasper. Even Thompson would head to other countries including America and then throughout South America.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1920-1930-part-2-america.html

1910-1920 – Part 2 – Three Great Architects

17th at Pinehurst #2

There were many architects active through this period doing great work, but three emerged to create some of the greatest courses in American Golf.

Donald Ross began his design career before almost immediately upon arrival from Scotland, but it was his move to becoming a full time golf course architect early in this decade that began arguably the most storied career in American golf architecture. Ross emigrated from Dornock, where he was head professional, and brought with him many of the ideas of that great links. He began with Oakley in Boston, and would use that city as his base for much of his career making a massive impact on New England golf, but it was his long association with Pinehurst that would have the most dramatic impact on his design career. Ross began slowly renovating and laying out courses around Boston, but it was through the work he did at Pinehurst and the connections he made that he quickly began to design courses at a massive rate right through to his death. What Ross brought to design was an outstanding understanding of strategy. He used fewer bunkers in more prominent positions to influence play. He brought to golf architecture a greater emphasis on green contour and short grass around greens as another way to defend par – influencing the thoughts of future American designers. Ross was more subtle than most, yet his courses stood up as equally well as more flamboyant projects of the time. He taught us that architecture could be restrained, straight-forward and honest and still be outstanding.

The 18th at Winged Foot

The enduring image of Tillinghast is that of the impeccably dressed architect poring over the plans for a golf course. Tillinghast was the first designer who consciously set out to create golf holes that were visually attractive. He helped transform golf course architecture from its roots in nature to a greater art form. He drew on the principles of landscape design, engineering and art to transform an average green location into a spectacular site entirely created by Tillinghast’s imagination. To Tillinghast’s credit he was able to consistently change the character of the courses he created from project to project. The bunker and green complexes at Winged Foot and Baltusrol are not at all alike. Yet both are joys to look at and play despite their obvious differences. Variety was the name of his game; he seldom presented the same look into a green on the same course twice. He also led a larger than life lifestyle and his architecture was just as bold, brash and full of confidence as he was.

The 6th at The Creek Club

The final architect is Seth Raynor. Raynor was originally hired to survey out the holes at the National Golf Links for MacDonald, but was eventually retained to oversee construction. Raynor was soon expressing his creativity and ability to visualize MacDonald’s instructions to create the holes at the National Golf Links. Raynor was eventually convinced by MacDonald to strike out on his own in 1914 and then helped send him a string of high profile clients though his business connections. Raynor largely followed MacDonald’s approach and adapted the same hole concepts. Raynor has been criticized occasionally for working to a template, but once you review the routings and the clever variety of his adaptations you soon realize this man had series talent and lots of personal imagination that made these variations work so well. Raynor experimented with combining concepts and even tried a few new ones himself. It’s not until you list the courses he built until you realize how truly great he was.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1920-1930-part-1-architects-venture-to.html

1910-1920 – Part 1 - Landmark Courses

Oakmont's 14th, clearly penal in nature







Three of the most important courses in golf architectural history all can trace key moments to this decade. Each one of them went through a slow transition toward what it would eventually become.

While Oakmont originated in 1904, it was the transition from Henry Frownes to William Frownes in 1911 that began a long campaign to continually improve the golf course. It was William who made Oakmont what we know today. Oakmont is likely the ultimate and almost perfect expression of the penal school of design. William Frownes believed that a shot played poorly should be a shot irrevocably lost and set out to insure that with all his changes. Frownes continually added bunkers to any location where players missed their shots and seemed to have an opportunity to recover without penalty. He also revised par and added length to make sure that the course would always be deemed to be the toughest in the world – and likely still is. The lesson for designers here is to go with the flow of the land. The course fits the site perfectly, yet the use of the terrain has created many of the biggest complications of the course particularly with the greens that fall naturally with the grade.



Merion's short and interesting 7th







The next course was Merion which opened in 1912. It was planned by Hugh Wilson who like CB MacDonald also made a pilgrimage to Scotland and England to study the great courses of that era and came back to lay out the course for the club. Unlike Oakmont, Wilson created a course that was full of strategic options and opportunities to try and score. The course went through years of transition where holes had to be altered as the road got progressively busier, the bunkering was improved by Wilson and then later by William Flynn and finally the course went through an evolutionary process under the guidance of superintendent Joe Valentine. Despite the evolutionary improvement, what really set the course apart was the remarkable skill at which the course fits perfectly into such a small site. I personally feel there is no finer routing in golf. The course has 18 great holes and the most interesting flow of any course I know. It begins fairly strong, which forces the player to work hard at the beginning. The course then becomes short and full of decisions through the middle where the player is under pressure to score. Finally the last 5 holes are as hard a run of golf as you can find anywhere and the player is literally trying to hold on. The flow is as important as the holes themselves in creating greatness.



Pine Valley in 1924, clearly more open, and lost more sand




The last course is Pine Valley, which is clearly based in the penal design, but unlike Oakmont strays into the strategic school where opportunities are given to challenge the course – but often at your own peril . It’s the mixture of the insurmountable holes like the 5th with strategic holes like the 6th which makes this a fascinating course to study. Designer George Crump found himself dissatisfied with the quality of courses around Philadelphia and set out to build a great course to test the greatest players in golf. While this is largely his work, he did collaborate with Harry Colt on the routing. He also sought the advice of George Thomas, AW Tillinghast and others while under construction. The course represents Crump’s slow and meticulous process of continually walking the property until he had a routing that not only made best use of the land, but also fit his carefully considered ideas about length and types of holes he felt were necessary to make a perfect course. It was his obsession and patience that lead to Pine Valley’s sublime set of 18 holes, but unfortunately the same pressure likely lead to his untimely death too. Pine Valley remains one of the most impressive courses in golf, full of great opportunities, a tremendous price for a missed shot, fantastic green contours, tremendous pressure placed on a player, the use of intimidation as an architectural weapon, the completely unique aesthetic appeal of the sand barrens surrounded by trees.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1910-1920-part-2-three-great-architects.html

World Golf Interview and Profile

I've been featured in two columns by William K. Wolfrum in the last week. I had a great deal of fun talking with him and William has even offered help with getting information on Stanley Thompson's work in Brazil.

The first article is titled: Golf course architecture much more than celebrity names and big paychecks

"Much like in normal architecture, however, the real work gets done behind the scenes, by people with names that you probably do not recognize. But when you talk to guys like Ian Andrew and Rick Jacobson, you see that the spirit of golf architecture is still alive and well, and in capable hands."

See the article at this link:

http://www.worldgolf.com/column/golf-course-architecture-andrew-jacobson-tiger-woods-5051.htm


The second is a profile on my business and my blog:

Golf architect Ian Andrew waits at the Caddy Shack for his big design project

"March 5, 2007) - Ian Andrew knew all along that he'd be a golf course architect. He just never imagined he'd spend so much time writing about it."

http://www.golfcourserealty.com/features/golf-architect-ian-andrew-5043.htm

1900-1910 – Part 2 – The United States

The 9th at Myopia Hunt

In the United States golf course architecture took dramatic strides with three particular courses.

Herbert Leeds was dissatisfied with state of American architecture. He convinced the members of Myopia Hunt to let him design them a much better golf course than they had. The course he laid out then is still largely intact today and features some of the greatest natural green sites and rolling green contours you will find anywhere. He was the first to build a great course in the United States, using the land to full advantage and the addition of some very deep bunkers to create superior strategies. Even by today’s standards some of the original holes are still some of the best in the United States. The other interesting feature was the famous chocolate drop mounds created by burying the stone walls found on site, these mounds certainly had future influence on the use of mounding to add definition.

A Travis addition to Garden City

Garden City was a built around the same time as Myopia Hunt. It was initially routed and planned by Deverault Emmett using shallow bunkers and cross hazards, but the course also made great use of the land and feature frequent changes in direction to catch different winds on each hole. The course came into major prominence when Walter Travis filled in many of the cross bunkers and deepened all the green side bunkers to make the course much more difficult for the US Open. It was Travis’s changes that completely changed the nature of the course and largely made it what it is today. Travis was one of the first men to write extensively on architecture and was a huge proponent of strategic design. He was often misinterpreted to be from the penal school because of his belief about the depth and penalty of bunkers. His ideas and writing, were even influential than his later career as an architect, since he helped change the early perceptions on what golf architecture should be and helped shape the game.

The spectacular National Golf Links of America

The final course to shape the era was the National Golf Links of America designed by Charles Blair McDonald. He set out to build the greatest course in America and went across to Europe to study the best holes the game had to offer. He reviewed and wrote about their strategies and drew his own conclusions upon what elements of what holes that he should adapted to create the perfect golf course. And by god he nearly did, since his adaptations were so good that most exceeded the quality of the original hole including the great Redan from North Berwick.

What all three of these architects did is set the new standard for expectations in the United States. Each one was able to create something even better than the last architect and showed America that they could have their own great course equal to the greatest courses of Scotland.

A Scotsman named Donald Ross also came to the Boston area and began to design or revise a few of the courses around the area – but he’s a subject for another decade.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1910-1920-part-1-landmark-courses.html

1900-1910 - Part 1 of 2 – Out of the Heathlands

Sunningdale by Willie Park, later remodelled by Harry Colt

I talked about people like Morris, Strath and Robertson being the initial architects that began to shape golf course architecture, but it was Willie Park Jr. who was really the first golf course architect. With his work at the turn of the century at Sunningdale and Huntercombe he introduced golf to a whole new style of golf courses by cutting courses right out of the heathlands where often trees had to be removed to create holes. The new tree lined fairways had a definition and enclosure that many players found just as appealing as the open links. Willie also went one step further by manipulating grades to create tee sites and green sites, and even altered some grades to create landing areas too, and golf architecture as we know it today was born.

He also began to create greens that had rolling green contours very much akin to the ones found on the links courses and built bunkers that were far more natural looking than pot bunkers. He even placed them in important strategic locations or natural rolls for full effect. The courses featured imaginative routing that maximized the land, but also this new architecture that created great strategies and great beauty. And he was not alone. His peers, Harry Colt, J.F. Abercromby and Herbert Fowler (together with Park were called the Healthland Quartet) embarked on creating some of the greatest courses around London that still stand the test of time today. Without this work as an example, many of the early inland courses that shaped golf in other nations may not have occurred so soon.

Colt's plan for Toronto Golf Club

Harry Colt is probably the most important architect is history. Colt not only designed a series of outstanding courses around London, but continued to provide the initial outstanding courses for many countries throughout the world. Canada, for example, is blessed by both Toronto Golf Club and Hamilton G&CC which are both two of the finest layouts in the country. Colt’s skill in routing and his knowledge of strategic design created the basis of future golf design embraced in the golden age. Almost every great architect at one point has indicated the debt they owe to Harry Colt and the influence both his work and his writings have had on them. Even the long history of great architects that worked out of his office from Charles Alison to Alister Mackenzie proved he was just as great a teacher to those around him.

Early Colt bunkering

Colt had a secondary influence concerning the way things were done, he introduced the idea of working drawings. Colt was the first to create planting plans, construction details and field instructions. He even ran an office with Alison using correspondence to stay involved from abroad. He was a man way ahead of his time, which included the integrating of housing and golf together. He even went as far as to recommend turf grass selection and other agronomic improvements to ensure his courses made for fine playing conditions. He had all the required skills to achieve excellent golf courses and is the basis for what an architect must know – even today.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1900-1910-part-2-united-states.html

The Next Series....The Influence of Each Decade

This by no means will be definitive, but I thought it should be fun to walk through decade by decade the changes to golf architecture and what it meant to architects practicing today. The first post below is more informative than educational, but as I move forward, I will try show where architecture was shaped and by who. I’ve already discovered that a blog per decade will not work out and the next 10 years will be divided into America and the United Kingdom. I thought this perspective may be entertaining, but also informative to how much architecture is a layered learning process and how much we continue to pull from the past for answers even today. I will try interjecting more opinion and a little less fact as I go, so its not just pure history which you can get from books.

Pre 1900 - The earliest architects

Early St. Andrew's

I’m intentionally avoiding any reference to the origins of the game or the development of links golf which had more to do with finding holes and natural green sites. What I wanted to talk about in this series is the hand of man, where he made changes, what features he added and his eventual impact on architecture. The idea is to take a look at the good and the bad ideas that were introduced along the way and their overall impact on the architecture we have today. This by no means is intended to be definitive since I do not have the time or the resources to really be accurate enough – this is an opinion piece where I will try my best to show the development of golf course architecture.

For perspective, I will make quick mention of Tom Morris and the earliest designers of the late 1800’s who largely spent a single day on site laying out the entire course or making changes to the rudimentary courses that existed at the time. For the most part these architects went about finding natural green sites and linking holes from one great green site to another. The courses were full of blind shots, narrow fairways and were largely bordered by whins which while difficult were simply part of the game. Over time the courses were made easier through additional widening, or tougher through the introduction of created or formalized hazards. Professionals like Alan Robertson (the Old Course) and David Strath (North Berwick) were entrusted to make adjustments to the courses and thus became the earliest golf course architects – their work would eventually have a huge hand in the development of golf architecture. They began to build new greens and add hazards to influence play and make the courses more interesting – they ended up creating many of the earliest strategies like the Redan.

The Redan before the turn of the century

At the same time there was another group of architects, like Willie Dunn, who were building manufactured courses that were far different from the links. They largely gave rise to the penal school of golf courses architecture and featured artificial landforms that were often geometric. They had a tendency to offer courses with steeple jump like hazards that had to be carried, and the architecture tended to tell you where not to go and what not to do. When compared to the open invitation to find the ideal route presented by the links, it is no wonder that Tom Simpson describe this as “the dark ages: “They failed to reproduce any of the feature sof the courses on which they were born and bred, or to realize the principles in which they were made. Their imagination took them no further than the conception of flat gun platform greens, invariable oblong, round or square, supported by railroad embankment sides or batters….The bunkers were constructed on the fairways way be described as rectangular ramparts of a peculiar obnoxious type, stretching at regular intervals across the golf course and having no architectural value whatsoever.”

A Willie Dunn bunker

The penal school’s influence was not all bad and the philosophy was carried through into a number of very famous layouts we revere today, but the early rudimentary geometric architecture was quickly replaced by a desire to have more natural looking features and an aesthetic which we also revere today.

Some key moments of the century included: St. Andrew’s changing the holes closest to the clubhouse leaving only 18 holes in 1764, Tom Morris introducing the idea of returning nines and the double loop at Muirfield, the subtle introduction of strategy into the links course through the placement of some of the earliest introduced hazards and formally planned greens.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1900-1910-part-1-of-2-out-of-heathlands.html

Mention in Golfweek by Brad Kliein

This past week I was featured in Golfweek Magazine (US) in the Eye on Architecture section. Brad Klien provides an interesting page dedicated just to architecture, with a feature called Design 101, in this case a short quiz and a feature on an architect. Much to my great surprise, Brad called and wanted to profile what I was up to. He featured a before and after image of Scarboro and talked about my skills with before and after images in the feature (The before image was cut off from the clipping that was easiest to read).

I’ve always been a big fan of Brad, he certainly knows his architecture, and I particularly enjoyed his book called Discovering Donald Ross. It is one of the books in my library that I read regularly when I'm looking for more subtle ideas on architecture.

Click on the image to read the article

Finding a Theme before a Design

Sand Hills, a discovered routing through patience and architecture that matches the scale and raw qualities of the site

I’ve spent the entire week talking about style of play. I think before you design a single hole, you must make decisions on how you want the course to play, what you want it to look like and what you want the course to be. I think if you simply sit down to design holes, you will follow patterns and tendencies that produce a consistent style but avoid exploring all the possibilities. Often you need to take a step back and think of all the other great holes you have seen in order to find the right inspiration or to explore all the possibilities for a potential new approach.

When I sat down to work through some routing ideas and concepts for the changes that will eventually come at Saskatoon Golf & Country Club, if found myself taking the time to write down what the course was supposed to be. I committed myself to the idea that Bill Kinnear’s architectural style would be the basis of what I was going to do. Since I would be adding new holes to existing holes I had an obligation to make them match as close as possible so that the course would remain cohesive. I wrote down typical fairway widths, noted the bunker placement patterns, looked at his green sites, and considered his playing strategies at Saskatoon and Riverside. This didn’t mean that I was left to copy holes, what it meant was I had a playing style and aesthetic that became my framework before I began even to route. When I went looking for holes, it was a combination of natural features and similar style holes that drove the process.

The hole aimed out at the quarry butte, lots of width, bunkers moved into the interior of the fairway, multiple options for play

Let’s look at this using another project to explain this process further. I worked on a design for a quarry site near St. Catharines. I had no framework and was left to make decisions on how I wanted the course to play. It was completely up to me what aesthetic I wanted to bring and what I felt should be the overall experience. The nice part was I had such a dramatic site that many decisions made themselves. There were limitations to how I could route because of the space and severe topography, but the eventual routing left holes with width. With width came the opportunity to use of the interior bunkering to get the playing characteristics that I have lovingly described over the last two days. I had set out to embrace the quarry at every opportunity and routed until it became a key feature or backdrop at every hole. Every hole featured the quarry prominently, so that it was the main theme for the course, even the whispy native grasses around the quarry edges gave inspiration to a bunker style and a look that would blend best with the site.

Many people thing that anyone can design golf course, but we all know lots that you that leave you uninspired and very few that you wish you could play every day. The greatest courses have almost invariably come from a clear philosophy on how the game should be played and the ability of the designer to give the player the freedom to explore and discover their way around the course.

Should bunkers be inside the fairway lines only?

Pacific Dunes #3, offers an excellent example

The best bunkers are built when they are placed where you want to go. I’m not talking about cutting off an avenue of approach, but in a position where you would have naturally played for if there were no bunkers. Or as Alister Mackenzie eloquently said, “A hazard placed in the exact position where a player would naturally go is frequently the most interesting situation, as then special effort is needed to get over or avoid it”

The 16th at St. Andrew’s is made by the location of the Principal’s nose. The bunker cluster is about 260 yards off the tee in the exact location you would play for if the hole had no bunkers. Because of the out of bounds is on the right edge of the fairway, you would naturally aim to the left side of that fairway hoping to cut it back into the middle. Therefore the bunker location creates an instant decision from the tee.

The Braid Bunker at Nairn

The 5th hole at Nairn is a favourite of mine and the bunker added by James Braid makes an enormous difference to your decision making from the tee. It’s not in the exact position you would like to go, since that involves hugging the beach, but in the exact place you would naturally bail to avoiding flirting with the beach. Braid keeps you honest with that one simple bunker.

My final example is the 5th hole at Friar’s Head. Coore and Crenshaw placed a bunker about 260 yards out from the tee, right in line with the green, that must be flown or skirted if you want to reach the green on this short par four. The smart play is to lay-up, but this solitary bunker challenges your psyche and makes you want to flirt with certain trouble. Mike Stranz suggests that, “The more you flirt with a hazard – the closer you stay to hazards or successfully carry hazards – the shorter the distance you should have to a hole with a better angle of approach” By moving bunkers to the interior of the fairways, you have to flirt even more in order to gain the best position on the hole. The remaining width on either side of the bunkering is to allow for more options for positional play and more width for the average player.

Frair's Head's 5th hole bunker, right where you want to hit it

As Willie Park Jr. summed up my thoughts best, “If a bunker is visible to the player, and there is sufficient room to avoid it, it is the player’s responsibility to steer clear of it.” If there are optional ways around the hazard and different ways to play the hole, now we have a lot more interest that flanking fairway bunkers could ever provide.

Spirit of Freedom

I have provided you with one of my favourite quotes I know in regards to the spirit of the game:

“The concern of the architect should be positive and have solely to do with what a golfer should do. His mission is not that or a moralist, the principle word of whose vocabulary is DON”T. The golfer should not be made to feel that he must renounce, that the primary object for him is to conquer his faults. It is not for the architect to inform him he played badly. That is for the professional. No, the mission of the architect is that of a leader. By the development of his hazards he exhorts the golfer to do his best, enticing him at times ‘to shoot the bones for the whole works.’ Thus he instills the golfer a spirit of conquest by presenting him with definite objectives upon which he must concentrate. It is for the golfer to stamp his law upon the ground. It is no way the business of the architect to stamp his law upon the golfer. But thus it is in most cases. The penal school of golf spells death to that spirit of independence, life and freedom which we are all seeking, and which we should find in all places of our recreation.” – Max Behr

I will always prefer to play holes where I have clear alternatives. I’m not talking about a hole where I can try cutting a corner to gain a better angle in, but a hole where I can play it a multitude of ways in order to secure a score. Think of the 14th at St. Andrews as a prime example, the hole is full of optional routes and favors no particular type of player. You can choose so many different lines in order to suit your own ability and set up your preferred selection on the approach. Holes like this can be played so many ways that it would take 100’s of rounds of discovery to figure out what work best for you – and even that would depend on the wind and how you’re playing. Discovery and freedom are two aspects that I enjoy as a player, it why holes like this have caught my imagination as a designer.

The goal of the architect is to provide an interesting a playing experience as possible. There is nothing more interesting than having an optional way to play a shot or to play a hole. When a decision doesn’t make itself for you and you truly have to choose – these are the moments of freedom that captures the spirit of the game describe by Max Behr.

Why a Par 72?

Capilano's opening hole

I wrote yesterday about Rye Golf Club in England being a par 68. Rye is probably one of the most underrated courses in the world primarily because people have a tough time dealing with the unconventional par. Why has par become so important that most new courses are built to a par of 72 because it’s an assumed standard? I can only imagine how many layouts have been compromised or even ruined with an architect trying to find one or two extra par fives to ensure their course adds up to 72.

How many courses feature inferior holes because a course can’t let go of a number? People are still fairly tolerant of a par 71 but any mention of going to a par 70 makes them bristle because this is assumed to be inferior. It’s funny that most US Open venues are now played at par 70, because this is the only way to defend par. I have a club with a very short par five that in today’s game plays as a strong par four. The club is so concerned with maintaining the current par, that they are willing to entertain many costly changes just to maintain the par five. A change on the card would incur no extra cost. It makes my head spin some times.

There was a lot of criticism of Capilano’s recent decision to change the par on the first and tenth holes to four, which reflected the way they played. The members par remained as it always was. For perspective if you’re not familiar with the holes, I’m not long, but I had a nine iron into the first and a six iron into the tenth when I played there last time. The change in par reflected today’s game, and the change cost the club nothing, but there were a vocal group who felt this was a bad decision. Why, the course stayed exactly the same, only the number of strokes required was changed. One way to deal with technology isn’t it? You think historical clubs don’t do this – what if I told you that the Road hole at St. Andrew’s was once a par five. This has been going on for a long time and some of our greatest par and a half holes have come from this process.

Capilano's approach to the 10th green

So as I like to do – let’s take this a step further. Why can’t I design a par 69 or 68 right out of the gate? It would take less land and be faster to play. Since all par fives are either reachable, or become so long that they make horrible holes that eat large acreages of land, why not build far fewer. I know, I know - the answer is convention, and the risk is players will refuse to play a course that has a par in the 60’s. Truth is that this is too big a risk to take that chance.

Let’s look at another possibility, - what if the scorecard had no par listed anywhere and offered a final par only in the total? Would this bother you, or would it release you to simply play the hole as it comes? I still think one solution to fight technology is to lower par. At least we would stop rebuilding classic courses and stop increasing the acreage required for new courses. Makes you wonder, is a course as old as Rye the future rather than a break with convention.

10 Course I want to See and Why – Part 2

I’ve considered an awful lot of courses today and settled on my final five. While I could keep going with this list probably forever, I thought it better to stick to the initial question. It pained me not to select courses like Ballybunion or Fishers Island, which both capture my imagination and I will likely play them before any of my 10 courses on the list. I was stuck to five that offered something different or vital lessons in architecture that I still could use.












Rye Golf Links, Guy Campbell

My interest in Rye is two-fold. I want to see if the absence of a true three shot hole (the first is a par five at 485 yards) has any effect on what I think of the experience. I’m curious to see if I or my companions would realize. I doubt I will notice, and this may offer a huge impact on my feelings about an over-all par. The other side of Rye is the unbelievable variety and quality of golf holes. Rye’s holes are a text book on the variety of opportunities available to using a landform. The holes take on the dominat ridges by diagonally attacking them, playing off them, between them, over them, from top to top, or the devilish run along the very top of the ridgeline itself. All the possibilities are there!










Myopia Hunt, Herbert Leeds

I’ve always had an attraction to courses that represent a specific time in architectural evolution. This is one of the first, if not the firs, great American course. There is much to learn from the use of bunkering through to the importance of cant in a green. Severe and complicated greens can sometimes be a consistent but strong slope and there are some fine examples here. There is probably the finest collection of short holes in golf, so this for me is a must play since I could argue that this is one of the keys to greatness.













Woodhall Spa Golf Club, SV Hotchkins

If you have ever seen a set of photos that illustrate the bunkering and green sites at Woodhall Spa, then you know where I’m going with this one. The bunkering leans on the severe end of things being very tight and very deep, but this is also the element that sets this one apart. You can’t help but be impressed by the steepness and tightness of the faces right agains t the greens themselves. It begs to question how we do our bunkers and offers new insight into what is possible and to what effect it could create. The heather and gorse add texture and colour to the bunker edges to really make this course stand out. Not to mention that there happens to be a magnificent course also waiting to be enjoyed.











Winged Foot , AW Tillinghast

The only really famous course on my list, but selected for so many reasons that it became a must. There may be few better examples of how to make a course tough and demanding particularly at the greens. I have long been fascinated by the green sites and how Tillinghast created depth and demand by flaring up the sides of the greens. The bunkers flanking the greens are some of the most severe and beautiful in golf. But the most important reason because the course is spectacular despite being built over very average land.












Royal Worlington and Newmarket

Once again any course on an average site that manages to find every nuance available in the land and become a great course is of huge interest. The site is cramped, fairly mundane and yet the course has nine great holes (it is only a nine hole course). This may be one of the finest examples of assessing what features you have to use and getting the most out of each one by using on more than one hole to have a bigger impact. Finally these greens are as bold and interesting a set of green as you’ll find.

That’s my 10, no Augusta or Shinnecock Hills, but a very fine set of unique experiences that is every bit there equal.

10 Places I want to Play and Why - Part 1 of 2

First off there is no mention of Augusta National - yes I would play there in a heart beat - but I’m well beyond ever hoping that will happen. So my essential 10 courses are made up of courses I know I can get on and am very eager to see.

















1. Sand Hillls – Coore and Crenshaw

This is our generation’s landmark course. If it didn’t announce the latest movement in architecture, then it certainly put the exclamation point on the fact that this was the next great movement in golf architecture. The course is also a great example to architects about the importance of patience in trying to find the best routing. With so many options, and 100’s of excellent holes to choose from, the tough part was finding the best routing – and they did. It’s rare that a course has no dissenters and that is why this course is high on my list.

2. Royal Melbourne – Alister Mackenzie

The course was conceived on a massive scale, it makes perfect use of the topography, the green contouring is some of the finest the game has ever seen, it has one of the smartest short fours in the game, it may be the best bunkered course in the world, and it blends perfectly into the surrounding land. This course is very close to perfect. The main reason I personally want to visit the course is the bunkering technique, they are so beautiful, so well blended and so well detailed – they may be the best example of bunker construction in golf.















3. Prairie Dunes – Perry & Press Maxwell

There may be no course that blends better into its surroundings than this one. The course creates a very blurry line between the edge of the golf course and the beginning of the native grasslands that the course was developed in. No course embraces and respects the natural environment like this one – it is a great example in a more enlightened time of what’s right. To top if off the original nine has some of the best green contouring in golf and may have been the best nine holes course the world has ever seen.












4. Swinley Forrest – Harry Colt

The golf course is short and a par 68, but it may is probably the best course in the London Heathland area. The golf course is all about ambiance and excellence. This has one of the greatest collections of natural par threes in golf, something I have begun to think is one of the great secrets to routing. Colt may have concentrated on the threes, but the golf course offers an almost perfect progression from the opener to the closer without one falter along the way. Colt called it his least bad course – which to my ears may be perfect – despite the unconventional par.















5. Lawsonia Links - Langford and Moreau

There are two things that attract me to this golf course. The first is the similarities to the work of Raynor and MacDonald. The count features big bold greens and massive pushed up features that are so obviously created, yet the course manages to blend out into the surroundings. The second attraction is the massive scale of all the golf holes and the feature work. Working in a large scale is dangerous because it really exaggerates mistakes, but when it is done like Lawsonia it becomes an awesome experience that overwhelms the player. I have always admired San Francisco Golf Club, and this would be another lesson into the most elusive design idea.

The next 5 will come next week – tomorrow’s blog will be on something else

The Best in Canadian Golf – My Choices

I was surfing last Friday night when I ended up at the Score Reader’s Choice Awards and it got me thinking I should offer my best of Canadian Golf List. I hope this will spur some people on to go and explore some of these great courses and holes that they might not have otherwise seen. Score had a tendency to regionalize their choices and I will respect their system and do the same.














Best Course
Atlantic- Highland Golf Links
Quebec- Beaconsfield Golf & Country Club (this was a very tough choice between 4 different courses)
Ontario- St. George’s Golf & Country Club
Central- Jasper Park Lodge Golf Course
British Columbia- Capilano Golf & Country Club















Best Resort – Jasper Park Lodge Golf Course

Best Golf Destination – Saskatchewan (value and quality is unmatched in Canada)

Best Scenery – Furry Creek Golf Course
Best Service – Angus Glen (10 years without a drop in quality)

Best Condition – Dakota Dunes (on his budget, it was exceptional)















Best Value
Atlantic- Northumberland Links
Ontario- Allandale (Barrie)
Central- Dakota Dunes
(I couldn’t make a fair choice in other two regions)

Best Clubhouse – Capilano Golf & Country Club













Best Par 3
Atlantic- 4th at Northumberland Links
Quebec- 15th at Beaconsfield Golf & Country Club
Ontario- 15th at Catarqui Golf & Country Club
Central- 4th at Banff Springs Golf Course
British Columbia- 6th at Greywolf Golf Course
*One special one to seek out – 8th at Uplands














Best Par 4
Atlantic- 2nd at Highland Links
Quebec- 7th at Mount Bruno Golf Club
Ontario- 2nd at St. George’s Golf & Country Club
Central- 4th at Banff Springs Golf Course
British Columbia- 7th at Capilano Golf & Country Club
*Best short par four – 7th at Scarboro Golf & Country Club














Best Par 5
Atlantic- 15th at Highland Links
Quebec- 10th at Laval-sur-le-lac Golf & Country Club
Ontario- 14th at Summit Golf & Country Club
Central- 8th at Waskesiu Golf Course
British Columbia- 18th at Capilano Golf & Country Club

Best Practice facility – Coppinwood Golf Club

Best Halfway House – Highland Links













*Special Places to Seek Out
Atlantic- Green Gables
Quebec- Braeside Golf Club (turn of the century golf)
Ontario- Allandale (9 holes of Thompson as it was – just the sand is missing on few bunkers)
Central- Waskesiu (the best fairway contours next to highlands)
British Columbia- Victoria Golf Course (a series of holes on the Pacific Ocean)

*Best Local Rule – The Raven Rule at Mountain View Golf Course (Yukon) (essentially a stolen ball is replaced without penalty)

*personal additions

Some Writings that Shaped Me

Golf Architecture In America by George Thomas

This was the first golf course architecture book I ever read. I had to read a photocopy of the book because I had no idea of how to get one and the reprint had not yet come out. The basics of routing and design are found in this book. Through his courses he also teaches you about creating strategy and uses wonderful illustrations of many ideas which help make the concepts easier to follow. Nothing can match the photos that accompany the text and provide us with a window into another era. Still my sentimental favorite.

Some Essays on Golf Architecture by Colt and Allison

Rather than a manual on how to design a golf course, I would consider this more a series of lessons. The essays work well to allow Colt a little more freedom to explain some of the views on subjects on the periphery of golf architecture. The writing is excellent as anything he writes since he tends to clear and concise with his thoughts. Short and expensive, the book is still worth it.

Toronto Golf Club Field Notes

Within the notes is a one page explanation on how to build a bunker. Very short and very concise, but if you can’t figure out how to make great basic bunker forms from this, then accounting is your calling.

Anatomy of a Golf Course by Tom Doak

Even though by the time I had read this book I was already a practicing golf course architect, I still found that Tom’s thoughts were interesting enough to spur on my thoughts about convention versus less conventional holes. The book, while mostly an excellent step by step walk through what you have to think about to design a golf course, also contains many thought provoking moments about strategy. Slightly less technical that Thomas book, and clearly based on it, this may be the best starting point for anyone interested in golf architecture.

The Confidential Guide

For me personally, this book is a source of clever insights along with some very pointed criticism. The lessons on architecture are found in both. While criticism hurts people’s feelings, often some of the greatest lessons come from when someone explains what not work and why. In older versions the why is covered in much greater detail than the current ones. The real joy of the book is the 31 flavours where he offers many clever little insights into some really great architecture, occasionally on courses you didn’t know, from my perspective there needs to be more courses covered in the future reprint.

Golf Architecture by Alister MacKenzie

Conceptually this was the book that most shaped my perception of the game philosophically. His view that a course should challenge the player yet give them the room to play struck a cord. I also love the concept, which I somewhat borrowed for my personal philosophy, that a bunker is not meant to punish shots but to make the game interesting. There are great quotes throughout the book like, “a hazard placed in the exact position where a player would naturally go is frequently the most interesting situation, as then a special effort is needed to get over or avoid it.” This could arguably be the best book to understand all the facets of the game including the philosophy of golf architecture, while some of the nuts and bolts of the other great books are missing, his explaination on how the architecture influences and effects the player is essential reading.

The Spirit of St. Andrew’s by Alister Mackenzie

The explanation of the contours of the 16th green at St. Andrew’s and how they effect play all the way from the tee changed my perception of the value of great green contours. The Old Course is the foundation of architecture, and this is the best short course anyone could provide into the subtleties and intricacies of that magical ground.

Mike Strantz – Golf Club Atlas Interview

This is the one interview that I have turned to multiple times for inspiration. In the beginning I read his interview before seeking out Monterey Peninsula so I can understand how he thinks. I read the interview again after playing Tobacco Road an found what he had to say inspirational. I don’t want to design like Mike, but I appreciate the conviction he had for what he believed and I enjoyed that he had a well determined philosophy on what he was trying to do. Mike helped me clarify my own philosophy and to add to my palette of options.

Other Influences:

The Architectural Side of Golf by Wethered and Simpson
The Links by Robert Hunter
The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
The Future of Golf in America by Geoff Shackelford
The Golf Course by Cornish and Whitten

There are a lot of articles by Walter Travis and A.W. Tillinghast not mentioned here from Golf Illustrated and American Golfer that also had an impact too.

Accreditation

This is the 16th at St. George's, I was stunned by my research, so which are not original bunkers?

One thing that we all want to know about the historic courses that is how much is original. This sounds really easy and too often we want to make easy simple pronouncements based upon what we see or what we find. We have a tendency to repeat the conclusions found in books or magazines and take them as fact. Occasionally we find ourselves repeating a legend, assuming it to be true, right up until somebody presents information to the contrary. The inaccuracies come from making an educated guess, without compiling all the information necessary to form an accurate conclusion.

Let’s look at all the possible sources of information first. The first is the routing plan; it provides us with a window into the architect’s intent - not what was built - but the intent before they began. Some architects tend to be very close, whereas many architects like Thompson tended to stray from the plan. When you can combine this with an early aerial we often begin to see a reasonably good picture of what was there. But to offer you perspective there were already 8 bunker changes between opening day and the 1939 aerial at St. George’s, so taking an aerial at full value is dangerous, particularly because of the influence of the depression. The plan in the clubhouse also has a series of bunkers that were never built between the 17th and 18th hole too. So be careful with plans and aerials.

Nothing beats a “full” set of opening day photographs like Cataraqui has. It makes it much easier to put everything together, with the only important limit being that it is from a single angle that often hides other details. If you can combine this with a good aerial then you usually have a pretty accurate picture on what was there. For Stanley Thompson courses, I can only think of five that have this much information readily available.

Burlington's 13th is a great example of a green with every last detail so perfect that it matches the other greens - yet it is an old rebuild. Nobody could deduce this one by sight or by aerial.

Once we move outside of this area everything begins to become an educated guess. The architect’s on site instructions or letters can often provide a wonderful window into intent, but they seem to be very rare. Membership remembrances have provided wonderful clues as well as writings by reporters from that era. The Canadian Golfer and Golf Illustrated occasional even have course profiles that give us an idea of what we are looking for. Note that I said, what we are looking for, not what was there. The problem often comes from either the accuracy of these or what they don’t tell you. For example all St. George’s greens were rebuilt (verified by the bill) , but the author never told us by whom, and how much actually changed at each green. So are they Thompson greens or not? I find this is a good last resort, although ever once in a while you find a member who is both sharp and old enough to provide stunning windows into the all the changes of the course. This is likely the most underutilized resource at clubs, and one that is literally dying as we speak.

Working drawings are rare, but provide excellent detailed direction, but don’t tell you the important on site adjustments that made the really creative architects special. There are architects that believe you should follow the working drawings exclusively when restoring, but that to me is not honoring the built form that the architect created. So that leaves the course itself. I would put my knowledge of Thompson’s architecture up against anyone, but even I know I can’t just look at a bunker or green and say that’s definitely Thompson. I can only make an “educated” guess. Yet many people make a visit to a course, look at the architecture, look at the few items of historic value and then make a pronouncement on what is there. Here’s the problem, there almost always wrong, and this is compounded when that person is from a society that celebrates a particular architect because they will be taken at their word. So if you are going to provide accreditation, you better make sure it’s accurate.

The best way I could describe this process is forensic research, where you try peel back as many layers as you can find looking for the “closest” answer you can get.

The "Final" Final Thoughts

First off, I want to thank Alison King, Dan Pino, Paul MacDonald, Dr. Stephen Norris, Stephen Ross, Jeff Calderwood, Nathalie Lavallée, Bob Weeks, Robert Thompson and James Cronk for there conversations, emails or comments on this subject. I also want to thank the many of you who posted comments or thoughts on this very subject. Even my 12 year old shared in this, though he wished Dad would find something else to talk about!

I know many of you are wondering why I went on such a tangent, and frankly so am I, but the subject is dear to me. As I said before I was a junior golfer who got lots of coaching, access and reduced green fees and look at what an impact it had on my life. I want to thank Graham Gunn and Dave Kempshed for teaching me and never once charging me for a lesson, because I was a junior. I was also a player in dozens of golf tournaments put on by volunteers where the course was donated and so were the prizes. I even ran junior events myself when I was in my twenties (the last time I was actively linked to a club). To every volunteer past, present and future I offer you my personal thanks.

I have two children who have already indicated clearly without their father’s prodding that they want to play. My youngest played his first 9 holes at 5 because there is a course called River Edge in Kitchener that encourages parents and children to play. Here is the link if your interested: http://www.riveredgegolf.com/ . My older boy and I were going to play and have the youngest walk with us, but the lady looked at me incredulously and said why he isn’t playing. I sheepishly said I figured he’s too young and you would be worried about him keeping up. She said, “He’ll keep up, it’s you I’m worried about!”

There are so many people who really care about the future of the game, and I mean really care. I just hope that we can all find that common ground that will “grow the game”

There are more articles on the blog all done over the same three week period. Each organization was allowed to comment or make a statement to allow them the opportunity to present their case or explain their own efforts. You will only need to go into january of 2007 to find the remainder.

Paul Daley’s Favourite Holes By Design

I’ve been ill almost all week now, so I thought I would take a light subject for a change of pace.

One of my favorite golf architecture books for relaxing before bed is Paul Daley’s Favourite Holes by Design. It doesn’t have the depth of insight that I love from Golf Architecture in America by Thomas or Mackenzie’s Spirit of St. Andrew’s, but there are lots of small moments to love. The book has such a simple premise, get 70 different golf course architects to write a one page review of a great hole and publish them all together in one book. I certainly wish I knew Paul Daley at the time because I would have loved to have participated in the book.


The Himilayan Golf Club's 6th from the tee over the river, and back across to the island green






Each architect has written in detail what they admire about the hole, whether it simply fits the eye, offers a unique set of playing options, or pushes the art to a new level. They have covered well known holes from Cypress Point to Augusta, but the best ones are from courses not known by more than the most ardent architecture junkie, like the Himilayan Golf Club by Ron Fream or Martin Ebert’s choice of the outstanding 5th at Royal Worlington and Newmarket (likely the finest nine hole course in the world). This is the area where the book becomes the most fun.

There are great personal moments, like Todd Eckinrode’s views on the 13th at Royal County Down, which are framed around his trip to play in the British Amateur. Robin Hinesman starts his with “Isn’t it great when something not only meets you expectations, but exceeds them. Especially when your expectations were so high to begin with.” He goes on to talk about the joy he found at the often maligned Cashen Course at Ballybunion. I know find myself wanting badly to see this course after reading his review. Some of the illustrations are spectacular and some of the writing is beautiful, but all of the reviews make you want to see the holes you have not yet played. Paul even included a photograph of each hole taken usually by David Scalletti so that people could see what makes the hole special too.

The 6th at Kingsbarns, Brian used Kyle's own sketch to illustrate the hole.

If your curious about which hole I would have picked then you better use this link to find out:
http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2006/06/18-holes-day-16-6th-at-creek.html

The back of Paul’s book finishes up with a list of each architects favourite 5 par 3s, 4’s and 5’s.
I have offered you my favourite hole and I will finish up with the 15 holes that I think are the best at each par. I stuck with only the holes I knew from personal experience, so I’m sure there are other more worthy holes I haven’t met…..yet!

3’s
16th at Cypress Point Club
11th Los Angelas Country Club
4th National Golf Links of America
10th Pine Valley Golf Club
8th Royal Troon Golf Club

4’s
10th Riviera Golf & Country Club
13th Pine Valley Golf Club
14th Royal Dornock Golf Club
13th Royal County Down
6th The Creek Club

5’s
8th Crystal Downs Golf Club
18th Pebble Beach Golf Links
15 at Highland Golf Links
14th at St. Andrew’ Old Course
13th at Cruden Bay Golf Club

I bring this up to any of you who have not heard of this book and I have provided a link to the publisher Paul Daley. He can be reached at : http://www.fullswinggolf.com.au/

Course closures outpace openings in 2006

"According to the National Golf Foundation, there was negative net growth in golf facilities in 2006 for the first time in 60 years, as the number of courses that closed (146 18-hole equivalents) was greater than the number of openings (119.5). In releasing the data, NGF said it was not an alarming occurrence, but a confluence of events – openings returning to more normal levels and weaker facilities being culled. "

We began a cycle of dropping participation just after the start of the new millennium. Of course, the IPSOS Reid study claims that we had a big increase last year. Now remember this poll was based on equal sampling in all the regions so that southern Ontario had the same impact as PEI. This makes the results tough to believe when a quarter of all play is from Ontario and a huge majority of that is from southern Ontario. Ask any course operator in southern Ontario, play is down.

"In the late 1980s, the number of openings was about 100 per year. There followed a wave of increased construction in the 1990s that peaked in 2000 with nearly 400 openings. Since then the wave has subsided to near historic levels. "

In southern Ontario the build out has easily followed this massive spike and it is quite clear that we are about to follow the same pattern of construction…or lack there of. The interesting thing is there may be a possibility of no new courses built in southern Ontario in a year or two!

"The culling of courses is not viewed as a negative by NGF. The organization expects overall course supply to stop expanding in the absence of increases in demand. It is primarily the weaker courses that are closing and, in many cases, owners who sell are profiting from long-term real estate appreciation. Finally, a better quality overall golf supply means a better quality experience for players."

I really have no problem with what they are saying about weaker facilities and bad business models being culled. In fact, many of Ontario’s most foolish projects will end up declaring bankruptcy. The Niagara region has a series of courses all built beyond the regions price point, and the casino traffic is not what they all anticipated. Anyone surprised by this – after Legends we all knew. The Muskoka’s feature a very short season, granted there is plenty of money (for now), but too many courses were built in isolated locations. Nobody wants to leave the family and the cottage for the day to play golf and these courses are excessively expensive to build. Finally Collingwood will be the next area to face the same. There building like mad to match the real estate boom, but the courses are already showing signs that the demand is not there – and yet more are coming.

"NGF recorded a 56 percent jump in the number of closures between 2005 and 2006, from 93.5 to 146. These 146 closures represent about 1 percent of the total supply of golf courses in the U.S. Closures were primarily public (97 percent). They were disproportionately short courses (executive and par-3) – 20 percent were short courses vs. 8 percent of total facilities. And, they were disproportionately stand-alone 9-holers, 46 percent vs. 28 percent of total facilities. Closures were predominately values courses; with nearly half having peak green fees under $25. Closures occurred in 39 of 50 states."

We’re always a little behind the curve up here, but this is coming. As a developer friend said to me a few years back, “Why would I build now, when I can buy them at 50 cents on the dollar in a few years?” Clublink will begin to acquire courses again but many will simply go to bankruptcy. I’m still trying to figure out who is going to fill Coppinwood, the new Greg Norman course and Gord Stollery’s course all being or been built east of Uxbridge for high end membership. The market won’t carry all of them.

The business model still remains the same, if you build a clever course at a reasonable cost, you will make money and be busy. If you build a massive project with every bell and whistle, you must charge a premium, and then everything must go perfectly for you to make money - including the economy, and that nobody can control.