1970-1980 Jack Nicklaus begins...

Another fascinating period for what it meant to the future of golf course architecture. As an important side note, what I’m going to continue to talk about is the major events and major players in the design business who have made a lasting impact on the way golf architecture is now practiced. This means I will skip by some who did have an impact. That was always the idea of this series – but I know that I’ve now entered the era where most architects are alive and many are in practice – and a few may be sensitive to being ignored.

This era was the initial sign of the future rise of the celebrity or “brand-named” designer. The first “name” designer was Jack Nicklaus, the designer of Glen Abbey Golf Course in Oakville, who remains even through to today the best known of the “brand-name” designers – those golf architects who are recognizable by name. His later successful transition from player to architect ushered in the next great architectural trend – one that remains prevalent today – the trend to hire a “brand name” designer to design a new course. Nicklaus’s serious interest began with his visits to The Golf Club to see what Pete Dye was building. While he struggled with many of the ideas that Pete had, he certainly became increasingly interested enough to get eventually involved with Pete - as only a consultant - at Harbour Town in South Carolina. Harbour Town turned out to be ground breaking and the flash point to beginning a new trend in golf course architecture. Harbour Town may have been the symbolic end to the Trent Jones era even though he and many others continued to build in that style long after the popularity had declined.

















In 1973, Jack would work with Desmond Muirhead to develop Muirfield Village Golf Club, the new home for his Mermorial Tournament. The plan involved a tournament course - largely based upon Augusta National - and a housing community built around the outside of the course largely to finance the project. Muirhead planned the community and (according to most) routed the golf course. Desmond was a man with unusual ideas - and likely frustrated Jack – and they parted ways before the course was built. Jack hired Bob Cupp and Jay Morrish to be his staff and to see the course through to completion. Jay Morrish was the on site architect for Muirfield Village. The course displayed Jack’s ideas about play - demanding high soft approach shots - and aesthetics. H followed this approach until the last few years where he softened his demands on players and began to build courses that were a little more player friendly - and better from my view. With the success of the Memorial Tournament and the high praise for the course, Jack Nicklaus was in high demand right from the outset. He would become one of the most prolific golf architects in this era.

Pete Dye was definitely the rising star in golf architecture circles during the 1970’s. The decade began with Harbour Town, which immediately attracted golfer’s imagination during the Heritage Tournament. They were enthralled by his courses that looked so different than anything else they had seen. The timber banks, waste bunkers, pot bunkers, tiny greens, use of accent grasses in the bunkers, tight fairways, etc. This looked nothing like their home course and golfers traveled in droves to see this magical place.

This happened because this was also the decade where televised golf took off with large ratings brought upon by stars - like Jack Nicklaus. The public was now exposed to all these new courses through their television and this exposure was responsible for the rise of Pete Dye.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1980-1990-road-to-excess.html

1960-1970 – The Emergence of Pete Dye

The 13th at The Golf Club

This was another great era for the growth of golf where Trent Jones built another 100 courses all over the world. There was a whole new breed of architects that began the next great wave of golf course architecture and almost all were designing the way Trent Jones did. The modern (Trent Jones) school of design was the style that dominated the era almost completely. This was the era of modernization and “progress” where history was ignored for a more modern approach to everything. Maintenance and practicality often took precedence over artistry and aesthetics. Even the architecture in the United Kingdom, walked away from its roots and embraced the new modern American style of golf course. If Tom Simpson were alive, I have often wondered if he would have called this the second dark age.

Only a short rise in front of the green

There was one very fascinating exception to everything that was going on. Pete Dye made a tour of golf courses in Scotland with his wife Alice Dye and came back determined to build course that resembled those great links course and not the courses of Trent Jones. He was the very antithesis of the Trent Jones era doing almost exactly the opposite. He built shorter courses when length was in vogue. He believed in sharp abrupt features like swales and pits and hollows rather than long graceful lines. He built small difficult greens full of wild contour instead of the massive greens of the era. He moved as little dirt as possible, while new course were entirely shaped and cleaned up.

Bunkers unlike any others I have ever seen

He also brought back unusual features like railroad sleepers and pot bunkers. He also wasn’t afraid to use subtle features like a grass slope or long rough as a feature rather than always relying on a bunker. Some of his holes were very tight while others were unusually wide open. He built holes that were nearly impossible, while others offered a breather to the player. If there was one word to describe his style it was variety. This was all a return to much older ideas and sharply away from the modern idea of fairness that was slowly creeping into golf. Dye ran directly against the current trend in golf course architecture, and eventually influenced an overwhelming change in opinion.

The work Dye did at this particular point is some of the most influential on my generation’s architecture. He took us back to our roots, told us that we did not need to move the land, to make the details more intimate, look more closely at the early strategies, forget about length and just design interesting holes, and don’t be afraid to add a sense of humour back into the game.

The massive irony to me is everything he did at this point is an important part of what I believe now – everything that would come later seems like a contradiction to his early ideals.

Footnote added at 6:00pm

1. I forgot to mention Nicklaus came over to see what Pete was doing and this lead to harbour Town

2. See Tim's comments about televised tournament golf - this was an excellent insight that I was not aware of.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1970-1980-jack-nicklaus-begins.html

1950-1960 – The Robert Trent Jones Era

Robert Trent Jones’s emmergence coincided with a change in how courses were built. Before the war, courses were still largely being built by hand, by the machine age was about to begin. Architects would soon utilizing large amounts of earthmoving equipment. Initially, this was done to speed up construction but it soon removed the limits on what could be accomplished. Architects like Jones seized this opportunity and began to move away from adapting their ideas to suit the site, and began a design era of adapting sites to suit their ideas. As harder sites were overcome, this eventually ushered in the idea that anything was possible and golf courses were built on more and more difficult sites – eventually capped off when Jones built Mauna Kea right out of old lava fields by crushing the rock and turning it into soil.

The 1951 US Open made Trent Jones’s famous because of the renovation to Oakland Hills. Trent created what he called target golf by pinching most landing areas on both sides with bunkers and heavily bunkering the greens to create difficulty. Depending on your point of view Jones was either the villain or the hero – but aside from that he was all of a sudden very well known. Trent continued to make use of this new found fame and actively promoted his work as a designed by Robert Trent Jones, and likely even coining the phrase of signature design too. Trent was a far greater salesman, than designer, and quickly became the architect that everybody sought out because he was the best known architect of them all. It could be argued this was the origin of the celebrity designer.













Trent Jones believed in what he called the heroic school of architecture, which was in his mind a blend of the penal school and the strategic school. While his origins point often to Tillinghast and Thompson,Trent Jones also had his own strong ideas including using lots of water right up against greens. He was particularly fond of this idea for par threes where the hole was all carry from tee to green, like the famous 4th at Baltusrol. The idea was one heroic shot would be memorable and using water created heroic situations for the golfer to overcome. The only problem with this was the technique became highly overused by not only Trent, when a hole lacked natural features, but also by everyone else in that period – and is still overused by many architects today.

There were other architects from Eddie Hackett to William Mitchel, but only one gave him any real rivalry and that was Dick Wilson. Wilson was a savvy salesman just like Jones, but lacked the same world wide connections to carry near as much work. His constant battles with alchohol likely kept him from having a far greater presence. His architecture was based upon his old employer William Flynn. It had a little more aesthetic appeal, but was slightly less demanding strategically. He designed Doral shown below among many other well known layouts.


Doral - this week's venue









The interesting thing about the work from this era is how much it has influenced half the golf course architects in practice today, and how much it is completely dismissed by the other group I will talk about at the end of this series.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1960-1970-emergence-of-pete-dye.html

1940-1950 - The War Years

Biarritz, with the ocean holes long gone

Just as the golf industry seemed poised to recovery fully, the war completely stopped the progress of golf architecture. Not only did nothing get built, but the demand for the limited supply of oil and gas caused many courses to close and go to pasture. Both Maidstone and Augusta two courses belonging to the elite in society were forced to shut down till the end of the war.

To many of the seaside course the results were far more permanent. Turnberry was paved over to become an airstrip for the air force, the scars are still visible even today. Others like Princes and the famous Biarritz course in France were bombed out of existence. Oahu in Hawaii and Kawana Fuji in Japan were also severely damaged through bombardment. There were many smaller courses that were used for military training and even turned over for the production of vegetables to help make it through. Many courses disappeared for the greater good and rightfully so.

Paraparaumu and its wild undulations

The war would end in 1945 and reconstruction began, but golf was not an immediate priority. One early exception is also one of the only significant courses built. Paraparaumu in New Zealand was designed by Alex Russell (Royal Melbourne East) and made use of the severe and rolling terrain to make an exciting (and wind swept) golf course. The fairways feature pitch and roll with many greens set on natural plateaus placing a premium on shot-making. The course is the first of a slow trickle of new projects that came at the end of the decade, but many began to look different that their predecessors.

The end of an era saw Trent Jones make some changes to Augusta including the relocated 11th green and major change to the #16 hole. Both holes were clearly built to the new heroic school of architecture. This also brought the two “Bobby” Jones’s together, which led to the 1948 collaboration on the new Peachtree Golf Course in Atlanta. While this was supposed to combine the two talents, it became a pure expression of Robert Trent Jones instead. Peachtree marks the definitive end to the Golden Age and the definitive beginning to modern golf architecture. Robert Trent Jones built a course that featured huge tees and greens, huge flexibility in set up, including very defined pin positions built into very large greens. This architecture was very maintenance friendly with its ability to spread wear and offer massive flexibility in set up. It was flexible in the set up from long to short and from hard to easy depending on tee markers and pin positions. It also reflected Trent’s philosophy of a hard par and any easy bogie. It was the beginning of a new era.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1950-1960-robert-trent-jones-era.html

1930-1940 – The End of an Era

Augusta National is built ushering in Parkland golf







The market crash of 1929 had a massive impact on golf, particularly in North America. This was a major turn of events where 600 courses would close and only 200 would be built over the next 30 years. Most architects fell on to hard times with many having to retreat to other professions to survive.

Interestingly the world faired much better than the United States. The British Isles had an average of forty new courses built each year and many great courses like Royal Birkdale, Turnberry, and Ballybunion went through major transitions during this time. Charles Alison built Hirono and his pupil Kinya Fujita built a series of great Japanese courses. Stanley Thompson may have had less work in Canada but built a series of courses throughout South America all while building Capilano and Highland Links. Things had slowed down but course construction was still reasonably strong.

Pinehurst #2 goes through a major change in bunkering and regrassing the greens



It was the United States that was really hurt by the depression. In the US, Robert Trent Jones had an ominous beginning when his first golf course Midvale had to declare bankruptcy upon opening. Even Donald Ross was forced to retreat back to Pinehurst and but fortunately for all of us began to rework most of the courses including the fabled #2 course to make improvements from turf through to the architecture. Much of what is admired from playing characteristics through to green contours on the #2 course came from this period when the bunkers were rebuilt, the greens raised up with an additional layer of sand and Bermuda grass was established on the greens.




Prarie Dunes is built which became the influence for Sand Hills


The busiest architect was the mid-west designer Perry Maxwell who was working with many communities that had money because of the oil industry mainly. He was brought in to design both Southern Hills and Prairie Dunes which became important layouts. Maxwell also worked in partnership with Mackenzie to get courses like Crystal Downs through to completion. Maxwell’s architecture featured some of the most clever interior green contours the game has seen. He also had the ability to blur the line between architecture and nature at Prairie Dunes, so that the course blends marvelously in with the prairie environment. His site sensitive design style and reliance on contours in the land and contours on the greens would eventually be emulated by the minimalist movement to come. Maxwell would also end up rebuilding a few greens at a little course in Georgia.

Augusta National may not be the best course in golf, but it certainly is the most well known. At one point I would have said the most influential too, but Augusta is marching currently completely out of step with the rest of golf. Augusta National was Bobby Jones dream course (designed with Alister Mackenzie) based upon the playing styles, options and freedom found on the Old Course at St. Andrew’s. I have an old article from before construction that describes many of the holes like the 4th as based upon the Eden hole and even talks about the original concept employing a Redan! The course features dramatic fairway contours, water hazards, winding creeks, tree-lined fairways and high flashed bunkers that essential set the standard for what is considered the American Parkland golf course. It was even set up with the spectator in mind, another idea that resurfaces again down the road.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1940-1950-war-years.html

1920-1930 - Part 3- The books that shaped the Game

This era brought one of the most important developments in golf course architecture for future architects – the architects began to write books. The insight that this era offered to future architects is stunning. We learn about the basics of design, routing, strategy, philosophy through examples of some of the courses that were mentioned this week. My knowledge of architecture comes as much from these books as it does from all other sources and experiences when combined. This is where most future architects begin – or at least should.

The first to come out was Some Essays on Golf Architecture by Colt and Allison (1920). It was a collection of Colt’s writing and observations offering a series of insights and lessons into the design of golf courses. The book is short but full of many observations and anecdotes that give you concise looks into different facets of building a golf course in that era. The book was followed soon after was Alister Mackenzie’s Golf Architecture which remains a personal favourite. Alister expressed his very strong views on playability and design, but went deeper into the philosophical ideas of design and playing experience. He talked a lot about the psychology of the player and the architects influence over what the player experiences out on the course. He laid out much of his own personal philosophy and prefernces in design which is clearly evident in the body of his work. This was a much deeper looking into the art and science and was the first book to step away from a more how to do approach featured in many other books.

The end of the era brought three more outstanding books. The Links by Robert Hunter (1926) takes the reader with Hunter on his travels through England and Scotland with Hunter pointing out the good and bad on a series of golf courses he visits. Hunter slowly educates the reader about golf architecture, particularly pointing out the failings of penal architecture and the elements of architecture that add the greatest interest. He even sprinkles in a few surprising criticisms of famous courses along the way in order to educate the reader about design. Scotland’s Gift – Golf by CB MacDonald (1928) came soon after giving us MacDonald’s reflections of the game and his masterpiece. While we get excellent insight into how the National Golf Links of America was developed, we also get insight into other areas of golf including the origins of the USGA. This a rich book full of great quotes. The last was The Architectural Side of Golf by Wethered and Simpson (1929). This is perhaps the most thorough analysis of the strategic school of design. The book is very poignant and full of strong opinions particularly from Simpson when it comes to penal architecture. The interesting discussion that ensues about the ideal course is particularly interesting and the accompanying text and illustrations are some of the best.

I can not express how important this part of the Golden Age influenced future architects. It is the single most important decade in shaping most of the latest generation of architects.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1930-1940-end-of-era.html

1920-1930 - Part 2- America

The decade opened with a course called Pebble Beach (1919), and like the landmark courses discussed before, it was also planned by a first time architect named Jack Neville along with Douglas Grant. The golf course features some very great holes – revised by Mackenzie, Egan and others – but what made the golf course great was the amount of ocean front and its influence on so many holes. Samuel Morris planned housing around Pebble Beach, but instead of being on the ocean, he set it back and let the views out be over the course and out to the ocean instead. Pebble Beach was a great example for future integrated golf and housing projects where the golf did not have to be compromised to maximize the value of the housing.

The next course built in this massive development was Cypress Point Club by Alister Mackenzie where once again the golf course features the most ideal land. Where Cypress Point was clever was how Mackenzie used his architecture to integrate the trees, the dunes land and the ocean frontage. It is a remarkable lesson in the importance of transition and how this is accomplished. Anyone trying to integrate two completely different environments should look at this example. Cypress Point also does a wonderful job of teaching us about how the best holes are far more important than meeting convention, back to back par threes and fives are lost within this paradise.

George Thomas would start Riviera in 1927 with a simple box canyon that was not overly spectacular and would go on to eventually create one of the greatest courses the game has to offer. The amazing thing about Riviera is the amount the course rewards a player who can work the ball. Thomas balanced fades and draws even occasionally asking for both on many holes. He used trees, bunkers and slopes to influence your decisions, but also used carry bunkers and options to encourage thoughtful play. Riviera is almost a flawless example of a golf course that is fair and interesting for the average player, while an exacting an clever test of a great players ability to work the ball and use their head.

There were other architects regional architects including Langford and Moreau who were all busy at work building 100’s of new courses throughout the United States trying to fill the demand for new courses. One particular architect bares specific mention for the influence he would eventually have. William Flynn was a Philadelphia based designer of a series of golf course that were not as aesthetically pleasing as Mackenzie or Thomas work, but Flynn was a master strategist. Flynn carefully laid out his holes so that the golfer had to make shots in order to score. He used a combination of green slopes, fairway slopes, trees and bunkers to force the player to shape and work the ball for position. He often completely dictated playand became the basis for the modern school of architecture.

Next entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/1920-1930-part-3-books-that-shaped-game.html

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.