Architect #17 – Herbert Fowler

Best Course: Walton Heath

Other notable work: Los Angeles CC (South), Berkshire (Red&Blue), Eastward Ho

Notable Renovations: Royal North Devon, Cruden Bay, Royal Aberdeen, Royal Lytham & St. Annes



(image courtesy of Geoff Shackelford's "the Golden Age of Architecture)

Overview: In an era where a new course was often planned in as little as a single day, Herbert Fowler spent two years planning and creating his new course at Walton Heath. Fowler spent numerous visits on horseback first finding the best natural green sites and then tracing them back to uncover natural holes. He repeated this process over and over until he had found his course. This was a process he continued on once again even borrowing a horse from Myopia Hunt when he was laying out Eastward Ho.

In the early 1920’s Fowler partnered with Tom Simpson, with Fowler concentrating mainly on the work in the British Isles while Simpson did a majority of work on the continent. Fowler spent a considerable time in the United States working on a series of projects in California and the great Eastward Ho near Cape Cod. One interesting note is that his firm for a short period of time also included both JF Abercromby and Arthur Croombe.

Praise for the work: Bernard Darwin said of Fowler, “I never knew anyone who could more swiftly take on the possibilities of the ground” Fowler had an interesting approach of finding natural par three locations and then trying to work the holes to and from those locations in order to create the most interesting routing. His architecture was not full of grand flourishes and would be best described as understated. He kept his tee sites simple with many being on native grade. He used his bunkers sparingly, concentrating on key strategic locations on a relatively flat site like Walton Heath. He let the land become the challenge when he had great natural terrain to work with and the rolls and undulations stood out more than the features that he created. His greens were often right on the natural grade and often simply extensions of the fairway. Others were carefully placed on small rises to add some additional difficulty. The one thing he never seemed to do was to add mounding or other backings to add definition, he chose instead to embrace what was always there.


Royal North Devon's 5th (from Golfclubatlas)





Criticisms: The main one is that his work is dull. I think this comes from his choice to often let natural grasses or native plants supply the contrast on a wide open site rather than adding bunkers or features that would supply a little extra definition to a hole.
His work is very plain to some and wonderfully restrained to others.

Great Quotes: “God builds golf links and the less man meddles the better for all concerned.”

My favourite: Walton Heath was my favourite for how it plays. I enjoyed the opportunity to try and use the ground to gain advantage and also to try recovery shots. I found I had lots of options on how to attack the holes. I was also very interested in how much the playing experience to a front seat over the visuals – very similar to my feelings about St. Andrew’s. The par threes were all particularly compelling and interesting.


Eastward Ho's amazing setting and undulation (from Golfclubatlas)



What I take from him: Take your time on the routing, and don’t be afraid to walk it through a few times to be sure you haven’t left a better on out on the ground. Restraint – there are times when the architect feels they are too smart and too important and simply get in the way of great natural golf. If the ground is good for golf – find the holes – and get out of the way. The course will bring joy for ever – even if it doesn’t produce postcards.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/06/architect-16-george-crump.html

Architect #18 – Walter Travis

Best Course: Hollywood

Other notable work: CC of Scranton, Cape Arundal, Westchester, Yahnundasis, Ekwanok, Lookout Point

Notable Renovations: Garden City (so numerous it’s considered a Travis course)

The incredible 4th at Hollywood, how many architects would have created this?

Overview: Walter Travis is well known for his great playing career winning the US Amateur in 1900, 1901 and 1903 and his stunning win at the 1904 British Amateur. He used his prominent status in the game to influence the direction of golf and course architecture – largely fighting against the penal style of architecture. He founded and edited “American Golfer” and used that position to comment and often criticize the state of golf architecture throughout the United States. This was a common occurrence since it was his comments, suggestions and criticisms of Garden City in a 1906 article that eventually lead to his major renovation of Garden City. The work was so extensive that after a few years many feel that the course was a Travis course. He actually began his career in golf design working with John Duncan Dunn at Ekwonok in 1900, but it was his work at Garden City which brought him to prominence as a golf course architect.

Praise for the work: If you have ever played a Walter Travis course with original greens, you will understand when I say that he probably built the best greens of any architect. His greens varied throughout the course using creases, wild undulations, sharp pitch, bowls, false fronts, and ridgelines. It was the compartmentalization of pin areas that set him completely apart from all others. He accomplished this by combining pockets and rolls primarily, but occasionally would use other features too. He managed regularly to deliver greens where putting from one pin position to another was extremely complicated. Any surprise from the man most considered the greatest putter in history. Every architect should study his use of a ridgeline because no architect ever has done them better.

Cape Arundel, many like Bruce Hepner think this is his best

The downhill hole to a peninsula green is another trademark that is unique to Walter. He would often bench a green part way down a slope so that a bounce in approach would be prudent, but the typically aggressive attempt to fly the ball in would be met with a harsh penalty if the player missed the green. Walter certainly routed some of the more unusual holes like this and created some exciting shots not found on too many other courses.

Criticisms: Walter had no issue with a blind shot, and would often route a tee shot over a hill to set up the next shot into a natural green site. There are great examples at Westchester, site of the Buick Open in June. The criticism that I have is that many other holes seem at odds with the land leaving me wondering if that was the best routing for the property. With small modifications to his routing many of those holes would no longer be blind and the holes around would remain unaffected. While I admire the audacity to break convention and create unusual holes like the 10th at CC of Scranton, there are so many others that seem blind only for the sake of being blind.

While exciting on occasion - the tee shot over the hill is a common trait at many courses

Great Quotes: "The primary idea of a hazard is to punish, to the extent of one stroke, a poorly played shot, and to make the recovery exceedingly difficult, and even by the virtue of the following shot being extraordinarily good. If this end is not attained, the existing hazard fails to fill it's functions."

My favourite: Hollywood: The course is a little different from all the others being a little larger and a little challenging than most of his work. The greens are great examples of his contours, but the bunkers are completely unique for Travis. The use of sand in such a massive scale bring reminds you of Pine Valley – and his use of angles is more pronounced here than at any of his other work. The cheeky creation of the 4th hole is one for the ages. What I really enjoyed the most was there was much less of the blindness that seems to dominate some courses.

The green contours at the CC of Scranton are as good as it gets in golf

What I take from him: I’m certain influenced by the greens and there impact on how a course plays. In fact everything that Walter did that involves a ground game from putting to chipping to the bounce in approach is wonderful. This is the game that I enjoy and the reason why he is held in such high esteem. He certainly understood the spirit of the origins of the game even if he was so critical of British Links golf – but that was likely due to the treatment he unfairly received at the British Amateur – something he could never let go of.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/06/architect-17-herbert-fowler.html

Architect #19 – James Braid

St. Enodoc's famous 6th hole

Best Course: Gleneagles (King’s)

Other notable work: Perranporth, St. Enodoc, Blairgowrie, Boat of Garten, Brora, Royal Musselburgh, East Lothian

Notable Remodel: Carnoustie (Medal), Nairn, Royal Troon, Royal Pothcawl

Overview: James Braid was the original golf professional at Walton Heath a landmark course when built and remained there all his career. He is best known as part of the great triumvirate with JH Taylor and Harry Vardon, winning 5 British Open titles in his career. He began his career as a golf architect after winning the first, but it wasn’t until after his playing days were finished that he dedicated himself full time to golf course design.

Braid’s work was limited by his problems with motion sickness and a deep fear of the sea. He became very reliant upon John Stutt to supervise and build much of his work. To make up for these issues, Braid planned his courses from topographic maps and produced very detailed working drawings to make up for the limited time in the field. Braid was also responsible for starting CK Hutcheson into design with the two collaborating on a few projects. Tom MacWood pointed out that he had in fact done work previous to this.

Praise for the work: He handled severe terrain as well as anyone, often benching green sites in severe land to wonderful effect. He didn’t change the land very much and often allowed the holes to simply fall with the terrain creating the need to hit shots that would hold the slope. He would then either find natural green sites or bench the greens and tees into the slope creating some really unique and quite spectacular green sites. The green sites often featured distinctive sharp fall offs on the low side. Interestingly rather than bunker many of these, he often allowed the sharp fall off to be the hazard to avoid.

I’m particularly fond of the bunkering work he did at Nairn. At the 5th hole in particular he made a fascinating decision. Rather than protect the dangerous but direct line to the green, he bunkered the exact location you would play a safe shot too, which meant you felt compelled to play a riskier line and challenge the hole. At Gleneagles he used quite a lot of traditional placed bunkers but punctuated that at key points like the tee shot on the 13th with a bunker that confronts you and forces you to make a decision. At his most prominent courses he provided an excellent range of hole types and strategies, courses that are fun to play.

Criticisms: In the beginning he did little more than stake out courses but over time became far more actively involved in the construction. The work that stands out is clearly correlated with the amount of time he spent on site, whereas he should be criticized for the number of projects where he provided little direction and the courses often suffered for this practice. His stubborn refusal to make changes after the course was open for play strikes me as a weakness, although it likely could be seen as an asset too. There are many holes designed by Braid where you are left wondering if a different routing or different approach may have been better.




The facinating 5th, Het Girdle at Gleneagles








My favourite: Gleneagles King’s Course: A highly underestimated course largely ignored for not being a seaside links. The course features a wonderful romp up and down sometimes severe terrain with not a weak hole among the group. Short holes like the 14th are underestimated they are often an intentional breather hole. The holes are better appreciated in the context. The 14th for example follows the awesome and difficult 13th (Braid’s best) and precedes the long tough 15th.

What I take from him: There are two things that standout in his work. His benched in greens fascinate me for their simplicity in form yet their inherent difficulty to hit. It’s a great example of something that appears fairly easy to play, but is much tougher than it looks. The other aspect is the use of interior bunkers to confront you. These bunkers draw your immediate attention and force you to make decisions including some you may even not want to. I love the idea of an architectural punctuation mark.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/06/architect-18-walter-travis.html

Architect #20 – Hugh Wilson

Best Course: Merion Golf Club

Other notable work: Merion West, Cobb’s Creek, (finished last 4 holes at Pine Valley)

Overview: Merion Cricket Club like so many other clubs decided to move to upgrade their facilities. Lucky for them that Hugh Wilson had both the time and the interest to spend seven months abroad studying the great courses of the British Isles. He even sought advice from C.B. MacDonald and went to see the National Golf Links to assist him with ideas for the new course he would build.

Praise for the work: There have been many suggestions that Wilson adapted and borrowed famous holes to create the holes at Merion but I personally don’t see the some of connections that have been drawn. Merion has a full set of unique holes each in response to the land that Wilson was given to work with. What makes Wilson’s work at Merion special was how he found these eighteen great holes on such a small and tight site. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the perfect routing for this property.



The famous 11th green site















Wilson also brought with him a few architectural innovations of his own. The bunkering was outstanding not only for the placement and the strategic implications it had, but also for how visible they were and the aesthetic quality they brought to the golf course. The “white faces” created a beauty not seen at other courses, but also a new level of intimidation by there size and placement. It is believed that Wilson used bed sheets in the field to review the bunker locations and lines until he was happy and then the crew would set about building the bunkers. Wilson’s bunkering at Merion taught architects that bunkers had a visual importance as well as a strategic importance.

Criticisms: The questions on his inclusion will always stem from the fact that his place in architecture is built on one great course and that the fact that his other courses are only interesting at best. The role of evolution, Joe Valentine and William Flynn also deserve some credit for Merion. Finally, that the course is too short to be great. All I can say is that I feel sorry for anyone who can criticize the course after playing it.


The West course at Merion















Great Quotes: “Looking back on the work, I feel certain that we would never have attempted to carry it out if we had realized one-half the things we did not know.”

His best: Merion Golf Club - 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 self imposed 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.


The 12th at Merion in 1924












What I take from him: He routed the course as the land gave it to him. He didn’t worry about par, mixing holes, or any other trivial standard. He took the time to find the best holes that the land would yield. The bunker visibility and scale is certainly something all architects have been inspired by and I think his influence in this area is underestimated.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/06/architect-19-james-braid-best-course.html

Architect #21 – Herbert Strong

courtesy of Ron Whitten

Best Course: Engineers Golf Club

Other notable work: Ponte Vedra Golf Course, Canterbury Golf Club, Saucon Valley (old), Manior Richleau

Overview: Strong left for the United States in 1905 and became the professional at Apawamis Club, a course featuring pronounced land forms and blind shots. When you combine this with his time spent at Royal St. George’s, you start to see a lot of his architectural influence. In 1911, he moved to Inwood Country Club and remodeled the course over several years eventually leading to the course hosting both a PGA Championship and U.S. Open.

He believed in the need for good shot-making and felt that a player should pay the price for a poorly executed shot - occasionally with very dire results. His greens were what set him apart and often set more of the strategy than the more famous bunkers. He designed boldly contoured that required careful approach, from the ideal side of the fairway to avoid running through the green and into trouble beyond.


3rd hole

Praise for the work: At Engineers, Strong's routing approached the hills from every conceivable angle making a full and varied use of the available topography. He routed holes that play straight up the hill, had holes that are routed along the crests with second shots to green sites placed below, and even from one hill to the next. He brought you in at an angle and off the top depending on what topography he could take advantage of. His routing skills were even more impressive at Manior Richleau where he managed to find a great course on a very severe piece of topography with 400 feet of elevation change.


11th hole












The more subtle joy of Strong’s work was the positioning of play. Players were left often to figure out the need for position off the tee. While a play to an open area in the fairway would seem initially ideal, in reality the contours of the green would be extremely tough to access from that angle and the approach would run off the surface and into trouble. This left the player to think that they simple failed to execute the shot, when in reality they failed to play to the right position to approach the green.


The 2 or 20 hole








Criticisms: The criticism is pretty consistent about the severity of his architecture – even today Engineers appears to be looking to soften the contour of his greens for playability. He architecture has been labeled “a bag of tricks” used to make his course tough rather than good. Most struggle with the boldness and aggressiveness of the architectural forms that he used.

My favourite: The original Manior Richleau was fully of fascinating holes that tumbled up and down one of the most severe properties you’ll ever see.


The 16th











What I take from him: The ability to find good holes on land that seems far too severe for golf. The guts to build very bold and distinctive holes that are open to criticism but clearly are more thought provoking and interesting than most other architects work. That green slopes are still the single best defense of a hole.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architect-20-hugh-wilson.html

Architect #22 – Max Behr

Best Course: Lakeside Golf Club in California

Other notable work: Rancho Santa Fe: (written by Geoff Shackelford) Behr’s brilliantly routed inland masterpiece in San Diego incorporated coastal sage scrub and land features to create strategic interest.

Overview: Max Behr is one of the greatest writers on golf of all time and was the first editor of Golf Illustrated. He also provided the single best explanation about what golf architects should be trying are to accomplish with strategies and the playing experience (see below).

Praise for the work: Max Behr was a bit of a radical in his approach. He disliked the use of rough and preferred to have wide open areas where strategy was dictated by bunkering. He talked eloquently about the placement of hazards with the following quote, “The direct line to the hole is called the line of instinct, and to make a great hole you must break up that line in order to create a line of charm. The line of charm is the provocative path that shaves off distance and provides an ideal an ideal line into the green, usually by skirting bunkers and other hazards. The golfer wants the most direct line he can find to the hole, while the architect uses bunkers and other hazards to create risk and reward options that suggest the ideal line for the player, or the line of charm.” He actively defended his greens from all but the ideal line using green contours, approach slopes and bunkers to make placement from the tee more important than it initially appeared.



The 13th at Lakeside Golf Club (photo courtesy of Geoff Shackelford's The Golen Age of Golf Design)




Criticisms: The question raised by one architect was if his work was so great - why did so little of it survive. Some criticism has been suggested that he was a far better writer than architect.

Great Quotes: “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.”

A shorter one: “What then, should the function of hazards be? The answer is: to attack skill through the mind.”

His best: Lakeside Golf Club (written by Geoff Shackelford) Bobby Jones fell in love with Max Behr’s inland links while filming his 1931 golf movies. Behr believed in wide fairways and multiple hole location options to dictate tee shot placement. It is safe to say that Lakeside inspired Jones and MacKenzie to go forward with Augusta National’s revolutionary design.

What I take from him: His thoughts about playing freedom have shaped my design philosophy and I know put a lot of time in designing towards the ideal playing experience because of his writings. He has made me determined to design in the freedom for players to choose the routes they want to take, the difficulty they will take on and the playing experience they want for themselves.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architect-21-herbert-strong.html

Architect #23 – Robert Trent Jones

Best Course: Spyglass Hill

Other notable work: Valderamma, Peachtree, Cragburn, Montauk Downs, Dorado Beach,

Notable Renovations: Augusta National and Oakland Hills

Overview: The 1951 US Open made Trent Jones’s famous because he had done the renovation to Oakland Hills. Ben Hogan’s famous remark “that I brought the monster to its knees,” and the attention he had through a series of articles about his work, made Trent the most famous and recognizable architect in golf. At 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. He ushered in the tactics that the USGA still embrace as the way to conduct a US Open.


















Trent Jones claims to have originated a new school of design called the heroic school of architecture, which was a blend of the penal school and the strategic school. While he points to Tillinghast and Thompson as inspiration I feel there is a lot of William Flynn in his work too. Trent often used a combination of carry bunkers and target bunkers to emphasis the strategy of many landing areas. He also used flanking bunkering on occasion and even fronting bunkers at greens to mix things up. His architecture was very visual and he tended to fully define all the target areas from tee to green and make the course easy to understand and challenging to play.

Praise for the work: There is no question that Robert Trent Jones was the champion for the average player. The variety in yardages and the mantra of a hard par and an easy bogie was something the public liked and the media embraced as good design. Trent Jones employed a common sense approach and a visual flair to create a “new” standard for golf design that was easy to understand and clear right from the very first play.

His courses featured huge tees and greens that were easy for maintenance. His designs had huge flexibility in set up that offered seemingly endless variety. He kept the challenge by building well defined pin positions into very large greens, but the real secret was the flexibility in the set up from long to short and from hard to easy depending on tee markers and pin positions that made the game much more enjoyable for the average player.













Criticisms: Trent Jones introduced the idea of creating ponds right up against greens to add beauty and challenge. He was particularly fond of this idea for par threes where the hole was all carry from tee to green. He believed this particular heroic shot made the holes memorable with the water heightening the excitement. The only problem with this was he overused the technique to deal with holes without natural features. As he used it more and more so that it became almost a standard on the green sites of most of the par fives, when you add in the similar use by other architects of that era and you get an awful lot of work that looks and plays very similar. This technique is still overused by many architects today.

The other criticism is he took on too much work and ended up turning too much to a formula where all his work looks and plays the same. Any art done to a formula is no longer art. While his work is very solid with few mistakes anywhere, it is too predictable and safe to really compete with the great work by the architects to come.

Great Quotes: “a hard par and an easy bogie."

My favourite: Spyglass Hill, despite the fact that you begin on the best stretch of land and finish with the remainder of the holes in the trees, the golf course is rock solid from start to finish. Some of the interior holes, like the 16th are some of the best on the course. I personally think that the 4th hole at Spyglass is the very best hole I have seen of his work.















What I take from him: To be very frank it’s his marketing skills. He turned the media coverage from the Oakland Hills renovation into a sales pitch. Once Herbert Warren Wind wrote a very flattering piece in The New Yorker about Trent and the Open he recognized the value of all the attention and coveted it for the rest of his career. He brought us the idea of the signature architect and made his own name a brand name.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architect-22-max-behr.html

Architect #24 - Herbert Leeds

(picture is from Geoff Shackelford's book - The Golden Age of Golf Design)

Best Course: Myopia Hunt Club, ranked 33rd in the Classic List in Golf Week. The course was so good that it hosted four early US Opens.

Other notable work: The Palmetto Golf Club in Georgia, and Kebo Valley Golf Club in Maine

Overview: Not a lot is known about Herbert Leeds other than he came from wealth and was a lifelong sportsman excelling in sailing and golf. He was even a member of the USGA executive committee in 1905.

He does not have a large body of work so we are left to judge him mainly on Myopia Hunt - the focus of his life’s work. Leeds was not happy with the state of American course architecture - particularly the original course at Myopia - and persuaded his club to build a new and much improved 18 holes. He began by visiting Shinnecock Hills - then the standard of excellence - to learn about the architecture. He paid close attention to the greens set in the natural hollows and on top of plateaus and employed the same techniques. Where he excelled was how he also incorporated the undulations of the land to challenge the tee shots. He reinforced the strategies with numerous bunkers to penalize a misplayed shot. While he did design a couple of other courses he focus was making refinements and improvements to Myopia Hunt right up until his death.



2nd hole at Myopia Hunt

Praise for the work: Whether the strategies came from evolution and observance - or right from the initial design - the results speak for themselves. He was known to carry white chips with him and if a good player got away with a seeming miss, he would drop a few chips in the area and a bunker would shortly appear thereafter. Because of this approach to bunkering the course has often been called penal, but that would be underestimating the superior strategies created by the cants of the fairways and the severe contours he created aton the green that create strategy. The bunkers simply supported or emphasized what he had already laid out.

The use of landforms remains the genius of the course by combining severe penalties for a miss and the tiny greens as targets, the course still holds up well in a modern context. The club has one of the finest collections of short holes in golf.



The Taft Bunker on the 10th at Myopia Hunt

Criticisms: Myopia is considered more penal than strategic in nature due to the proliferation and depth of the bunkers that Leeds added over the years. There has also been criticism for his famous chocolate drop mounds created by burying the stone walls found on site. He built them because he felt the mounds were more fair that playing around the walls. The critics have suggested the mounds look forced upon the site and have pointed out the future influence on the use of mounding to add definition.

My favourite: Myopia Hunt Club




Kebo Valley, early 1900's

What I take from him: Utilizing the natural cants to create strategy is an underestimated skill in routing. For bunkers to have meaning and create strategy - they must be deep and occasionally penal. That green contours are the most important contours of all.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architect-23-robert-trent-jones.html

Top 25 Golf Course Architects - #25 - Mike Strantz

The opening shot at Tobacco Road -intimidation at its best - there's lots of room beyond the dunes

Best Course: Monterey Peninsula GC (Shore Course), 44th in Golfweek’s modern list

Other notable work: Tobacco Road, Royal New Kent, Caledonia Golf & Fishing Club, Tot Hill Farm, Stonehouse, True Blue

Overview: Mike Strantz’s inclusion in my list might raise a few eyebrows. He’s still not well accepted as an architect - even today – which surprises me since I think he will be better appreciated over time. The people that really like his work actively seek out all his courses and interestingly enough many are the younger architects in the ASGCA. He embodies the idea that the line between genius and madman is razor thin – often stepping on both sides with delightful results. No matter what you think of his work, there is no denying his superior talent, and his guts to push golf course architecture to its very limits.

Praise for the work:
I have never seen an architect combine intimidation and opportunity so masterfully. His architecture is as frustrating as it is exciting but once you finish you can’t wait to play it again. As an architect I admire his audacity to build something so different and so controversial that you knew it couldn’t be embraced by critics or the public at large.

He believes that you get a bigger thrill when you make a great shot that seemingly overcomes impossible odds – he does this by making his work look overwhelming at times but in reality is a lot easier than it appears. While most would point to the intentional blindness and very wild greens to say that his work is over the top, they have missed his use of width to create playability and alternative (safer) routes. People seem to be focused on the dangerous short cuts that encourage a risky style of play and often don’t play the course enough to find the safer alternatives of each hole. It’s too easy to condemn his work on first play.

Caledonia Golf and Fishing Club












Criticisms:
His architecture is said to be too severe to have any playability with the chief complaint being how tough the courses are for the weaker player. The bunkers are severe; there are massive expanses of sand everywhere, you can putt off greens due the severe shelves, he uses cross hazards, and some shots are all or nothing with no options. The biggest complaint has to be the intentional use of blindness that most feel is not only unfair but dangerous. They think his architecture is akin to the high school bully who pushes them around and intimidates them until they go home. His work is either loved or hated – and they hate it.

Great Quotes:
“It is important to make the golf hole look more difficult than it really is."

“That is almost always the case on our courses, but if your mind convinces you that it really is a difficult shot, you’re beat before you even take the club back.”

A sketch of the 6th at Moneterey Peninsula Shore Course with the seeping fairways.

My favourite: Monterey Peninsula GC (Shore Course) If fits the space so well with massive horizontal movement in the fairways to help fill the wide open space of the site. The more restrained and subdued architecture at MPCC, with a few little flash points here and there, gives you more time to enjoy the setting.

Future Movement on the List: Up

What I take from him: A superior playing experience is not only brought through the freedom to choose, but also through the joy of overcoming difficulty.

Mike has taught me to take risks with my architecture and to say to hell with convention and criticism – it’s all about great holes.

Next Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architect-25-mike-strantz.html

Architects that Didn’t Make My List

The 13th at Addington by Abercromby









The 25 architects on my list span from golf architecture’s origins to very recent times. I made the decision that I would not include active architects, since that could lead to hurt feelings, and this would avoid the fact that their status may rise and fall with a single project. My list of architects vary from men with hundreds of projects to their credit through to architect’s with a single course. I decided that it was best to include everyone regardless of the amount of work they did, and to not combine architects that worked together. I wanted to judge them separately where possible. As I write this I still do not have the list in a final order and likely won’t until the day I write each piece!

When I knocked the list down to 25 architects, I was quite surprised at the quality of architects that didn’t make my top 25. Consider the following names and the work that they did and you’ll see why:

J.F. Abercromby
John Low
Deverault Emmett
Tom Bendelow
George Combe
C.K. Hotchkins
Horace Hutcheson
William Frownes
Charles Banks
Chandler Egan
Robert Hunter
Walter Hatch
James MCGovern
Kinja Fujita
Wayne Stiles
Vernon Macan
Billy Bell
Mackenzie Ross
Alex Russell
Fred Hawtree
Red Lawrence
William Gordon
Dick Wilson
Eddie hackett

The 1st green at Paraparaumu Beach by Russell







So why did the above list of architects not make the list? Many simply have too limited a body of work without that significant project that sets them apart. Other architects were famous from one very important course but they were not the only one involved, even if they were a key figure. A few of the architects worked in partnership with a more significant architect and their own solo work was not strong enough to warrant inclusion. The best example of a tough choice is William Frownes. Nobody can argue against the quality of the course that he built at Oakmont, but Oakmont has not had the same influence over the future of golf course architecture that other courses have – when you combine this with one great course – it was not enough. When I have struggled, I have often turned to influence to help draw the line.

The more interesting debate for me came with some high profile architects who have dominated the periods they practiced in. I’m not a believer in popularity or quantity as a measure of greatness, in fact quantity is often a source of my criticism since it breeds mediocrity - but I did find it hard to exclude all their influence and to recognize the quality found in some of their projects.

Enjoy the list as a source of fun – make your comments and offer your criticisms too – just remember this is not intended as a definitive list.

First Architect: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/top-25-golf-course-architects-25-mike.html

Do I dare do produce a list of the Top 25 Greatest Architects of all Time?

“This list is so horrible I don't know to begin so I won't because there's too much to talk about.” One of the first comments on the 50 Greatest Fighter List

I have enjoyed reading the 50 Greatest Boxers of all Time – a feature presented on ESPN.com – written by Kieran Mulvaney. The link is here for the curious:
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/greatest/featureVideo?page=greatest150

The list is highly controversial - and heavily criticized – but compelling all the same. The film clips presented with the article must be seen. I’m not a boxing aficionado by any stretch of the imagination, but even I was nostalgic watching the clips of fighters like Roberto Duran and Muhammad Ali.

This got me thinking that there must be a list of the top 10 or 25 greatest or influential golf course architects. Apparently there was something in Golf Week that mentions Mike Strantz – since he had mentioned it on his web site - but I was unable to come up with that list. I couldn’t find anything and it had me wondering could I dare come up with an actual list. I like lists – hell everyone likes lists – but this one seemed a tall order. I think the idea of one person putting together a list of the greatest architects of all time is kind of silly since none of us could possibly have the knowledge to really do this by ourselves and we all bring specific bias that will shape the list to suit out tastes.

The next problem is familiarity, since most people have a closer association to one or two particular architects and will have very limited exposure to work by others due to geography or time. This is where their reputations and the written opinion of others will end up shaping the list more than one person’s experience could. To do this you would need to go out on a limb at times - Kieran certainly did – but it would open you up to criticism for even trying.

I was able to put together a quick tentative list of my personal top ten architects, but that seemed to be too few. I then decided to list all the architects who did something that shaped golf course architecture and I found I was quickly up to 35. I ended up with an arbitrary list of 25, since that seemed to include all the really great architects in history and a few worthy of mention for their contributions to the art form. After I formed my initial list of 25, it wasn’t who made the list that drew my attention, but rather the quality of architects left off.

The next question was where to place people single course architects with one incredibly great course to their credit? Would that be fair to compare them to an architect who built 100 courses with only one that was considered the equal of the greatest - but the rest of his work was clearly not?

Next Page: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/05/architects-that-didnt-make-my-list.html

The Notion of a High Water mark

Merion with front bunkers returned on the 4th

Pat Mucci has asked some questions on Golfclubatlas.com about restoration, and specifically about renovating to a key date or time in a clubs history. This is often referred to as the architectural high water mark.

The thread is here:
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=29029

I’m not sure I buy into the concept of “high water mark.” I do think restoration architects usually choose a date to restore to and then spend their efforts trying to get “most” of the course back to that date. In fact most “dates” present themselves without much debate. Whether due to information or circumstance, one day usually stands out from all others and selecting this date as a high water mark may make perfect sense.

But what if there are many dates to choose from? For example what was the high water mark at Merion for example? The 1930 US Open with Bobby Jones win? Ben Hogan? The Last US Open won by Davis Graham? Merion is the best example where one significant date seems too narrow-minded. While 1930 was a great date for golf, I struggle with that being “the” date for the course when you consider the work of the superintendent Joe Valentine and where the course evolved to during his tenure. To ignore that seems to myopic to me. Merion choose 1930, which was a logical date I guess, but I personally found there are a couple of holes where I wish they never went back to 1930 when they did the recent renovation.

Pat asks the question of who should decide. My answer is an architect or golf writer who is heavily involved in preservation and history of golf course architecture. They need someone who will place the history of the course and the importance of the architecture in its proper perspective. I think a club has to seek outside opinion and see if they all agree. They may need to do nothing until they are truly sure that they have made the correct decision.

Choosing one date is not always appropriate. Most clubs have many significant dates and many photographs that span a series of years. The information provides a series of snapshots to the evolution of the course. While one logical date may tie in with a significant moment at the club, there is also a chance that the architecture of the club was far superior before or after this date. The last Canadian Open at St. George’s brought significant changes and I would argue this was also the architectural “low” water mark for that club, but someone else may choose that date because of the historical significance. Choosing one date brings a danger. Seminole would be an example where going back to “Ross” would be an immediate reaction and yet the 18th green relocated by Dick Wilson is a standout thatmakes the hole great.








This is not a simple question, and truth be told, this can only be answered on a case by case basis. While I don't disagree with the notion of a high water mark, I don't agree with the concept of a high water mark for all courses.

So....What’s in the Future?

Well I’ve either entertained you or bored you to death with a three week out look at the history of golf course architecture. This wasn’t an accurate history, but rather a look at the key players and key developments along the way and how they shaped the current state of golf architecture.
I’ve identified Coore and Crenshaw both as the leading architects and the most influential designers of this era. I’ve also pointed to Tom Doak, who looks to be trying his damn hardest to be considered the greatest architect of his generation. While he’ll certainly build more than Crenshaw and Coore, that may also be his undoing since he also tends to spread himself too thin at times. His work in the southern hemisphere has certainly turned all heads in his direction though. Coore and Crenshaw’s insistence on handling no more than two jobs at a time means they will remain more selective of properties and projects and put more personal time into each site. That is the recipe for greatness.

The Minimalism movement will begin to dominate golf course architecture and slowly push aside a few of the older modern architects as times get a little tougher. The cheaper to build “minimalist” course will continue to make more economic sense and minimalism will continue to get more critical support as time goes forward. Golf will have a recession in the next few years and this will also help to push the Minimalist design style as the logical answer to continuing to build. Golf will go through some harder times in the near future but as usual there will be more building on the other end beginning with the more sensible economic models first and then getting back to some more ambitious projects later on. The driving force in new projects will be the value of real estate – either surrounding the courses – or the value of land under the course.

In my heart I want to believe that the infatuation with celebrity designers will stop, but society is so celebrity obsessed that I don’t hold out any hope. Britney Spears will design her first course….just kidding. Tiger Woods will become the biggest designer of the next era. Tiger will quickly topple Jack Nicklaus from the king of the player designers and Jack will retire at the end of this decade due to health. Tiger will employ half of the existing Team Fazio, at first as a partner and 10 years out as the owner when Tom sells the business to Tiger. Tiger will build far more courses than anyone else beginning about 5 years from now.

The greatest architect of the next decade will not have played professional golf. They will not come from a large office. They will be able to run a dozer and a computer, but do neither in the end. They have already interned or worked with an architect. They are not yet 30. They won’t move much earth. They will be fluent with philosophies and principles of the Golden Age. They will know the entire history of golf course architecture and have built their personal design style on that knowledge. They will not be a minimalist but have a style completely different from Coore and Doak. They will start the "next movement in golf course architecture."

2000 – 2007 Minimalism becomes.......Popular?

Bandon Trails by Crenshaw and Coore

Coore and Crenshaw have established themselves as the best architects in practice – their reputation clearly eclipses former decade leaders Fazio and Dye. Both are still busy, but people have found Fazio too predictable and Dye to…well….to unpredictable. A new crop of designers have also emerged to take over from the previous generation and while a few practice a version of modern design, most practice a style similar to Coore and Crenshaw. This style has been given the name “Minimalism” and this has become the new buzzword in golf design – it’s the name of the movement that defines this decade. The trend appears to be very firmly rooted and will quite likely be the defining trend for the near future.

Old Sandwich by C&C

Minimalism is actually a lousy term for what the movement really is since it was incorrectly named for the assumption of no earth movement in these new “retro” designs. The new movement is more a return to the roots of golf design. The latest crop of architects are choosing to ignore almost anything done recently and instead look all the way back to the work of the Golden Age of Golf Course Architecture. They are influenced by Colt and Mackenzie, rather than by Nicklaus or Fazio. They love early Pete Dye but have little regard for his latest work. They all love Bill Coore and want to build courses like he does. He has become the benchmark for this generation, their inspiration and often their mentor too.






Pacific Dunes by Tom Doak

So why is this style better than modern or post modern? It’s the playing experience itself. Golden Age Design is about freedom and discovery. Modernism or Post-Modernism tends to tell you what to do and where to go. Golden Age design invites you to gamble or “to shoot the bones for the whole works,” but also provides you with the freedom to take any route, including a tentative longer route to avoid risk. The great Golden Age layouts always compel you to take on greater risk than you should.




Barndougle Dunes in Tasmania by Tom Doak

While architects like Gil Hanse (Rustic Canyon), Mike DeVries (Kingsley Club), and others have create wonderful and interesting layouts, the architect who has moved to the forefront to take on Coore and Crenshaw is Tom Doak. Doak is to some a controversial figure due to his strong opinions and Confidential Guide to Golf Courses, but without question one very talented designer. Tom made his name initially with his writing and opinions and back them up with a very interesting first course called High Pointe, but his work at Pacific Dunes was his coming out party. The course received immediate comparisons to Cypress Point for its architecture, stetting and unusual hole sequences. The course was shorter than normal, wider than most, but brilliant in the use of the environment and the land to create a series of very compelling holes. Doak followed that up with a series of spectacular sea side courses in Australia, New Zealand and in the US. His work is comparable to the work of Coore and Crenshaw in both playing style and aesthetics – and now in quality too. There is no question he is clearly influenced by the work of Coore and Crenshaw – the question now is can he surpass it.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/sowhats-in-future.html

1990 – 2000 The decade of Contrasting Styles

Sand Hills opener

This is one of the most interesting decades due to the explosive divisions in architectural philosophy practiced by a series of high profile architects. You have Rees Jones continuing on the legacy of his father with his new work like Atlantic Golf Club. His renovation work at Bethpage Black and other famous layouts provides him with the “Open Doctor” moniker just like his dad had and he become the USGA’s go to guy – like his dad. Nicklaus continues to work on hundreds of projects with many being outside the US, but gets into financial problems with the development and construction arm of his company. Pete Dye becomes the very antithesis of his early origins, while he continues with the remarkable design ideas that brought him to prominence, he now shapes and moves everything – a far cry from The Golf Club. His courses are still strategically excellent and fascinating, but the work lacks the same charm of the early courses. This culminates at Whistling Straights where he takes an average albeit lakefront property and moves millions of yards of earth to build a stunning “links” layout with so many bunkers that nobody has ever counted them.

Whistling Straights 17th

Mike Strantz, who had previously worked for Tom Fazio, was an architect walking completely out of step with all other – to my delight. The first signs of his genius are with a small tight property at Caledonia where he builds a remarkably clever and interesting layout that is a little different looking and playing than what people are used to. But there was so much more to come when you listen to this quote from an interview, “It is important to make the golf hole look more difficult than it really is." That is almost always the case on our courses, but if your mind convinces you that it really is a difficult shot, you’re beat before you even take the club back.” Caledonia was tricky in places but when he built Tobacco Road he built the most intimidating and controversial course constructed in recent time. This course is either loved or hated. I personally think this is because the course needs to be understood and respected before you can try out play it. The course uses large doses of intimidation – including blind shots – to overwhelm the player into playing in fear. The course also has width and short cuts galore to encourage a risky style of play, add this all up and you have one of the most unique and entertaining courses I have played. His work eventually softened culminating with his last course - the sublime Monterey Peninsula Shore Course - but one thing you can say about Mike’s work is that it was always interesting.

The 13th at Tobacco Road

The final prominent architect of the decade is Bill Coore. Bill began working with Pete Dye as a superintendent but became interested in architecture working on a few smaller jobs. He became involved with Ben Crenshaw and began to design so very lay of the land layouts with lots of interesting ground options and alternate strategies. The work caught immediate attention for the enjoyment in created when you played the courses. Everything changed overnight when they were asked to do Sand Hills in the middle of the Sand Hill country in Nebraska. Sand Hills was an exceptional property. Coore and Crenshaw showed the patience to walk and walk the property until they had found the right routing. While 100’s of perfect holes were available, they walked until they found a routing that would work, without having to disturb any of the natural site. Many of the hazards are natural blow outs, and others that were created to look like they were also blow outs too. The course is like Prairie Dunes where the line between golf and nature is blurred. The golf course is a perfect reflection of the site, has a perfect set of holes and will be this era’s greatest course.

The 17th at Sand Hills

Bill Coore caught everyone’s attention and ultimately ushered in a new movement called Minimalism. It may have originated with the Golden Age, been picked up by Pete Dye with The Golf Club, been regenerated with Tom Doak’s High Pointe, but it was Coore and Crenshaw that really made the statement that this movement was here to stay. They built the ultimate example at Sand Hills and then built a series of excellent examples at other less spectacular sites. Now their style has been copied by all the other architects including Nicklaus and fazio. Coore and Crenshaw became the trend setters.

Next Entry: http://thecaddyshack.blogspot.com/2007/03/2000-2007-minimalism-becomespopular.html