|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 12, 2019 4:37:45 GMT -5
Not as distinct of a thumbprint, but when I pulled the LIDAR for NGLA and saw the short hole, my jaw dropped at how HIGH the thumbprint-ish mound in the center is. And they pin it there too, like menaces. I can’t find a picture that even comes close to doing it justice. It has to be 3 feet higher than the edges of the green. I always thought that this section of the green looked more like a plateau. I remember when RJ made Elysian Downs and placed an "inverted" thumbprint on the short and people really liked it. It sort of reminded me of the short at NGLA. It looks like a plateau thumbprint in a way.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 12, 2019 4:39:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TannerBronson on Nov 13, 2019 11:41:01 GMT -5
Seriously I love joegolferg’s work and I don’t mean to offend anyone especially him. But I don’t get Seth Raynor designs due to the fact I “believe” a lot of the holes are copy and pasted around the country. Change my mind?
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Nov 13, 2019 12:05:41 GMT -5
TannerBronson - I know where you're coming from - that was my initial feeling, which is why I decided to make a template course to understand it all better. It's far more about the underlying concept than 'bunker here, green here, bunker here'. Take the Leven for example - have a look at these holes and you can see the strategy, but they are far from the same copy/paste design. The Fried Egg website is great for this sort of thing: thefriedegg.com/leven-template-hole/When you're done with that website (loads there in their template series), have a zoom around Old MacDonald at Bandon: envisage.golf/oldmacdonald/?utm_source=BDGR_OMSo much to appreciate on just those courses. Then play Joe's a couple of times, and the Patriot, and Fisher's Island, and Elysian Downs, and maybe even Greenstone River. Come back and tell us they're the same I think the closest to copy/pasteable is probably the Eden due to the distinctive bunkering. Beyond that, you'll see all sorts of interpretations of the templates. Like I say, I do get where you are coming from, but it's such a wonderful rabbit hole. Take a little time to get to know them and you will be so rewarded. Pretty much all of my strategy understanding in my designs has come from these holes. I know mayday_golf83 , PithyDoctorG , joegolferg and numerous others would say similar.
|
|
|
Post by TannerBronson on Nov 13, 2019 12:10:07 GMT -5
TannerBronson - I know where you're coming from - that was my initial feeling, which is why I decided to make a template course to understand it all better. It's far more about the underlying concept than 'bunker here, green here, bunker here'. Take the Leven for example - have a look at these holes and you can see the strategy, but they are far from the same copy/paste design. The Fried Egg website is great for this sort of thing: thefriedegg.com/leven-template-hole/When you're done with that website (loads there in their template series), have a zoom around Old MacDonald at Bandon: envisage.golf/oldmacdonald/?utm_source=BDGR_OMSo much to appreciate on just those courses. Then play Joe's a couple of times, and the Patriot, and Fisher's Island, and Elysian Downs, and maybe even Greenstone River. Come back and tell us they're the same I think the closest to copy/pasteable is probably the Eden due to the distinctive bunkering. Beyond that, you'll see all sorts of interpretations of the templates. Like I say, I do get where you are coming from, but it's such a wonderful rabbit hole. Take a little time to get to know them and you will be so rewarded. Pretty much all of my strategy understanding in my designs has come from these holes. I know mayday_golf83 , PithyDoctorG , joegolferg and numerous others would say similar. Thanks for the response! I’ll dive into this!
|
|
|
Post by gamesdecent on Nov 13, 2019 12:21:00 GMT -5
Yep, Old MacDonald is the one that changed my mind. Template =/= Geometric style.
|
|
|
Post by PithyDoctorG on Nov 13, 2019 13:48:23 GMT -5
Remember that templates are simply MacDonald's spin on holes he studied when he toured the British Isles. In my opinion, every architect borrows ideas from those courses to one degree or another. MacDonald was just very forthright. Raynor was a great engineer and made his holes fit the site very well--whether it was a flatter site (Chicago GC) or more challenging (Yale). I haven't played either of those courses, but I imagine if I played them back to back I wouldn't come away feeling like they were the same. I would suggest playing a MacDonald/Raynor/Banks course in real life before dismissing the style out of hand. I had the chance to play a Banks course this past summer (along with CiB0RG) and thought it was a lot of fun.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 13, 2019 14:58:46 GMT -5
Seriously I love joegolferg’s work and I don’t mean to offend anyone especially him. But I don’t get Seth Raynor designs due to the fact I “believe” a lot of the holes are copy and pasted around the country. Change my mind? Ben has already said most what I would have said but I would like to chip in with something that Macdonald believed, and it is something you don't hear talked about too much. CBM pioneered the philosophy that only around 24 truly original golf holes exist in the world of golf architecture, all others considered non templates are just variations of templates. Pretty deep stuff when you actually think about and go through the list of templates holes and compare them to other golf holes all around the world. The whole idea of his template concept was to ensure that courses, by way of using templates, would be the most varied and original designs that they can be. Using templates litteraly stops you from repeating the same hole concept over and over again on the same course. For example, I could probably pick out a certain hole on one of your courses that shares the same characteristics as a certain template, and also find this same concept copy and pasted several time throughout the same course but maybe with different lengths or elevations. I've noticed this trend with many community created courses yet I doubt the designer actually realized they were just repeating the same hole over and over. Seth Raynor may have copied the same templates over and over, but they were always different in some way or another whether it be to topography or distances and width, they were never truly the same. This is exactly what I've tried to do with my designed courses, too. The templates I've built have almost always had different characteristics than the others, although I'm not afraid to admit that I also like the idea of going as far as replicating a hole I've already built if it fits the routing, flow or land of another course I might be building.
|
|
|
Post by TannerBronson on Nov 13, 2019 15:03:56 GMT -5
Seriously I love joegolferg’s work and I don’t mean to offend anyone especially him. But I don’t get Seth Raynor designs due to the fact I “believe” a lot of the holes are copy and pasted around the country. Change my mind? Ben has already said most what I would have said but I would like to chip in with something that Macdonald believed, and it is something you don't hear talked about too much. CBM pioneered the philosophy that only around 24 truly original golf holes exist in the world of golf architecture, all others considered non templates are just variations of templates. Pretty deep stuff when you actually think about and go through the list of templates holes and compare them to other golf holes all around the world. The whole idea of his template concept was to ensure that courses, by way of using templates, would be the most varied and original designs that they can be. Using templates litteraly stops you from repeating the same hole concept over and over again on the same course. For example, I could probably pick out a certain hole on one of your courses that shares the same characteristics as a certain template, and also find this same concept copy and pasted several time throughout the same course but maybe with different lengths or elevations. I've noticed this trend with many community created courses yet I doubt the designer actually realized they were just repeating the same hole over and over. Seth Raynor may have copied the same templates over and over, but they were always different in some way or another whether it be to topography or distances and width, they were never truly the same. This is exactly what I've tried to do with my designed courses, too. The templates I've built have almost always had different characteristics than the others, although I'm not afraid to admit that I also like the idea of going as far as replicating a hole I've already built if it fits the routing, flow or land of another course I might be building. That’s actually pretty cool. Again I love your work and you nail the raynor style. I’ve read up on some of it today and I’m starting to understand. Thanks for your awesome insight!
|
|
|
Post by gamesdecent on Nov 13, 2019 15:05:35 GMT -5
Pete Dye was asked what he enjoyed most about Raynor courses and he said "variety", people forget that. Or assume he was being facetious.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 13, 2019 15:10:52 GMT -5
Pete Dye was asked what he enjoyed most about Raynor courses and he said "variety", people forget that. Or assume he was being facetious. According to Brian Silva, Dye WAS actually a fan of Raynor and that comment wasn't a tongue in cheek pop at Raynor. Also worth noting that Pete built so many courses with flat bottom, grass face bunkers and even went as far as cutting geometric shapes. I think Dye was a fan of Raynor's in more ways than one.
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on Nov 13, 2019 19:10:37 GMT -5
The fried egg is a great site, is one of the places in which i spent hours, in the few days of study before to be forced to leave my home. I can't wait to be at home again to continue to learn. About Raynor, I can't find in any way lack of variety on his work. To use a template implicates anyway that the result is a bit different everytime. Right now, for example, I'm deeply in love with the Biarritz. I love it cause I see is an incredibly smart way to guarantee a different challenge with different clubs on every pin. Every single time. And, even assuming we would place the same 4 pins on two Biarritz greens, is enough to change slightly the sloping of these greens, to have in any case 8 seriously different challenges. On Fried eggs there are a lot of samples of various Biarritz holes. All of them are easy to recognize, cause they offers very peculiar differences. I suppose the variety in this kind of holes is not about visual impact, is just about the shot and the strategy required everytime. Is a work of nuances. It shows there is no need of revolutions, to offer variety. This is probably the lesson I'm learning from Raynor. And I'm just at the Biarritz (in terms of deep study, I mean). I miss all the others
|
|
|
Post by gamesdecent on Nov 18, 2019 12:44:21 GMT -5
joegolfergAny familiarity with Gibson Island Club? Was originally supposed to be two Raynor 18s, only one got made, and it’s down to 9 in current times. Land reminds me a lot of Fishers, and this routing has topographic lines on it, I wonder if there’s any LIDAR data. Wouldn’t help much for the golf features, but at least you could nail the routing and general elevation.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 18, 2019 13:25:02 GMT -5
joegolfergAny familiarity with Gibson Island Club? Was originally supposed to be two Raynor 18s, only one got made, and it’s down to 9 in current times. Land reminds me a lot of Fishers, and this routing has topographic lines on it, I wonder if there’s any LIDAR data. Wouldn’t help much for the golf features, but at least you could nail the routing and general elevation. Yes! I've read about Gibson. I think it was an earlier project of Raynor and Macdonald and it's Knoll hole is still very much intact and is quite the beauty. This is a perfect fit for a 9 hole project, lidar or fictional.
|
|
|
Post by PithyDoctorG on Nov 18, 2019 14:57:54 GMT -5
joegolferg Any familiarity with Gibson Island Club? Was originally supposed to be two Raynor 18s, only one got made, and it’s down to 9 in current times. Land reminds me a lot of Fishers, and this routing has topographic lines on it, I wonder if there’s any LIDAR data. Wouldn’t help much for the golf features, but at least you could nail the routing and general elevation. From what I've heard the 18 that got built was a far cry from what it could have been. This map would be really neat to work off of for an "inspired by" project (sort of like what I did with Sharp Park and Mori Point GC).
|
|