New "linksy" designs vs old school parkland style.

[deadsolid...shank]

Just wondering others opinions.

 

The hot commodities course wise now all seem to be the big, open, wind-swept, linksy variety. Bandon, Streamsong, Ballyneal, Prairie Club, etc.

 

Personally I'm partial to the tree lined parkland style layout. I have trouble picking targets and lines on the open courses.

 

Anyone else out share that feeling or does most everyone prefer the other type course.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

If they can provide firm, fast, well-drained, cool climate turf on those open wind-swept playing corridors I'm all for it. Cutting down every tree on the property but then having the same overwatered, overgreen turf I can play at thousands of parkland courses is purely window dressing. And not very attractive window dressing IMO.

[italianstallion]

[quote name='Fourmyle of Ceres' timestamp='1387639313' post='8331681']
If they can provide firm, fast, well-drained, cool climate turf on those open wind-swept playing corridors I'm all for it. Cutting down every tree on the property but then having the same overwatered, overgreen turf I can play at thousands of parkland courses is purely window dressing. And not very attractive window dressing IMO.
[/quote]

Agree with this. If the course plays like a links course as opposed to a parkland course, then I prefer the links style layout. These layouts typically provide a variety of options off the tee and into the greens, which makes them fun. If the superintendent can get the ball bouncing with firm turf, then that just increases the fun.

Parkland courses will have their place, but I'm not too partial to overwatered swamps.

[deadsolid...shank]

Makes sense. It was kind of fun hitting a putt from 50 yards. I guess I grew up on parkland style and I just that "framing" on a hole. I think any type of course plays much better if it's firm and not soggy.

[mr_divots]

The more I play old courses, the more I enjoy them. The brand of architecture was much more extreme and interesting when length of the course was not the sole defense. I can't help but think of some old school courses around here that have developed very good players. Part of that I believe is missing the smaller greens and having to develop more of a short game. Too often, modern greens are very easy to hit due to their size, and it then becomes a lag-putting contest the rest of the time. But, they'd never build greens with the slope of yore. If they speed up old greens too much, they get almost unputtable.

But I've noticed a lack of some old-school features that could be designed into modern courses more. Like upslopes in the fairway at strategic spots. Even when the ball didn't go as far, they made these features so you really had to hit it a long ways to gain an advantage moreso than now. If you didn't clear the fairway upslope, you may only be 10-20 yards in front of your playing competitor. Things like that are often lacking in modern design from what I've seen.

[farmer]

Is it really possible to have a true links course in the middle of the US? Bandon has the ocean with a cold current, so it can get hard and fast. Colorado (Ballyneal) and the Nebraska courses do not have native grass that lends itself well to golf turf. So they have to plant turf grass, but it has to be kept damp or it will die. I live in the high plains of Texas, and if a course was burned down like Muirfield, you would have to start over. I've played Prairie Dunes, and it has cool season fairways that require water. Away from coastal areas, it gets too hot to maintain a true links course. I live in wide open, treeless, windy country, so I prefer a nice parkland course, if for no other reason than the novelty.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

There's a course I've played a couple time in Ohio that bills itself as sort of "linksy" or whatever. Built on heavy clay soil so the "well drained" part isn't gonna happen there. But as long as the weather is fairly dry, they do a good job of having really firm and fast conditions with what I vaguely remember as being bent grass fairways. Get a bit of a breeze going on the wide-open holes and catch it when it hasn't rained for a few days and it's a fun course.

[mr_divots]

The closest thing we usually have to links golf is very late in the season when the ground is frozen and fairly dry.
We have a few courses billed as "links" style, which they are, but the overly wet turf keeps them from playing as such as you're forced to play it in the air.

[gunmetal]

I'm definitely a fan of Doak and the minimalist approach. There's something about playing something that looks like it actually belongs there.

That said, I play mostly parkland because 2 of our 3 city courses are that way. Both aren't terrible because they didn't remove trees, but rather added trees.

While I understand they have their place, I really don't dig the real estate courses that have homes littered on all sides of the fairways or courses that have a football field (sometimes more) between green and next tee making it seemingly impossible to walk.

Would love to see a comeback of sub 7,000 yard courses, too. Speeding up the game starts at design.

[ryu123]

COASTAL LINKS vs INLAND FIRM & FAST


I haven't played there, but Sand Hills near Mullen NE apparently plays like a links course.

Wine Valley in Walla Walla WA does play firm and fast, and there is often wind in the afternoons. Even in the summer when the temperature gets in the 90s, the course has links-like playing conditions.

And speaking to mr_divots' excellent points about modern courses' large greens and length, Pacific Dunes (Bandon OR) is not an overly long course, but with its small - medium sized greens and movement in its fairways, it is a stern test. If you don't have an optimal angle into those greens, your short game better be precise.

But Old Macdonald (Bandon OR) has some of the largest and most undulating greens on the West Coast, and placement of the approach shots is crucial, to avoid 3 putts.

[mr_divots]

[quote name='gunmetal' timestamp='1387664023' post='8332829']
I'm definitely a fan of Doak and the minimalist approach. There's something about playing something that looks like it actually belongs there.

That said, I play mostly parkland because 2 of our 3 city courses are that way. [b]Both aren't terrible because they didn't remove trees, but rather added trees.[/b]

While I understand they have their place, I really don't dig the real estate courses that have homes littered on all sides of the fairways or courses that have a football field (sometimes more) between green and next tee making it seemingly impossible to walk.

Would love to see a comeback of sub 7,000 yard courses, too. Speeding up the game starts at design.
[/quote]
I hate to say it, but tree additions, year after year, seem to be about the worst thing most courses routinely do. And I see it all the time.
We have a course that was recently renovated and they had to take out over 500 trees planted by over-zealous greens committees for many years just to be able to play the course as it was originally laid out. The designer studied with Donald Ross and all of the Ross-like features, namely the great sloping parcel of land, the playing lines were all cut off by too many trees. Not to mention the damage the root structures and all that shade do to turf quaility. Seeing pics of the course in its infancy in the 20's and 30's when my grandfather caddied there, it looked nothing like it did in my playing years.
The site was former farmland and chosen specifically because it did NOT have trees on it, and they "fixed" it year after year until it was no longer the same course due to too many trees.

Sorry. Too many trees elicits rants from me in course discussions. ha!

[mringwelski]

[quote name='farmer' timestamp='1387661767' post='8332709']
Is it really possible to have a true links course in the middle of the US? Bandon has the ocean with a cold current, so it can get hard and fast. Colorado (Ballyneal) and the Nebraska courses do not have native grass that lends itself well to golf turf. So they have to plant turf grass, but it has to be kept damp or it will die. I live in the high plains of Texas, and if a course was burned down like Muirfield, you would have to start over. I've played Prairie Dunes, and it has cool season fairways that require water. Away from coastal areas, it gets too hot to maintain a true links course. I live in wide open, treeless, windy country, so I prefer a nice parkland course, if for no other reason than the novelty.
[/quote]
[size="2"][color="#000000"]Just because a golf course is seaside doesn't automatically make it links. "Hlinc" is the old Scottish term referring to links land and it refers to the land between the fertile farming land and the sea, usually sand dunes. Links golf in terms of the style of play in a nutshell is to get the ball "running" meaning fast fairways and firm greens. I don't really want to say the greens aren't receptive because its all relative, but to the average American golfer they wouldn't be. [/color][/size]

[size="2"][color="#000000"]True links golf courses are pretty rare. However, I think modern golf architecture has been "re-vamped" on getting back to its roots and making courses with lots of undulating fairways and preserving the natural lay of the land. Majority of American golfers have no idea what true links is nor played a links golf course. The style of golf is considerably different as approaches and around the green are on complete opposite sides of the spectrum. [/color][/size][color=#000000][size=1]I find it profoundly annoying how widely the term "Links Style" is used which is why most have no idea what it means in the first place. America's missing out on a very fun style of golf and I hope more links tracks and less of "links style".[/size][/color]

[bk52]

I enjoy both parkland and links courses. The problem I have with many of the links-style courses built in my neighborhood (Midwest USA) is that the long "heather"/grassland that borders our faux links is unplayable. In my trips to Scotland and Ireland, often a poor offline shot could be located and at the very least gouged back into play. Here in America's heartland, the "heather" grows into a lush, dense, unplayable jungle. Even if one could find the ball, it is rarely playable. As a result, the courses tend to further widen the mown areas until it becomes almost impossible to hit a ball into the "heather". Or, worse, some courses resort to posting the "heather" as a lateral hazard.

[mringwelski]

[quote name='ryu123' timestamp='1387664256' post='8332843']
And speaking to mr_divots' excellent points about modern courses' large greens and length, Pacific Dunes (Bandon OR) is not an overly long course, but with its small - medium sized greens and movement in its fairways, it is a stern test. If you don't have an optimal angle into those greens, your short game better be precise.

But Old Macdonald (Bandon OR) has some of the largest and most undulating greens on the West Coast, and placement of the approach shots is crucial, to avoid 3 putts.
[/quote]

Pacific is a perfect example because it really shows off short par 4's. #16 and #16 are short holes where you have a one specific target in the fairway to give you the best chance at getting GIR.

How about that punch bowl green on #18 at Old Mac? Front right/center pin approach shot is played with a knockdown 50 yards left of the flag. Try to find that shot anywhere else in America...

[gunmetal]

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1387664895' post='8332899']
[quote name='gunmetal' timestamp='1387664023' post='8332829']
I'm definitely a fan of Doak and the minimalist approach. There's something about playing something that looks like it actually belongs there.

That said, I play mostly parkland because 2 of our 3 city courses are that way. [b]Both aren't terrible because they didn't remove trees, but rather added trees.[/b]

While I understand they have their place, I really don't dig the real estate courses that have homes littered on all sides of the fairways or courses that have a football field (sometimes more) between green and next tee making it seemingly impossible to walk.

Would love to see a comeback of sub 7,000 yard courses, too. Speeding up the game starts at design.
[/quote]
I hate to say it, but tree additions, year after year, seem to be about the worst thing most courses routinely do. And I see it all the time.
We have a course that was recently renovated and they had to take out over 500 trees planted by over-zealous greens committees for many years just to be able to play the course as it was originally laid out. The designer studied with Donald Ross and all of the Ross-like features, namely the great sloping parcel of land, the playing lines were all cut off by too many trees. Not to mention the damage the root structures and all that shade do to turf quaility. Seeing pics of the course in its infancy in the 20's and 30's when my grandfather caddied there, it looked nothing like it did in my playing years.
The site was former farmland and chosen specifically because it did NOT have trees on it, and they "fixed" it year after year until it was no longer the same course due to too many trees.

Sorry. Too many trees elicits rants from me in course discussions. ha!
[/quote]

All great points. One of our courses, Pinecrest, has so many tree problems it's a joke. Every year they keep having to remove them because of what you stated. Our other parkland course, Sandcreek, is much younger but the root issue is becoming serious. Sadly, this course could have been a real gem as its built around a bunch of natural sand dunes.

I hadn't really thought of it the way you put it as I was choosing between the lesser of two evil parkland styles (removal vs addition), but in the end they're probably both just as annoying.

[dlygrisse]

Firm golf is so much more fun than playing in mud. I really agree with most of the points made in this thread. I just like courses to look natural, forced tree placements etc. don't appeal to me, but a links that plays like a bowl of pudding really isn't a links. That being said I like all styles of golf courses, a pretty parkland style course in a wooded area is great, so is a links by the sea.

[Mitchell]

Always have been a fan of any course that utilizes the natural terrain and does not fight against the topography of surrounding area.

[Sean2]

Also, a lot of new course designs require forced carries, which can wreak havoc on the play of the average golfer. A good architect will work with the land as it is and build a course around it, and not bulldoze his way through it putting in fake ponds and the like.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

Well, at least if the good architect isn't working with land having unfillable wetlands and environmentally sensitive areas covering 60% of the property!

[teejaywhy]

Interesting that "tree-lined parkland" is considered old school, but history shows that open layouts are the more traditional style, and most tree-lined courses are the result of years of ill-advised tree planting.

Agree that open and windswept is but one of the elements that makes links style golf.

And while true links land is not common in North America, the trend toward more links "inspired" designs that embrace all the qualities of links golf is a welcome change along with the move away from the verdant green maintenance model focused on the visual aesthetic and more toward the objective of providing good golf playing conditions.

For me, one great feature of links golf is the inclusion of the ground game. Being able to work the ball toward the hole by using the features and contours of the ground adds a whole different dimension to the game. So much of modern golf forces a point-to-point aerial attack, by design and by maintenance presentation, which in my mind takes away a dimension of the game.

[bandonman91]

Working at an inland Tom doak golf course is great. It never gets boring. Wide fairways make it more of a challenge in many ways because you need to find the correct portion of the fairway. Being able to play all kind of shots is key not only to the development of a good golfer it also is a lot more fun. I was also at Bandon for a couple years. That place is just special. Its so different and that adds to the mystique. Saying that I still do enjoy a classic parkland country club but the neo classic designs of soak and coore Crenshaw have my heart because it takes true creativity and imagination to be successful.

[QMany]

[quote name='farmer' timestamp='1387661767' post='8332709']
Is it really possible to have a true links course in the middle of the US? Bandon has the ocean with a cold current, so it can get hard and fast. Colorado (Ballyneal) and the Nebraska courses do not have native grass that lends itself well to golf turf. So they have to plant turf grass, but it has to be kept damp or it will die. I live in the high plains of Texas, and if a course was burned down like Muirfield, you would have to start over. I've played Prairie Dunes, and it has cool season fairways that require water. Away from coastal areas, it gets too hot to maintain a true links course. I live in wide open, treeless, windy country, so I prefer a nice parkland course, if for no other reason than the novelty.
[/quote]
Have you played Sand Hills or Wildhorse in Central Nebraska? They are not kept damp, actually quite the opposite.

[mr_divots]

I think the land available NOW to build courses on compared to what they had to work with in the "golden era" of design is so different, it's almost like trying to compare the great players of yore to the recent ones. So often, it seems to be land reclamation on old garbage dumps, quarries, etc.
Compare to some of the parcels used to build the "great" courses, and its almost not even fair. I'm always astounded by what they were able to do back in the day with the earth moving equipment they had compared to now. Makes it all the more impressive. People were smarter then I think. LOL!

[deadsolid...shank]

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1387754714' post='8336649']
I think the land available NOW to build courses on compared to what they had to work with in the "golden era" of design is so different, it's almost like trying to compare the great players of yore to the recent ones. So often, it seems to be land reclamation on old garbage dumps, quarries, etc.
Compare to some of the parcels used to build the "great" courses, and its almost not even fair. I'm always astounded by what they were able to do back in the day with the earth moving equipment they had compared to now. Makes it all the more impressive. People were smarter then I think. LOL!
[/quote]

I think that's why you're seeing more of the open, links style designes built on the plains. You have ample amounts of open rolling terrain. They don't have to build on old dumps. Plenty of room to build the type of course that is the current rage.

[Marrrk]

[quote name='bandonman91' timestamp='1387745321' post='8336147']
Working at an inland Tom doak golf course is great. It never gets boring. Wide fairways make it more of a challenge in many ways because you need to find the correct portion of the fairway. Being able to play all kind of shots is key not only to the development of a good golfer it also is a lot more fun. I was also at Bandon for a couple years. That place is just special. Its so different and that adds to the mystique. Saying that I still do enjoy a classic parkland country club but the neo classic designs of soak and coore Crenshaw have my heart because it takes true creativity and imagination to be successful.
[/quote]

great points. the wide fairways at an Old Mac/Ballyneal make it so even poor drives are findable/playable. however, if you're out of position, a superb or extremely creative next shot will be required. the typical punishment for a bad shot is the increased difficulty of the next shot, rather than provisionals or penalty drops.

like the saying goes, "if the man lived in the woods, he never would have invented golf."

[Sean2]

To piggy back on what I said before, earlier course designers allowed golfers to play the course on the ground, which was great for the vast majority of amateur golfers. Modern course design requires a lot of forced carries, which many amateurs struggle with (but is a joy to the golf ball industry).

[Marrrk]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1387758966' post='8336875']
To piggy back on what I said before, earlier course designers allowed golfers to play the course on the ground, which was great for the vast majority of amateur golfers. Modern course design requires a lot of forced carries, which many amateurs struggle with (but is a joy to the golf ball industry).
[/quote]

yup. it makes the game less dynamic. instead of being able to play a hole correctly 4-5 different ways, a player is essentially limited to target golf.

and great point about the equipment industry. they've thrived like never before because golfers now need more height, more distance, more spin, more [i]perfection[/i].

[Sean2]

[quote name='Marrrk' timestamp='1387760401' post='8336973']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1387758966' post='8336875']
To piggy back on what I said before, earlier course designers allowed golfers to play the course on the ground, which was great for the vast majority of amateur golfers. Modern course design requires a lot of forced carries, which many amateurs struggle with (but is a joy to the golf ball industry).
[/quote]

yup. it makes the game less dynamic. instead of being able to play a hole correctly 4-5 different ways, a player is essentially limited to target golf.

and great point about the equipment industry. they've thrived like never before because golfers now need more height, more distance, more spin, more [i]perfection[/i].
[/quote]

Too bad too. Because perfection and golf do not mix. :-)

[Chief Illiniwek]

I guess I'm weird, but I like American parkland style golf.

As someone previously mentioned, much of the American climate is drastically different than Britain. I find it amusing when Brits laugh at our 4" rough and brag about their knee high gorse. With our climate and grasses any rough over 4" makes a ball almost impossible to find and pretty much unplayable.

And I guess I don't understand the reason for a point another previous poster made. They said at Old Mac there's a hole you need to aim about 50 yards away from the hole to get it close. Why is that better than just aiming for the flag, or at least the fat portion of the green? What if someone has never played the course before? They get an automatic bogey and a "now you know"?

I like the beauty of a tree lined course. That's the natural habitat of much of the Americas. To me what's cool about the links courses in Britain is they are built on the already existing habitat and terrain. But for the same reason I like American parkland style courses.

[deadsolid...shank]

[quote name='Chief Illiniwek' timestamp='1387772676' post='8337865']
I guess I'm weird, but I like American parkland style golf.

As someone previously mentioned, much of the American climate is drastically different than Britain. I find it amusing when Brits laugh at our 4" rough and brag about their knee high gorse. With our climate and grasses any rough over 4" makes a ball almost impossible to find and pretty much unplayable.

And I guess I don't understand the reason for a point another previous poster made. They said at Old Mac there's a hole you need to aim about 50 yards away from the hole to get it close. Why is that better than just aiming for the flag, or at least the fat portion of the green? What if someone has never played the course before? They get an automatic bogey and a "now you know"?

I like the beauty of a tree lined course. That's the natural habitat of much of the Americas. To me what's cool about the links courses in Britain is they are built on the already existing habitat and terrain. But for the same reason I like American parkland style courses.
[/quote]

To that's a really good point chief, on on parkland style course you can go by yourself for the first time and usually have an idea where to hit the ball.

Our first time at Wildhorse, in Gothenburg, NE(mentioned earlier by (QMany), we couldn't find the first tee box!, let alone knowing where to hit it. It sounds like on a lot of these new courses if you go alone the first time you're basically hosed.