What Makes a Golf Course Great (or good)?

[oldpalchamp]

While reading through the thread on underwhelming Tour courses, I thought it was interesting to read that so many people were underwhelmed by so many courses. I have been fortunate enough to play a few of the courses mentioned and agreed with some of the opinions, and disagreed with some. So my question is what defines to you a great course?

 

Is it location/scenery? Strategy? Conditioning? Routing? Green surrounds? Shot values?

 

What are some of your favorite courses, and why? One of my favorites is the Country Club of York, in York, PA. It's a wonderful old Donald Ross design on a very interesting piece of land. You have to think your way around it, and it has terrific green complexes.

 

Of the famous courses I have played, I really liked Erin Hills. I love the "scale" of the course. And, while it may seem open, there are definitely very clear "lines of play."

 

Again, this is just my opinion, and I was wondering what you thought.

[GWD]

Personally, I like a course where nearly every club in your bag is used.

Different challenging situations on most holes such as hazards, trap locations, elevation changes, and green characteristics keep the day interesting.

Three courses I've played meet the criteria well IMO: The [b]Olympic Club[/b] in San Francisco, [b]Yocha DeHe[/b] casino/resort course in the Sacramento Valley, and [b]Banff Springs[/b] in Banff, Canada.

There are a couple of less elite city-owned courses in Fairfield, CA that are close, [b]Paradise Valley[/b] and [b]Rancho Solano[/b]. But it boils down to the fact that I enjoy golf wherever it is.

[floycota]

I love golf course architure that allows the course to play different depending on conditions. My favorite course is the Course at Yale. The 9th hole for instance is Biarritz par-3 over water. Depending on the flag placement, tee placement, and weather it can play from an 8-iron up to a 3-wood. It's the same course but can play completely differently day to day.

I also like risk-reward holes also. A driveable par-4 like the 15th at TPC River Highlands is pretty fun. You can make birdie or eagle but also double-bogey.

[slocagolfer]

Great course - history, scenery, conditioning, cool factor (whatever you decide that is), variety, a course where strategy is important

Good course - fun, scenery, decent conditioning, variety, strategy comes into play
For example, at a local course I play there's a long par 4, downhill, about 440. A good drive (for me) leaves me around the 200 yard mark, closer with a really good drive. The second shot is a slinging five iron that has to draw a bit (fairway is sloped higher on the right), land short, and roll onto the green which slopes away from the tee. There's OB right (driving range) and behind the hole. It's a fun shot.

[mark m]

This info about 100 years old - From [b]Alister MacKenzie, [i]The Spirit of St. Andrews[/i][/b]

("the essence of golf is variety")

1. The course, whenever possible, should be arranged in two loops of nine holes.
2. The should be a good portion of good two-shot holes, and at least four one-shot holes.
3. There should be little walking between the greens and tees, and that in the first instance there is always a slight walk forwards from the green to the next tee; then the holes are sufficiently elastic to be lengthen in the future.
4. The greens and the fairways should be sufficiently undulating, but there should be no hill climbing.
5. Every hole should be different in character.
6. Their should be a minimum of blindness in the approach shots.
7. The course should have beautiful surroundings, and all artifical features should have so natural an appearance that a stranger is unable to distinguish them from nature itself.
8. There should be a sufficient number of heroic carries from the tee, but the course should be arranged so that the weaker player with the loss of a stroke, or a portion of a stroke, shall always have an alternate route open to him.
9. There should be an infinite variety in the strokes required to play the various holes -- that is, interesting wood shots, iron shots, pitch and run up shots.
10. There should be a complete absence of the annoyance and irritation caused by the necessity of searching for lost balls. (He was not a fan of long rough.)
11. The course should be so interesting that even the scratch man is constantly stimulated to improve his game in attempting shots he has hitherto been unable to play.
12. The course should be so arranged that the long handicap player or even the absolute beginner should be able to enjoy his round in spite of the fact that he is piling up a big score. In other words the beginner should not be continually harassed by losing strokes from playing out of sand bunkers. The layout should be so arranged that he loses strokes because he is making wide detours to avoid hazards.
13. The course should be equally good during winter and summer, the texture of the greens and fairways should be perfect and the approaches should have the same consistency as the greens.

In the book, he goes on to explain further, and he would break from some of his own above principles depending on the piece of land he had to work with. But it is a good list and I thought some of you might find it interesting. He clearly is one of the best designers of all time. I would recommend the book as it has a lot of good info and funny anecdotes. I think it is still available at amazon.

[backtees]

For me a great course is a course where I feel that I am welcome at the counter when I pay the greenfee. A course that allows different strategies to play it. A course with a wide variety of different holes and not more of the same. A course that is well maintained.

Last year two buddies and me, we intended to play a very exclusive and very very nice course that is open for non-members only on Mondays. I called them in advance to find out that booking a tee-time in advance was not possible. So we went there on the off chance without knowing if we would have the chance to play it.

Once we were there they told us: 1. We offer you a reduced green-fee 2. You can play whenever you are ready 3. Here are some free coins for range balls.

And after the round when we were sitting on the porch and had a drink the president of the club plus the head greenkeeper asked us to join them for a cold cut platter because we let them pass during the round without knowing who they were. And all drinks and the snacks were for free.

On top of that: The course was really great and did exceed our expectations.

[oldpalchamp]

[quote name='mark m' timestamp='1391458908' post='8591672']
This info about 100 years old - From [b]Alister MacKenzie, [i]The Spirit of St. Andrews[/i][/b]

("the essence of golf is variety")

1. The course, whenever possible, should be arranged in two loops of nine holes.
2. The should be a good portion of good two-shot holes, and at least four one-shot holes.
3. There should be little walking between the greens and tees, and that in the first instance there is always a slight walk forwards from the green to the next tee; then the holes are sufficiently elastic to be lengthen in the future.
4. The greens and the fairways should be sufficiently undulating, but there should be no hill climbing.
5. Every hole should be different in character.
6. Their should be a minimum of blindness in the approach shots.
7. The course should have beautiful surroundings, and all artifical features should have so natural an appearance that a stranger is unable to distinguish them from nature itself.
8. There should be a sufficient number of heroic carries from the tee, but the course should be arranged so that the weaker player with the loss of a stroke, or a portion of a stroke, shall always have an alternate route open to him.
9. There should be an infinite variety in the strokes required to play the various holes -- that is, interesting wood shots, iron shots, pitch and run up shots.
10. There should be a complete absence of the annoyance and irritation caused by the necessity of searching for lost balls. (He was not a fan of long rough.)
11. The course should be so interesting that even the scratch man is constantly stimulated to improve his game in attempting shots he has hitherto been unable to play.
12. The course should be so arranged that the long handicap player or even the absolute beginner should be able to enjoy his round in spite of the fact that he is piling up a big score. In other words the beginner should not be continually harassed by losing strokes from playing out of sand bunkers. The layout should be so arranged that he loses strokes because he is making wide detours to avoid hazards.
13. The course should be equally good during winter and summer, the texture of the greens and fairways should be perfect and the approaches should have the same consistency as the greens.

In the book, he goes on to explain further, and he would break from some of his own above principles depending on the piece of land he had to work with. But it is a good list and I thought some of you might find it interesting. He clearly is one of the best designers of all time. I would recommend the book as it has a lot of good info and funny anecdotes. I think it is still available at amazon.
[/quote]

Great post! Thanks for sharing. Did this MacKenzie guy ever design any courses?

[teejaywhy]

Mark M - Thanks for sharing the wisdom of the good Doctor.

As one experiences more and different golf courses, one naturally begins to discriminate. At first, the most obvious characteristic is conditioning. For myself, I gradually realized there was something more, and I began to think about what I found interesting and what common factors influenced my like or dislike for particular courses.

MacKenzie's list of quality traits closely resembles my own thoughts that have evolved over the years. In particular, variety, strategy and the natural setting. Walkability is another. But something I've noticed in playing a lot of the modern designs of the recent boom years (80's - 00's), a big part that seems to be missing from the modern game are [b]options[/b].

[quote name='mark m' timestamp='1391458908' post='8591672']

8. There should be a sufficient number of heroic carries from the tee, but the course should be arranged so that the weaker player with the loss of a stroke, or a portion of a stroke, shall always have an alternate route open to him.

12. The course should be so arranged that the long handicap player or even the absolute beginner should be able to enjoy his round in spite of the fact that he is piling up a big score. In other words the beginner should not be continually harassed by losing strokes from playing out of sand bunkers. The layout should be so arranged that he loses strokes because he is making wide detours to avoid hazards.

[/quote]

These two I highlight as characteristics that seem to have been bred out of many of the modern designs which favor a singular, point-to-point style of play without option. With many designs, the shot or play is dictated by the design and there is no strategy other than executing the shot presented. In many cases, the hazards are arranged not for strategy, but to present a "do-or-die" challenge that must be negotiated.

These types of courses remove the cerebral element (which IMO is a big part of the attraction of the game) and favor a purely athletic exercise of ball striking. For me, repetitive and uninteresting. For the golfer of more modest skills, an exercise in self flagellation.

[rrkman]

For me, it is the whole package.

Course location. Ko'olau is a better location than Streamsong.
Condition. I'd rather play a decent course in great condition vs. great course in bad condition.
Layout. Don't force holes into a space. I don't want a par 5 with a 3 iron layup off the tee because they wanted it to be a par 5 and put a marsh 230-350 off the tee.
Service. To me, golf is a service industry. If I don't feel welcome and don't get the service I think is appropriate, I don't enjoy my round as much....which reflects on my overall feelings of the course. This also included the other golfers....a clubhouse full of attention whores can ruin a place for me.
Caddie. I couldn't care less if I have a caddie or not....but there's been instances where a mandatory caddie (not the mandatory part but the actual caddie) ruined a course for me.
Facilities. Played Turtle Bay. Practice area / range might be the worst I've ever seen. Certainly reflected on overall experience.
Ranger / course control. Longaberger near Columbus is a nice course...but dreadful to me because we're always behind the slowest golfers in the world and the ranger does nothing but joke and make excuses about it.

So it really is the whole package for me. I enjoy the disney courses because I've always had pleasant experiences there. The location of Ko'olau makes it one of my favorites...and I played it alone with nobody on the course...talk about relaxing and enjoyable.

[cdnrockies]

I also agree with what many have said already. It is the complete package of layout, course conditions, service, location/scenery, variety, etc. The great courses will get high marks in all categories, where merely good courses are significantly lacking in one or more. The truly great tracks you could play all day, every day and find something new to love each time.

For me, so far, Pacific Dunes, Whistling Straits-Straits, Chambers Bay, Blackwolf Run-River and the Banff Springs (slightly biased...lol) are my favorites. That may change after my trip to Bandon next week.

My list of really good courses that border on great is long and includes Broadmoor East, Torrey Pines, Troon North, We-Ko-Pa, Circling Raven, the Legend at Giant's Ridge, Stewart Creek, Predator Ridge, etc.

[cardoustie]

GREAT THREAD:

Here is what gets my motor running ..,

Surrounded my nature (not an excess of houses and roads)
Four different yardages for par 3's. I love a really hard short hole as well .. ie 140 yards max
Water, but not on every hole .. Say on 1/3 of the holes max
Minimal forced carries off the tee and into greens. Let's remember the ladies, juniors and seniors please
You can always hit a driver off of the par 5's
Three of the par 5's should be reachable with two great shots
A good mix of holes moving left and right
A mix of tighter and more open designs
Some holes running downhill and some running uphill
Holes that require good golf strategy. ie Taking on a bunker or hazard down one side / corner leaves a better angle to the green
At least one driveable par 4
Green surrounds that offer the ability to get near the hole with different styles .. bumps, flops, texas wedges, etc
A mix of green complexes that allow for different types of approach shots
Smooth greens
A great membership
Cold beers
Solid "golf food menu" but not over the top
Friendly pro shop and wait staff
Great TV's for the majors
A nice patio

[Gdane]

Ive always been called the "golf snob" of the group. Living in the Chicagoland area, many courses offer the same type of layout: Tree-lined fairways with holes on top of each other and a lack of elevation change.

That being said, the main thing that sets most courses apart for me is conditioning. I love a course that not only offers a noticeable distinction between the fairway and the rough, but also a first cut. IMO, there [i]should[/i] be a penalty for missing the fairway. Also, a course where the greens are "true" will always win out in my book.

Aside from that, I prefer a course that is [i]without[/i] houses lining the fairways, a mix of tee boxes so that the course doesn't always play the same, and a course that rewards you for taking risks while penalizing you for missing important shots.

A frequent beer cart is also key.

[Saluki91]

My Top Ten no particular order...
1 - A course should be laid out on enough land for a golf course.... no "18 holes in the space of 16".
2 - I prefer tracks built on the land, not land built for the track... the less dirt pushed around, the better.
3 - No railroad ties, and absolute NO 90* dog legs... please and thank you. ; o )
4 - The fewer homes, the better.
5 - Outstanding conditioning is always a plus, but as long as the greens are smooth and consistent, the rest is acceptable. I don't mind thick or gnarly rough (it is supposed to penalize you, after all), and I don't need to have fairways that you can play billiards on. As long as everything is consistent, I'm fine.
6 - For me, fast and firm trumps soft and plush. It's OK to occasionally ask the player to play the game on the ground.
7 - The course should call for a variety of shots - especially the par 3's.
8 - One of the par 4's and one of the par 5's should be risk-reward... reachable, or at least tempting. Conversely, a few holes should make you feel like par is an all-world score.
9 - I think wind is an integral part of the game, and should be considered a primary defense for a course... holes should be designed with prevailing wind in mind.
10 - Above all, difficult is fun when it is fair and honest. If a course calls for shots that I don't make, it can still be a fun course. Mickey Mouse/tricked-up difficult is no fun. Neither is stupid-easy resort golf.

[t-shot_nasty]

How do u guys feel about a course u could lose a ball on every hole(secluded holes) vs. a course where it's almost impossible to lose a ball (parkland, adjacent fairways).

For me I feel much for comfortable on the latter. Its relieving sometimes to know I can slice my ball 90 degrees and still have a chance for par. Whereas the course with secluded holes im hitting 3 off the tee.

I could also see the lower handicap player and is hitting straight drives the majority of the time prefering the course with secluded holes to gain an advantage from a higher handicap who is being given strokes.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

whatever floats your boat, let's face it, you just know when a place has the SOMETHING special. when I fire up the Cheverolet, pull out of the parking lot and stare back that once in the rear view mirror. for that brief Jack Handey moment all I think is, "can't wait till a next time I get to play that s.o.b."

[BMC]

For me, natural terrain and history. Most of the Donald Ross courses.

[WiscoGolfAddict]

A course that can stand the test of time. I don't mind a shorter course (eg 6,500 yards), but like when there are a number of options. My home course is I think a great golf course: North Hills CC. The course will never play easy and has great defenses against scoring.

I agree, I don't like difficult for the point of being difficult, even though those courses can be fun to play once in awhile as long as you can keep your score in perspective.

I love a course that works with the land. A course like Erin Hills, for example, just melts in to the countryside and the hilly terrain like it was always there. Another one like that is The Harvester in Rhodes, Iowa - it flows so well.

I love good routing, too. I played with the guy who routed Erin Hills at this year's US Open media day and he was pointing out on occasion other holes they were considering. There were hundreds of them. It all came down to the flow of the holes, keeping sunset out of the players' eyes on the way in, etc. Really interesting stuff! Another beautifully routed course is Shoreacres in Lake Bluff, Illinois - Seth Raynor's work there is genius the way he brought in the ravines and water features.

The courses at Bandon, of course, are as close to perfectly routed and designed as it gets. Maclay Kidd's work on Bandon Dunes brought some amazing course architecture from Scotland to the US. Nothing feels forced, and everything feels natural; it provides options and great variety in the holes while incorporating the most beautiful spots of the property in where their affect is maximized.

I like a course that feels BIG. The Wilderness at Fortune Bay in Tower, Minnesota, is a great example of this: The scale of the natural surroundings and of the design elements is spectacular. The River course at Blackwolf Run, Chambers Bay, the Dunes and Pines courses at The Prairie Club, Doak's new course at Dismal River, Bandon Trails, Greywalls, The Classic at Madden's Resort, Kiva Dunes, University Ridge, Pacific Dunes and Old Macdonald are also similar in that respect.

Then, of course, there is conditioning. Nothing worse than playing a great, expensive course and finding beat-up greens and completely chopped part tee boxes. You won't find better conditions than at the Witch Hollow course at Pumpkin Ridge, all of the Kohler courses, Sweetgrass, Milwaukee CC, North Hills CC, Hawk's Landing in Verona, Wisconsin, and a few others where downhill putts or being short-sided above the green complex will downright scare you.

I love the movement toward "Pure Golf" in the United States, and I think Ashworth's "Golf/Man" campaign came along at the perfect time (http://golfman.ashworthgolf.com/streamsong/approach?icid=hp-button-golfman). Those are the kinds of golf experiences that live with you and make me excited to get back to those courses!