The Responsibility of the Golf Course Architect

William Carlson

AP Seminar

March, 2024

If asked about golf course design, the average golfer likely won’t have much to say on the topic. But, the number of golfers who would have something to say is increasing today. Golf course design is currently going through a renaissance, where ideas from the past are being revived in modern design. The design philosophy of architects of the Golden Age of Golf Course Architecture, characterized by the complex strategy and aesthetic beauty of the courses, was largely forgotten over the past century. But, it is being brought to light and applied to courses today by modern architects. By reclaiming these ideas that stand the test of time, and applying them to the modern game, golf course architects are fulfilling their responsibility to create the best courses possible and undoing prior malpractice. 

Many golf architects describe golf course design as an art form, and like any other art form, it changes and evolves. From the primitive early designs of the nineteenth century, the very idea of golf course design has matured and been sophisticated by various architects over the past hundred and fifty years. At the start of the twentieth century, during a time of economic posterity many of the world’s best golf courses were built, including; Pine Valley, Cypress Point, National Golf Links, the Lido, and Augusta National. Thanks to the extreme leap in understanding and quality of design during this period from approximately 1911 to 1937, the era has been given the name; The Golden Age of Golf Course Architecture. (Richardson, 2002) The leading philosophy was that courses should be built with a focus on strategy, beauty, and overall enjoyment for the player, all relatively new ideas at the time. Golf historian Geoff Shackleford said the following referring to Golden Age architect George C. Thomas; “he genuinely believed, he wrote about it, that their group at that time in the twenties was just sort of the beginning of golf architecture, in terms of what it could be and how much more interesting it could be. (Hurdus, Morrison, Johnson, 2023: 25:10)”. Thomas and his fellow architects had this sense of responsibility to better the courses and the game. They prioritized creating the best course possible on the land, and this attitude and responsibility is what fueled the innovation at the great courses of the time. Unfortunately for golf, Thomas’ belief for the future wasn’t realized, with the Great Depression and World War II devastating the economy and putting an abrupt stop to golf course development.

Following World War II, the philosophy that was realized during the Golden Age had been effectively forgotten. Courses were no longer built with the primary focus on strategy and beauty, and in the strategic school of golf course design. The new goal for what was considered a good golf course was difficult, and fraught with danger. This new design philosophy aligned more with the penal school; where any poor shot should be penalized, and only perfect shots will offer scoring opportunities. The courses of prolific architect; Robert Trent Jones Sr. are described in an article for GOLF Magazine by Josh Sens as; “Among other hallmarks, his courses were notoriously tough. (Sens, 2023)”. These courses were also built with evolving technology and heavy machinery that gave architects the ability to bend the land to their and fit their vision for the course. As said by Jan Ballard in a study on golf courses’ relationship with the land; “For various reasons, contemporary courses were built artificially. They are usually constructed on land left over after the more interesting sites have been used for the development of homes or resorts. Heavy earth-moving equipment was introduced into the process after World War Two. (Ballard, 1994)”. 

This new ability to shape the land also eliminated much of the character that courses from the Golden Age possessed. Previously courses had to be designed to fit the natural landscape. But, now that the landscape could be modified and any landforms could be created, the courses became largely artificial and often unoriginal. Despite the lack of architectural focus, this period from the late 1940s to around the 1990s, was an era of immense growth for golf. Leading to the mass production of golf courses, with little thought being put into the design of each one. According to the National Golf Foundation, during this era over ten thousand new golf courses were built. (Bedits, 2023) This number of courses produced far outweighed the number produced in the golden age, making architectural excellence a rarity. 

Following the chaos of the Great Depression and World War II, the majority of the design principles developed in the Golden Age were abandoned. This decrease in design quality however was no longer due to a lack of resources as it had been during the Depression and the War. Rather it was merely human folly and incompetent use of new resources. Heavy machinery wasn’t used to perfect landscapes for golf, rather it was used to degrade them, decreasing the quality of the courses in the process. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1933 Inaugural Address addressed this idea of mismanaging resources at the time; “our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils that our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we still have much to be thankful for. (Roosevelt, 1933)”. Golf architects of the Golden Age were able to create some of the world’s best courses with little to no use of modern equipment. Horses tilled the land and rock had to be moved by hand. If great courses were able to be built within such limitations, the industrial power introduced to the field during the mid-twentieth century should have elevated the possibilities of the field, not diminished it as it did.

This era has been referred to by some critics as the “Dark Age” of golf course design. Like the historical Dark Ages, they did come to an end, and in much the same fashion. By the late 1980s, new architects were coming onto the world stage and starting to focus on the design principles of the Golden Age. Architects including Tom Doak, Bill Coore & Ben Crenshaw, Gil Hanse, and David McLay Kidd have grown to be recognized as staples of this movement. In the past few decades, many notable courses have been built by these architects that resemble the philosophy of the Golden Age; Bandon Dunes, Tara Iti, and Friar’s Head are among the most notable. With the Golden Age philosophy, a new school of golf course architecture has arisen: the minimalist school. Minimalist golf architecture consists of courses that are built to have the least impact on the natural environment or create the most natural-looking landscape possible. A primary example of this is Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw’s Sand Valley in Wisconsin. The course was built on land that was previously an abandoned paper mill pine tree plantation. In the construction of the course, the non-native plantation pines were removed, and the natural sand barren prairie landscape was restored. This created a stunning setting for golf and a haven for native species. Another hallmark of this Renaissance has been the desire to build courses on the best land for golf. 

While building new courses has been proficient in the modern Renaissance, another main focus has been the restoration and renovations of existing courses. Regardless of architectural preference, golf courses need to be renovated over time to keep course conditions and infrastructure up to date. But, how these renovations are done can either greatly improve the quality of a course, or be detrimental. As said by architect Geroge C. Thomas; “The rebuilding of courses is often severely criticized, and in many cases, such censure is deserved; (Thomas, 1927)”. Golfers, especially those at private clubs have a connection to the courses they play, and when they are changed they make their opinions heard. But, it is important to listen to these opinions with discretion, as it is the responsibility of the architect to engage and challenge the player not bend to their every need. (MacKenzie, 1920) Many projects being carried out during the current era of golf course design, are renovation or restoration projects. Renovations generally rebuild the existing course in an entirely new fashion, while restorations bring back characteristics of the course that have been lost over time. Some of the most notable restorations of this Renaissance are Gil Hanse’s at Los Angeles Country Club, Andrew Green’s at Oak Hill, Tom Doak’s at Bel Air, and Coore and Crenshaw at Pinehurst No. 2. But these projects haven’t been carried out without criticism. 

The history of Oakland Hills Country Club in Michigan encompasses the central themes of golf course renovation and restorations. The course was originally designed by Golden Age architect Donal Ross in 1917 and was later renovated by Robert Trent Jones Sr. in 1950 in preparation for the 1951 U.S. Open. Jones toughened the course in the penal style of design, adding bunkers to tighten landing areas, and shrinking greens and pushing them up against hazards. The course played so difficult in the tournament, that it brought the eventual champion Ben Hogan to say; “I’m glad I brought this monster to its knees,” (Sens, 2023). But, this version of the course didn’t age well and Gil Hanse was hired to restore the original Ross design in 2021. (Howting, 2023) This restoration, like others, ended up becoming the center of some controversy. People believed that removing the work that Jones had done removed the history that was made on his version of the course and diminished his legacy as an architect. Robert Trent Jones Jr.’s opinion of the changes was as follows; “it irks him to see his father’s work erased, as has happened with recent marquee restorations, including Baltusrol, Congressional, and Oakland Hills. (Sens, 2023)”. 

This response highlights the issue in the golf course architecture industry. Many architects, developers, and media focus on the reputation of the architects, rather than the quality of their courses. The architect Tom Doak, is a harsh critic of this part of the golf course architecture industry, and in his book; The Confidential Guide to Golf Courses he criticized courses regardless of their reputation. His goal for the book was to; “learn about golf architecture by studying the best courses and attempting to discriminate between the bad, the good, and the best. (Doak, 1996)”. Writing negative commentary on the work of other golf course architects was unheard of in mainstream media at the time, and Doak who was not yet a spotlight architect received heavy criticism for voicing his opinions. His reviews were often harsh, and sometimes even offensive to architects and their courses. But, this brutal honesty showed the coming change in the field where the quality of the course is placed above all. 

In general, golf courses are not built for one person, they are places enjoyed by many people. Especially when it comes to public golf courses where thousands of different people have access. Not only does the course impact the golfing community, but the entire local community. A successful course can provide jobs, healthy recreation, increased tourism, havens for nature, and even serve as the social center of a community. With those incredible opportunities, it should be the utmost focus to create a course that will make all those beneficial outcomes possible. Building courses for mere financial profit and not putting a focus on the actual design of the course or its impact on the community is neglectful. Something that is made for many people should be designed to its highest potential, for the sake of golfers having an enjoyable experience that leads to the future success of that course and the game itself. History has shown that the design philosophy of golf architecture’s Golden Age creates the most intriguing and beautiful courses, and the recent replication of such character has been shown to have the same positive effect at both private and public courses. Therefore, it should be the main goal of architects in the modern renaissance and beyond, to always develop the best course for the entire community that the course impacts.

References

Ballard. J. (1994) The Golf Course, Landscape, and Ideology: Symbols of Dominant Culture in Mid-19th and Late 20th Century America, Grand Valley Review: Vol, 11 Iss, 1, Article 16. 

Bedits, J. (2023, April 24). Golf course supple: The long view. National Golf Foundation.

https://www.ngf.org/golf-course-supply-the-long-view/

Doak, T. (1996). The Confidential Guide to Golf Courses. Sleeping Bear Press.

Forrest. R. L. (2002) Routing the Golf Course; The Art & Science the Form the Golf Journey, John Wiley & Sons.

Fried Egg Golf. (2023, June 12). George Thomas in Los Angeles | Presented by The USGA [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTDyH3NZp9E

Hosting, R. (2023). Oakland Hills Country Club. Oakland Hills Country Club. https://www.oaklandhillscc.com/History.aspx

Keiser, M. (2022). The Nature of the Game: Links Golf at Bandon Dunes and Far Beyond. Alfred A. Knopf. 

Lohmann. K. B. (1926) The Design of Golf Courses, American Society of Landscape Architects, Landscape Architecture Magazine: Vol. 17, No.1, pp. 8-26

MacKenzie, A. (1920) Golf Architecture; Economy in Course Construction and Green Keeping, Coventry House Publishing. Republished: (2019)

Roosevelt, F. D. (1933) Inaugural Address College Board: (2024)

Sens. J. (2023, Jan-Feb Edition) What About Bobby? GOLF Magazine. 74. 

Sullivan, P. (5 May, 2021) Money Game: Course restorations take time and can cost millions, but here’s why most are worth the wait GOLF Magazine. https://golf.com/lifestyle/money-game-course-restorations- cost-millions-worth-wait/.

Thomas, G. C. (1927) Golf Architecture in America; Its Strategy and Construction, The Times-Mirror Press. Republished: Sleeping Bear Press (1997)

Young, R. (2024, January 29). Winter Park’s success story. SCOREGolf. https://scoregolf.com/opinion/rick-young/winter-parks-success-story/