"Each home will be between 367 and 700 square metres, with turf and pebble roofs."

Sarah Matheson in the Epoch Times looks at this week's New Zealand Open host site and developer Michael Hill's planned underground housing, along with its almost entire underground clubhouse. Almost.

Meanwhile, Craig Better at Golf Vacation Insider questions the wisdom of the concept and says it gives new meaning to "living in a bunker."

According to GolfChannel.com, coverage begins with the first round Thursday morning at 6:30 a.m. Pacific.

One More MacKenzie Design Out There?

Granted, it needs to be built, but...

Thomas Dunne pens one of my favorite stories of the year in the November/December T&L Golf on an Alister MacKenzie design that was never built.

The course that the Good Doctor drew up for Anchorena turned out to be something special, even by MacKenzie’s standards. Though it would bear many hallmarks of other great courses he designed, it was in one way compellingly different: It features nine double greens of the sort that distinguish the Old Course at St. Andrews. The routing was an ingenious intertwining of two nine-hole loops, somewhat similar to that of Muirfield. MacKenzie apparently scouted the grounds, drew up the plans, handed them over and presumably collected a fee—but then the course was never built.

Why MacKenzie’s design for El Boquerón wasn’t executed remains a mystery. Instead, Anchorena hired Dentone to build a nine-hole course on the estancia grounds that, although situated in the location that MacKenzie had in mind, was only loosely based on his design. It too was called El Boquerón, it had a clubhouse, and golf was played on it for a generation by the Anchorena family and their friends. But after the patriarch’s death in 1951, the property was divided among his heirs, and the course gradually disappeared.

One of those heirs was Enrique Anchorena Jr., who turned the clubhouse into his permanent home and kept the original MacKenzie plans in a frame above the fireplace. There the document languished for the rest of the century, a faded star in the Englishman’s glittering career.

"I'm hoping to make it for the opening."

Thanks to reader who spotted this post on The Golf Forum. Apparently a Herald-Sun piece on golf included this list (not available online):

'In one of the centre spreads, [Robert] Allenby lists his top five favourite golf courses'

1 - Royal Melbourne (Sandringham)
2 - Augusta National (Georgia)
3 - St Andrews Links (Fife)
4- The Forest Resort (Creswick)
5 - Riviera Country Club (Pacific Palisades)

I couldn't help but notice the explanatory paragraph for number 4 on the list

"It's in this list because I've just designed it. I based it on Royal Melbourne. I can't wait to play it. I'm hoping to make it for the opening. It's about an hour's drive from Melbourne, near Ballarat, just a lovely part of the world."

I'm constantly astounded by the devotion of these players architects!

“The classic model of houses ringing a golf course is dying"

Sallie Brady of the New York Times looks at emerging trends in golf course housing development and lists some of the cutting edge communities of note.

Got to love the frank lede:

There's never been anything terribly sexy about living in a golf community. Imagine cookie-cutter spec homes dotting yet another dull par 4 in Myrtle Beach, and you get the picture. Even if you like the game and are in the market for a vacation home, you may never have considered buying in one of these old-style resorts.

Fast forward...

“The classic model of houses ringing a golf course is dying,” said John Kirk, an architect with the New York firm Cooper Robertson & Partners, who designed homes at WaterSound, a beachside golf community in the Florida panhandle. “Instead the golf course is like a big public green,” he said, adding that “people want to be able to walk to the post office or to get their morning coffee.”

Vacation home buyers continue to get younger — a median age of 47 in 2006, down from 52 in 2005, according to a survey by the National Association of Realtors — as more families move in next to the retirees at golf communities. Developers have responded by offering more design options, holiday kids’ clubs and summer camps, and myriad recreational activities beyond the driving range.

But the question is whether there are enough buyers for these new golf retreats. “The long-term demographics are favorable,” said Walter Molony, a spokesman for the National Association of Realtors. “It would not be surprising if we saw the vacation market hold its own while the rest of the market declines.”

"So I'm proud to be mentioned with Old Tom. If we played each other? Well, I'd have the edge, because of my fashion sense."

I managed to put three minutes aside for my monthly power flip through Golf Magazine and actually stumbled upon  something worth reading in the form of Connell Barrett's look at innovators.

Granted, a couple of them I trust as far as I can throw them, but at least Ran Morrissett got some nice recognition.

"I think of GolfClubAtlas.com as a museum. Architecture is an art, and a course is like a 200-acre canvas. My Web site gives like-minded people a place to discuss and debate these works, to keep the discussion happening. People on the site are regular guys who want to protect great courses and preserve classic architecture. The dialogue can get pretty intense. Things got personal a few years back when Tom Fazio redid the bunkers at Merion. A lot of name-calling. Some thought that changing the bunkers was akin to drawing glasses on the Mona Lisa. It's funny — the nicest, kindest gentleman can become a pit bull online! But that's part of the passion. It's my passion, too. This is a nonprofit site. Since I started it in 1999, I've gotten a lot of offers to sell, but I never will. It's like those commercials. Annual cost of running a web site: a few thousand dollars. Helping to keep architecture debate alive: priceless."

Actually, priceless was Greg Norman fawning over himself in arguably the most nauseating paragraph of self promotion ever published in a major golf publication.

Here's Greg, on himself:

"This January, I'll be honored with the Old Tom Morris Award, for giving back to the game. For one, I feel that golf should be more compatible with the environment. Courses elevate property value and create jobs as well as provide green spaces, filter air, and create a wildlife habitat. Doonbeg, in Ireland, was built with shovels, not bulldozers. We moved just 26,000 cubic yards of soil and protected a microscopic snail species. In addition to that, my tournament, the Merrill Lynch Shootout, has raised more than $10 million for CureSearch National Childhood Cancer Foundation. So I'm proud to be mentioned with Old Tom. If we played each other? Well, I'd have the edge, because of my fashion sense. I'd wear something from my Greg Norman Collection, which is comfortable and stylish. How can you make a full turn wearing a double-breasted three-piece wool suit?"

"Predictable Courses That Dull The Drama"

Lorne Rubenstein considers why the PGA Tour plays so many drab courses. He quotes former Tour player and architect John Fought, who gets to the heart of the matter (at least in some cases):

"The golf courses they play on tour aren't as good [as they should be]," former PGA Tour player John Fought, now an architect, said in Toronto the other day. "They don't play wonderful old courses, generally. They play the latest development deal that a guy is trying to sell."

TPC Las Colinas Update

An unbylined Dallas Morning News story looks at the TPC Las Colinas redo by D.A. Weibring, with plenty of insights into the project. Most interesting of all is this note, which would seem to indicate that the PGA Tour is taking its architecture seriously these days.

 PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem stamped his approval on the project's status last week after touring the facility with Henry Hughes, the Tour's chief of operations. Officials from EDS, Four Seasons and the Salesmanship Club also gave a thumbs-up.

Technofitting

Ryan Ballengee, prompted by posts here and on Golf Digest about their Panelist Summit, makes several interesting points on the restoration debate, particularly related to Tom Fazio's remarks. Though Ryan loses all credibility when he labels me a Great American but could win some points for the creation of fine new term to describe the Fazio/Jones approach to classic courses: technofitting.

"Why would anyone bother trying to design a course for us?"

For those of you new readers who haven't followed the technology debate and its impact on the game, John Huggan offers a juicy primer that is also filled with some fresh quotes and thoughts for those of you who have tracked this key issue.

The other day, former US Open champion Geoff Ogilvy played a round with friends at the splendid Kingston Heath course in his home city of Melbourne. When they came to the 567-yard 14th hole, which was playing downwind, admittedly, Ogilvy hit a good drive... before striking a 7-iron approach through the green.

That's not a misprint. How long does a hole have to be before one of the game's leading exponents is unable to reach the putting surface with two full-blooded shots? Given that Ogilvy hit a drive and 7-iron around 575 yards, he was capable of reaching a green about 200 yards further on with his 3-wood.

Let's make the hole 800 yards in length, just to make him think a little. As the world No.11 asked companions rhetorically: "Why would anyone bother trying to design a course for us?"

Fast forward... 

"I don't pay too much attention to distance statistics, because most of my courses are not being built for the professionals," says leading designer Tom Doak. "But I try to stay abreast of what's going on, because the governing bodies don't!"

Wow, the Doakster finally speaking out forcefully! Better late than never.

And from Huggan: 

The typical response to this new breed of tour player has been predictably, and disappointingly, one-dimensional. Most courses have resorted to golf's most boring hazard - longer and thicker rough - and ever-increasing length, and in the process have destroyed any semblance of strategic choice for players who are supposed to be the best.

In other words, thinking and planning have largely been eliminated from the game at the highest level. On almost every hole there is but one choice of shot, with the creation of interesting angles for the approach something those old guys did before technology ran amok. It is tedious and heartbreaking to watch and, no doubt, to play.

The danger is that the average golf club committee will imagine that growing more and deeper rough and creating longer holes by way of more back tees offer the way forward for their course. Big mistake. That approach ignores the fact that the average golfer gains little or no advantage from modern technology. Largely starved of the club-head speed that is yardage's fuel, his drives have "stretched" by only a few measly yards. Besides, there is a better way.

"On most of the courses we work on, we put in back tees for the good player only on those holes where the green size is appropriate," says former European Tour player Mike Clayton, now a much-respected course designer. "We would not, for example, make a 310-yard hole 40 yards longer just because we could.

"In fact, par-70 is the answer to many tour course design questions. By reducing the par by two shots, you create two less vulnerable holes. Throw in a couple of great short par-4s and a short par-3, and it is possible to keep a course around 7,000 yards in length while still making it both difficult and thought-provoking for the professionals, and playable for the members without having tees they never go anywhere near."

Of course, all of that could be achieved by hauling the ball back 50 yards. Come on guys, get it done!

50? Shoot, I'll take 20 at this point. 

"Well, it's a simple issue. You just fix it. You do it."

Bob Carney does a super job summing up the various debates and vigorous give-and-take that took place during the Golf Digest Panelist Summit, and offers this from Tom Fazio on his work at Augusta National. I missed his presentation today while flying the unfriendly skies. But it was a typically masterful blend of Fazio rationalization:

Fazio, who did that remodeling, was having none of it. "Put yourself in Hootie Johnson's postion. You are in charge. And you have the best players in the world and you have a venue that used to contain long, strong par 4s--No. 1, No. 5--that required a long drive and a mid-iron. What do you do. Well, it's a simple issue. You just fix it. You do it."

Yes, and it's been so well received.

Length, yes Tom. Rough, silly tree planting, no optional tee flexibility and an overriding emphasis on protecting egos through other contrived features?  Not working.

Fazio suggested another exercise in imagination. He said imagine Donald Ross, today, watching Tiger Woods tee off on Pinehurst No. 2. The ball explodes off the tee. "Donald Ross has never seen anything like this, says Fazio. "What do you think he thinks? He's going to say, 'If that's the way golf is now, we need to look at that.'"

Yes, on the regulatory side. But since Fazio has openly encouraged the distance expansion, it's clear he has his own best interests at heart over the health of the game. What a shame. 

A Few More Panelist Summit Comments

I sat through two enjoyable Powerpoint presentations by John Fought and Rees Jones here at the Carolina. Two points by Jones were of most interest.

Encouraging was his message to Golf Digest and the panel: categories like Aesthetics, Ambiance and Conditioning threaten to make the rankings "into a rich man's list." Losing those categories while emphasizing how much "continuing interest" (repeat playing fun) of a course would make, in Jones's view, for a better ranking that serves the game better. Naturally I wholeheartedly agree.

Another comment of interest was his disdain for the Golf Magazine panels' love of "collapsing" bunkers and how courses featuring this "fad" were overtaking their list and threatening to ruin it. Collapsing would be your Coore/Crenshaw/Bradley/Doak/Urbina/Hanse/Wagner/Devries etc. style that Rees has always hated, but unfortunately which many golfers are finding more appealing looking compared to cleaner, rounder hazards.

I got a giggle out of his remarks, yet on a similar theme, the panelists who had just played Pinehurst No. 2 were saying privately at the evening dinner (after Jaime Diaz gave a great talk on Tiger entering the design business) were consistently underwhelmed by the course. And in large part, their lack of enthusiasm stems from the course's lack of visual interest, and in particular, the bunkering as well as the mundane wall-to-wall Bermuda look eliminating much of the sandy scrub that once gave the course such a distinctive flavor. I have to say I strongly agree that Pinehurst has lost much of it's unique character and other than its distinctive greens, looks like way too ordinary.

So the morale of this story is simple: visual stuff does matter in making you want to play a course. I think those rugged, wild, inspiring and seemingly natural "collapsing" bunkers are here to stay.

More importantly, Rees posed for a photo with his favorite golf blogger (I've cropped the others in the shot to protect the innocent from any potential photo caption fun!).

Let's Not Rewrite The Classics Yet

Now posted is my latest Golfdom column on questions about the restoration movement's validity

Also posted is David Frabotta's story on environmentally progressive superintendent Pat Blum's efforts to improve his own course and the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program's requirements.

The Ideal Club

Links has posted my "Ideal Club" essay in parts, divided by topic. To save you the time, here they are:

Ideal Clubhouse

Ideal Locker Room
Ideal Golf Pro
Ideal Practice Area
Ideal Scorecard
Ideal First Tee
Ideal Halfway House
Ideal Finishing Hole
Ideal Grillroom
Ideal Parking Lot

More On Tiger's First U.S. Design

Links editor Hunki Yun pens the most extensive feature I've read to date on Tiger Woods's first U.S. course design at The Cliffs. The spread also features easily the best lit staged architect-developer photo of all time (left). Nice use of reflectors boys! Though way too much Dockers ad for my taste.

Anyway...

Anthony contacted Woods in February, and a major factor in Woods’ decision was the Cliffs’—and Anthony’s—emphasis on health and wellness, which mirrors Woods’ values. In the spirit of fitness, Anthony and Woods originally announced that High Carolina would be walking only. But in the only misstep of the day, they later clarified that walking will be encouraged but not required.

Oh well.

There remains the considerable task of building a course worthy of the hype, not to mention Woods’ fee, estimated to be more than $20 million including real estate sales incentives—nearly 10 times the highest previous going rate. The Cliffs is still working on the permitting for the site, which sits at about 4,000 feet and features 50-mile views of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Meanwhile Woods’ design team, led by Beau Welling, formerly Fazio’s top man, has yet to finalize a routing—construction is not likely to begin until mid-2008 and the course won’t open for at least two years after that.

I'm sure we won't hear a thing about it between now and then.

"Then I've done what should be done."

The architect press release quotes are getting more torturous every day.

Jack Nicklaus, on the Tucson course he's started that will reportedly land the WGC Match Play when it's done, assuming the design proves worthy...well, and that site licensing fee check clears in Ponte Vedra...

 "Golf course design has been a blessing for me," said Nicklaus. "It has allowed me to take what I learned playing the game of golf and apply it to a piece of ground to create a legacy that will live well beyond what I accomplished as a golfer. If I can design The Ritz-Carlton Golf Club, Dove Mountain to take advantage of its spectacular high desert setting and beautiful vistas, while integrating solid strategy and good, fair golf shots, then I've done what should be done."