The only course that will remain difficult under all conditions will be one that is designed and kept for golf of a stereotyped, monotonous character, and this makes a most uninteresting proposition. BOBBY JONES
Available via Amazon (US): Golf Architecture For Normal People
Barnes And Noble (online and in stores)
Bookshop.org option to support local independent bookstores.
Reviews:
"Golf Architecture for Normal People . . . should be required reading for those who are not ashamed to admit they know little about the subject, and for those who think they do . . . . Golf course architecture geeks have trouble slimming their thoughts down to bite-sized chunks, but Shackelford has achieved a remarkable success here." —Independent (Ireland)
"From the relative newcomer who’s slowly getting hooked to those that have played the game for most of their lives and think they know a thing or two, Golf Architecture for Normal People provides a solid and sober perspective that will help everyone recognize why some golf courses are worth playing more than once while a single trip around others is all you’re ever likely to want or need." —Links Magazine.
“It’s a wonderful book. An easy read that arrives just in time for your summer reading list. If you’ve never thought about how an appreciation for course design could heighten your enjoyment of the game, you must check this out.”—The Peterborough Examiner
"As in his prior publications, in his newest book Shackelford shows a deep appreciation for what can be done to create a golf course that appeals to the broadest possible golfing audience…Shackelford’s prose is succinct, often witty, and accessible."—Cape Gazette
"Author, blogger and golf architecture expert Geoff Shackelford, who helped Gil Hanse design Rustic Canyon and restore 2023 U.S. Open host Los Angeles Country Club, taps into his passion by creating a guide that helps every golfer understand the nuances of course design. Published by Tatra Press, the 164-page hardcover book is a must-read for every golfer to better understand the game they love." —Golf Pass
"Shackelford provides an informative picture [and]...sprinkles in history lessons about those who planted the game's architectural roots, defines common terms and helps you hone your eyes when it comes to identifying some of the tricks of the trade."—FORE Magazine
"This new book does a great job demystifying golf course design ideas for average players, but can also be a beneficial read fro PGA Professionals and other golf course employees to get a better understanding of their home courses." —PGA Magazine
Golfobserver.com has posted my 2005 series on the changes to Riviera. Sad to say, the destruction has continued. With the white bunker sand, sterilization and Orlando whale tails added everywhere, it feels more Florida than Pacific Palisades.
Golfonline's Joe Passov takes a look at George Thomas's design work in the area and reviews the remaining public courses that he designed.
The great places in golf subtly point out their history, if they do it at all.
Naturally, that means at Riviera they purchase a headstone rock, slap a bronze plaque on it and for that classiest of touches, embellish it with some lillies. Just as Ben Hogan would have wanted!
Rough Where There Used To Be Short Grass (Click to enlarge)Greatest option par-4 in golf? Yes, many would vote for Riviera's 10th, which was recently discussed and celebrated in Links Magazine (yours truly was a contributor, no link available).
But as we all know, options can lead to birdies, and we know that can't happen! So in their on-going attempt to do something to Riviera, Tom Marzolf and gang have made two almost mind-bogglingly poor change to the great 10th. Almost, because, well, they've made others in recent years.
The first I knew about and lament as I see it in person this week. The aiming bunker that the smart player goes out to the left, has been expanded toward the green to cut down on the number of drives going for the green (because you know, that's so boring to watch!).
Rear view of No. 10 lost approach (click to enlarge)The other change is subtle but far more egregious. A good portion of the left approach and lefthand drop off area, mown as fairway from 1993 to 2006, have been converted to light rough. This keeps missed approaches or attempts to drive the green closer to the putting surface. (This in the second photo you can see the outline of the old fairway area that ran balls well away from the green.)
Yes, this is one of those minor things that us architecture junkies howl about, but this short grass area was precisely the type of element that makes No. 10 such a playing and spectating joy. The short grass added dimensions to the decision-making process and were left with all sorts o of weird shots, particuarly to the back hole locations.
Now balls will stay closer to the green and the hole should play easier. But worse than that, the growing of rough were there was once short stuff will eliminate options around the green, making it less interesting to watch or play.
The lower photo shows the "restoration" of 2006 based on the old photographs. The 1929 image above shows the look left behind by George Thomas and Billy Bell. I don't know about you, but I see a resemblance...to Bethpage!
Saving the worse for last, here are a few photos of the new hole location added to Riviera's wonderful third green.
3rd at Riviera (click to enlarge)Feeling Nicklaus-esque with its sunken-quadrant, circa 1991 Sherwood feel when Jack would throw a tier in just about any old place no matter how badly it fit, the apparent thought process behind the "restoration" of this hole location was George Thomas's original sketch.
It showed a hole location in exactly the spot where one has been restored. Unfortunately, we also know that Thomas's sketches did not bear much resemblance to what was actually built. He tinkered in the field, or Bill Bell did. The result was a better course. Unfortunately, architects who rely on plans and who do restorations, seem to not be aware of the in-the-field methodology and it has led to a disappointing addition to Riviera's third.
Aerials do not show such a pronounced hole location, nor do photos indicate the funky tiering that is now in the once wickely subtle third. 
Rear view 3 (click to enlarge)
Besides enlarging a green that was nice because of its fairly small square footage (and yet, number of versatile hole locations), the addition is fasinating because it seems to eliminate some of the deceptive qualities that have long made No. 3 unique.
Whether that deception crept into the design intentionally or through the evolution of the fronting bunker is debatable, but either way the real charm of this approach was the slight angle that the fronting bunker sat at, making goes at right side hole locations a bit daring (in the way that #12 at Augusta works, only with sand in this case).
And like the added hole locations on 8, 9, 12 and 13, the new work looks exactly that: like new, modern design ideas added to really nice old architecture.
The old barranca/hazard on Riviera's 7th then and now. Note the subtle but significant change to the fairway edge caused by the late 30s flood. Oh, and the cool bridge.
Notice the historic photo with No. 12 to the left. In the distance is the Riviera par-3 course (today's range) and clubhouse.
The spectators below are encircling the old green floor.
The photo below that shows the newly enlarged green, which has lost the "long, thin" character of the old green and actually appears to be larger than the original. There were also changes to the fronting bunker (now less deep and less intimidating than it was before...).
It's debatable whether this green really needed expansion.
The enlargement work shares the same problem as the expansion on No. 9: the new green falls away from the primary surface, making it debatable whether a hole location can be cut on the new area because of its slope.
Looking at it today with Geoff Ogilvy, he felt it was dicey if the greens were fast.
Since the idea was to restore a purportedly lost hole location (if it every existed, which appears iffy), the goal of this work doesn't make sense. Nor does it bode well for this summer's expanstion of other greens).
And once again, the expansion of the 12th green makes shots missing this surface so much different and easier than in the old configuration. Once arguably the most difficult up and down on the back side, the larger green should make recoveries simpler. Because in effect, they are no longer recoveries, but instead, birdie putts.
Note this photo of PGA Tour pro John Riegger putting on the 12th during the practice round. Last year he would have faced a devilish lob recovery shot from this spot. Today it's a relatively easy two putt.
That would be fine if the new hole location added some strategic enhancement. But both of those questions are up for serious debate, especially with a 25-yard wide fairway that makes it impossible for someone to flirt with the O.B. by driving down the left side to open up the best angle of attack.
Instead, the new green seems to be an addition designed to offer an inaccessible "Sunday" hole location.
But with the bunker made more shallow, it actually becomes relatively harmless since and up-and-down isn't too difficult (whereas before it was deadly.)
None of this adds up to reflecting Captain Thomas's style.
The short par-3 16th at Riviera in the late 1920s and today...
Riviera has long served as a classroom for those interested in golf architecture.
It continues to serve as a place for study, though at the current pace, study of a different kind.
Namely, how not to "restore."
As Thomas Bonk outlined in the LA Times, Riviera management, superintendent Matt Morton and Tom Fazio's firm have overseen the expansion of three greens: No. 3, No. 9 and No. 12. The changes have been described as a restoration of the original George Thomas-Billy Bell design.
While the idea of expanding greens back to their original size is nearly always a great idea on older courses, Riviera is sadly serving as a case study in how not to go about it.
In their defense, the problem is extremely complicated: trying to add green space onto existing USGA spec greens. It's a bit like trying to expand an aquarium while keeping the tank full. In this case they are attempting to tie into a sand substructure while also working into the surrounding terrain.
As difficult as the task is, it is manageable.
The current expansions of No. 3, No. 9 and No. 12--a precursor of even more changes to come this summer--was ultimately unsuccessful because of the failure to account for the nearly 80 years of top dressing build up that elevated the green floors above the surrounds.
Ah, but for those of you whose eyes haven't glazed over at this point, you might be saying, "the greens were rebuilt in 1993, how can their be topdressing build up?"
When the greens were rebuilt, they were not lowered the 4-5 inches that would have taken the greens down to their original height. A mistake? Perhaps, but Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw were not attempting to restore the greens to their original sizes. They were adding some lost hole locations, but in general, trying to not disturb the evolved course.
Therefore, today you have the original green areas (slightly expanded in '93), and then these newly "restored" areas that are sloping down and away from the elevated, primary green space. The effect is Donald Ross/Pinehurst-like. Unfortunately, Thomas-Bell were not into the crowned green look (and Donald Ross wasn't either if you look closely at the evolution of Pinehurst).
Now, all of this would seem to be a minor technicality except that nearly all of the "restored" green space on No. 9 and No. 12 does not tie-in with the primary green, and worse, is unpinnable in tournament conditions because of the noticeable tilt away from the main green floor.
(Well, unless Tom Meeks was handling the setup, then this quibbling is all irrelevant!)
The approach to No. 9's front hole location has long been extremely difficult. But the expanded putting surface should make the shot much easier with such an inviting target and less difficult recovery pitches for those missing the green.
Most noticeable is the front expansion on No. 9, which will help players landing short of the green. (Before, the chip shot over kikuyu to the small green surface was incredibly demanding...now those misses will be putting.)
In this historic photo of No. 9 taken from the third tee, notice how the green in the front area has a backstop of sorts (the approach comes into this green from about 2 o'clock in the photo).
Also notice how that banking has changed to today's look (above), which is a false drop off. Then look at the photos taken today where you can see the border of the old green, and the new surface in the lighter shade. That entire "restored" area of new surface falls off gently toward the left of this photo.
With a bit more attention to this type of detail, I suspect that these green expansions could have tied in better with the existing green and served to restore the original design.
Unfortunately the green expansions appear to do a disservice to the original design.
They fail to add more hole locations, while also not adding any strategic interest, which was always the number one priority for Captain Thomas.
Thomas Bonk writes about Riviera's latest changes.
The greens on three par-four holes — the third, ninth and 12th — have been brought back to their original size and shape, all of them slightly enlarged to take away the encroachment of the Kikuyu over the years and to come up with pin placements that had been lost since the club opened in 1926.
It opened on June 24, 1927, but hey, no worries.
"We're restoring them to recover the flexibility that Riviera had in the very beginning," said Michael Yamaki, the club's general manager. "Mother Nature has been the one who kind of grabbed those greens. We fought back."
Mother Nature? We fought back? Hopefully Captain Thomas doesn't get the L.A. Times where he is now.
Tom Fazio, the architect who oversaw Riviera's previous round of changes in 2003, which basically involved the lengthening of the course, was again at the head of this latest project with the greens.
A half-day visit en route to the desert constitutes heading a project? Poor Tom Marzolf does all of the work and gets no ink. Then again, looking at the 7th, 8th, and 15th holes, maybe that's not such a bad thing.
Todd Yoshitake, Riviera's head pro, said the pin placements now reflect what was available in the past.
"We're getting back to our heritage," he said.
The insights you glean in the Times!
Looking through club archives and maps of the layout and studying aerial views of the course from the 1930s helped Fazio discover the original shapes of the greens that Yamaki targeted for restoration. Computer enhancement of the aerial photographs provided nearly precise dimensions of the greens. In their research, the revisionists discovered that the Kikuyu had moved in more than three inches on the greens.
The revisionists discovered that the Kikuyu had moved in more than three inches.
Priceless.
MikeWeir.com's Chris Cook does a nice job sharing key historical information from the Riviera club history to preview the Nissan Open.Doug Ferguson reports that Riviera is begging interested in hosting the 2009 Presidents Cup.
"They're keenly interested in taking a look at this," said Michael Bodney, senior vice president of championship management for the PGA Tour. "It's all very preliminary, but they unsolicited wrote us a letter to host it."
"One thing they don't utilize are those lower tennis courts. There's a lot of room down there, and there seems to be enough room for a good TV compound."
One other issue was local interest. The gallery was noticeably thin during the '95 PGA Championship.
"You wonder about the L.A. market," Bodney said. "You've seen what's happened the last two majors, and that causes you to stand back a little bit."
Quotes in Thomas Bonk's LA Times story would indicate that this is a non-story.
Bodney said Riviera is big enough to handle the staging issues of a big-time event, such as corporate hospitality areas and a television compound, but he said he was concerned that the market wouldn't respond.
"I can take this event to 10 or 15 places and I know for sure 25,000 or 30,000 people will show up. I don't know if that's going to happen in L.A.," Bodney said. "We can't afford to have a dud. We can go to a lot of places and I know it's not going to be a dud."
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
