It’s back!
Twenty years later Tatra Press has kindly allowed me to bring back Grounds For Golf now that golf architecture is of more interest to the masses. A new Introduction looks at what’s driven the interest growth and two new chapters I had a blast adding (plus a few edits to keep things up-to-date).
The Amazon purchase page for the book arriving June 15, 2026.
From the AP story:
Louis J. Willie Jr., a black businessman who helped defuse a racial dispute surrounding the 1990 P.G.A. Championship, died here Sunday. He was 84.And...
The 1990 P.G.A. Championship was held at Shoal Creek Country Club, in suburban Birmingham. Protests mounted after the club president said Shoal Creek would not be pressured into accepting black members. Mr. Willie helped quiet the situation by accepting an honorary membership.
From the wires...
World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) chief Dick Pound praised golf for aiming to rid the sport of doping, but balked Thursday at the World Golf Foundation's use of its own performance-enhancing substances list.Actually, they still suggest it's not a problem, and without testing, who is to argue with them?
"Two or three months ago, the PGA was denying that there was ever a problem in golf," Pound said in a conference call. So, "there is quite a lot of progress that's been made."
"It's very disappointing to us, however, that they would not use (the WADA) list" of banned substances, he added.It's hard to get as worked up as Dick when you see that they have added some pretty significant stuff to the golf list, as Doug Ferguson reported:
US PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem earlier announced that golf's top professional players would face random drug tests beginning in 2008.
The list of banned substances is similar to one released by the women's LPGA Tour in March, including most muscle-building steroids and adrenaline-diminishing beta-blockers.
But it does not include substances that, Finchem said, do not enhance performance in golf.
"I don't understand that, unless it's simply organizational testosterone - they can't be seen to accept anyone else's list," Pound lamented.
"My question to golf would be: Is there anything on the list under the world anti-doping code that you think your players should be able to take?
"And if there is, then golf should indicate what they think their athletes should be able to take that the rest of the athletes around the world can't."
The list of banned substances includes anabolic agents, hormones, stimulants, narcotics, beta blockers and masking agents. Golf did not adopt the World Anti-Doping Association list because Finchem said it would cause an additional administrative burden and “we do not consider the substances in any way impactful as a performance enhancement.”
Thomas Bonk talks to Dr. Gary Wadler, a member of a World Anti-Doping Agency committee, who is much more upbeat about the testing list than Pound:
"I applaud the PGA Tour and all of the other bodies in professional golf," he said. "I've said on many occasions, there's no sport that's inherently immune to doping. It's a sad commentary, but it's true."
And...
The number of prohibited substances and methods represents only a small percentage of what is banned by WADA. Its lengthy doping list is a 19-page document. While WADA chair Dick Pound said the entire list should have been adopted by professional golf, PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem said some substances were not included because of high testing costs and their irrelevance to golf.
Wadler said the inclusion of hormones on the banned list could be interpreted as testing for human growth hormone, which he said needed to be on every professional sports anti-doping list.
"It sounds to me as if they should not try to reinvent the wheel when that wheel has already been invented, so it sounds as if they used the World Anti-Doping Agency's prohibited list as a guide, and that's good," he said.
Steve Elling raises an essential question to the drug testing policy: will there be full or even partial disclosure?
Given how the testing issue relates to the PGA Tour, the most economically influential circuit in the history of the game, not to mention the most public-relations paranoid, here's something else to keep in mind.And...
Will they really be minding their pees and queues?
Make no mistake, the implementation of drug testing is mostly about maintaining appearances, not that there's anything wrong with that, per se. Thankfully, there has been zero evidence that any notable player has taken performance-enhancing substances over the years. Still, the tours decided to be "proactive," as they put it.
For years, Finchem has been prodded about revising the PGA Tour's absurd policy relating to the disclosure of fines, suspensions and player discipline. For example, Woods has been known to brag -- that probably isn't the right term, exactly -- that he has been fined more often than any other player in history for using four-letter words during TV broadcasts.
As the world tours study over the coming weeks how best to sanction players for potential performance-enhancing violations -- the sanctions darned well better be meaningful, starting with a first offense -- the folks in Paranoia Vedra might want to weigh this related issue as well.
Fast forward...
If Finchem's emissaries are pointedly asked whether a player has been suspended because of a blood-doping violation, how will they answer? Forget player privacy issues. Finchem can't afford to be so fiercely protective of the integrity of the tour and its individual contestants.
Competitors, if not fans and sponsors, have the right to know who's playing by the rules. Without working myself into a 'roid rage here, the bottom line on this drug-testing beaker is as clear as the glass container itself.
In an individual sport like golf, protecting a cheater is the same as the act of cheating itself.
Use the juice, get cut loose. Then make sure everybody knows about it.
The press conference on the "anti-doping" policies demonstrated that our governing bodies and assorted tours are on the same page. But I continue to be fascinated by Commissioner Finchem's stance on how this all came about.
Q. If you don't mind me paraphrasing, you've always said that there was no evidence of any performance-enhancing drug use, and the honor system of golf, etc. All that said and wherever you are today, do you consider this a landmark day for golf or a sad day for golf?
TIM FINCHEM: Well, I think that as everybody else has spoken, it's a day where we are going to be proactive in light of the realities of what's happening in sport. But for the problems in other sports, I doubt we would be at this point.
But certainly the problems in other sports have created a growing perception among fans that athletes generally in many cases, in the minds of many fans who utilize substances that in other sports are banned. Now we don't ban substances in our sport, but when you combine that in the reality that for example, in the case of The European Tour, they have to undergo testing protocols because governments are requiring that they do; as does the LPGA in some instances, all of these things argue for moving forward.
I think it doesn't mean we like it and it does mean we are concerned about shifting the culture of the sport from one where you know the rules and you play by the rules, and if you violate the rules, you call a penalty on yourself; to if you engage in testing, perhaps creating the specter that an organization doesn't trust what the player says, which is certainly not the case.
So we are going to have to work hard on that point, but we are where we are given the way of the world and I think it's a positive day for golf because we are, A, together; B, we are spending a lot of energy to do it right. We are learning from watching what the other sports have done that in some cases have not been perhaps the right thing to do. It's taken them awhile to get it right, and we've been quite deliberate about where we're headed. And all of these things I think are positive. I think that's a positive message for the game.
"We are where we are given the way of the world."
Okay, I can see that. Just like Jake could see the logic of Elwood trading the Blues mobile for a microphone.
However, let's ponder this for a moment. And to longtime readers, I apologize for sounding like a broken record.
We've heard for the last 10 years or so, and quite specifically from various leaders, that distance gains have been the product of improved athleticism with little acknowledgement that equipment might be the driving force. The most notorious was USGA President Walter Driver's claim that 75% of distance increases could be blamed on "improved athleticism." (And in Finchem's defense, he's also been quite clear that this evolving athleticism might lead to some form of distance regulation.)
So aren't we here today at least in part because golf's leadership wheeled out a suspect rationale for distance increases? A rationale that might drive young athletes to try performance enhancing drugs in order to improve their athleticism, and therefore, perhaps keep up distance-wise?
Catchy, wouldn't you say?
Not much to glean from the statement, which was sent out by the R&A and PGA Tour. The USGA's version is still awaiting approval from legal.
STATEMENT REGARDING GLOBAL ANTI-DOPING POLICY IN GOLF
Leading Golf Organizations Come Together to Develop Anti-Doping Policy for Golf
St. Augustine, Florida – The major governing organizations in golf today announced that they have agreed in principle to an anti-doping policy for professional golf on a global basis that will be accomplished in two phases.
The first phase of the policy, which has been completed, encompasses the development of The Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List discussed later in this statement, a copy of which is attached.
The second phase of the Policy, which is anticipated to be completed prior to the end of this year, will include general standards for all the fundamental elements of an anti-doping program for golf organizations that become signatories to the Policy, while providing flexibility for such signatories to develop specific policies and procedures necessary or appropriate for their organizations. Such standards will encompass the Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List, as well as medical waiver procedures, testing protocols, results management, penalties, sanctions and reciprocity of outcomes.
Leading golf organizations who have lent their support, leadership and cooperation for the development of the Policy as a result of their representation on the Board of Directors of the World Golf Foundation and who will, subject to approval by their governing boards, become signatories to the Policy include:
Augusta National Golf Club
European Tour
Ladies Professional Golf Association
PGA of America
PGA TOUR
The R&A for The Open Championship
United States Golf Association for the U.S. Open, the U.S. Women’s Open and the U.S. Senior Open
Other leading golf organizations who have agreed to become signatories to
the Policy include:
Asian Tour
Australasian Tour
Canadian Tour
Japan Professional Golf Tour
Sunshine Tour
Tour de Las Americas
The Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List (modified as necessary for individual golf organizations) will be incorporated into the respective tournament regulations of a number of signatories to the policy, effective in 2008. Player education and outreach on the Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List is ongoing and will be given increased emphasis by the signatories of the Policy moving forward.
An Anti-Doping office of the World Golf Foundation will be created in 2008, and will, among duties, coordinate and share information with golf organizations with respect to medical waiver procedures and therapeutic use exemptions under the Policy. Disciplinary procedures and penalties for violations of the Policy will be controlled and administered by the signatories to the Policy, and disclosed to other signatory organizations for consistency and coordination purposes. Testing protocols will also be within the purview of the individual signatory organizations and will be developed and approved by each organization on an individual basis. It is anticipated that signatories who will be testing under the Policy will commence and activate their testing programs in 2008.
Really, aren't they going to give Medinah a run soon for most renovations by a course miraculously beloved by the Golf Digest panel?
This time--like every other time in recent memory--the condition of the putting surfaces is the culprit. But hey, it gets them out of the 2009 U.S. Amateur, where they figured to lose money anyway.
Leonard Shapiro reports in the Washington Post:
The 2009 U.S. Amateur golf championship will not be played at Congressional Country Club as scheduled and will be moved to another site, most likely Southern Hills Country Club in Tulsa, according to sources at the Bethesda club and the United States Golf Association.
Concerns among PGA Tour players and club and USGA officials about the state of Congressional's putting surfaces during the inaugural AT&T National tournament in July prompted the decision.
The club plans to redo the greens on its championship Blue course and will begin the work in the summer of 2009, almost two full years before it is scheduled to host the U.S. Open in June 2011.
The USGA also wants to tweak some bunkers, fairways and tee boxes on the course before the 2011 Open, and the implementation of those fixes also will begin almost immediately after the 2009 AT&T National, Washington's PGA Tour stop hosted by Tiger Woods.
No need to tweak. Just rip the entire thing up and start over. No one will miss it.
Earlier this summer, Woods and several other PGA Tour players complained about the speed of the greens during tournament week. One source indicated that club members were not happy to read the criticism from the No. 1 player in the world and that some Congressional members and USGA officials were concerned about the greens even before the event.
The decision to move the Amateur also is expected to result in Woods's tournament remaining at Congressional in 2009. Last spring, club members overwhelmingly voted to approve a contract to host the event in 2007 and 2008. Woods has said he would like to play the tournament at the storied course off River Road every year, and the decision to reschedule the Amateur now clears the way for 2009, pending approval of the membership.
A club source also said last night that the PGA Tour had approached Congressional about playing Woods's event at the club in May 2009 instead of July, the better to give the course time to recover before the U.S. Amateur. But the club apparently had no interest in hosting two tournaments in the same year.
Yes, they clearly hit rock bottom at the Turning whatever classic, where Tom Fazio was invited into the press center to help ease the assembled inkslingers into an afternoon siesta.
I really would not read this rambling mess of inanity unless you forgot to get your Lunesta refilled. Really, it's press conferences like this that make you understand why most golf writers think that course design is such a boring field.
The uh, highlights...
Certainly the opportunities are endless, and that is one of the unique things about golf design and what we strive for. We strive to create distinctive, unique, special, one of a kind pieces. The PR people add other words to those word pieces and call them lots of different things. But my goal is always to have it very distinctive.Why, oh why? Especially when you can come back and "re-perfect" them 15 years later!
Again, throughout those decades of my career, I've had the opportunity to do a lot of golf courses. None of them look like this golf course. The next group, assuming I'm fortunate enough to live longer, none of them will look like this golf course. Why would you do it again, the same thing?
Obviously, you take the character and the style, but in the old days much golf architecture in America, golf is roughly only 120 years old, maybe now it's getting to be 130 from the beginning. Which is not a long time. And not many people knew about golf.
When golf was brought here by the Scots, mostly and some of the Irish and the UK countries, the UK Kingdoms of where golf kind of started the idea was a golf professional or someone who knew golf came over with the idea of building a golf hole in the early days of my career I used to hear the word Rodin greens, and Cardinal bunker, and all those old famous things that you can find in the British Isle golf courses. And people would come here to bring those ideas and incorporate them.
Well, we've had enough of those and plenty of those built. And now over the last, say, 50 to 75 years, five or six decades, we have so many golf courses we're always trying to create different styles. And certainly Turning Stone is a perfect example.
Of what? Yes, we've had enough of those Redans! We want our architecture boring and forgettable!
For example, we could have a U.S. Open here if the golf course is of that quality. But what happened what the USGA would require, and I don't speak for the USGA, even though I've done lots of renovations for U.S. Open golf courses. But you look at the history and their concern is the tee shot landing areas. They want to have a 23-yard fairway where the driving areas are. 30 years ago, that same location was 27 yards.
Uh huh.
So there's been changes even in that evolution, because again, it only makes sense if the golf ball goes straighter because of clubs and technology, why wouldn't you adjust those narratives and widths for the best players.
Now for the majority of us, we don't really know the difference between 23 and 27. You know, 27's not wide enough. We want 30. So there are just so many different ways that that could be done, and you would do that. And it wouldn't necessarily be a change, it would be the process because that's what golf is about. That's how it has evolved forever, decade after decade.
Peachy.
Q. Some people talk about the short par 4, the short risk-reward par 4 as being the most exciting hole in golf. Best tournament hole. Did you consider that when you built Atunyote?
TOM FAZIO: Yes, not individually. And I agree with that. I've been building short par 4 golf holes before that became famous. That became the in thing, because lots of people have.
He's such the innovator and precedent setter!
A couple of interesting FedEx Cup "tweak" pieces were recently posted offering some outside the box thoughts. First, Steve Elling at CBSSports.com says the Tour should maintain it's "Top-10 and you're in" rule during the playoffs, offers other suggestions and notes this on the marketing push:
Week one, day one, we asked Finchem if he believed the initial outrage expressed by fans and media when Woods skipped the FedEx opener was partly attributable to the saccharine series of FedEx ads that have bombarded fans all year long. He insisted the advertising blitz wasn't too "cheesy or hype-y" and that he received great feedback on the incessant TV campaign while attending the British Open. Well, those people like Benny Hill reruns, too. The cheese factor was so high in these ads, fans became lactose intolerant. The 2008 campaign must be seriously reigned in for credibility's sake alone.Probably because I get impatient with the registration wall or sheer laziness, I missed this from the Augusta Chronicle's Scott Michaux, posted almost a month ago.
FLAW: RELATIVE WORTH. Let's say Woods doesn't win the FedEx thingy. Does the PGA Tour really think he's not the season "champion" already having won five times, including a major and two WGC events, and blitzed the rest of the tour in the points and money lists. Who's the player of the year?
SOLUTION: Market the FedEx Cup for what it really is - a gimmick to add a little intrigue to what typically is a meaningless end of the season. Don't try to sell it as the definitive answer for a year's worth of effort. What works in team sports is simply contrived here.
And...
FLAW: SHORT FIELDS. The PGA Tour borrowed from NASCAR's "Chase" for its format, but it missed the main point. In NASCAR's chase, every driver still races though only the chosen few are part of the Nextel Cup subplot. The PGA plan (which, to be fair, was foisted upon Finchem by the players) will winnow its field each week, which actually decreases the drama.
SOLUTION: Keep the fields full, bringing more variables into the tournament equation. There are already too many short field events on tour, and it limits competition. Limit the FedEx field within the field to the top 50 in the season-long points chase, reshuffle their points and let them try to play their way into the Tour Championship. To be eligible for the title, you have to play in all three events.
Thanks to reader Steve for this ebay post break-up rant/sale listing. Warning, some R-rated imagery here.
Reader Peter J. was perusing GolfLink.com and caught this course listing. Now, I understand typos as someone who has mastered the art, but this one looks like a silly GolfClubAtlas DG log in name.
The 18-hole "Ardsley" course at the Ardsley Country Club facility in Ardsley On Hudson, New York features 6,522 yards of golf from the longest tees for a par of 72. The course rating is 72.3 and it has a slope rating of 131 on Bent grass. Designed by Willie Dunn, Jr./(R) Al Stermakenzie, the Ardsley golf course opened in 1895. John Brisson manages the course as the General Manager.
Al Stermakenzie is actually Ali G speak for Alister MacKenzie, no?
My friends at the NSA have been waiting for LPGA Tour Commissioner Carolyn Bivens to return from the Solheim Cup, knowing that an inevitable instant message chat with the PGA Tour's Tim Finchem would take place after all of the FedEx Cup excitement died down. Previous chats are here, here, here, here, here and here).
Thanks to reader Graeme for this:
AUSTRALIAN golf great Peter Thomson has suggested golf balls should be redesigned to harness the distance they are being hit by pros and amateurs. In an article in the Australian Financial Review last week Thomson suggested the solution lies in the ball’s dimples. Ten years ago, testers found that the greater the area of the ball covered by dimples, the more aerodynamically effective it became and the better it performed in cross winds. They changed the dimple pattern to cover 100 percent of the ball. “If we restricted the dimple pattern to cover 40 percent or 50 percent of the ball, it would return the distance of the drive to 250 yards [228.6 metres],” says Thomson. “This would also reduce the incidence of balls flying over fences into neighbouring houses and onto roads.” The rules of golf state that every golf ball must comply with three things: its weight must not be greater than 1.62 ounces, its diameter must not be less than 1.68 inches and its initial velocity, when fired from a testing cannon, must not be greater than 250 feet (76.2 metres) per second. Manufacturers have been able to tinker with the ball’s cover, internal composition and dimple pattern to comply with these rules, and yet still get greater distance.
It can't be good for the USGA that one of the R&A's biggest supporters isn't talking up the grooves.
Gary Van Sickle hands out FedEx Cup awards, including this one for Tiger:
Jed Clampett Award: The richest man in golf is Woods. He won seven times in 16 appearances and cleared $10 million for the year. At the Tour Championship, he snagged $1.26 million for the tournament victory and the famously deferred $10 million for capturing the FedEx Cup title. Maybe now he'll start leaving decent tips.
Meanwhile Doug Ferguson lauds the FedEx Cup's success and examines the problems with various "tweaks" to the Cup, including one that I initially thought was an essential fix. Now I'm not so sure the field sizes should change if the points volatility is improved, as expected.
Furyk offered the most comical assessment by noting that 125 players keep their cards, but 144 players start the playoffs. But the season began with 225 exempt players, so actually only 64 percent made the playoffs.
The biggest problem with this solution is that short fields make for dull tournaments and a lousy experience for the fans. Consider the 70-man field at Cog Hill, where an entire day of golf was over in six hours. There has to be consideration given to the tournament and its fan base. Plus, it's harder to win against a larger field.
The limited field events really are getting old, not because Tiger always wins them, but because you sense they might introduce more leaderboard competition as we saw at the first two playoff events.
From Doug Ferguson's notes column:
The PGA TOUR will make it official this week that it will have a drug policy in 2008.
Golf has been under increasing pressure to come up with a policy against performance-enhancing drugs, and PGA TOUR commissioner Tim Finchem said earlier this year that while there is no evidence of steroids, drug testing in sports has become a reality and it was prudent for all golf organizations to deal with them collectively.
"I think we're at a point where to maintain confidence in the public and the fans, we have to take this step, even though there's great speculation about the extent to which substances can help you in this game," Finchem said two weeks ago in Boston.
A conference call to discuss the policy was planned as early as Thursday, although it was not clear what Finchem would announce. He has said any policy would start with an education plan and a list of banned substances, although testing might not begin until at least the second half of next year.
MacKenzie or Nicklaus? (click to enlarge this fine piece of work by the La Habra and Minneapolis art departments)I finally had a chance to sit down with Ron Whitten's Golf World column on restoration, and while his early statements are pretty negative regarding the restoration movement, the remainder of the piece and Whitten's positive portrayal of Kris Spense's work in the same issue softens the blow considerably.
I'm curious if anyone has heard of a classic course that chose to undertake a restoration using as much historical information as possible with minimal modification to original design concepts, and come away from that process unhappy that they did so?
Yes, there are always going to be unhappy members, but I'm wondering about an entire restoration-driven project that was considered a mistake.
To put it another way, has anyone undertaken a serious attempt at restoration that came back a few years later and went with a modern design redesign that was considered an improvement?
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
