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
Pete McDaniel reviews some of the more intriguing moments on the shortened par-4 13th Saturday, which along with a few other touches, appeared to breath a little life into the tournament by introducing strategy.
You have to do some reading between the lines in Alex Miceli's item on Phil Mickelson getting accosted by a fan Saturday, but in case you were wondering if it had to do with his course comments, think again.
Let's see if the BellSouth Classic turns back into a major on moving day.
The leaderboard, when it works, can be viewed here.
The over-under on the first Hawaii Five-O promo? 2:55 ET.
****For those having trouble posting comments, I'm told a simple clearing of your browser cache will do the trick. Here's how to do it without clearing passwords, cookies and other fun stuff.
So much for a gentleman's game! Rees Jones, better known now as "the guy who did this one," has fired back at Phil Mickelson's criticism of Atlanta Athletic Club as an example of lousy modern design.
"Phil's just trying to round up some course-design work for himself," Jones, above, said in an interview. Mickelson had complained about Jones's course revisions at Mickelson's hometown Torrey Pines, and the Atlanta Athletic Club, site of this week's PGA Championship. He griped that the penal style at Atlanta "doesn't let the average guy play."
And Golf Channel's Kelly Tilghman Tweeted this yesterday:
Tim Finchem and the networks now have a good idea where they stand with Tiger, so let the big ne-gosh begin.
Meanwhile, it was an ugly PGA for Tiger Woods and for one last time (until November), the scribes write up his saga.
I spent more time than I'd like to think about looking at stories on Rory McIlroy's decision to play a shot from near a tree root during round one of the PGA and the coverage is shocking on a number of levels.
That's Davis Love talking about the 260-yard 15th.
While I feel for the players having to play the par-3 15th or any hole that long with a green designed for a shot about 75 yards shorter, I couldn't help but laugh seeing three and four irons as the club of choice for those under the age of 35. And as Bill Fields explains, the guy who shot 63 sums up the best approach. Or is it?
"I'm not a huge fan of playing a 260-yard par 3 with water and bunkers, but like I said yesterday, we all have to play it, we all have to suck it up and try to hit a good shot there," said Stricker. "You're going to see some big numbers there and you're going to see some birdies there. But it's very difficult."
As Bob Sowards, an Ohio club professional who carded a first-round 69 said after parring No. 15 with a 17-degree hybrid and two putts, "I don't play many holes like that."
The hole played to a 3.4359 scoring average, with 9 birdies, 88 pars, 43 bogies, 14 doubles and two others.
It's a shame there isn't a little more fairway leading up to the green so that someone could lay-up. Though I suspect that might tip folks off that it's not the best design ever. But who says you have to hit a green from a par-3 tee?
Phil Mickelson, talking to writers after the round, made similar remarks to PGA Tour radio. Thankfully, he did not share these with Atlanta Athletic Club member and Member Hall of Fame member Jim Huber's face during his TNT interview!
Q. Talk about the golf course, different than what you played ten years ago?
PHIL MICKELSON: It's totally different. It's great for the PGA. It's terrific. It's in great shape. It's difficult. It's challenging. There's some really hard holes, and there's some birdie holes. And I think it's a great site for the PGA.
But....
But I also think if you look at the four par 3s here, it's a perfect example of how modern architecture is killing the game, because these holes are unplayable for the member. You have water in front and you have a bunker behind, and you give the player no Avenue to run a shot up, and the 7th hole, where there is not any water; there's a big bunker in front and right of the green, instead of helping the player get it on to the green, it goes down into the lower area, as does the left side.
Now, for us out here, it doesn't make a bit of difference, because we are going to fly the ball to the green either way. And that's why I say it's great for the championship.
But it's a good reason why the number of rounds are down on this golf course amongst the membership. And it's a good reason why, in my opinion, this is a great example again of how modern architecture is killing the participation of the sport because the average guy just can't play it.
And a follow up question from Tom, who must have missed the first part?
Q. Can you talk about your views on the golf course, the par 3s here?
PHIL MICKELSON: Well, Tom, I think this is a great site for the tournament, I really do. It's perfect, because there's some really hard holes and there's some really easy holes for birdies. And I think it's going to be exciting to watch. You're going to see a lot of calamity coming down the stretch and a lot of birdies early and late in the round -- early and middle of the round.
Did and again, it's a wonderful site. But the four holes, the four par 3s, are a wonderful example, and a number of others throughout the course; that is the reason why participation in the sport is going down, because of the modern architecture, that doesn't let the average guy play.
Now, we have no problem playing these holes, but when you put water in front and a bunker in back, and you give the player no vehicle to run a shot up, the member can't play and that's why membership participation on this golf course is down like 25 per cent.
And it's every course throughout -- modern architecture, there are some great ones, but the guy that redid this one, you know, it's great for the championship, but it's not great for the membership.
While I share Phil's view about modern designs like AAC and share his disdain for Rees Jones' no-reward design, it's still unreasonable to blame modern architecture for the game's problems. Modern designs like AAC are a response to the distance the ball is flying. Maybe not a great response, but a response nonetheless. You can't blame the folks for trying to respond, but when the situation is constantly in flux, you are bound to get it wrong.
And Phil is opposed to any kind of regulation of his equipment to keep courses relevant without changing them.
So complaining about such designs without also wanting something done to rein in distance advances is like complaining about credit default swaps, and then fighting any new laws to regulate them.
Seth Jones, on the ground for Golfdom magazine, reports on the freak mishap Wednesday night on the eve of the PGA.Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
