When one comes to the quality of the bunkers and other hazards we pass into realm of much dispute and argument. Primarily bunkers should be sand bunkers purely, not composed of gravel, stones or dirt. Whether this or that bunker is well placed, has caused more intensely heated arguments outside of the realms of religion, than has ever been my lot to listen to. C.B. MACDONALD
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
Graylyn Loomis has photos of the vehicles moving into place and executioner Martin Hawtree overseeing the Old Course at St. Andrews' Phase 2 destruction slated to include new bunkers and most pathetic of all, removing the "acute spur formation" that has guarded the fourth green for centuries.
Even though the spur is integral to the strategy, the R&A, reluctant to change it, agreed because today's greenkeepers can't figure out how to mow what's been around for centuries. 
You may recall that last year in late November, distracted by the anchoring ban, the word dropped late on a Friday (when else?) that changes were being made to the Old Course to help the links prevent a 59 from being shot keep up with the modern game, under the supervision of the R&A's Chief Inspector Architect, Peter Dawson, with help from golf architect Hawtree and from a Links Trust proudly abdicating its responsibility to defend the Home of Golf from vandals.
As you may also recall, the reviews were not good, especially from those pesky Australians (here and here).
Dawson went on a PR swing of sorts to the few outlets that wouldn't press him about his past comments suggesting that any tampering with the Old Course would be akin to putting a moustache on the Mona Lisa and just not a wise thing to do.
There had been indications that support was eroding for elements of Phase 2.
You can relive the entire saga here in the archives. And there was this to be dusted off, courtesy of the art department:
Thanks to the reader who sent in this image of an ad in Thursday's St. Andrews Record calling out R&A Chief Inspector Peter Dawson for his reversal on Old Course changes.
The full text:
“Because of the history of the Old Course, moving hazards is not the option it would be at many other places. You simply can’t move a bunker here or there on the Old Course. All that leaves is to move tees. The course has proved many times that it is subtle enough to provide a strong challenge. We are not trying to change the character of the course…” 22 02 2005
Mr Dawson, why have you changed your mind?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/golf/4292635.stm
The course is currently hosting the Alfred Dunhill Links Championship, with Phase 2 of the R&A mandated changes set to begin this winter. Though there have been indications that support is not unanimous for going forward with some of those changes.
Nicholas Christian reports that Hamilton Grand is half sold-out at pretty astronomical prices.
And that's before the £7.58 million penthouse sells and becomes Scotland's "most expensive residential accommodation."
Alistair Tait files an extensive look at the St. Andrews Links Trust's trademarking efforts and their continued demands of payment from local St. Andrews businesses that have been using the town name on their town businesses for years. 
Also noteworthy in the story was the annual report revelation of $27.9 million in 2012 revenues, including $16.7 million from golf operations on operating expenses of $24.3 million.
Thanks to DTF for this one-club event held many years ago (anyone know when) at the Old Course, featuring the Lee Trevino, Seve Ballesteros, Nick Faldo and Isao Aoki playing one club with Peter Alliss announcing.
Even better, St. Andrews Links Trust head honcho Euan London uses a baseball analogy in making a stunning comment about the extreme nature of Old Course changes that his organization ultimately approved.
From John Huggan's must-read dissection of the Old Course meddling:
“So I understand there are legitimate counter arguments, one that says ‘don’t ever tinker with the Old Course’, and another outlining the futility of trying to out-run technology.
“There was, however, no obligation on our part to go along with the R&A’s wishes. In fact, when they first came to us I don’t think there was any expectation in the minds of Peter and Jim that any of this was going to pass first base.”
As Huggan pieces together, the original stance of the parties involved turned out to be a fictional account. Or at the very least, one designed to mislead about the chain of events.
The original Friday news dump press release suggested the changes were dictated by recommendations from architect Martin Hawtree, but as a subsequent admission from R&A Chief Peter Dawson hinted and Loudon confirms to Huggan, the changes were entirely driven by the R&A and that Hawtree was hired by the Links Trust merely to implement the plan.
“From my perspective, the R&A came to us with what they saw as the ‘big picture’,” says Loudon. “Martin was the detail man.”
Why does this matter? Because we have a governing body making changes to a masterpiece--the masterpiece--for no apparent reason other than to try and elevate scores and mask their regulatory malfeasance.
Sadly, Loudon reveals that the approach to the work wasn't even that thorough in its cynical calculation.
Players like Tiger Woods have wondered how they could try to make the Road hole tougher considering its astronomical scoring average at every Open Championship. Huggan, in going through each of the changes with Loudon, wonders how a hole like the Road could average closer to bogey than par and still need to be made tougher with new greenside contouring.
“You make a good point,” acknowledges Loudon. “Those statistics were not part of our thinking. Maybe they should have been.”
Oh dear.
I want to say I'm still very much looking forward to EA Sports' Tiger Woods PGA Tour '14 game because of its heavy focus on history, with the opportunity to play legends like Young Tom Morris, Bobby Jones, Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus in historic settings.
That said, this YouTube video with "Ryan the product manager" for EA's Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14 does have me hoping there is a 14.1 update at some point. Because while I can deal with Arnold Palmer playing the Hootie-ized 11th hole in the 1950, complete with the confining pine trees planted this century to destroy the hole, it's when Ryan shows us the Old Course scenes with Young Tom Morris that I get concerned.
Identifying him as Old Tom--which I can deal with because, well, I don't know--the Young Tom creation by the EA team is using a steel shaft about 65 years before anyone knew what they were. But worse than that, we see him teeing off on the first hole and what's in the distance?
Why it's the Old Course Hotel, erected in horrifying fashion about 100 years after the historic scene depicted.
Anyway, Ryan also shows up clips of the 1934 version of Augusta National--which we also saw in a preview video--and it still looks ridiculously accurate in detailing the original MacKenzie-Jones design, so that's good enough for me to shell out the necessary dough to play Augusta as the architects created it.
A few of the more horrifying (to historians) screen grabs, starting with Young Tom playing the Old Course in the late 1800's with the fairly recently renovated Old Course Hotel in the distance:
Young Tom Morris, using steel shafts...if only...
And Arnold Palmer, playing Augusta National's 11th hole in the 1960s, about forty years before Hootie Johnson and Tom Fazio turned it into a Christmas tree nursery because, you know, it wasn't hard enough.
Thanks to Darius Oliver for alerting us to Paul Prendergast's lengthy interview with Geoff Ogilvy touching on a number of hot button issues but I couldn't help but focus on his remarks about the R&A's changes to the Old Course at St. Andrews. 
He joins fellow Aussie Peter Thomson in denouncing not only the idea of changing the course to produce higher scores, but also the secretive and deceptive process by which the changes were conceived and executed.
It’s disappointing in that the whole point of it is to make us shoot a slightly higher score every five years [at The Open], and it’s embarrassing – disgusting – that they’re doing it for that reason. I mean .. it’s hard to have the words to describe the arrogance of doing something like that, it’s incredible.
And...
The reason the sport is what it is, is because of St Andrews. It didn’t evolve to the point where it’s at because of people doing what they’re doing right now. It evolved, it didn’t get designed. It came because of nature, all the balls finishing in one place so there were lots of divots and that spot became a bunker. It’s the first place that anyone should ever study when they think about golf course architecture.
This was nice too...there goes Geoff's Royal and Ancient Golf Club membership chances. Join the women of the world.
I think the thing that really affected most people that got emotional about it was the way they went about it. Making a sneaky little announcement the same weekend everyone was talking about the long putter ban. The bulldozers were out the next day. Surely the Old Course deserves a round table of the smartest people in golf with the best intentions and to discuss it for two years before you do anything?
And this is such a key point about the 11th green, and speaks to the absurdity of trying to force uniform green speeds on a course, especially the Old.
They've done plenty of bunker work for maintenance reasons over time but changing contours that have evolved and adding to the 11th green to provide extra pin placements are pretty fundamental changes ...
It’s been fine for 400 years, in the form it’s in it’s been fine for a hundred years. It’s fine!
I mean, if they get crazy wind and you can’t put a pin up the back left on 11 then, oh well. Or, you just have that green running two feet slower than the others. We're the best golfers in the world, surely we can work out that the green is slower. We’re not that precious.
...just not the ones screwing around with the most sacred ground in golf.
No, it seems the Links Trust of St. Andrews that is charged with caring for the seven courses and the same group that rolled over when R&A Chief Architect Peter Dawson decided he could improve golf's most sacred architecture, has decided to crack down on St. Andrews companies that have been using the St. Andrews name for just a mere 150 years. How dare they!
According to an unbylined Scotsman story, the Links Trust is fighting the club and bag makers after learning they were attempting to trademark some of their stuff.
Ewan Glen, chief executive of the St Andrews Golf Company, said: “What has happened is absolutely outrageous. The trust was set up to run the golf courses and it is dripping with money received from the public in green fees. Money and power seems to have gone to its head and [it is] now resorting to bullying and threatening businesses that have been in St Andrews for generations.
“I fully understand that the ‘St Andrews’ name needs to be protected from the threat of counterfeiting and copying but the trust is acting like a hard-nosed commercial company, rather than a not-for-profit trust. They [the trustees] are pretending to be the only legitimate custodians and seem to want to play God with the name of St Andrews.”
Glen added: “We have been told by the trust they will take us all the way legally even if it means going to judicial review and they have made it clear they will spend as much as it takes to knock our company out of this battle."
If only we could get them this worked up over changes to the trademark design features.
And as you can see from the St Andrews Golf Company website, they're not exactly using the town name in vain!
Martin Dempster talks to Ernie Els and Louis Oosthuizen about R&A Chief Inspector Architect Dawson's changes to the Old Course.
Louis, the last man to win the Open at St. Andrews, not surprisingly had no idea what Dempster was asking about. Els, the 2012 Open Champion, tried to defend the changes but in doing so unknowingly offered the worst indictment possible.
“Most of the courses we’ve played in the past ten or so years have changed, including Troon, Royal Liverpool and Sandwich. In fact, they’re making changes to all of the courses on the rota in a bid to make the challenge as tough as possible.”
A course designer himself, Els added: “The only thing that bothers me a bit about it is that, when the wind changes direction sometimes on these courses, it can be tough to get to the fairway from some of these new tees.
Quibble, quibble! These pros today are so spoiled. Go on...
“But I think these courses do need to change. The R&A want to have the same kind of scores winning today as you did back in the 1920s."
Psssst....Ernie, that's about the most cynical, small-minded thing a governing body charged with ensuring skill is rewarded can end up doing! Especially one constantly touting their lack of concern for winning scores far under par.
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
