#11 at Oakland Hills-South: The anti-thesis of what Turner's talking about. |
- Wm. Flynn (1891-1945).
Last night I listened to episode 4 of an interesting new series of podcasts called 'State of the Game'.
In this episode, host Rod Morri talks golf architecture with guests Mike Clayton and Greg Turner. Both Clayton and Turner are Tour pros turned architects. Clayton has done some great work recently in his native Australia, and now partners with fellow Aussie, Geoff Ogilvy, in the design business. Turner is also a golf pro turned architect, who's doing some interesting work with fellow Kiwi Scott Macpherson.
Geoff Shackelford has a link to this very interesting discussion, at his blog, here.
One of the most interesting bits of this 46 minute chat came from Turner, who says it's critical that golf architects play a role as educators. (I agree.) Some times it's not easy though. Turner adds: When working at clubs with means, architects are often dealing with people who are successful in their own walk of life and who, in turn, are some times disagreeable with views on golf and course architecture. Many of these people look at golf architecture simply as a way to penalize golfers for erring, he says. And, the more a golfer errs, the greater they think the penalty should be.
Turner recognizes that this is a rational, logical way to think about things, and a reasonable way to run a society. But, we're not talking about running a society, he says. "We're talking about a game. We're talking about a sport, something that's supposed to be fun and enjoyable."
Words of wisdom that more golfers need to consider.
I agree with Turner. A strictly penal approach to golf architecture results in making the game increasingly more miserable for those who are least able to deal with it. Sound golf architecture is not about penalizing poor shots. It's about making golf more interesting, fun and enjoyable.