WEBVTT - Golf Architecture 101: Greens 0:00:00.160 --> 0:00:03.920 On any golf course, the greens are the center of gravity. 0:00:04.519 --> 0:00:07.680 About forty percent of the shots you hit in a 0:00:07.680 --> 0:00:12.639 given round on a regulation course will be putts. Around 0:00:12.800 --> 0:00:14.800 half or more than half of the shots that you 0:00:14.880 --> 0:00:19.360 hit will be either putts or chips, and any approach 0:00:19.360 --> 0:00:21.759 shot that you hit, at least any decent approach shot 0:00:21.840 --> 0:00:25.880 you hit, will interact with the green or it surrounds. 0:00:26.600 --> 0:00:30.159 So today's topic is a very important one. In this 0:00:30.320 --> 0:00:33.840 installment of our Golf Architecture one oh one series, we're 0:00:33.840 --> 0:00:38.360 talking about greens, how they're designed, how they're built, and 0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:41.640 what makes a good one. I'm Garrett Morrison and this 0:00:41.840 --> 0:00:52.320 is designing golf as usual in Golf Architecture one oh one. 0:00:52.479 --> 0:00:57.440 I am joined by my colleague PJ Clark. How you doing, PJ? Hello. 0:00:58.040 --> 0:00:59.240 I'm excited for this one. 0:00:59.360 --> 0:01:02.480 Unlike I would say the majority of our prior Golf 0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:05.760 Architecture one on one experiences, I truly have no idea 0:01:05.760 --> 0:01:08.440 what I'm walking into today, so I'm very excited for this. 0:01:09.040 --> 0:01:11.520 So what is it about the topic of greens that 0:01:11.760 --> 0:01:14.200 that kind of opens up possibilities for you or it 0:01:14.240 --> 0:01:16.320 makes you wonder where we might be gone with this? 0:01:18.360 --> 0:01:21.560 I feel like in prior episodes there was maybe a 0:01:21.600 --> 0:01:23.760 little bit of homework, So I have I had done 0:01:23.760 --> 0:01:28.040 something no homework. I've done absolutely nothing to get prepared 0:01:28.080 --> 0:01:33.399 for this. There's not like a It's very open ended, 0:01:33.760 --> 0:01:36.360 as you just alluded to. Feels like a lot of 0:01:36.360 --> 0:01:38.840 directions we could go here. Whereas you know, we were 0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:44.039 doing a history lesson or Mackenzie thirteen principles all things 0:01:44.080 --> 0:01:48.720 like that, it's very confined to this one specific segment. 0:01:49.000 --> 0:01:52.880 Whereas greens there are a lot of them. There's actually 0:01:52.880 --> 0:01:57.760 eighteen of them on basically every golf course possible, So 0:01:57.880 --> 0:02:01.040 I feel like there's unlimited possibilities that you're about to 0:02:01.080 --> 0:02:01.920 hit me with right now. 0:02:02.520 --> 0:02:05.960 It's a big topic, partly because of how important greens 0:02:06.000 --> 0:02:09.800 are in golf architecture. So yeah, a number of different 0:02:09.840 --> 0:02:13.280 things that we could talk about related to greens. You know, 0:02:13.440 --> 0:02:16.360 just to start off, do you have any takes about greens? 0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:20.880 Have you have you thought about green design, green architecture before? What? 0:02:20.880 --> 0:02:23.400 What do you like or not like in greens? Have 0:02:23.440 --> 0:02:25.959 any thoughts come to your mind about this area of 0:02:26.440 --> 0:02:27.640 golf course design before? 0:02:29.400 --> 0:02:34.360 Not particularly, I'm when I'm out there playing golf poorly, 0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:36.440 I'm really just focused on how am I getting the 0:02:36.440 --> 0:02:40.560 ball in the hole. So I think, you know, there 0:02:40.600 --> 0:02:44.280 are greens, you know, like punch bowls or funnels, you 0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:47.080 know those are fun for somebody that's bad that I 0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:49.080 get to, like, you know, ride a little ridge that 0:02:49.120 --> 0:02:50.880 could get me closer to the hole. Again, the ball 0:02:51.000 --> 0:02:52.520 of the games about getting the ball in the hole. 0:02:53.240 --> 0:02:56.960 But no, I can't say it's something that I actively 0:02:57.080 --> 0:02:59.720 think about. I understand I'm probably wrong in doing that, 0:02:59.760 --> 0:03:00.959 so excited to learn why. 0:03:01.360 --> 0:03:03.880 No, there's no wrong or right here. You know, if 0:03:03.919 --> 0:03:06.839 you enjoy punch balls, you enjoy punch bowls, that's you know, 0:03:07.520 --> 0:03:11.239 who doesn't on occasion like to see their ball actually 0:03:11.919 --> 0:03:14.160 go toward the hole when it gets on the edge 0:03:14.200 --> 0:03:16.959 of a green Once in a while, Yeah, just once 0:03:16.960 --> 0:03:19.960 in a while. So you know, I wanted to do 0:03:20.000 --> 0:03:24.280 this episode partly because we have to do this episode 0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:26.160 in any kind of one on one series, you got 0:03:26.160 --> 0:03:31.560 to talk about greens eventually, but also more specifically because 0:03:31.600 --> 0:03:37.280 I've often seen a divide in the way that greens 0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:42.400 are discussed among golfers. When non architecture geeks say that 0:03:42.440 --> 0:03:46.880 a course has good greens, they're typically talking about the 0:03:46.960 --> 0:03:51.880 condition of those greens, right, they're talking about whether they 0:03:52.520 --> 0:03:56.920 roll smoothly and quickly. That's good versus bad grains. Good 0:03:56.960 --> 0:03:59.720 greens are in good shape, bad greens are in bad shape. 0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:01.840 Is that's something that you've you've picked up on among 0:04:02.000 --> 0:04:04.640 just among the among the gem pop. 0:04:05.040 --> 0:04:07.360 Yeah, absolutely than thousand percent. 0:04:08.400 --> 0:04:11.640 That would would basically be the way I or any 0:04:11.720 --> 0:04:14.840 of my friends would refer to to greens on whether 0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:16.680 they're beat up or not more than anything else. 0:04:16.760 --> 0:04:19.000 Right, Yeah, if you want to get along with people 0:04:19.040 --> 0:04:21.120 in a normal way, if you just want to be normal, 0:04:21.320 --> 0:04:23.680 then this is this is how you talk about greens. 0:04:23.920 --> 0:04:28.039 Yeah, I get that, So I certainly have that box check. 0:04:29.480 --> 0:04:33.200 Now when architecture heads say good greens, I think they 0:04:33.240 --> 0:04:36.720 mean something very different, right, And and that's gonna that's 0:04:36.720 --> 0:04:38.960 going to kind of be the governing principle of our 0:04:39.000 --> 0:04:43.520 episode here. What makes a good green beyond it just 0:04:43.680 --> 0:04:46.000 being smooth and fast? In other words, what makes a 0:04:46.040 --> 0:04:50.359 green well designed, not just well conditioned. A lot of 0:04:50.400 --> 0:04:53.040 this is obviously subjective, so so we'll discuss that as 0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:55.120 we go along. You know, not everybody has to like 0:04:55.920 --> 0:04:57.960 the same type of design and greens. But I think 0:04:58.000 --> 0:05:00.599 there's a lot more to this subject than just the 0:05:00.640 --> 0:05:03.279 condition of the greens, though we will talk about how 0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.000 greens can come to be well conditioned because that has 0:05:07.040 --> 0:05:11.560 to do with design and construction as well. So admittedly 0:05:11.800 --> 0:05:17.320 a pretty daunting topic to cover in one episode. You know, 0:05:17.400 --> 0:05:20.120 in my intro I talked about how many of the 0:05:20.120 --> 0:05:24.160 shots we hit during a normal round that interact with 0:05:24.240 --> 0:05:28.240 greens thirty to forty putts per round, depending on how 0:05:28.279 --> 0:05:31.320 we're putting, you know, a handful of chips and pitches 0:05:31.480 --> 0:05:35.760 and recoveries from greenside bunkers, and then of course eighteen 0:05:36.040 --> 0:05:39.440 approach shots assuming those approaches get somewhere in the vicinity 0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:42.920 of the green. All of these all of these shots 0:05:43.320 --> 0:05:47.000 are in some way or another engaging with the design 0:05:47.400 --> 0:05:51.560 and the condition of the greens. So it stands to reason, 0:05:51.600 --> 0:05:54.279 of course that a golf architect would put an inordinate 0:05:54.360 --> 0:05:57.960 amount of effort into the design and construction of greens. 0:05:58.240 --> 0:06:02.479 So very high stakes portion of the golf course for 0:06:02.560 --> 0:06:03.680 an architect, right. 0:06:04.240 --> 0:06:05.920 It's a good way of putting it a tie stakes. 0:06:06.000 --> 0:06:11.159 Yeah, it is arguably the most important part, as you 0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:13.560 said there, So yeah, that's a good way of putting it. 0:06:13.839 --> 0:06:16.000 If you screw up the greens. Nobody's happy with you. 0:06:16.200 --> 0:06:18.600 Yeah, now you're spending a lot of time on them, 0:06:18.640 --> 0:06:19.520 So yeah, that makes sense. 0:06:20.120 --> 0:06:23.640 All the details need to be right. And the result 0:06:23.680 --> 0:06:27.520 of this is that greens are the most heavily artificial 0:06:27.560 --> 0:06:30.760 components of any golf course, especially on a modern golf course. 0:06:31.360 --> 0:06:34.920 They are more intensively shaped than anything else. They have 0:06:35.000 --> 0:06:40.040 more drainage and irrigation infrastructure than anything else. So if 0:06:40.040 --> 0:06:42.880 you really want to assess the abilities of an architect 0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:46.480 and a construction crew, you need to start with the greens. 0:06:46.680 --> 0:06:49.200 You look at the greens first to see to see 0:06:49.200 --> 0:06:52.279 how an architect has performed, and besides that, they just 0:06:52.360 --> 0:06:56.120 naturally attract the attention of the golfer. CB McDonald had 0:06:56.120 --> 0:06:59.520 a great quote about this, our old friend C. B. McDonald. 0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:03.400 He said, putting greens to a golf course are what 0:07:03.440 --> 0:07:07.680 the face is to a portrait. The clothes the subject wears, 0:07:07.720 --> 0:07:12.600 the background, whether scenery or whether draperies are simply accessories. 0:07:13.160 --> 0:07:16.920 The face tells the story and determines the character and 0:07:17.040 --> 0:07:21.160 quality of the portrait, whether it is good or bad. 0:07:21.920 --> 0:07:23.720 I think that puts it pretty well. If you have 0:07:23.840 --> 0:07:26.920 good greens, you probably have a good golf course. The 0:07:27.040 --> 0:07:31.880 character of the greens is, to a significant degree the 0:07:31.960 --> 0:07:34.840 character of the golf course. When we take photos of 0:07:34.840 --> 0:07:37.240 golf courses, think about what you're pointing your camera at. 0:07:37.600 --> 0:07:41.520 You know, usually you're pointing it at a green, and 0:07:41.880 --> 0:07:45.600 that is because, yes, indeed, the greens are are the face, 0:07:46.160 --> 0:07:48.720 and you know, the golf course doesn't really make sense 0:07:49.480 --> 0:07:53.920 without them. Now, before we get to what makes a 0:07:53.960 --> 0:07:56.400 good green, because that's the main thing I want to 0:07:56.440 --> 0:07:59.000 talk about today, what makes a good green, let's talk 0:07:59.080 --> 0:08:03.840 quickly about Volume two of Frida Egg Golf's coffee table book, 0:08:04.480 --> 0:08:05.560 Got to do This right, PJ. 0:08:05.720 --> 0:08:08.040 A lot of greens in this In this book, I 0:08:08.080 --> 0:08:08.960 would assume a. 0:08:08.960 --> 0:08:11.640 Lot of photos of greens, a lot of discussion of greens, 0:08:12.200 --> 0:08:15.080 a lot of good stuff about if you're interested in 0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:19.240 green design. It's available for pre order right now. Volume 0:08:19.280 --> 0:08:21.400 two of our Coffee table book. This is our second 0:08:21.400 --> 0:08:24.520 collection of course profiles, and I think they really give 0:08:24.560 --> 0:08:28.160 a sense of what we prioritize in golf course coverage. 0:08:28.480 --> 0:08:30.240 You know, we do hit some we do hit some 0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:34.240 legendary courses like like Oakmont, North Barrack, Fisher's Island or 0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:37.720 All Saint George's Pineish number two. But we also show 0:08:37.800 --> 0:08:40.000 the other side of the coin. Courses like wild Horse 0:08:40.200 --> 0:08:42.360 in St. Andrew's Beach, two of the best that you 0:08:42.360 --> 0:08:45.000 can play anywhere for less than one hundred dollars. Both 0:08:45.040 --> 0:08:48.800 have fantastic greens. In fact, actually Saint Andrew's Beach, a 0:08:48.840 --> 0:08:51.920 green at Saint Andrew's Beach is going to come up today. 0:08:51.960 --> 0:08:54.440 We also have a little chapter on on North Haven, 0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:57.000 a tiny nine holer on the on an island off 0:08:57.040 --> 0:09:00.400 the coast of Maine, one of my favorite chapters the book. 0:09:00.480 --> 0:09:03.920 So you know, a big range of golf course coverage here, 0:09:04.400 --> 0:09:07.720 and you know this is volume two of our of 0:09:07.720 --> 0:09:10.720 our coffee table book. But it's not like you have 0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:13.319 to read volume one in order to understand Volume two. 0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:16.120 This is this is a fresh new collection with its 0:09:16.160 --> 0:09:18.600 own identity, and we're really proud of it. I think 0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:21.800 it's extremely beautiful. And I can say that because I 0:09:21.840 --> 0:09:24.720 had very little to do with the uh you know, 0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:26.840 only a few of my photographs are actually in the book, 0:09:26.840 --> 0:09:28.520 and the design of the book was completely out of 0:09:28.520 --> 0:09:31.120 my hands. And so yeah, it looks it looks awesome. 0:09:31.440 --> 0:09:34.800 Pre Orders are open now through September fourth to begin 0:09:34.880 --> 0:09:39.280 shipping on October seventh. Go grab yours at pro shop 0:09:39.559 --> 0:09:44.960 dot the fried egg dot com. All right, PJ, Let's 0:09:44.960 --> 0:09:48.520 get into the factors that make a good or well 0:09:48.720 --> 0:09:55.320 designed green. The first factor is obviously location. Now we 0:09:55.400 --> 0:09:57.679 talked a bit about this in our one oh one 0:09:57.760 --> 0:10:05.679 episode on routing right. Finding well suited compelling sites for greens. 0:10:06.480 --> 0:10:10.120 That means you can, you know, construct the green in 0:10:10.280 --> 0:10:15.040 a simpler and more efficient way, and you get more 0:10:15.120 --> 0:10:18.559 natural results. You don't have to completely manufacture a green 0:10:19.280 --> 0:10:22.800 if you find a good site for it. You want 0:10:22.840 --> 0:10:26.120 a variety of green sites throughout the course. You know, 0:10:26.400 --> 0:10:28.559 you can put greens on ridges, you can put them 0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:32.200 in valleys, you can put them on knolls or in saddles. 0:10:32.280 --> 0:10:34.679 You can put them on slopes of various kinds, you know, 0:10:34.760 --> 0:10:37.720 back to front, front to back side slopes. You know, 0:10:37.760 --> 0:10:40.360 one thing that I always do when I'm walking through 0:10:40.400 --> 0:10:43.440 a golf course is I look at what the green 0:10:43.520 --> 0:10:46.280 site is. And sometimes it's hard to tell, because again 0:10:46.400 --> 0:10:49.840 greens are heavily artificial, and it can be tough to 0:10:49.880 --> 0:10:53.320 tell what the natural environment initially was. But if you 0:10:53.360 --> 0:10:55.559 look around the green, look at the terrain, look at 0:10:55.559 --> 0:10:58.319 what the general kind of movement of the land is doing. 0:10:59.000 --> 0:11:01.120 Then you can get a sense for what the original 0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:04.880 location of the green was and get a sense for 0:11:05.240 --> 0:11:08.680 how much variety the course has achieved in green sites, 0:11:08.920 --> 0:11:12.200 Courses where every single green is on a ridge or 0:11:12.240 --> 0:11:14.280 every single green is in a valley are likely to 0:11:14.440 --> 0:11:18.280 start to feel a little bit repetitive. So you know, 0:11:18.400 --> 0:11:20.680 my favorite greens, I think are the ones that really 0:11:20.760 --> 0:11:24.760 use their natural landscapes and don't rely too much on 0:11:24.960 --> 0:11:29.600 manufactured features for their identity. They may have manufactured features, 0:11:29.640 --> 0:11:34.520 but the essential character of the green kind of comes 0:11:34.520 --> 0:11:38.000 from its location. Does that make sense? 0:11:38.840 --> 0:11:40.360 Yeah, no, I think that. 0:11:40.920 --> 0:11:43.920 I'm now going through I haven't played a ton of 0:11:43.960 --> 0:11:45.840 DELF recently, but I got to play yesterday. So now 0:11:45.880 --> 0:11:47.960 I'm going through yesterday and trying to think back to 0:11:48.840 --> 0:11:51.160 of green sites and seeing if I came up with 0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:52.280 anything or missed anything. 0:11:52.320 --> 0:11:53.440 This is a great picture here. 0:11:54.120 --> 0:11:56.840 Well, I just brought up a slide show. Now for 0:11:57.040 --> 0:12:00.680 those who are listening audio only, don't worry. I'm going 0:12:00.720 --> 0:12:02.880 to describe what's on the slides in a basic way, 0:12:03.000 --> 0:12:06.160 and it's not going to be totally essential to the 0:12:06.920 --> 0:12:10.600 experience of this podcast, but we will show some photos 0:12:10.640 --> 0:12:15.400 of various greens on you in this slide show and 0:12:15.760 --> 0:12:19.160 they'll be available on YouTube and all that. So the 0:12:19.200 --> 0:12:21.960 green that I'm showing PJ right now is the third 0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:25.320 green at Saint Andrew's Beach, a lovely tom Doak golf 0:12:25.360 --> 0:12:29.600 course in Australia on the Mornington Peninsula. And the reason 0:12:29.640 --> 0:12:31.920 I chose the third green is that it just has 0:12:32.000 --> 0:12:36.600 a wonderful natural location and the green just sits in it. 0:12:36.600 --> 0:12:40.040 It basically sits in a high saddle. There's a ridge 0:12:40.400 --> 0:12:43.360 and there's kind of a natural notch in that ridge 0:12:43.840 --> 0:12:47.679 where the green is sitting. And you know, this green 0:12:47.800 --> 0:12:52.640 derives its character from the landscape. A great site was found, 0:12:52.720 --> 0:12:55.640 a natural site was found for this green, and that's 0:12:55.679 --> 0:12:58.520 where it gets its personality from. So these are the 0:12:58.600 --> 0:13:02.000 kinds of greens that I personally really enjoy, you know, 0:13:02.280 --> 0:13:08.800 because you're not relying too much on artificiality to create interest. 0:13:09.200 --> 0:13:11.840 So that is the third green at Saint Andrew's Beach. 0:13:11.880 --> 0:13:14.280 Any impressions from this photo as you're looking at it 0:13:14.360 --> 0:13:14.920 right now, PJ. 0:13:15.360 --> 0:13:17.880 Well, I mean it looks like it's supposed to be there, 0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:20.520 which I think is kind of what you're getting at right, 0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:26.000 like it looks obviously trees or bushes, shrubbery was cleared out, 0:13:26.080 --> 0:13:29.680 but it looks like it is just fits in the 0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:32.360 surrounding environment, like it was just a patch in the 0:13:32.360 --> 0:13:34.400 middle of these trees that they stuck a flag in. 0:13:34.600 --> 0:13:38.880 Like it doesn't look like anything was, you know, move 0:13:38.960 --> 0:13:42.000 too much or out of place, which is appealing to 0:13:42.040 --> 0:13:44.080 the eye certainly, like it. 0:13:44.000 --> 0:13:45.920 Was meant to be a green, and it might be 0:13:46.040 --> 0:13:48.440 something that you don't even notice as you're playing golf. 0:13:48.480 --> 0:13:50.719 You're just like, oh, there's a green. But that can 0:13:50.760 --> 0:13:54.280 be a good thing that a you know, a green 0:13:54.559 --> 0:13:57.199 does not take you out of the flow of the round, 0:13:57.240 --> 0:13:59.679 doesn't take you out of the experience. You just feel 0:13:59.679 --> 0:14:03.040 like you're experiencing the landscape and that the holes are 0:14:03.160 --> 0:14:06.000 sitting on the land in a way that feels inevitable 0:14:06.080 --> 0:14:08.440 or natural, and it doesn't even jump out to you. 0:14:08.480 --> 0:14:10.440 That can be a good thing because you can focus 0:14:10.480 --> 0:14:12.800 on other things you don't you aren't focusing on what 0:14:12.880 --> 0:14:16.080 the architect did. But the architect did a lot here. 0:14:16.240 --> 0:14:18.920 Tom Doak chose a really good site for the green 0:14:19.000 --> 0:14:21.880 and made the choice not to do much to it. 0:14:22.520 --> 0:14:25.800 So that's three at St. Andrew's Beach. That's an example 0:14:25.800 --> 0:14:27.760 of how we'll go through some of these slides here. 0:14:27.800 --> 0:14:31.520 We won't again it's an audio medium primarily here, but 0:14:31.800 --> 0:14:33.560 you'll see some of this stuff on YouTube if you 0:14:33.560 --> 0:14:38.360 want to. All Right, the second big factor PJ that 0:14:38.440 --> 0:14:42.800 I think makes a good green after choosing the location 0:14:43.840 --> 0:14:47.200 is drainage. This isn't the sexiest topic in the world, 0:14:48.000 --> 0:14:51.760 but it is probably the aspect of green design that 0:14:51.920 --> 0:14:58.040 architects think about the most and players think about the least. Yeah, 0:14:57.760 --> 0:15:01.160 and yeah, and yet it's it's so important, right it is. 0:15:01.680 --> 0:15:04.280 When you talk to architects about building greens, they just 0:15:04.320 --> 0:15:08.160 talk to you about drainage. I mean, the fund design 0:15:08.200 --> 0:15:12.960 stuff is it comes up later. One component of drainage 0:15:13.080 --> 0:15:15.760 is obviously site selection. What we just talked about location. 0:15:16.120 --> 0:15:20.080 You know, you choose locations that naturally drain well, which 0:15:20.120 --> 0:15:23.800 is why on older courses you often see greens on ridges, 0:15:23.840 --> 0:15:27.360 greens on high points, or if they're lower, you see 0:15:27.400 --> 0:15:31.480 greens kind of next to creeks or natural ditches or 0:15:31.520 --> 0:15:34.840 other drainage elements that were just in the landscape, so 0:15:34.880 --> 0:15:37.600 that the water goes off the green and onto this 0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:41.560 lower ground. So finding sites where there's lower ground around 0:15:41.600 --> 0:15:45.680 it can really help and saw that with the the 0:15:45.720 --> 0:15:47.920 third hole at San Andrew's Beach. Even though it's kind 0:15:47.920 --> 0:15:50.560 of sitting low in its a media environment, there are 0:15:50.680 --> 0:15:54.120 places where it naturally water will naturally drain away from it. 0:15:55.640 --> 0:16:01.120 Another component of drainage is conjuring. Greens need to be 0:16:01.280 --> 0:16:05.560 molded so that the water funnels off and either spreads 0:16:05.600 --> 0:16:09.000 out or goes into drains. So you can't have places 0:16:09.120 --> 0:16:13.800 on the green where the water pools right, and there 0:16:13.800 --> 0:16:16.960 are various ways of doing this. You know, this is 0:16:17.040 --> 0:16:20.320 sometimes where architects can get into a little bit of 0:16:20.360 --> 0:16:24.120 trouble because if you're contouring the greens so that it 0:16:24.200 --> 0:16:28.840 drains off, sometimes you do that in ways that don't 0:16:28.880 --> 0:16:33.200 look very natural or that look contrived in some way. 0:16:33.800 --> 0:16:37.520 And you know, often on greens that I would consider 0:16:37.600 --> 0:16:40.320 kind of poorly shaped or poorly executed. You see what 0:16:40.360 --> 0:16:44.040 are called catch basins, right, and catch basins are these 0:16:44.080 --> 0:16:46.640 kind of swales around a green with drains at the 0:16:46.640 --> 0:16:49.000 bottom of them. Sometimes you see them in fair ways 0:16:49.000 --> 0:16:52.280 as well, where you know the water will obviously just 0:16:52.840 --> 0:16:55.560 you know, run into the swale and go down the drain. 0:16:56.320 --> 0:16:58.040 But when you look at them, it's like, oh, well, 0:16:58.080 --> 0:17:01.800 that's just that's basically just a gutter sitting there around 0:17:01.800 --> 0:17:05.879 the green. And you know, catch basins can be necessary sometimes, 0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:10.800 especially on sites that don't naturally have soils that drain quickly, 0:17:11.440 --> 0:17:14.320 but they have to be executed in ways that don't 0:17:14.440 --> 0:17:17.440 call attention to themselves. And I'll show you an example 0:17:17.480 --> 0:17:22.160 here from Bandon Dunes of a green surrounded by catch 0:17:22.200 --> 0:17:25.320 basins that I think kind of jump out to the 0:17:25.320 --> 0:17:28.840 eye and do call attention to themselves in a way 0:17:28.880 --> 0:17:32.639 that I don't find particularly attractive. So this is the 0:17:32.680 --> 0:17:35.520 third hole Abandoned Dunes. It's a photo from behind the green, 0:17:35.880 --> 0:17:39.760 and what we see are kind of these symmetrical swales 0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:43.040 all around the green, each of which has a drain 0:17:43.280 --> 0:17:45.720 at the bottom of it. And I just think this 0:17:45.800 --> 0:17:49.840 green could have been carried out in a more kind 0:17:49.840 --> 0:17:53.840 of naturalistic way that these drainage elements could have could 0:17:53.840 --> 0:17:56.960 have been executed better. Now I love this golf course. 0:17:56.960 --> 0:17:59.320 I think Bandon Dunes is a great golf course, but 0:17:59.440 --> 0:18:01.760 this is one green where where I think, you know, 0:18:03.000 --> 0:18:05.399 probably the construction crew could have could have done a 0:18:05.440 --> 0:18:07.080 little bit better. Does that does that? 0:18:07.359 --> 0:18:07.479 Uh? 0:18:08.040 --> 0:18:10.600 Can you see what I'm talking about in in this 0:18:10.760 --> 0:18:12.040 uh in this image PJ. 0:18:12.760 --> 0:18:17.080 Yeah, I I mean it, at least in a way 0:18:17.840 --> 0:18:22.119 I understand your your critique from this aerial view. At 0:18:22.200 --> 0:18:26.360 least it's like, I don't think it's unappealing to look 0:18:26.400 --> 0:18:28.879 at I I I don't mind like the symmetry. It 0:18:28.920 --> 0:18:31.480 looks a little kind of even on all sides there 0:18:31.600 --> 0:18:34.240 that in the catch basins, but the existence of the 0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:37.400 catch basins, I understand what you're you're you're getting at 0:18:37.520 --> 0:18:37.960 for sure. 0:18:38.320 --> 0:18:41.880 Okay, that was a quick rundown of green construction and drainage. 0:18:42.480 --> 0:18:45.040 You know. Just keep in mind that this is what 0:18:45.160 --> 0:18:47.040 this is what architects are talking about when they talk 0:18:47.080 --> 0:18:48.280 about building greens. 0:18:48.520 --> 0:18:50.399 This is something I've never thought of before in my 0:18:50.600 --> 0:18:53.160 entire life. So I'm I'm I'm here, this is this 0:18:53.200 --> 0:18:55.480 is already a win. I think for this episode of 0:18:55.520 --> 0:18:56.879 Golf Architecture, what I want. 0:18:57.080 --> 0:19:00.840 Perfect Let's get to the third factor that I think 0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:04.320 makes for a good green, and that is the green's 0:19:04.400 --> 0:19:08.879 relationship with the rest of the whole. We've talked about 0:19:08.880 --> 0:19:11.280 this before on Golf Architecture one oh one. This is 0:19:11.359 --> 0:19:18.000 kind of the central aspect of strategic golf architecture, What 0:19:18.240 --> 0:19:21.919 is the relationship between the green and what's going on 0:19:22.200 --> 0:19:25.679 in the fair way and the tea shot. A good green, 0:19:26.720 --> 0:19:30.720 I think determines the strategic character of the whole. That's 0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:34.680 the green to tea thinking that we have developed in 0:19:35.080 --> 0:19:38.280 some past episodes of golf Architecture one O one thinking 0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:42.639 from the green backwards. The green is really the first 0:19:42.640 --> 0:19:46.439 thing that you need to contemplate before you understand a 0:19:46.480 --> 0:19:49.640 golf hole, and I think it's good greens that give 0:19:49.680 --> 0:19:53.960 you something rich to think about. So the first aspect 0:19:53.960 --> 0:19:55.879 of the relationship between the green and the rest of 0:19:55.880 --> 0:20:01.680 the hole is size and receptiveness. Generally, the longer the 0:20:01.720 --> 0:20:06.040 average approach shot, the bigger and more receptive the green. 0:20:07.000 --> 0:20:10.800 Large greens allow for more margin for air and kind 0:20:10.800 --> 0:20:15.359 of suit. The dispersion patterns of longer clubs, broad open 0:20:15.440 --> 0:20:18.280 fronts with contours that help the ball onto the green 0:20:18.920 --> 0:20:22.399 can also be used when you're dealing with a long 0:20:22.440 --> 0:20:25.240 approach shot, so a long par three, a long par four, 0:20:26.080 --> 0:20:28.679 Generally what you want to see is a larger and 0:20:28.720 --> 0:20:33.480 more receptive green. And so an example of the distinction 0:20:34.840 --> 0:20:38.320 between a green that can receive a short approach shot 0:20:38.840 --> 0:20:42.480 versus a long approach shot would be on the one hand, 0:20:42.960 --> 0:20:46.639 the seventh hole at Pebble Beach par three, famous par 0:20:46.760 --> 0:20:50.639 three about it, you know, one hundred or so yard shot, 0:20:51.080 --> 0:20:54.440 and the green is tiny. Now it has shrunk over time. 0:20:54.480 --> 0:20:58.399 It's probably smaller than it should be, but certainly it 0:20:58.480 --> 0:21:03.560 was designed to be partly because the shot that you're 0:21:03.600 --> 0:21:07.480 hitting into it is very short, and that that size 0:21:08.080 --> 0:21:11.840 suits the scale of the shot. At the other end 0:21:11.880 --> 0:21:15.360 of the spectrum, maybe you have a green like the 0:21:15.400 --> 0:21:20.160 third at Chicago Golf Club, which is a Birt's template, 0:21:20.920 --> 0:21:25.080 a long par three where players are supposed to be 0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:29.240 hitting long irons or even woods. And what you see 0:21:29.280 --> 0:21:32.480 here is a nice big run up into the green, 0:21:32.640 --> 0:21:36.480 a broad open front. The bunkers are along the sides 0:21:36.880 --> 0:21:39.800 of the hole, and what you have is a nice 0:21:39.800 --> 0:21:42.600 big fairway where you can land your ball and let 0:21:42.640 --> 0:21:44.639 it run up onto the green. And then the green 0:21:44.720 --> 0:21:51.119 itself is very large, broad receptive, accommodating, but still interesting 0:21:51.920 --> 0:21:54.639 because you have that little swale in front of it, 0:21:54.680 --> 0:21:56.320 and so you can kind of run your ball through 0:21:56.359 --> 0:22:01.320 that swale. And you know, of course it's not an 0:22:01.359 --> 0:22:04.719 easy shot still because the size of the green is 0:22:04.760 --> 0:22:09.439 suited to the size of the possible misses that you 0:22:09.560 --> 0:22:13.600 would have with those longer clubs. So green size is 0:22:13.920 --> 0:22:18.040 a key component of that relationship between the green and 0:22:18.080 --> 0:22:20.400 the rest of the hole. But I do think that 0:22:20.480 --> 0:22:27.320 sometimes this rule is worth violating because it can create 0:22:28.240 --> 0:22:33.800 really interesting and exciting situations if the green is out 0:22:33.800 --> 0:22:37.400 of scale with the length of shot being hit. So 0:22:37.440 --> 0:22:42.040 think about the road hole. What makes that hole exciting, Well, 0:22:42.040 --> 0:22:45.040 it's the fact that the green is too small for 0:22:45.119 --> 0:22:47.160 the length of second shot that you're heading into it. 0:22:47.480 --> 0:22:49.800 And probably part of the reason it's that size is 0:22:49.800 --> 0:22:51.920 that the hole started as a part five and people 0:22:51.960 --> 0:22:54.840 were expected to be hitting short third shots into it 0:22:54.840 --> 0:22:57.520 as opposed to long second shots. But now that we're 0:22:57.960 --> 0:23:00.800 more commonly hitting long second shots into the well, that's 0:23:00.840 --> 0:23:05.399 that's really quite a moment because the green is so 0:23:05.520 --> 0:23:10.159 fiercely guarded and it provides such a fine margin for 0:23:10.440 --> 0:23:13.480