It started with a social media post during the AIG Women’s Open (unrelated to the tournament) suggesting only golfers who have been playing the game for some time have any interest or ability to appreciate good course design.
The implication was that the way courses are laid out is of little importance in attracting people to (or more importantly, keeping them in) the game.
On the surface, it seems a logical point of view. Even those whose main interest in the game is its playing fields will recall a time when they weren’t even aware course architecture existed and yet, they still enjoyed the game.
But like so much in golf, the intersection between the act of hitting the ball and how and where the game is played is less obvious.
It is a nuanced relationship that doesn’t really require the golfer to understand there is such a thing as course design to have course design impact their enjoyment.
It’s not uncommon to meet people in golf who will loudly and boldly proclaim they are not only not interested in the subject but are actively uninterested.
“It is a nuanced relationship that doesn’t really require the golfer to understand there is such a thing as course design to have course design impact their enjoyment.” – Rod Morrie.
Of course, their stance falters once they have answered the simple question ‘do you have a favorite hole’ to which the answer for every golfer on the planet is ‘yes’.
By default, if you have a ‘favourite’ hole you must prefer that hole over other holes you have played because of – wait for it – some element of its design.
So, if even those who claim to shun course design actually DO have an interest, is it reasonable to assume those who have no idea of its existence can be equally affected by it?
The answer is yes. Rare is the ‘golfer’ whose entire and ongoing experience of the game is to whack balls at a driving range or practice only their putting.
Golf is a game of multiple skill sets, the joy of which comes from testing those various skills over the grounds upon which the game is played.
If those grounds were some form of regulated, geometric, flat area like a giant football field with nine or 18 flags stuck in the ground, ‘interesting’ would have no place in describing them.
Even the most ardent anti-architecture type couldn’t possibly think golf would be enhanced by making it so dull.
And so to the original point about the broader role of architecture in the game and who better to articulate the matter than the great Dr Alister Mackenzie.
As he wrote in The Spirit of St Andrews:
“There are some games, such as roller skating and table tennis, which become merely passing crazes, and this is so because one obtains a certain standard of proficiency which neither increases nor decreases, and in consequence the game becomes monotonous. Golf on a first class course can never become monotonous, and the better the course, the less is it likely to do so.”
The message is simple: architecture matters, whether people know it or not. It is the key to gaining and maintaining interest in the game and is far more important to ‘growing the game’ than anything professional golf might come up with.
© Golf Australia. All rights reserved.