Part 1
Architects from the golden age of design (1920s) were especially keen on emphasizing shotmaking skills. Does modern pro golf really show that requisite skillset and has power golf simply become the chief asset over anything else?
Nathan Crace: It’s not just pro golf. I’ve been coaching a high school golf team for 15 years. These juniors hit it longer and longer every year and it’s tough to break them of the “bomb and gouge” mindset.
The modern game is played differently than it was–just like design and agronomy have evolved. There’s not enough room here for that discussion; but I have always said that if you brought Donald Ross back to life, he would understand the need to adapt to the changes in technology over the last 100 years. He was ahead of his time a century ago and there’s no reason to think he would not adapt to those changes.
Richard Mandell: I recall Rory McIlroy’s comment from last week’s Truist Championship at Philly Cricket: Hit driver everywhere and then figure it out from there. That answers your question for me.
What we can do as architects is focus on the little details of putting surfaces to challenge the golfers when they get to the green and apply fine details around those greens to create grey-area situations for them as well.
In other words, don’t allow the pros to have simple black or white decisions.
Central hazards off the tee are one way we can test the professional’s thought process within their power golf.
John Fought: Unfortunately, power golf has redefined the tournament courses. Because tournament players hit the ball such great distances, and tees are stretched to their maximum, the wonderful strategic elements often are out of play for today’s players.
However, I still think great strategic design that challenges both the weak and the strong is preferred by all types of players. I love golf holes that have multiple options integrated into the design.
Lester George: Unfortunately, yes, power golf has become the most prevalent consideration for the governing bodies of golf in determining their tournament sites.
The last shotmaking site was the U.S. Open at Merion East, which was won with a score of one over par. The U.S. Open at Winged Foot had a chance to be similar, but they lost their nerve and cut the rough down, subsequently allowing the strongest guy in the field to play “bomb and gouge” all week to win.
How important for any design is the correct selection of the specific grass type to use for the playing surfaces — especially putting greens?
Lester George: Paramount. Second only to selection of the architect and contractor.
Choosing the wrong grass can have a devastating effect on the preparation and execution of any event, especially a major. My recent memory of grassing choices made at one U.S. Open site (putting greens) and one U.S. Women’s Open site (fairways), on two exceptional golf courses had disastrous effects on playability.
So much so, neither course is scheduled to host another Major Championship for the foreseeable future.
Richard Mandell: For me, I don’t really care about what grass is used beyond the big choice of cool-season or warm-season. As a golf architect, the grass is just what is on top of the features I create or topography I reveal.
John Fought: The putting greens are the most important element of a golf course so a course that utilizes the correct turfgrass combined with the most interesting contouring will always be a good test of golf.
With today’s green speeds it is critical that the greens have a turf grass that can be maintained at faster speeds while also being maintained for daily play.
I do want firm and fast conditions for design so if a particular grass – one that is more drought-tolerant – can be chosen to minimize irrigation, I am all for it.
Nathan Crace: Turf selection is one of the most important factors. In recent years, we’ve seen a number of southern courses with bentgrass greens converting to one of the ultradwarf bermuda varieties like Quail Hollow did back in 2013.
At Old Fort Golf Club near Nashville, we converted from bentgrass to Prizm zoysia greens during our renovation in 2024. And more southern courses are converting from ulradwarf to options like Platinum TE paspalum that performs better with questionable water sources and can require fewer inputs.
The USGA and R&A are planning a roll back of the golf ball starting in 2028 for elite pro players – then in 2030 for recreational players. However, the PGA Tour and PGA of America have shown hesitancy to support such a far-reaching initiative. What’s your take on this issue from an architectural perspective and how do you see the issue resolving itself?
Nathan Crace: I think most architects have been internally conflicted regarding how far the ball travels now with changes to equipment and the ball itself. Advances in agronomy and irrigation have also played a part in some of those changes.
On one hand, we hate to see classic courses becoming irrelevant or being “tricked up” just to challenge long hitters. On the other hand, when changes need to be made, those courses typically reach out to an ASGCA member architect for that work to protect the integrity of the course while adapting to the modern game–and we’re here to help.
John Fought: In my opinion this should have been done years ago. The players don’t want anything to change but I think it is important to preserve our classic courses that cannot be lengthened.
What if baseball allowed aluminum bats or auto racing allowed unlimited horsepower? For the good of the game this needs to be done.
Richard Mandell: Architects have been asked this question from the start. Old Tom Morris got shown the door by Allan Robertson because he favored the guttie over the featherie.
Mackenzie wrote about this extensively and all of us on this panel have been asked this question for decades. I think a rollback would be good because we are running out of space to lengthen courses. The pros make money based on how far they hit the ball so I do understand their hesitancy.
For me, one who likes to have varying lengths of holes so golfers can use all of the clubs in their bag (see Mackenzie again), a rollback would allow that to happen a bit easier from the back tees. I can still do it from the other tees.
Lester George: I seriously doubt the recreational players will adhere to any type of rollback, unless it is a closely monitored event. Eventually, as with all things, the courts will probably get involved the first time someone challenges someone else over the fairness of winning an event with the “rolled back” golf ball being played.
As an architect who has had some of the 13 Major events played on his courses, I am consistently aware of the length players are hitting the ball and am frequently preparing for that in my new courses, renovations and restorations when it is on the client’s list of design initiatives.
However, I am also cognizant that length is not the only defense the golf course can present. Landing area width, mowing patterns, bunkering, tee location, orientation, alignment, and elevation all make a difference in the defense of par. Depending on the client and the course, green contours are also a good way to counter pure length and restoring shot-making skills.
What letter grade would you give to the PGA of America on site selection for the staging of its flagship event and what suggestion(s), if any, would you offer for future improvements?
Lester George: I would give the PGA of America a grade of “C” on site selection. I would suggest they start finding newer tournament sites that are more interesting to the television audience.
The PGA Championship has the lowest television viewership for a reason, and it’s not the players. It is the monotony of sites. Hopefully that will start to change when they switch to their new venues in Frisco and other newer venues.
Richard Mandell: I would give the PGA of America a C. Again, back to the distance issue, the PGA is forced to go to courses that have the length to handle the professionals and that usually translates into boring architecture.
Pros don’t like blind shots, they don’t like central hazards, they don’t like quirky mounding in the middle of fairways, and they don’t like greens that slope from front to back. That said, there have been some interesting venues, like Whistling Straits and the Ocean Course but even those are lengthened so much that the architecture is diluted.
Visually, courses like those at Erin Hills or Chambers Bay (not PGA sites) are interesting to look at but the rest of them are flat-out boring. Even Bethpage has lost a lot since it became a major venue. All those Tillinghast bunkers are irrelevant.
Nathan Crace: It’s one of only two majors the men play on this side of the Atlantic that change locations every year. In my lifetime, the U.S. Open has always been considered the one of those two that rotated among the “historic clubs.”
The PGA Championship was always the major that gave newer courses an opportunity to showcase a major (and it used to be the last shot at a major every year). I grew up near Louisville, so Valhalla is a good example of that mindset.
As far as suggestions, I would like to see more western time zone courses utilized to grow prime time TV viewership and maybe expose people to courses a little more off the beaten path when possible. Moving it to May from August a few years ago should make more Southern courses better options because May is not as sweltering as August.
John Fought: The PGA of America has done a very good job of selecting site for their major events (-A). Today’s events require so much more infrastructure, parking and general space.
Many of the great classic courses that the USGA utilizes just don’t have the space or infrastructure to have major championships any more. I love Merion but it’s too small for big events.
You’ve got one specific course you’d like to see host a future PGA Championship and it’s one with the needed logistics to pull it off – which club would you pick?
John Fought: With the PGA now being played in May I think the championship must be played in the southern half of the US. That means that courses in Minnesota, New York and even in the Pacific Northwest should not be considered.
I think it would be best to play the PGA at Riviera, or Colonial or Pinehurst No. 2.
Lester George: The Pete Dye Course at French Lick. Absolutely ready for a PGA Championship.
Richard Mandell: Let’s go back to Westchester CC’s West Course in Rye, New York and add the needed yardage to pull it off.
Nathan Crace: I’m going to go with a shameless plug on this one. Todd Quitno and I are renovating Merit Club north of Chicago starting later this year.
The club hosted the 2000 US Women’s Open and after the changes we are planning, I think it would be a great place to host a future PGA Championship.
Course images credit: PGA of America/Gary W. Kellner
The Participants
Richard Mandell / Pinehurst, NC
Self-proclaimed golf architect for the people, Richard Mandell, ASGCA, ISA, registered landscape architect in four states, has dedicated himself to creating fun and enjoyable golfing experiences since he started in the business back in 1992.
Many of his projects are the most iconic public venues in America – Keller Golf Course in Minnesota, Tanglewood Championship Course in North Carolina, and Bobby Jones Golf Club in Sarasota, Florida just to name a few. His design work is getting more and more radical yet still strategic and playable. Check our Richard’s new book, Principles of Golf Architecture.
Nathan Crace, Magee, MS
Nathan Crace is a golf course architect based in the Southeastern United States. He is a member of the American Society of Golf Course Architects (ASGCA) and past member of the ASGCA Board of Governors.
A Midwest native, Crace is a graduate of Mississippi State University and has new course and renovation clients nationwide ranging from public and resort courses to private clubs, former PGA Tour stops, and the US Air Force.
John Fought / Scottsdale, AZ
John Fought culminated a successful college golf career at Brigham Young University by winning the 1977 U.S. Amateur. After graduating with a degree in accounting, he turned pro, joined the PGA Tour the following year and won two events in 1979.
After several years, he turned to golf course architecture as a career, and in the late 1980s began working with Bob Cupp, eventually running a branch office in Portland, Ore. and serving as Cupp’s primary West Coast designer. In 1995 John started John Fought Design in Scottsdale, Ariz.
Some of his most recognized designs include The Gallery South Course in Tucson, Ariz.; Langdon Farms in Portland, Ore.; The Reserve Vineyards and Golf Club in Portland, Ore.; and Rush Creek in Minneapolis, site of a 1997 LPGA event.
Lester George / Chesterfield, VA
His new course designs and renovations have won numerous awards, including his Kinloch Golf Club being named the number one golf course in Virginia by Golf Digest. Having the opportunity to renovate many of the most historic and well-regarded golf facilities on the East Coast by the most revered golden age architects is a privilege he treasures.
Successfully transformed two brownfields into golf courses, converting overgrown hazardous areas into plush, green recreational turf. Believing everyone should have a chance to play the game, he has donated much time and effort to the First Tee Program. Among several other First Tee courses, George designed The First Tee Chesterfield, the premiere 18-hole First Tee course in the United States, and The First Tee Richmond (a brownfield site).
