A reader, Melvyn Hunter Morrow( and of a famous Scottish golfing lineage),  raises some important issues of design and the philosophy of golf. Lorne comments at the end.

‘Penal’ and ‘Strategic’ are they really two separate and different concepts of design or are they, as I believe, part and parcel for the strategic design package?
The modern attitude is for easy golf, of riding and not walking, of using distance aids, be they books or electronic aids in place of one’s own eye/brain coordination. In my opinion they are a serious loss to the average golfer who at a stroke has cut him/herself off from the delight and more importantly satisfaction of doing it under one’s own steam.

With this in mind I believe that the modern designer may have concentrated on what is called a strategic design but with a well watered down penal aspect. Yet as we see in our modern society, strategic policies without a penal element are a sign of weakness and rarely works. This I see in golf.

We need a mix and I say yes to deep bunkers that might force a retreat out the back or sides as the best options available, yes to hazards that makes the golfer think carefully before deciding if he/she feel their skill is worthy of the shot. Lets not forget the game of golf is all about the challenge, it’s not just about hitting a long ball from the Tee, its all about facing and overcoming the traps and hazards placed by the designer to test your ability to navigate around his design in the least number of strokes, to push you to your limit and perhaps even help you rise to the occasion. I exclude Island Greens because they go way past accepted penal; they are in fact the equivalent of hanging someone for stealing. The Island Green is more than a hazard, the immense size of some only allow the good golfer the chance of managing the Green, as for the average golfer, these hazards not just penalise you, worst still they can kill the game and perhaps your interest in the course stone dead, not what I consider the meaning of a hazard in golf even a penal one.

Yet how many think, let alone actually notice the work of the designer. At least while walking and using ones own God gifted senses we have more time to understand exactly what we are really facing. That is something that riding and aids just can not match. Lets not forget that golf for over 600 years has been a walking and thinking game, its only in the latter half of the 20th Century that Golfers seem to want to water down their own experience and their game of golf by not playing in the time honoured manner. Perhaps we need to look to that building in front of The Old Course at St Andrews and ask those who are meant to protect our Game of Golf why they have allowed these aids onto our courses.

I will in defence of the cart say that for those unable to walk, the cart is a good tool but for able bodied golfers, I just ask why are you bothering to play golf, clearly its is to much of an effort to play the game as its has always been played. As for those distance aids, well that in my opinion speaks volumes about the ability (sorry I should have said lack of natural ability to judge distance) of those golfers. But then, that again is only my opinion.

Golf is a great game no matter ones skill level, it’s the fun and challenging aspect of the game but it needs that penal aspect that is naturally inherent within strategic planning. Surely the real fun and enjoyment comes from doing ones best, being able to perhaps achieve a little victory over one of the 18 holes, yet that victory then becomes ones target for the next time you play that course. Why are the club lounges, bars and pubs near a course always full of happy smiling faces including those who feel they failed to conquer any part of the course on that day. That’s because it golf, a walking and thinking game.

Like a well known beer ‘normal golf can refresh the mind that other aids can not reach’ not forgetting that ‘Golf’s final frontier is all in the mind’, but you do need to loose your toys (carts distance aids etc) to experience the joy of the game.

Regards from Melvyn Hunter Morrow

Lorne Smith comments:-

Dear Melvyn,   Thank you for your thoughtful and stimulating comments. You raise fascinating issues with which the vast majority of readers, I am sure, will agree.

I would like to take the opportunity of explaining further about my use of the word ‘penal’ and how it fits into the Four Eras of Golf Architecture.

Hazards must of course by definition penalise. Links pot bunkers - and inland ones like those at Ganton and Woodhall Spa, for example - are great hazards that infest the mind.

Being called  ’strategic’ or ‘penal’ is determined by where they are placed.

Era One: Early golf hazards (pre c.1890), often across the fairway, tended to catch the rank bad shot. This has been called the ‘penal’ design period.

Era Two: In the ‘golden era’ through the Edwardian expansion of golf and up to the Second World War, hazards were ’strategic’ally placed where the expert wanted to play his ball and he was thereby penalised for the ‘not quite truly hit ball’ (see Woking GC review for further explanation).

Era Three: In the over-watered 1980/90s era of ‘through the air’ target golf, stopping the ball by the flag became too easy. Television demanded ‘modern penal’ hazards again to create drama - the Island green being the extreme example, where only the expert can succeed while for the less able it is hopelessly insurmountable.

Era Four: It is exciting to see how some of the latest golf architects and developers are moving forward to a new ‘fine golf’ era.  With firm greens, even the very best strikers of the ball, have to consider how to run up their shots to the pin. The distance ‘through the air’ becomes less important and creative shot making returns.

The new ‘minimalist’ school seems to epitomise this return to strategic design for firm running conditions. The Renaissance GC, near Muirfield created in 2008 by Tom Doak, a leader of the minimalist school, is an example where use of fine fescue grasses and firm conditions (under the management of one of our most able greenkeepers) are the key to challenging the best golfers, rather than protecting the course by penally placed hazards.

We are so lucky in the British Isles, our temperate climate encourages these grasses that like dry, firm conditions, (even if recent wet summers haven’t helped!)

Let me also add that the modern aids you understandingly hate, are encouraged by ‘target’ golf. They are of less use in ‘fine’ golf.

The trend again is ‘fine golf’ !

Best wishes from Lorne