School of Golf Architecture: Minimalism

There is little consensus on the meaning of minimalism in golf architecture. Although the term is widely used to describe various design styles and methods, it hasn’t been defined rigorously.

In art and building architecture, minimalism tends to be defined by characteristics like purity of form, lack of ornamentation, and functionality. It refers to the reduction of a design to its core components. Minimalism in building architecture arose in the mid-1900s as a reaction against the heavily ornamented Classical Revival and Art Deco styles. 

In golf course design, minimalism arose in a similar way: as a reaction against the excesses of the 1970s and 80s. Many courses built during this period were heavily manufactured with little regard for the land they were built on. By the late 1980s, however, some architects began to refocus on working with the natural terrain. Tom Doak’s High Pointe (1989) and Coore & Crenshaw’s Sand Hills (1995) are early examples of this pioneering work. Golf Digest architecture editor Ron Whitten was among the first to use the word “minimalism” to describe this type of design.

The characteristics most commonly associated with minimalist golf courses include:

• An emphasis on maximizing natural landforms
• Restrained earthmoving
• Naturalistic aesthetics

However, the notions of simplicity and subtraction should also be part of the discussion. For example, Oakmont Country Club sits on the ground naturally and was built with very little earthmoving, but because of its bold and numerous manmade hazards, the course cannot be considered particularly minimalist.

So perhaps minimalism in golf course design could be better defined as creating engaging golf with the fewest manmade features possible. Doak’s definition of minimalism in his “Minimalist Manifesto” places a similar stress on the avoidance of unnecessary design features: “The minimalist’s objective is to route as many holes as possible whose main features already exist in the landscape, and accent their strategies without overkilling the number of hazards.”

The diagram below illustrates this idea by showing two holes with the same strategic concept of challenging the left side to get a better angle into the green. The version on the left uses just a few features to drive strategy, whereas the right adds many that are not strictly necessary. 

Given the emphasis on moderate earthmoving, minimalism lends itself to attractive, topographically varied sites. At courses like Sand Hills and Pacific Dunes, the preexisting landscapes were so stunning that simple design worked beautifully. But when working with less exciting sites, many golf architects find the minimalist approach less appealing.

Overall, minimalism harkens back to the beginnings of golf, when courses were simply a means of navigating the natural landscape. Today, with the availability of powerful earthmoving technology, minimalism has become an exercise in calculated restraint: getting the best golf, by doing the least.