Can you explain why bigger greens are better (than smaller greens). Said another way, why would bigger greens at Pebble Beach or Bethpage Black make these courses better. Should all greens have 4 different pin positions? With green speeds increasing, some areas on greens cannot have a pin position anymore (effectively reducing the size of the green). Does this mean that greens need to be "softened?" Is there a way to map greens so they can be softened yet maintain original design. Can you think of an instance where rough made a course better? When did rough start in golf course architecture?

Allegheny is great. Private golf in Pittsburgh is phenomenal and somehow underrated.

I’m glad others commented. I don’t have anything to add except to say that I greatly enjoyed this.

Andy, I heard you reference on this podcast visiting Rodeo Dunes. I was just out there to see it yesterday and was amazed by the landscape. Interested to hear more of your thoughts about it. Are you going to be putting out some content on it soon?

I do think it is an interesting concept (is experiment a better word?) when we consider the absolute golf mania seen in South Korea, combined with their lower number of courses / smaller geographic footprint. Sort of a build it and they will come? We'll have to wait and see I guess! :)

Thank you, Laurence. Very kind words.

Yeah that course is eye-catching and intriguing, perhaps in both the wrong and right ways. The wrong is the fixed width of the corridors and overall sterility of the place. The right is the randomness of those pot bunkers and the reversibility of the holes. In that sense there's some Old Course-esque mystery/nebulousness of how exactly to play the holes, at least at first. Maybe there's something there, if executed properly and thoughtfully?

Thanks for the comment and reading, Joseph. I'd say Jacob is right--there are too many to mention. I'm going to think a little more on that, though, as there are a few general examples of "monotony" and ways to create change within that. Trees are an obvious one. Too many trees--break it up with some open spaces. No trees at all--break it up with some carefully planted and well-timed copses. Land is another. If super flat, find some ways to better use an existing feature or create some anew. If way too severe, perhaps try to find some available areas of calm (I will note this is often not "available" on many severe sites.) And then there's just architecture in general. The most common examples of monotonous courses tend to be from 50s/60s era designs that have not changed over time. These also tend to be the best opportunities for improvement, as they are more of a clean slate and are often on "core golf" (I.E. no houses within) sites. They usually provide opportunities not just to create new features--bunkers, greens, mounds, berms, burns, dry-washes, etc.--but also reroute holes and vary up their corridor widths. There tends also to be ways to break up what is usually an even spread of isolated trees--remove a bunch, highlight the better and more mature ones, and sometimes create more density and naturalness with the remaining stands. And all this also ties into level of challenge, types of strategy, visual stimulation, etc. The opportunities can be seemingly endless...

Collin Morikawa during his Master's press conference: "If you guys -- you can't just ask me when I'm playing well. You guys should be asking the top 10 players every single week, every single day, and just document it. Then you get a sense of who we are and you get a flow of how that comes to be." You can't say this and be mad about a reporter coming up to you on the first tee and asking you a question. He's doing exactly what you asked him to do! Collin's weird aggression with the media is the latest example of a modern tour player being completely out-of-touch. The worst part of this whole experience is all the people who have come to his defense. As if the media is out to get him by simply reporting the words he is saying and asking him questions about his performance -- this is their entire job, as Collin has stated! Before you jump to defend an athlete, especially a golfer, who criticizes the media, ask yourself this: Do we want a world where the only interactions we get with players are on their terms and on their channels? Where they never have to answer an uncomfortable question? Do we really want the players to have more control over "the narrative"? I don't. I value an independent observer point out inconvenient facts and calling players on their BS.

Thanks for the review of this interesting course and list of other good courses in the Boston area, they are all on my personal Google Maps of golf courses to be played.