I know Ive asked this elsewhere to Garrett. Is there a definitive list for "types" of courses? Ie links, parkland, heathland, mountain, desert, headland, sandbelt, etc? Should there be more or sub categories? In the midwest we love calling a treeless course links-style, which is a small pet peeve (usually more wetland or prairie ground). What are NE sandhills, WI sand based, NC sand based? Maybe Im getting too deep in the woods but just curious.

The modern driver is easy to hit and modern metals are about the same size as persimmon drivers of old. Rather than adding 100’s of yards to scale up classic courses, maybe architects should develop strategies to take the driver out of play for elite players. Modern drivers make the game less interesting at the highest levels of the game.

I recently found out that there's a "Perry Maxwell design" about 3 hours from me at Kentucky Dam State Park. I can't find much information about the course online, but from the pictures I've been able to find, it certainly looks like any Maxwell has been scrubbed from it. I will be making an effort to go play it this year but my question is when does a course become so far removed from it's architectural beginnings that it can no longer be credited to that architect? Also, any info on this course would be great!

Besides the Old Course, what Scottish courses have had the most influence on golf courses in the US?

Shoutout to Don Placek the GOAT!

Just back from a Wisconsin golf bender (I believe 15 courses in 8 days with some replays!) and two courses stick out in my head after the entire trip more than the other great offering. 1) Lido - Two rounds on the course and I want to play it every day unlocking different pin posiitons and understanding the strategy for the course. However, while I absolutely adored the course, I heard multiple other resort guests say how much they hated it and never wanted to return. What in your mind makes it so divisive? There's also another question for another day about how the increased real estate play on these new dream golf courses might affect the presentation of the golf course itself. 2) West Bend - Lucky to play here after being recommended by a friend and have to say the front 9 Langford and Moreau seemed like an even more audacious Lawsonia Links. The second nine while having some great work done on it by Kye Goalby and more to come I think. While the back nine was added later and is a let down somewhat after the front, the question is how we should consider these courses that had nine holes, then nine extra added on by a different architecht. Should we just consider the original nine to evaluate, or the entire course, or how would one go about giving such a course an egg rating? If anyone is headed to Wisconsin, absolutely go see this gem, the 7th hole will make you guffaw out loud!

I was hoping the women wouldn't catch up to the men in regards to how much they whine about course setup.Everyone's got to play the same course, and the winning score was still under par.

One of the best pieces about golf architecture (and life) that I have read in a long time. Great article.

1. The debut of Fields Ranch East in the LPGA major, seemed to get a lot of criticism. Just looking at the golf course architecture and how the players played the course, do you think the negative critiques were warranted or overdone? What, if any, changes would you make to the course to make it better for the PGA Championship in 2027? 2. Henry Fownes never built a golf course, then goes to to Scotland to study the courses. He comes back and builds Oakmont Country Club. Hugh Wilson never built a golf course, then goes to Scotland to study the courses. He comes back and builds Merion. Is tons of experience needed to create a world class golf course?

While I understand the historical relevance of traditional media in golf, I feel as though the world is moving away from it. I also think Tiger had a large effect on things, with his more frosty, “give them nothing” attitude in interviews disseminating to the next generation. That’s not to say EVERY new player is a wet blanket in interviews, but I think more of these guys see media as a chore rather than an opportunity, especially if many of them feel they could have greater reach, and more importantly, control of the narrative through their own channels (instagram, Twitter, and of course the Xander App…). Personally speaking, the only golf interviews I find myself watching / listening to are through podcasts or quotes in books. Maybe it’s due to the “give them nothing” attitude I mentioned above, but I just don’t think you get a ton out of guys when they’re in “tournament mode”. If you were to interview me after I just worked a full 10+ hour day, I’d probably also give you a hell of a lot less than if it happened on a day off and in a comfortable environment.Either way, will be interesting to see how this relationships evolves, especially with the recent Rory sentiments and such.