@@mattmiller07 I'm from Tulsa. I attended 22 PGA championship here at Southern Hills and loved the job Hanse did there. Wish I could attend Charles Schwab, but I'm excited to see how it looks on TV too
That was my first thought, too. Looks good. But also looks like fast moving water from storm runoff will scour away at the banks of the more “natural” edges of the creeks & river tributaries. Why were the “hardscapes” installed in the first place? Probably as protection against erosion that occurred previously and required restoration of creek banks and lost fairway and green surrounds areas.
Rugged bunkers eventually become a problem and much harder to maintain. Do they look different sure but oval or simple design bunkers play basically the same way. I'm not a fan of everything little thing when it comes to modern on a golf course but it's far better than rugged design
Leave it to Hanse to F up a great design to "restore" a course to its original design several decades prior. Why restore something back to the 40's when the game has complete evolved. He ruined the 13th hole but pushing the green substantially away from the water, essentially taking the water out of play which many fell victim too in the past. Hanse, golf courses are supposed to be playing tougher these days with technology advancements and more vigorous practice routines by the players, not easier
I’m curious, do you actually think the pre-renovation Colonial is “better” (however you may define that) than post-renovation Colonial? And why? I just want to understand the perspective of folks who are against golden age restoration methods like Hanse employs. To me, the litmus of a great golf course is more about aesthetic and enjoyment than difficulty relative to par
@@danielberlin5968Golf, at its core, is nothing more than a strategic game against a landform. Architects have become afraid of the fact that people will call their courses “too hard”. when it comes to courses that host tour events, I’ll never understand when they don’t adapt it to current golf standards. I’m not personally a fan of Hanse anyways, but there should still be an emphasis on balancing aesthetic & strategy. That’s literally all golf is.
@@danielberlin5968I’m saying this as a 13 HDCP. By no means am I good golfer, but I should expect to get beat up on a tour course. I’m honestly saddened by this new state of golf course architecture.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Hanse & crew are golf course wizards. Actually looking forward to the next Colonial to see the pros play this track now.
It just looks so much better with the restorations. And I love how something as simple as “Hey, let’s flip the picture” can lead to a nice change
Amazing restoration. So much more natural and fitting for the land
Knocked it out of the park again. Great idea to flip the 8th!
Couldn't agree more. As a Fort Worth guy, I love these changes and can't wait to see it in person
@@mattmiller07 I'm from Tulsa. I attended 22 PGA championship here at Southern Hills and loved the job Hanse did there. Wish I could attend Charles Schwab, but I'm excited to see how it looks on TV too
Incredible improvement
Love it so much.
Beautiful, but beware what your ask for. We'll see what erosion from fast moving water will do in the future.
That was my first thought, too. Looks good. But also looks like fast moving water from storm runoff will scour away at the banks of the more “natural” edges of the creeks & river tributaries. Why were the “hardscapes” installed in the first place? Probably as protection against erosion that occurred previously and required restoration of creek banks and lost fairway and green surrounds areas.
Rugged bunkers eventually become a problem and much harder to maintain. Do they look different sure but oval or simple design bunkers play basically the same way. I'm not a fan of everything little thing when it comes to modern on a golf course but it's far better than rugged design
Leave it to Hanse to F up a great design to "restore" a course to its original design several decades prior. Why restore something back to the 40's when the game has complete evolved. He ruined the 13th hole but pushing the green substantially away from the water, essentially taking the water out of play which many fell victim too in the past. Hanse, golf courses are supposed to be playing tougher these days with technology advancements and more vigorous practice routines by the players, not easier
I’m curious, do you actually think the pre-renovation Colonial is “better” (however you may define that) than post-renovation Colonial? And why? I just want to understand the perspective of folks who are against golden age restoration methods like Hanse employs. To me, the litmus of a great golf course is more about aesthetic and enjoyment than difficulty relative to par
@@danielberlin5968Golf, at its core, is nothing more than a strategic game against a landform. Architects have become afraid of the fact that people will call their courses “too hard”. when it comes to courses that host tour events, I’ll never understand when they don’t adapt it to current golf standards. I’m not personally a fan of Hanse anyways, but there should still be an emphasis on balancing aesthetic & strategy. That’s literally all golf is.
@@danielberlin5968I’m saying this as a 13 HDCP. By no means am I good golfer, but I should expect to get beat up on a tour course. I’m honestly saddened by this new state of golf course architecture.
The 13th has never been a hard hole