Alex, nice graphics. A couple of thoughts came about regarding other possible variables to consider: were you able to calculate what percentage of each hole is composed of fairways, greens, trees, sand traps and water hazards? There might be some correlation between the presence of one over another, and you could begin analyzing whether one variable, when placed on the hole, affects the appearance of another? You mention the angle of the course may be responsible for the difficulty - does foliage then come into play with regard to sight-lines? You have the layered analysis in slide 5, but how would it appear in section or as individual holes?
You mention that all of the holes seem to taper left - is this in relation to a north arrow or do they vary in compass direction but ultimately still taper left? Does the organization of the holes relate to sun orientation? Often golf courses give discounts for tee-offs in the late afternoon due to bad light and glare - does the course lend itself to be ideal with regard to the sun's location during peak hours vs. evening hours?
I think this is a good start. Include par info on the diagrams. I think sections would be great if you can get them. They could really help understanding of the relationship between holes and obstacles. Can you establish a normative relationship? If all of these are from the same course, it would be helpful to have an overall site plan so that we could see the relationship of the parts to the whole (or is it holes?)
Very clear process of what your doing, and everything makes sense. The veering to the left is quite interesting and i know you talked about further exploring the sectional qualities of Augusta. Maybe there is a way to think about exploring the bend in the course and relationship to topographical change. That left turn seems to be important i would be willing to bet there is some sort of correlation.
The mappings of Augusta are very effective at communicating your points. I wonder if there is a way to look at average golfer's scores on any of the holes and try to correlate those to some of the variables being used on various holes.
I know weather plays an important part in the game of golf. I wonder if showing data from more than one year, or from month to month where rain/wind may have been a factor would be beneficial?
I liked where you started and how it turned out. I think you could use the same process to compare Augusta over the years. The course became significantly more difficult after Tiger Woods shot -18 at the 1997 Masters Tournament. Post '97 the club attempted to "tiger proof" the course by making holes longer, fairways smaller, adding sand traps, and making greens faster and more undulated. It would be a lot a lot a lot of data to sift through as far as physical changes and player statistics but I think you could see the change through representational data.
First off, the graphics you provided are awesome. Hopefully you can find some information on elevation change, because the suggestion Nicholas made about finding sections would produce another variable that you could work with.
I really enjoy the plan based investigation. as Ainsley mentioned, would be it be possible to investigate the section? It would provide another layer of depth the the argument. Where are the snags to a low score. also, what do the putting greens look like? The scalar element would be great to see. Golf seems to a sport that can be broken down quite easily based on the club. How does that change the perception of the space?
I really enjoy the plan based investigation. as Ainsley mentioned, would be it be possible to investigate the section? It would provide another layer of depth the the argument. Where are the snags to a low score. also, what do the putting greens look like? The scalar element would be great to see. Golf seems to a sport that can be broken down quite easily based on the club. How does that change the perception of the space?
I think you stated your thesis very well, and gave the proper mapping to help support it. Great graphics on all diagrams, I really liked your own sketches of the course. I know you stated that you weren't able to find elevational changes. Too bad, a sectional analysis of the course would have brought it an even great level. Even there a study of just the greens and seeing which level changes make for different difficulty, since always seems to come down to putting at the Masters.
I think that a sectional view could be created, and information such as club choice, distance, and trajectory highlighted. I assume that an important aspect of golf is the loft of the ball.
11 comments:
Alex, nice graphics. A couple of thoughts came about regarding other possible variables to consider:
were you able to calculate what percentage of each hole is composed of fairways, greens, trees, sand traps and water hazards? There might be some correlation between the presence of one over another, and you could begin analyzing whether one variable, when placed on the hole, affects the appearance of another? You mention the angle of the course may be responsible for the difficulty - does foliage then come into play with regard to sight-lines? You have the layered analysis in slide 5, but how would it appear in section or as individual holes?
You mention that all of the holes seem to taper left - is this in relation to a north arrow or do they vary in compass direction but ultimately still taper left? Does the organization of the holes relate to sun orientation? Often golf courses give discounts for tee-offs in the late afternoon due to bad light and glare - does the course lend itself to be ideal with regard to the sun's location during peak hours vs. evening hours?
I think this is a good start. Include par info on the diagrams. I think sections would be great if you can get them. They could really help understanding of the relationship between holes and obstacles. Can you establish a normative relationship? If all of these are from the same course, it would be helpful to have an overall site plan so that we could see the relationship of the parts to the whole (or is it holes?)
Very clear process of what your doing, and everything makes sense. The veering to the left is quite interesting and i know you talked about further exploring the sectional qualities of Augusta. Maybe there is a way to think about exploring the bend in the course and relationship to topographical change. That left turn seems to be important i would be willing to bet there is some sort of correlation.
The mappings of Augusta are very effective at communicating your points. I wonder if there is a way to look at average golfer's scores on any of the holes and try to correlate those to some of the variables being used on various holes.
I know weather plays an important part in the game of golf. I wonder if showing data from more than one year, or from month to month where rain/wind may have been a factor would be beneficial?
I liked where you started and how it turned out. I think you could use the same process to compare Augusta over the years. The course became significantly more difficult after Tiger Woods shot -18 at the 1997 Masters Tournament. Post '97 the club attempted to "tiger proof" the course by making holes longer, fairways smaller, adding sand traps, and making greens faster and more undulated. It would be a lot a lot a lot of data to sift through as far as physical changes and player statistics but I think you could see the change through representational data.
First off, the graphics you provided are awesome. Hopefully you can find some information on elevation change, because the suggestion Nicholas made about finding sections would produce another variable that you could work with.
I really enjoy the plan based investigation. as Ainsley mentioned, would be it be possible to investigate the section? It would provide another layer of depth the the argument. Where are the snags to a low score. also, what do the putting greens look like? The scalar element would be great to see. Golf seems to a sport that can be broken down quite easily based on the club. How does that change the perception of the space?
I really enjoy the plan based investigation. as Ainsley mentioned, would be it be possible to investigate the section? It would provide another layer of depth the the argument. Where are the snags to a low score. also, what do the putting greens look like? The scalar element would be great to see. Golf seems to a sport that can be broken down quite easily based on the club. How does that change the perception of the space?
I think you stated your thesis very well, and gave the proper mapping to help support it. Great graphics on all diagrams, I really liked your own sketches of the course. I know you stated that you weren't able to find elevational changes. Too bad, a sectional analysis of the course would have brought it an even great level. Even there a study of just the greens and seeing which level changes make for different difficulty, since always seems to come down to putting at the Masters.
I think that a sectional view could be created, and information such as club choice, distance, and trajectory highlighted. I assume that an important aspect of golf is the loft of the ball.
Post a Comment