高尔夫球场一定要球场道吗？球车一定是高尔夫文化中的一部分吗？

请看高尔夫球场设计大师 Tom Doak （汤姆多克） 的评述，中文翻译部分仅供参考！

A L I F E O N T H E R O A D 
路上的生活

Published in Michigan Golfer, September/October 2002 issue
发表于《密歇根高尔夫球手》，2002年九月十月刊

In 1989, with two courses in northern Michigan under my belt, I bought a house in Traverse City. In the years since, I’ve spent nearly half my days out of town, and I haven’t worked within 200 miles of home. Why? I place a lot of the blame on cart paths.
1989年，我们负责两个在北密歇根的球场，我在Traverse城买了一匹马。从那年起，我的一半时间都在镇外面，同时，我们从来没有在离家200英里以内的地方工作过。为什么呢？我对球车道很不满！

I have nothing against golf carts -- for Casey Martin, for seniors, or for anyone who needs them on a hot and humid day. A few carts a day won’t do as much damage to the turf as the maintenance vehicles do. But I just hate building concrete roads through the middle of my courses because so many American golfers are too out of shape or too lazy to walk. When I pass by the local par-3 course, I see teenagers playing out of carts.
我没有理由来反对高尔夫球车，像Casey Martin的长者，或者对那些在热天和雨天需要帮助的人。少量的球车是不会对草坪造成太大影响的，就如同养护用的车一样。但是，我就是讨厌设立水泥球车道来穿过我的球场中央，因为美国太多的高尔夫选手太胖或者懒于走路。当我路过一个当地的三杆洞球场，我看到年轻人打球时并没有用球车。

For golf course architects, cart paths are a distraction -- a half-million-dollar budget item which takes our concentration away from making the golf holes more interesting. If we locate them ourselves, a freewheeling golfer might crash and sue us; if we don’t, the odds are they’ll scar the landscape. Even if they’re out of sight, by the developer’s rule of thumb, building those paths adds five dollars to every green fee thereafter, whether you ride or not.
对高尔夫球场设计师来说，球车道是一件分心是事情-50万美金的预算支出将会影响我们集中精力来把高尔夫球洞设计的更有趣。如果我们让球手自己确定球车道，凭惯性前行的高尔夫选手或许会撞车，还会起诉我们；如果设计师确定球车道，那将会给景观增加一道伤疤。即使球车道隐蔽起来，让开发商搭个便车，建造这些球车道，每位果岭费从此后都会增加5美元，不管你是否需要球车。

Worse yet, paths can be an actual barrier to good design. When I designed Stonewall in Philadelphia, a walking-only private golf club, I located a couple of green sites between the edge of a pond and a steep hillside background. Later, I realized we couldn’t have done it with carts, because there’s no place to put a cart path around the green to the next tee. And, while most people credit the setting and the design for the success of Pacific Dunes, I believe that the ambience -- no asphalt, no concrete, no golf cart noises -- has a far bigger impact than people realize. There aren’t many cart paths on the top fifty courses in the world. So maybe it’s no wonder that we’re more popular overseas than we are in the Motor City. We’ve just started new golf courses on coastal sites in New Zealand and Australia, where golf carts aren’t yet part of the golf culture, and we may also get to build one in Ireland, where you’d be asked to leave if you inquired about a buggy. They’re calling because they know we focus our attention on the golf first, instead of the paths.
更糟糕是，道路实际上是优秀设计的障碍。当我在费城设计 Stonewall 球场时，那是一个只能行走的私人俱乐部，我把几个果岭选定水塘边和陡峭的山壁背景之间。之后，我便认识到我们没有办法来处理球车，因为从果岭到下个发球台周围没有地方来设立球车道。同时，大多数人把这种设计归功于Pacific Dunes（太平洋沙丘球场）的成功，但是我相信周围的环境-没有沥青，没有水泥，没有球场的吵杂-其影响要远远超过人们认识到的。全世界前五名的球场并没有多少球车道。或许这就是为什么我们更喜欢去海滨而不是呆在一个汽车城市中。我们在新西兰和澳大利亚的沿海刚刚开始新建几个球场，哪里的球车已经不是高尔夫文化中的一部分了；同时，我们也将会在爱尔兰设计一个球场，在你出发之前会询问你是否需要一辆轻便的小车。他们支持这样做是因为我们的注意首先是集中在高尔夫上面的，而不是道路上面。

I’m not complaining, because we’re getting the chance to build golf courses on some of the most beautiful properties on earth. But we sure would love another opportunity to ply our trade without changing planes at Detroit Metro. Especially since every time I go through there, I bump into Steve Smyers or Warren Henderson or another of my peers on their way to design a course in northern Michigan.
我并不是在抱怨，我们有机会在这个星球上面最有价值的地方建造球场；而且，我确信我们喜欢有机会不断的旅行，而不是在底特律不停的换乘地铁，尤其是每次我经过这里的时候碰上我的同辈Steve Smyers 或者 Warren Henderson，或者其他在北密歇根设计高尔夫球场的同路人。