Interest in Golf Architecture

[T_MacWood]

When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

[wsmorrison]

Good questions, Tom.

I first became interested in golf architecture when I realized, it was more a qualitative gestalt, that so many of my favorite Philadelphia area courses were designed by a mysterious golf architect named William Flynn.  It prompted a semi-serious study into what made these courses so good and what commonalties and design tendencies produced such high quality work.  When I soon realized there was little or no information available, I started to conduct a formal inquiry that was part detective work and part research.  The challenge and opportunity were too great to ignore.  I've met so many great and informed people along the way, it has been an enriching experience.  Early on Ron Forse told me that as important as it was to study Flynn so in depth, it was important to see other architects works in order to see the big picture and have a proper perspective.  I've begun that process in earnest over the last 3 years or so and am learning something new everyday.

I definitely do differentiate between a desire to play the top-rated courses and study great architecture.  I like to make up my own mind on things, right or wrong.  I do not think something is great because someone tells me it is and then I smash the square peg into the round hole.  I keep an open mind and look for great architecture wherever it might be and in whatever quantity or fashion it might be on any course.  There's something to learn everywhere.  

Yeah, sometimes I succumb to name dropping and wishing to get on great courses but the reality is I enjoy studying them more than playing them.  I've walked National and Shinnecock many more times than I've played them and I certainly don't feel I'm missing anything.  If anything, I'm missing less and understanding the courses far more than if I were playing them.  I don't think you can focus on your golf game at all and be able to really study a golf course.  Well, I can't anyway.  It is for this reason among others that I think the rating process is seriously flawed.  Some may have the discipline to do both, I have serious doubts.  Golf architecture, especially classic architecture requires careful consideration.  If you know your game well enough and that of other golfer types, you don't have to play to imagine the implications on the ground.  It would be better to spend 4-6 hours studying the course rather than playing it.  As I've said before, any course rating should be done with at least one round of simply walking the course...if the golfer wishes to play that should be subordinate to the walkaround.

[JakaB]

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

No...In all honesty I would say the proof was in the pudding when I decided to stay and play at Cuscowilla instead of going out to tour courses that are currently under construction.   But just cause I never wanted to be an OBGYN doesn't mean I don't like.....

[Mark_Rowlinson]

I know I've said it before but it was my father who first told me that the golf course itself was likely to be a great deal more interesting than my golf over it.  I was then probably 14 or 15.  

When I play a course, great, good or indifferent, I usually try to make notes as I go round.  I then write an account of the course as soon as possible afterwards, while it is still fresh in the mind.  It does seriously affect the quality of my golf, but not as much as putting a medal card in my hand does!

I have walked courses from time to time but I miss things.  You don't always spot the deception which you probably would if you had club and ball in hand.  If the course is reasonably empty I quite often throw a ball onto a green to study its putting surfaces and, particularly, the effect of humps and bumps on the approach.  The best chance to study I ever had was when I wrote a book about all 83 courses then extant in Cheshire (it's now over 100).  I went out on my own at first light throughout the late spring, summer and early autumn.  I could play several balls if I wanted to, pick up and play from where I should have hit the ball, even not play a hole.  I got a very good insight into the courses and their subtleties in a way I could not have got in normal play or simply walking the course.  Happily almost all of them granted me courtesy of the course.

[blasbe1]

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

What an excellent question.  

Upon first thought, I would have to differentiate between playing a great course and appreciating great GCA.  For me, golf is a sport that I enjoy playing first and watching second.  Thus, for me appreciation of GCA is first observing an element of sport while playing and second an appreciation of independent expression (when done well).  That being said, while the concepts are distinct, to separate them analytically does appear manufactured.  For instance, it is difficult for me when reading one of Ran's reviews of a course that I've either played or not played to not also simultaneously imagine playing it.  

Therefore, if I consider playing great courses and appreciating great architecture to be fundamentally related such that consideration of one necessarily leads to consideration of the other, then upon further inquiry I would suggest that one is necessarily entwined in the other.  

I imagine that could have been answered more simply by stating that a great golf course is only great upon being played, it's an object that is created necessarily to be occupied by a subject and it does not appear logical to consider a great course a subject in itself.  

Thus, the answer is if a tree falls in the woods any nothing hears it, it makes no perceptible sound, rather it creates only perceptible sound waves waiting for fulfillment.  

Or something like that. . .

[Steve Lang]

When did you first become interested in golf architecture....

    ~1970 after walking Inverness in T-Town one summer day..

what sparked that interest?

    visuals and strategy needed to play well..

What was your perception prior to the interest?

    Shell's WWoG locations were all unique, but there had to be more to it than that..

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

     Yes.  In the moment, any course can be great as the ball travels to its intended destination, despite the imposed challenge(s).. from the gca..  Don't get me wrong, I like seeing what's regarded as best, but its not the end all purpose to cut notches in a belt or woodpost...

Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

      Yes, I believe subconsciously.  The ultimate playing zone  accepts or appreciates the subject gca and builds focus from it with out dwelling on it.  

[THuckaby2]

When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?
I'm not really all that interested in it now, never have been.  My take has always been that that's the realm of people who actually do it, and for the rest of us its hubris to think we know anything about it, or can learn anything about it outside of actually doing it.  So much more goes into creation of a golf course than just doodling holes on a piece of paper and dreaming of how they will play... or critiquing the play of existing courses... that it really seems futile to me to get too deep into it.  I have tried quite hard to read and study and come to understand the field better, but I have failed.  If anything my perceptions, described above, have just become more solidified the more I do dally in this.

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?
HELL YES!  I think anyone who plays the game has a desire to play great courses, and the more one plays the more one wants to play many more!  But an interest in golf course architecture seems to me to be completely outside of this... it's an academic pursuit, which seems to me futile unless you are in the business, but hey, there isn't anything wrong with futile pursuits.  

Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?
I'd say it's impossible NOT to focus on architecture while playing the game - one does have to make choices for his shots, and that in and of itself is a certain focus on architecture.  But if you mean FULLY focus and get the most out of it, then no, one really can't give full attention to each of these masters.  If you are into playing and score or match success is the goal, then you can't get too caught up in study of architectural nuances; conversely, if you are into study, you can't care too much about playing.

I doubt this is what you were after, but it is my take on these very good questions.

TH

[Bill Gayne]

What you mean golf architecture? I come to this site for football and politics. I don't have time for GCA.

[Lou_Duran]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)  When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

2)  Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

3)  Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?
-----------------------------------------------------------

1) In the 1971 - 1973 timeframe when I had the chance to play Scarlet on a semi-frequent basis for 5 - 6 months out of the year.   It became progressively obvious that playing the course was a lot more of just trying to hit the ball as far as possible with less consideration for where it was going.  The course sparked an interest in the game in me, and, despite being much more difficult that anything I had encountered before, it prompted me to become a better player.  Prior to that time, golf was just an ocassional opportunity to participate in a sport with friends, whack the ball around, throw a few clubs, and drink some beer.

2)  No.  By definition "great" courses are architecturally superior or they would not be considered great.  BTW, I don't begrudge the "trophy hunter".  We all have our reasons to want to play the Cypress Points and Pine Valleys of the world.  Many of us go out of our way to play other less reknowned courses because of their unique design features.

3)  I subscribe to Cirba's suggestion that interest in gca may make us into better golfers but worse players.  Since I've been involved in trying to systematically pay attention to the architectural features, my game has gone to the toilet.  Now, this could be entirely coincidental, but it does give me some rationalization which allows me to maintain my interest in the game.  And there is definitely a directional relationship with the volume of my notes and ever-soaring scores.  I want to think that it is a cause and effect relationship, but I am not sure which is the independent variable.  

[TEPaul]

"When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?"

About 6-7 years ago. My interest was sparked by an aerial of my course about 70 years ago. My interest in architecture prior to that had only to do with playing golf--mostly tournament golf. I looked at golf architecture in that context only---nothing more.

"Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?"

I differentiate between a desire to play golf or great golf courses and a real interest in golf architecture almost completely now. Much of that reason is probably that I'm older--60--and I've just sort of lost my desire to play golf as well as I can. A real interest in golf architecture seems to have supplanted that almost completely which I'm told is not really uncommon. Perhaps more than anyone on here I have no real interest in just going and playing "the great" courses, at least just to say that I have.

"Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?"

I cannot. I pretty much need to do one or the other. I'm just someone who apparently could never really do both simultaneiously.

[blasbe1]

Driving by a golf course is a dangerous thing with me as I look and look and look.

RMan:

Interesting you say that, Laura is a very patient wife b/c I've been known to drive in and all around the perimeter of courses I've wanted to see.  So far I've been taking mental note of the best and worst drive by courses and perhaps one day will transcribe my experiences.  

Two of the best drive bys have got to be National and Shinnecock.  The best drive in that I've seen recently is Deepdale.  Roaming the Long Island back roads and main roads in search of great GCA is an excellent late fall activity.  


 

[Brian_Gracely]

Interesting you say that, Laura is a very patient wife b/c I've been known to drive in and all around the perimeter of courses I've wanted to see.  So far I've been taking mental note of the best and worst drive by courses and perhaps one day will transcribe my experiences.  

Jason,

You might want to get together with Huckaby and I someday as we plan to write a book on the courses that we've jumped the fence to play over the years.

[Mike Benham]

Interesting you say that, Laura is a very patient wife b/c I've been known to drive in and all around the perimeter of courses I've wanted to see.  So far I've been taking mental note of the best and worst drive by courses and perhaps one day will transcribe my experiences.  

Jason,

You might want to get together with Huckaby and I someday as we plan to write a book on the courses that we've jumped the fence to play over the years.

Why do you think I posted the pictures of the new boundry fence at Stanford?  I grew up hopping the fence, wading in the creek, to play a few holes at Stanford ...

[THuckaby2]

Having lived next to Stanford GC for a few years and acquired an "evening membership" during those halcyon days, let's just say that that new fence had me wondering what might have been... jeez, where's the challenge???

[BCrosby]

I nominate the following as the single best sentence on GCA in the last month:

"I know I've said it before but it was my father who first told me that the golf course itself was likely to be a great deal more interesting than my golf over it."                     Mark Rowlinson

[cary lichtenstein]

I always wanted of be an OBGYN

[Sam Sikes]

Great question.

My interest in architecture was sparked right when I started playing golf, at 9 years old.  My parents, who were not particularly good golfers, were headed to Monterey to play Pebble, Spyglass, and others.  I saw pictures of pebble for the first time, and begged them to take me with them.  My dad promised me that when I got my handicap down to 10, he would take me out there.  Immediately, I responded, "I bet I can do that by the time I am 12."  He laughed, not knowing the potential of junior golfers.  At that point I embarked on a mission to get my handicap to 10.  14 months later, I broke 80 for the first time, and the following summer I won the State Junior in my age group.  That fall, my father held true to his promise and we went to Pebble.  It was everthing I imagined it could be and more.  It amuses me that people can be great golfers and not know a lick about great golf courses.  I have always wanted to know more about the courses than who was winning the tournaments.  After the trip to Pebble, my dad and I started a little tradition.  On my birthday every year, we would put together a foursome and go play a great golf course.  I was the only one to know what the great courses were, so I always got to pick.  Naturally, I studied for a year about where I wanted to go for my birthday.

When I was 14 or so my dad was on the board at our local country club.  The place was run by rednecks, and the club was having serious management problems.  We formulated the idea of building a new club in Huntsville.  My dad had a great friend who was a big local land owner in town, and concurrently approached him with the idea.  One thing led to another, and 8 months later Mike Hurdzan/Dana Fry were in my living room discussing the plans for what would become The Ledges.  John Blue, the land owner, also talked with other architects, Jerry Pate, Bob Cupp.  The meetings were always at my house because the Ledges would be built about a mile up a dirt road on top of Huntsville mountain.  

While this was all going on, my dad and I ventured off to play many other great tracks.  Spring Break my freshman year of High School we made some contacts and went back out to Monterey to play SFGC and CPC to name a few.

I had a front seat watching the Ledges being built during high school on land my friends and I frequented on four wheelers.

I also bought the Confidential Guide in 1996 and was instantly hooked on the commentary.  People I would meet from all over the country couldn't believe that I had heard of a club in their home town.  Consequently, they often invited me to play.  (Thanks Tom)  

After High School, I happened to be good enough to play at the D1 collegiate level.  Using the golf card, I was admitted to a school I may not have gotten into because of my grades in high school (3.4), The University of Richmond, and all because of my initial interest in architecture.  So here I sit, typing, having just returned home from Kinloch, and about to go to class for a quiz.  Many thanks to all of those who have made this journey possible, it has been a helluva ride, and I hope it continues at this grande pace.  Life is good!


sam

 

[John Kirk]

Great questions, Tom.  I've thought about asking similar questions to the group.

1)  When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

Here's a different answer for you.  I didn't play golf as a kid, but my father played as a young man, and his father was a Scottish immigrant who played regularly.  Around the 6th or 7th grade, I became interested in a variety of table sports games, mostly APBA baseball, but also other various football, basketball and golf games.  I had two table golf games at home, one called Thinking Man's Golf, and one called Sports Illustrated Golf (SI had a series of sports games in the early 70s).  Both games used two dimensional diagrams of 18 of the great golf holes in the U.S.  The game was simple; pick your aim, roll the dice, mark your new position, and repeat.

I also remember Shell's Wonderful World of Golf, and my grandpa would build me child size golf clubs when I was little.  But my consuming passion as a young man was basketball.

Near the end of college, I took up golf.  Concurrently, my father rediscovered the game, and shared a sport together for the next 25 years.  He worked at Stanford University, and was able to join Stanford GC as a staff member (I have also fished balls out of San Francisquito Creek, Mike and Tom).

Around then, I purchased the book called "Golf Digest's 100 Greatest Golf Courses...And Then Some", which featured a picture of Stanford's beautiful 18th hole.  From then on I was hooked, and have been on a life quest to find the best places to play.  In those early years, I dragged my father to Monterey and Santa Cruz, north into the Central Valley, and even into Oregon twice.  On the second trip to Oregon in 1992, I had the chance to play the newly opened Pumpkin Ridge Golf Club.  I was so taken with Pumpkin that I joined on the spot, and moved with my wife to Oregon nine months later (with her blessing).

I visited Scotland a few years ago, where I was floored by how great Royal Dornoch was.  And Oregonians have been blessed with the opening of the great Bandon resort.  Now I read my golfclubatlas.com every day.  I joined Ballyneal this fall, and I'm looking at new projects in the Great Plains as well as Prairie Dunes.  My golf life is great.

2)  Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

No.  I enjoy the walk in the park and the interesting shots I get to play.  Good architecture yields good golf shots.

3)  Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

Yes.  I focus on golf shots for a small percentage of the time spent on the course.  The rest is spent enjoying the company and the surroundings.  Perhaps if I concentrated on playing golf more I'd be marginally better.  I like the walking and talking part.

[A.G._Crockett]

When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

First spark of interest came from playing a tremendously fun Joe Lee course in the GA mountains, Bent Tree, and wondering how anyone had seen a golf course there.  It was art.
Second spark came from seeing a course that I had expected to knock me dead, and being underwhelmed.  (Sorry Pete B., if you're reading this!  Remember, I promised to try again at Xmas.)

I TRY to differentiate between GCA and playing great courses, but I am a sinful and selfish creature, and I want to hit and chase my golf ball first and foremost.  As soon as I see something I really admire in pictures or on TV, I want badly to play it...

I don't think there is necessarily a conflict between appreciating the GCA and playing, BUT, I do tend to be more aware while I play of architectural features I don't like, often associated with outcomes I didn't intend or anticipate.  This is undoubtably a weakness in my character.

[Lloyd_Cole]

I guess I always was, but I became much more active in my interest after reading Jim Finnegan. Especially his descripion of 'Foxy' at Dornoch.
Then Geoff and Doak's books.

[Mike Hendren]

I had two table golf games at home, one called Thinking Man's Golf, and one called Sports Illustrated Golf (SI had a series of sports games in the early 70s).  Both games used two dimensional diagrams of 18 of the great golf holes in the U.S.  The game was simple; pick your aim, roll the dice, mark your new position, and repeat.

jmkirk,

Did you also beg your mom to buy poster board so you could create your own course for the SI game, like this beauty circa 1972?



Mike

[Paul_Turner]

Mike

1972...that's really super for such a young chap.  Why aren't you out in the dirt?!

PS

Mack might have you for copyright in the bottom right.

Bottom left, a mirror image of the 12th at PV, circa 1930?

[Cory Lewis]

1)  When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

I got into GCA when I was in high school because of my then obsession with Pine Valley.  I was fascinated by the pictures of it.  How could a rustic target golf course be Ranked #1 in the world ahead of such classic designs like augusta and cypress.  When I really studied the photos, I began to understand why this course was so special.  That was probably the point when I began to understand the different styles of architecture.

2)  Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

I do differentiate because my goals have changed over the years.  The more I have learned about architecture the more I want to study the great courses of a particular architect.  Five years ago I would have said my must play courses were the hyped ones like PV, Cypress, and ANGC.  But now my must play are all Seth Raynor courses I haven't played like Shoreacres, Chicago, and The Creek.


3)  Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

I would change this to say that my study of architecture is hindered by my golf game.  Because my golf game centers on hitting it short and straight I often don't even notice the best design features of some courses.  A good example I can think of is the bunkers at Garden City, I wasn't in one bunker, they looked amazing but I probably didn't get a full appreciation because I never really got near one.  I would also say that having to ride in a cart hinders my study because I don't have as much time to take in the features, especially when somebody is behind me.  

[Tony_Chapman]

All great questions, Tom. Thanks for wonderful thread!!

1. When did you first become interested in golf architecture....what sparked that interest? What was your perception prior to the interest?

Growing up in Nebraska during the pre-Sand Hills day it was pretty tough to see a great golf course. Sure enough, my interest in awesome golf courses peaked when I was nine years old - 1986. It's the first Masters I remember watching, my dad's favorite player is Raymond Floyd so Shinnecock always stuck out in my mind.

Also that summer, I carried my dad's clubs at Firethorn in Lincoln. It felt like I was on another planet!! The shots that Pete Dye put in front of the golfer we unlike anything I thought I would ever see.

From that time on, I continued to draw golf courses all the time. I probably have about 50 of my favorites in the basement right now. It's always fun to going looking through those routings.

2. Do you differentiate between a desire to play "great" golf courses and an interest in golf architecture?

Who doesn't want to play great golf courses? But, I enjoyed Southern Pines last year, just as much as I did Mid Pines the previous day. I am interested in how the architect put the pieces of the puzzle together and made the player think his way around a golf course. That is the greatest joy I get from playing any course.

3. Can you be focused upon your game and golf architecture at the same time?

I think a ton of guys have said this before, but as I continue to love seeing and playing great golf courses, I could care less what I shoot. While it disappoints me to play bad, seeing a course for the first time is quite enjoyable.  

[tlavin]

I got involved in the grounds committee at Beverly CC in Chicago.  I started "tagging" trees with species names in an effort to educate the membership.  I wound up getting some education of my own when I began to understand the relationship between trees and turf and the ways that trees affect the playability of golf holes.  Next thing I knew, I was advocating cutting down trees with relatively new tags!  This was followed by working with the USGA at Olympia Fields.  But the single biggest influence on this amateur has been the writings and the friendship of one Brad Klein.  He has taken the arcane language of golf architecture and educated the willing.