Just how "important" is GCA.com?

[Adam_F_Collins]

This may seem like an odd question, but I thought I'd throw it out there and see what people thought. And of course, as with so many threads - it's probably been discussed before. I live in relative isolation up here in terms of the world of GCA and the people on this website are all known to me only as names and messages.

As many of you know, I am quite new to this subject. My interest most certainly stems from my obsession with golf, combined with my interest in design. To me, GCA is pretty much my only place to discuss this topic.

Once I began to search for books on the subject of GCA, and discovered how hard they were to come by - it seemed odd, given the fact that so many people play the game and have opinions about the designs. Finding this website was a great discovery for me, as it provides up-to-the-minute dialogue on the subject, and most strikingly - makes no structural distinction between the professional architect and the interested/opinionated novice. This is a great strength. As I have begun to think more about golf course architecture in relation to history and culture, it seems to me that the realm of golf plays a role which has yet to be fully recognized by those outside the game - (or in many cases, the religion)

I could be crazy, but taking part in the discussions on this board feels...I don't know...'important' to golf history...

Does anyone else feel this way?

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

Personally, no.  To me this is all just fun.  The day I find it important in terms of culture or religion is the day I swear it off forever.

But rest assured others do see it changing the golf world.

TH

[ian]

No, this is a fun place to discuss, argue, and generally talk about what we all love, architecture.

It can be a wonderful source of great information which means it does have some importance; but if you mean has it the ability to change the direction of golf, I don't think so.

[THuckaby2]

Ian:

I concur with you, obviously.  BUT... do understand that this issue has come up before, and there are regulars who do maintain that this place can and does change the direction of golf.  They tend to not take kindly to me, because as you can likely tell I don't take this place very seriously and stray from the subject of architecture all the time.  In fact a year or two ago there were some quite contentious back-and-forths on this very subject....

So I just wanted to point out, in fairness, that there are quite well-connected regulars here who do believe this place can, does, and more importantly SHOULD change the direction of golf.  

I sure as hell don't want to get into that subject again... but since Adam asked, well... he does need to know that that feeling does exist.

Perhaps those who espouse it will chime in here.

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

There is no doubt that GCA has some impact, however impossible to quantify.  

It's a worldwide, public forum, and I doubt there's an architect out there who isn't aware of its existence and I suspect there are more than a few lurkers in that community.

I also suspect that most of its impact is educational, and therefore, subconscious.

[Adam_F_Collins]

I'm not really thinking about its ability to change golf or somehow alter the course of its development.

I'm thinking more in terms of:

• Golf Course Architecture plays an important role in shaping the experience of millions of golfers, and therefore plays an important role in shaping the game itself.

• Golf Course Architecture as a study or a subject of interest has a limited "market", so books are relatively few, difficult to find and are often quite expensive.

• GolfClubAtlas.com has taken advantage of the internet as a way of connecting the 'limited market' in one forum, where ideas and perspectives can be shared and developed in a fairly constant discussion across the distances of geography.

Wether this 'meeting of the minds' will have any identifiable effect on GCA, remains to be seen. However, the possible results of the focused exchange of ideas amongst people who share a love for something should not be underestimated. A pooling of energy always has the potential for action and reaction.

[JakaB]

The problem with this site is not that it changes architecture... it is that it forces it to remain the same.....I don't want to name names....but....but why even bother to travel to these great new courses being built by the darlings of this site when you know what the designs are going to look like and how they are going to play before you even get there...That is the fault of this site and the people who beat the same drum day after day.....Hell, Klein even gets his new raters prepackaged thanks to this site....that really promotes diversity in design...

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

Well, it certainly does seem to be the best, and perhaps only, forum for discussion of golf course architecture.  That combined with the world-wide ease of use the internet allows does make for a large quantity of easily-exchangeable ideas.

As you say though, whether that makes any positive difference in golf does remain to be seen.  JakaB has already pointed out a negative.  And like it or not, there does seem to be a "groupspeak" on this site, which makes it easily ignored by architects who don't care to look further...

So who knows how this will go.  I just know I do feel better now that you have limited this to golf course architecture and left out culture and religion.  

TH

[TEPaul]

How important is GOLFCLUBATLAS.com?

You can't believe how much some of us have gotten together and discussed this over the last five or so years this site has been in existence. Matter of fact, there was group of a dozen or so who just happened to get together in NYC just the other night who were basically discussing this very thing. Ran was there of course.

This website is basically a small coterie of contributors who actually write on here but there always has been far, far more who log on just to read what's said. It would also blow your minds to know who some of them are who just come on a view some things without the slightest intention of ever contributing or admitting they do look.

Having said that, GOLFCLUBATLAS.com in a larger sense is the site some admire a great deal, others may admire very begrudgingly and many others just love to hate it! But the point is it does not go away, most can't seem to avoid it altogether and even those who hate it can't stay of away from it.

The other night in NYC I told the group that about a half dozen times in some of the most unlikely places (a few in some unuusual golf clubs) I've overheard groups of people who're obviously golfers discussing GOLFCLUBATLAS.com. I always try to eavesdrop, of course, and I've heard remarks such as;

"Clubs and people may not like some of what they're saying but they are pushing the subject, they're defending the things they feel should be defended and preserved and they are getting attention even though those whose attention their getting may not like it."

I do know for a fact that discussions on here about some clubs have been printed out and taken into things like golf and green committee meetings and even board meetings.

So, it's probably impossible to say how important GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is but like it or not it just may be more important than some or perhaps even most think it is.

It is very controversial, though, and in the end that might be a good thing---maybe the only way it really should be!

[tlavin]

I'm not sure "important" is the right word, but this site is certainly valuable, informative, edgy and regularly entertaining.

[THuckaby2]

TEP:

The question isn't do people see it.  They do.  It's on the internet and it has become well-known, among people interested in golf course architecture primarily, but also among the masses due to the Sports Illustrated article.

To me that's a given.

Isn't the question here is it important?

I'm interested in your expanded take on that.  I am here to learn.

See I'm with Tlavin... I too am not sure "important" is the right word...

TH

[Adam_F_Collins]

I'm not sure "important" is the right word, but this site is certainly valuable, informative, edgy and regularly entertaining.

im•por•tant (im por' tent) adj. 1. meaning much; worth noticing or considering; having value or significance. 2. having social position or influence. 3 acting as if important; seeming to be important; self important.

tlavin,

I see what you mean, and I think you're right as well. But in the context of this thread, "important" is what I meant.

[Dan Kelly]

why even bother to travel to these great new courses being built by the darlings of this site when you know what the designs are going to look like and how they are going to play before you even get there...That is the fault of this site and the people who beat the same drum day after day.....

Two sincere questions:

1) Really? You know how the darlings' courses are going to play, before you get there? Could you please be specific, John? I have played only one course by any of the darlings (Sand Hills), so I'm not qualified to even guess what you might mean.

2) Are the non-darlings of the site, free from the tyranny of gca.com, reinventing themselves with each new course? Or is it merely true that, in the real world, golf-course architects -- darlings or otherwise -- are in *business*, not in High Art, and the realities of business more or less require them, as they more or less require most of us, to establish a style and more or less stick to it?

----

To answer the thread's title question: I know, for a fact, that this Web site influences at least the two architects I know.

Does that make it "important"? Not from my point of view -- which is that golf-course architecture (a great big world, with room for everyone in it) is interesting, but not in the least important (except in Sense 1, Part 2 of Adam's definition).

Of course, by that definition, what isn't important on this Earth?

[THuckaby2]

Does that make it "important"? Not from my point of view -- which is that golf-course architecture (a great big world, with room for everyone in it) is interesting, but not in the least important.

Well said, Dan - concur 100%.

TH

[TEPaul]

John B. Kavanaugh:

I'll ask you again a question I've asked you on here a number of times, a question you never answer.

What is it that you're looking for in golf course architecture?

[ForkaB]

GCA.com keeps TE Paul off the streets for several hours a day, and that in itself makes it a very important public service.

[Adam_F_Collins]

Does that make it "important"? Not from my point of view -- which is that golf-course architecture (a great big world, with room for everyone in it) is interesting, but not in the least important.

Well said, Dan - concur 100%.

Tom and Dan,

I could be misinterpreting, but you seem to be referring to the importance of golf course architecture.

With 30,000 (or so) courses worldwide, millions of golfers, billions of dollars spent on the activity, more that 100 years in its modern form...

What would make the study of golf course architecture move from "interesting" to "important"?

[TEPaul]

This is a typical GOLFCLUBATLAS.com discussion. Someone asks how important GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is and we don't discuss the question, we discuss all the various nuances of the meaning of the word "important"!  

[Dan Kelly]

This is a typical GOLFCLUBATLAS.com discussion. Someone asks how important GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is and we don't discuss the question, we discuss all the various nuances of the meaning of the word "important"!  

Yeah. Isn't it great?

[THuckaby2]

TEP:

Define the word however you wish... Is this site important?  If so, why?  And I ask this not to be adversarial at all, I truly do aim to learn.

Adam:

Dan is far more eloquent than I am, and will answer this better.  My take is that golf course architecture in the scheme of things ranks somewhere ahead of construction of bowling alleys and behind construction and development of parks and soccer fields in terms of importance.  So is it bottom line "important"?  Well hell I guess so in a certain way - the game certainly does have an importance to a great many people, including me that's for sure, and architecture defines the game in many ways.  But in the overall world scheme of things is it important?  Well, you see how I rank it.  I guess perhaps "not in the least important" is too strong.  Put me down for "not very important."

So what would it take to move it from interesting to important?  For far more people - ESPECIALLY GOLFERS THEMSELVES - to really care about it.  My take is the vast majority of golfers could really give a rat's ass about architecture, as cost and condition determine where, when and how often they play.  Now I guess we could split hairs and say architecture also determines those things, but that's not where I thought you were going with this, defining architecture that broadly.

And then I didn't even mention the billions of people who don't know what golf is and don't care... and have far more pressing issues with their lives... to whom golf ranks in importance on the scale with the mating habits of the newt... thus even greater diminishing the importance of the game, not to mention the architecture....

TH

[tlavin]

This is a typical GOLFCLUBATLAS.com discussion. Someone asks how important GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is and we don't discuss the question, we discuss all the various nuances of the meaning of the word "important"!  

Yeah. Isn't it great?

Let's get Safire working on this post...

[Andy Hughes]

My take is the vast majority of golfers could really give a rat's ass about architecture, as cost and condition determine where, when and how often they play.

Bingo.
Tom, I think you are exactly right, and that there really is a very small percentage of golfers who care about a course's architecture.
With most of my friends, course conditioning is neck and neck with price for determining where to play. Architecture is down there somewhere next to cleanliness of the on-course bathroom.
So my vote is that architecture is not very important to most, very important to a small group of guys.

[Mike_Cirba]

There is nothing on this earth more important than GCA.  

May our collective wisdom be used to guide our civilization towards peace, prosperity, and better golf courses for our children's children's children.

Did you ever notice how the countries that don't play golf (and by extension, have no courses of real quality) are most often the one's who are fighting, bickering, and killing each other?

Spread the gospel, I say..  

[Adam_F_Collins]

My take is the vast majority of golfers could really give a rat's ass about architecture, as cost and condition determine where, when and how often they play.

Bingo.
Tom, I think you are exactly right, and that there really is a very small percentage of golfers who care about a course's architecture.
With most of my friends, course conditioning is neck and neck with price for determining where to play. Architecture is down there somewhere next to cleanliness of the on-course bathroom.
So my vote is that architecture is not very important to most, very important to a small group of guys.

You both are probably right. However, does it have to be important to a large number of people for it to be considered important at all?

Getting back to my original question, How important is GCA.com?, I guess it really has to be considered in relation to those who are affected by the subject, directly or indirectly. While few may actually be aware of, or focused on the subject, I'm wondering how many of those that are pay attention to the site.

I guess I'm paying specific attention that, to my mind, this is the first forum for world-wide discussion of the subject, involving both pros and ams who wish to take part.

That seems to have the potential for importance - within the realm of the subject.

My references to golf's implications beyond the game itself were an aside and that's a whole other can-o-worms.

[TEPaul]

"TEP:
Define the word however you wish... Is this site important?  If so, why?  And I ask this not to be adversarial at all, I truly do aim to learn."

TomH;

Why? Read post #7 again. If you look at perhaps even seemingly small results in an individual context of what I said there it might not seem like much but when you begin to total them all up this site begins to become important, in my opinion. Of course there'll always be plenty of people who'll crticize and hammer this website. Why? Probably because this website criticizes them either specifically or generally. It's no different in the much larger overall world of golf architecture,