Nicklaus in USA TODAY

[Jason Tetterton]

An article in the paper talking about his designs and future in golf.  Here is a link to the article.  


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/golf/2005-08-09-nicklaus-designer_x.htm  

[Voytek Wilczak]

Very interesting article - thanks, Jason.

Nicklaus seems a class act, as always. I always thought that sharing architectural credits (Sebonack, with Tom Doak) must be a difficult balancing act for Jack (and Tom, as well).

Not an easy thing to do if you are a legend in the game and a legend-in-the-making in golf course architecture. And not an easy thing to do if you are a young rising star in the latter, too...

[rgkeller]

"If you're relying on selling memberships or property," Doak says, "Jack's name is golden."

Now that is a backhanded compliment if I have ever seen one.  Well done, Tom.

And a backhand to Michael Pascucci as well.

[Tom_Doak]

I resent the thought that what I said was a backhanded compliment.

I spent about twenty minutes talking to Jerry Potter about Jack and his business.  We barely talked about Sebonack at all; Jerry wanted to know how it was to work together and what I thought of Jack doing so much work in so many places.  My quote was in admiration of how busy Jack is, I can't help it if it is the only part that I was quoted about and therefore can be taken in a different context.

Ask anyone who was at the press conference or on one of the tours we gave yesterday whether Jack and I got along and have proper respect for each other.

[Mike Benham]

"If you're relying on selling memberships or property," Doak says, "Jack's name is golden."

Now that is a backhanded compliment if I have ever seen one.  Well done, Tom.

Screw the compliment, it's true ...

[Jim Franklin]

Tom -

It is amazing how people try to read certain things into stuff written in the paper and then take their thoughts as gospel. I read your  remarks and felt you said that out of admiration for Jack's contributions to the game. Nothing more nothing less.

[Craig Van Egmond]

I also didn't read anything to it.   Usually people are cynical about things that Jack says and not Tom though.

Although 'Jack's name is golden'  =  'The golden Bear'    

[Jim Franklin]

Shiv -

I read it and did not read it that way. My opinion is all I was relating. If you read it as a backhanded compliment then so be it.



PS I am playing with your buddy in the Middle Atlantic Fourball at the end of the month.

[Brad Klein]

I was at the Sebonack press conference yesterday and spent the whole day on site. Those of you who make your judgments in a flash based upon a disconnected sentence or two - well, that's the function of a chat room, to misconstrue.

It was clear from the hours I spent with them both together and apart (in addition to knowing them both for years) that while they have stylistic and working differences in how they approach a property, they both have total respect for each other, which is not to say they cave in and don't have their disagreements. But they are professional disagreements, and they lead to healthy discussion, agreement and collaboration. Speculate all you want about it, it's clear that they have been working together out at Sebonack in mutual respect.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Brad,

How about a brief report on the golf course design?

[Lou_Duran]

Where is Alex's original comments?

Shivas,

Shame on you.  Is it a lawyer thing that you must read a sentence and consider every possible meaning or nuance?  Have you not been misunderstood even when you've tried to be very precise in your language?

I read the article as well, and never got the gist that some of you picked-up on.  Perhaps I am a dullard, though certainly no sychophant of Doak, because I had to go back and reread Tom's quote a couple of times before the backhand compliment thing hit me.  And you know that I have rabbit ears for put-downs of Nicklaus and Fazio.

Anyways, Tom Doak is much too smart to be taking disguised shots at Nicklaus, particularly in public.  Hopefully, they are both competitive and secure in their crafts that debate and disagreements came to the forefront and were resolved to their mutual satisfaction.  If not, the developer probably won't get his money's worth.

BTW, regardless of the smilies, if Chris S. is your bud, I'd fear your 2 cents worth on those lower on your list.    

[rgkeller]

"Anyways, Tom Doak is much too smart to be taking disguised shots at Nicklaus, particularly in public."

Yeah, I mean you'd think Doak wrote a book criticizing other architects' work or something.

[George Pazin]

Alex deleted his comments after reading Tom's response.

Unfortunately, one of the by products of our cynical world is that damn near everyone tends to read the worst thing possible into anything anyone says or writes, whether it's snipped out of context from an interview, quoted from someone's course review, posted by the generally thoughtful members of this site, or, heck, even hearsay from an obvious joke that someone made.

We all tend to do it, and we should all try to guard against it.

In regards to this site, I like to reflect on redanman's wise words: "I never met a stiff who was into architecture."

[Lou_Duran]

George Pazin,

You speaketh the truth!  Being that Redanman is such a Francophile, I seldom give a second thought, not to say anything about reflection, to his musings.  Please translate the stiff thing that you find so wise.  

Again, I echo your sentiments from personal experience.  Recently I used the names of two individuals here to make a point regarding experience on the ground trumping that gained from reading and viewing pictures.  Though I made several disclaimers, I was taken to the woodshed by the one who took my comments personally.

I earlier dismissed Tim Weiman's comments about the ability to write being critical in this forum.  Perhaps I was wrong then, and if so, maybe I have to rethink my participation on this site in the future.  I am just not oriented to reading between the lines; prefering my communications to be rather direct, but without the need to be offensive.

Shivas,

I was just kidding you.  I am aware of the importance of being pithy and accurate in our communications in the business place.  It is a shame that some of us have to be so precise with our utterances in what is supposed to be a mostly serious but also fun forum.

Many years ago, an attorney representing the company I worked for lectured me at length on this matter.  The young man attended a taped deposition for a lawsuit we filed, and his main role was to object to most questions posed by opposing counsel and to keep me from putting my foot in my mouth.

Well, he caught me at the urinals having casual conversation with the defendant's attorney about the weather (no, no
comments were being made about the temperature and depth of the water), and he let me have it afterwards.  You'd thought that I was selling our legal strategy and prepared response book to the enemy.

rgkeller,

Mr. Doak was just an exhuberant youngster when he wrote that book.  The "Guide" 's value today has little to do with its quality and style.  Instead, it clearly demonstrates the market forces of supply and demand; yes, he same that the author and many folks on this site sometimes fail to recognize.  

I suspect that now that the architect is becoming more mainstream and somewhat of a celebrity in the small community of gca afficionados, he is more precise in his use of language.  A new "Guide" would make for better reading, but probably not as interesting.

I do find that when varied experiences and growth accompany the passing of years, that there is little need for the tit-for-tat personal exchanges or to elevate one's self by knocking somebody else down implicitly or otherwise.  There is no doubt in my mind that Doak was being highly complimentary of Nicklaus, which does not necessarily endorse the latter's design philosophies and practices.

[rgkeller]

"There is no doubt in my mind that Doak was being highly complimentary of Nicklaus, which does not necessarily endorse the latter's design philosophies and practices."

Well, certainly Doak was being complimentary of Nicklaus's marketing power and not of Nicklaus' architectural skills.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Well, certainly Doak was being complimentary of Nicklaus's marketing power and not of Nicklaus' architectural skills.

Considering that the value of Nicklaus's name (not his "marketing power", whatever that is) in the market was being discussed in that specific instance, then Doak's compliment was on-topic and responsive.  Neither you or I know what or if Doak was asked about Nicklaus's architectural skills...the article, in typical USA Today style, didn't dive too deeply into the subject.

[Tim_Weiman]

Lou Duran,

At the risk of hijacking the thread - something I hate- I just wanted to be clear about my comments regarding ability to write about golf courses.

I genuinely believe it is a very difficult thing to do.

But, that doesn't mean any of us should give up trying. As a golf architecture discussion group, that is what we are all about. I just feel we should all keep in mind that most people haven't seen most of the courses we discuss.......and so we should all concentrate on writing for the reader who HASN'T seen the course we are writing about.

Also, hole by hole descriptions rarely work.

[Mark Hissey]

I'm a little stunned at the comments in here today.

Having spent close to every minute of every visit with Jack and Tom I can state this categorically. There is immense mutual respect for one another. Visits have not just been cordial, they've been great fun and enlightening beyond belief. Never in my dreams did I think that this collaboration would come together as well as it did. I always knew it would work one way or another, but never as well as it did.

Brad has described this collaboration better than I ever could. You can look into any nuances and sound bites you want, but Brad has described it precisely and the way it truly is.

I've been around Jack without Tom around and I know for a fact that his admiration for Tom is both sincere and profound. The reverse is also true for Tom in regard to Jack. But to take that further, there is one aspect of the press conference which hasn't been mentioned. That is the fact that Tom's tribute to Jack almost brought the great man to tears. It was heartfelt and eloquent.

So, look for negetives if you wish; it makes for a juicier story I suppose. But, it's not there and I really hope that you all stop digging for this "dirt" and just appreciate what two the giants of golf architecture have managed to create.

One last thing. The efforts of Jim Urbina, Chris Rule and Garret Bodington should not go unrecognised. They were on site constantly and poured their hearts and souls into the project and spent countless hours with an amazing crew of talented individuals insuring that Tom and Jack's vision became a reality.