Tom,
Not a bad question, and I just submitted an article for Golf Course News on that very subject, shamelessly using myself as an example of how a gca is influenced by various things. I actually have a longer version in the works for Cybergolf.
Read on:
What Influences Your Golf Course Architect?
Jeffrey D. Brauer
The saying “horses for courses” describes players likely to win at a certain venue. However, it also applies to selecting golf course architects to be successful at particular projects, since each one is unique. Most designers have a style and most clients understandably pick them based on previous work. Frankly, you hate to hear your Golf Course Architect (or airline pilot) saying “Hold on, I want to try something new.” Beyond investigating the past works of your proposed Golf Course Architect, you might want to consider the underlying conscious or sub-conscious influences of their designs as a barometer of how they will perform for you. These influences, shamelessly using myself as an example may include:
Personality
I have taken personality tests (yes, I have one!) and have a classic “Designer” profile. If I had never played golf, I would now be a city planner, furniture designer or landscape architect. But not every Golf Course Architect has a “designer” personality. It’s not required to obtain a landscape architecture degree (or apprentice under your father!). Non designers designing courses tend to have less flare. If you need practical design, that may be just fine, but it usually isn’t.
Mentors – Direct and Indirect
Like most architects, I have been also been indirectly influenced by classic courses I have played around the world, learning that there are many different ways to design golf courses that my contemporaries rarely consider! A well traveled Golf Course Architect is a usually better choice than one who isn’t interested in learning from others, but an architect’s own mentors usually have the biggest influence. I still do many things in similar ways as my mentors, who ingrained these ideas:
• If it can’t be maintained, it won’t last.
• If it can be built, it can be drawn
• If it can be drawn, you can predict a budget and that budget doesn’t have to be huge
While a lot has changed, I still draw plans, do estimates and usually opt for maintainable designs. While I would have never coined a name like minimalism to market my services, I came of age in the minimalist tradition of grading fairways only where required for vision, creating surface pitch for drainage, or to flatten the fairways to playable slopes. Architects with different training strip more topsoil and move more earth, but I have created nice golf courses moving less than 100,000 cubic yards of earth.
If you have a budget, you might want to consider an architect who has also done that with good results. Golf Course Architects with other training might draw on napkins, never meet a budget and disregard the cost of maintenance completely. At least, many are famous for doing just that!
My beliefs actually came from my mentor’s mentor, who owned golf courses during the depression. His courses required only two maintenance workers - one for greens mowing and bunker raking (which were big ovals for efficiency) and another for gang mowing fairways. Like him, I am influenced by career timing, having entered the profession in 1977 when golf economics of were similar to today. I welcome the return to practical golf. Architects entering in better times, apprenticing under famous architects, or with bigger construction and maintenance budgets probably view those times as “normal” and the current need for practicality a nuisance, which is a vastly different perspective.
Training
To become a Golf Course Architect, I had the traditional training of studying landscape architecture, surveying, aerial photography, agronomy, and drainage to learn the business. This training is important since new courses require accurate plans and quantity calculations to meet environmental standards. Architects coming from other backgrounds may have to learn on the job – but hopefully not your job.
If you want a course that looks and functions as well as it plays, you should probably consider someone with landscape architectural training, supplemented by a lengthy apprenticeship at an established firm.
Perhaps the greatest lesson learned in my apprenticeship was that there are no bad golf course design projects! I was once lobbied for a high budget project over a lower budget one to show off my skills (sounding very much like a typical NBA player). I was told that if I couldn’t do a superior design on a lower budget, I wasn’t the designer they thought I was!
Artistic Influence
My artistic approach is influenced by my landscape architectural education, which taught me general art principles, but my courses most closely emulate those of 1950’s architect Dick Wilson. Why? It’s because my mentors consciously emulated his design style to change their image from their mentor. I picked up that style, slowly making my own changes to distinguish myself from them.
Golf Background
An architect’s golfing ability influences their design less than generally presumed. As a recreational golfer, I design for playability and “interesting, even if less “fair” features” – whatever that is! (It is mostly the topic for another column) but have learned about shot values for great competitive players by collaborating with Tour Pros. Conversely, many good players consider their caliber golfers first, but work to reduce difficulty for others, often based on what they see in pro-ams.
Golf background may play a bigger role in design style. I was introduced to golf at a country club by a neighbor, but despite several membership drives, my father never would “pop” for a membership and I was soon golfing on public courses. While I am comfortable in a Country Club setting, I still love public golf course design, knowing that turning budget (or other) limitations to your client’s advantage is fun, and generally helps the game of golf more than projects with extravagant budgets.
Some Golf Course Architects refuse public course design projects and others wouldn’t feel comfortable in a private club setting. Some turn down very small projects, or technical projects like improving drainage.
Professional Background
Over 20 years, I have slowly realized that good golf course design requires us to be forceful in our demands for golf course acreage, when housing developers or land planners don’t consider the golf course to be as important, or when club members don’t want to spend the proper amount to complete a project correctly. While being agreeable is generally a good thing for a Golf Course Architect, sometimes it pays to have someone with the experience – and gumption – to tell you no when he/she needs to.
Critics
Golf Course Architects are influenced by critics, magazine rankings, and even internet discussion boards. A Golf Course Architect who has been pummeled by critics more than usual lately may be more conservative, while one who has never experienced bad reviews might be overly aggressive. Usually, neither is a good thing. An architect who has progressed through his career with a generally upward trend is a good barometer for you. You want one who can think out of the box (does the firm have any unique projects, or do they repeat the same design every time?) but not take overly wild chances. (Those of us with experience try not to make the same mistake twice!)
If you are interviewing Golf Course Architects any time soon, delving into these areas might give you a better picture of how your relationship will turn out, and more importantly, how your project will turn out.