[JWL>]

clay man

I'm not sure that I follow your questioning.  However, I am going to bow out of this conversation because I do not have any direct experience with what transpired with the original design at MV.  Your comment about JN "beginning to sort of get it lately" is a rather not so subtle expression of your lack of appreciation of JN's design work.  Therefore, I think it best that we don't discuss golf course design because we don't see things the same way.
You can give whatever credit you desire to DM.  It is hard to believe that anyone would defend his body of work on this board, of all places.  But, that is what is great about art, everyone has an opinion, and it isn't "wrong."

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Jim,
I do appreciate your view on Muirfield and do hope you continue to give us your opinions.

To all, I hope that we can encourage and not drive away intelligent and experienced people in the business who have something to offer to this website.

Jim, Yes, I do find it bizarre that a purist as myself would like anything that Desmond produced in his symbolic stage, but the body of his courses before that time are pretty strong, fun and challenging to play. I think you have hit it precisely on the head. Desmond was an artist. He was even a visionary but sadly a tad bit paranoid. He didn't like the fact that Jack, a person he considered a friend and one-time business partner, would write their efforts off as merely a one-time effort at Murfield Village--the place where their business relationship fell apart. They in fact did built several courses good together before that, and hopefuylly they too will be part of the great legacy of Jack Nicklaus with, at that paticular time, one of Golf's better practicing architects--Desmond Muirhead.

He was a great character and I consider his attributes first, before judging his misgivings which like many of acheivements have been lost in the rank and file of popular belief and speculation.

He wasn't crazy, he was in fact just being--Desmond.

[buckeye_bob]

I've played (18) Nicklaus courses.How many more should I play and how much have you enjoyed playing Muirfield Village?

Buckeye Bob

You simply haven't played enough Nicklaus designed golf courses.  BTW, Muirhead wouldn't even recognize MV today.
[/Iquote]

[A_Clay_Man]

JWL- I certainly don't wish for you stop your input, I do however want to promote discussion. The comment about Jack getting better is, as I see it, an evolutionary one. My implication was clear that I suspected Jack knows more now than then and therefore he PROBABLY depended on the input of others. WHo most likely was that other at MV? I SUSPECT it was Desmond. The fact that you have no intimate knowledge of what happened at MV should not stop you, it hasn't stopped me.

[redanman]

Someone above asked why JN hasn't built more courses like MV. It's been over 20 years, correct?

JWL- How can anyone downplay the role DM had at MV?

If it wasn't the fallingout with DM, where have all these great designs been hiding?

MAyacoo LAkes, oft mentioned here was done with DM in WPB, FLand is mush underappreciated today.  Even hte GD people recognized it for a while.  There is a number of really fun and interestings shots to be had, but of interest, the par 3's were already evolving more into Jack's "Signature" sty;e, even then and there.  

To: JWL>  

Has Jack's creative visual impact always been the greatest on par 3's?  Tehy certainly are the most recognizable by aesthetics alone.

[girdle salesman]

I like containment, but I dislike visability.

[JWL>]

redanman

I have never seen Mayacoo Lakes, but I do know it has undergone a pretty major facelift/renovation in the past couple of years.
I am not aware of any other courses that DM/JN worked together, but that doesn't mean there were not others.  I am just unaware.

Regarding your inquiry about JN's visual "speciality" being Par 3's, I hope not.  I would like to think that the design/visual approach philosophy would apply to every hole, regardless of length or par.  With that said, I do think the opportunities for dramatic Par Three holes are easier to find on a piece of land than Par 4 and/or Par 5's.  The reasoning is obvious, since in routing, the tee shot (280+) yards isn't a factor and routing linkage has more options.  JN does like great variety in Par 3's on a course.  One short, One very long, two intermediate, preferably routed in all four directions to maximize wind influence.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
JN has said: "The worst sight in golf is to see a ball bounce over the green and keep rolling and rolling away". It appears he will use a bunker back there for containment.

redanman mentioned JN's vision as one reason he likes visibility.
JN has said that: "Intense observation improved my strategic approach to shotmaking, which led to better scoring, which encouraged me to develop an ultra-analytical approach to the game(and use this approach) as a competitive tool."  JN closely managed his game plan and maybe he never really liked to be at the mercy of the fates on a course.
If I were playing for big trophies and big checks I would be less likely to enjoy randomness.  

As JWL points out, containment mounding is used for various reasons. In the context of playability even a very good player appreciates a kick back towards the fairway or the green every now and then, especially when competing.

I couldn't say what offset distance should be used or when it becomes a non-issue. That would seem to be a hole-by-hole
decision.  
  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy,

Weren't the "Golden Age" architects, disinterested parties, not imparting or infusing the way they played the game into their designs ?

It seems to me that Jack infuses the way he played the game, or liked the game played, into the design of his holes, thus tainting his design by favoring a particular style of play over others.

This would seem to alter the tactical balance of his holes, weighting them to favor a particular method of play, his method of play, when most of the "Golden Age" designers didn't favor any particular method of play or style.  They were truely more "play neutral" more independent with their designs.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
I don't know if you are wrong or right, you are just voicing an opinion.

Perhaps the GAAs did as you say for the most part but I wouldn't be surprised if some of those old boys, especially the ones who were talented players, didn't use a little poetic license in their favor when designing courses.

It has been said here that JN's newer courses are more appealling to a broader range of players. This suggests evolution at the very least.    

[redanman]

JWL>

I for one certainly appreciate your knowledgeable input regarding JWN and his courses.  I personally haven't been to Mayacoo for a few years now and any "new" renovation in that time frame is something I may hope to see this winter as I hope to be in SoFl at least twice if all oges well on a couple of fronts.  As for MAyacoo, it received much early tweaking to improve playability as in those pre-slope days handicaps from MAyacoo travelled very well, making members highly prized guest at member-guests!

I think we are on hte same path from two different directions regarding Jack's par 3's.  What I meant to imply is that his par 3's are the most easily discernable as his design, although I seem to find quite a few double fairway par 5's as well.  Also, I have always noted his concious attention to direction and length as far as 3's in the routing.  I believe that he also commented on that intention in the Ken Bowden book.

It is obvious that Jack has had "periods" in his design, and lately his staff is doing a better job than say 15-20 years ago from a standpoint of shot variety.  Aesthetics haven't really changed that much and are to me generally OK.  His courses have always rewarded the best players the most, but the problem a lot of design teams have is getting so-called "shot values" balanced from each set of tees, and "JWN design" is no better or worse than anyone else now I suppose.  

(What I mean by that is that there often seems to be a too-large gap in the last and penultimate set of tees on many new courses.  The last set is unrelenting for all but the elite golfer where the 5 handicap often gets a little too much of a pass on the penultimate set.  What i personally like to do is play most of teh back tees and move up for a few holes).

[JWN>]

redanman

I would like to think we are all better designers today than we were 15-20 years ago.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy,

I don't recall any of the "Golden Age" architects inserting their style of play, or weighting their understanding of A particular style of play into their designs.

Raynor and Banks weren't regarded as players.

I think this methodology may be unique to Nicklaus.

Perhaps others can shed light on the systemic weighting of a design to a particular style of play.  I can't think of any other examples.

[redanman]

JWL>

I think a key is that there are a lot of good golf courses being built today, much more and  a greater percentage of quality than ever before.  This is one benefit of modern construction  

I think a lot of what goes on here is what I like to call the blonde, brunette, redhead phenomenon.  We tend to prefer certain things in our golf courses (Never been a big fan of downhill holes, sorry! ) just as we all prefer certain kinds details in our beauties. (Catherine Deneuve vs. MArtha Burke-sorry, cheap shot!)


I forgot to ask if you had much involvemnent with Great Bear in the Poconos in PA.  I don't think it gets much recognition yet has a nice flow, good challenge, mix, use of natural features and while not ball-breakingly difficult, is really challenging fun to play.

If so, would you care to comment on it.  I know of several other Pennsylvanians and New Joiseyites who also like it quite well.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I suspect in most cases the architect's game would naturally have an effect on their designs - the problem is how many past architect's game is common knowledge. Not many. We know some were good players or poor players, but we don't know specifically their strengths and weaknesses.

Walter Travis's designs were a reflection of his game - he was very straight, a great bunker player and a brilliant putter. His courses have very deep bunkers off the tee and near the greens and his greens are severely contoured.

[A_Clay_Man]

One aspect of Paa Ko ridge that I found to be interesting was Ken Dye's use of natural containment. The use of hillsides on the right is a reoccuring theme.  I personally don't think design elements should reward wayward shots, especially unaturally built up ones. Although I think I would find it very difficult not to put something in, to stop a ball from rolling to eternity.
 Pace of play considerations seems to be the primary motive and as I like to point out Golf is not an exact science.

 I know this is ridiculous   but, wouldn't the ball manufacturers make alot more money if containment wasn't present? So why haven't they sued courses that are built in half pipes?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Are you suggesting that we're not familiar with the games of
Tom Weiskopf, Ben Crenshaw, Johnny Miller, Gary Player and Arnold Palmer but that we are familiar with Nicklaus's game.

Are you suggesting that noone is familiar with the games of
Dick Wilson, Donald Ross, CBMAcDonald, Robert Trent Jones, Rees Jones, Bob von Hagge, yet, you're familiar with Travis's game ?

How have any of the above inserted their style of play into their designs to the extent that Nicklaus has in his ?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
You said, "I don't recall any of the "Golden Age" architects inserting their style of play, or weighting their understanding of A particular style of play into their designs." Most of the architects you mentioned are not 'golden age', in fact only one is from that era - CB Macdonald.

Evidently Macdonald faded the ball and his first great design, Chicago GC, had nine holes with OB on the left & none with OB to the right. Other than that, I have no idea what the strengths and weaknesses of Macdonald's game -- do you?

Of the American 'golden age' architects, Travis's golfing career/talents was by far the best documented.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

I cited Raynor, Banks, Ross and MacDonald in addition to the others.

If Travis was so straight why would he design holes with very wide fairways, that doesn't favor his game, narrow fairways would.

If he was such a great putter, why would he design relatively flat greens, that wouldn't favor his game, contoured greens would.

Just because a golf course has OB on the left doesn't mean that the designer did so to favor his style of play.
Seems like a wild, unfounded conclusion or a stretch at best, absent an abundance of facts.

But, I understand, you just want to take issue with me.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
No need to get defensive. You said you weren't aware of any golf architects inserting their style of play, and now you know there was at least one - Travis. A very intersting guy, with a distinctive design philosophy, a design philosophy that is well documented.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
Was not Jack Nicklaus' style of play different enough for  Bobby Jones' to make the observation that his game (JN) was one "of which I am not familiar" and did this cause others to begin designing courses for the type of play he brought to the party?

Others more knoweledgeable than me have heretofore said he is building some good stuff with lots of variety.
Do you think that his style has evolved or do you believe he is still "tainting his design by favoring a particular style of play over others" as you previously said?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy,

A man who alleges he was with Bobby Jones when he made that statement indicated it was in the pure context of power, not style of play.

Tom MacWood,

I thought Geoffrey Childs had straightened you out, but,
once again you've jumped to a conclusion not borne by the facts.

Tillinghast designed Quaker Ridge with OB on the RIGHT on the first 8 holes.  Did he hook the ball as a player ?

He designed Ridgewood with OB on the LEFT on the first 4 holes, Did he fade the ball as a player ?

Nicklaus clearly inserted his style of play, and his preference for play, repetitively, into his designs.  I know of no other architect who has done the same thing, new, old or dead.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
With all due respect to Geoffrey, I don't recall him 'straightening me out'.

And if I'm not mistaken, Quaker Ridge was originally laid out by another golf architect - perhaps JD Dunn. But that's beside the point, no one claimed anything about Tillinghast. For all I know he hit it dead straight. It is difficult to draw any conclusions about Tillie when we know very little of his game.

But maybe you do. How much do you know about the strengths and weaknesses of Tillie's game? Macdonald's? Ross's? It would make an interesting study.

Based on your comment regarding golden age architects, I thought you might want to be made aware that there WERE architects whose designs were tailored to the game - Travis as an example.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

Whether it's true or simply mythical conjecture, I do recall reading that ole' C.B. designed the original Chicago with all the OB left since he was evidently a fader of the ball.  

I'm not sure I can find the source, but it doesn't seem too out of character for a guy who contested the legitimacy of the first US Amateur tournament because he didn't win.  Let's not forget that he was a fiery competitor, first and foremost, and with the paucity of golf courses in the early part of last century, any course he designed was likely to hold an important tournament.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
I think it would take some power to hit 200 yd high fades. Power was part of his play so whether or not the Jones quote is irrelevant can you answer the question- did his style of play cause others to begin designing courses for the type of play he brought to the party?

And while you are at it please try to answer my other question- Do you think that his style has evolved or do you believe he is still "tainting his design by favoring a particular style of play over others" as you previously said?

I'd like to know. Thank you.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()