"We've had many a discussion on who might have been the most influential architects in terms of how their innovations moved architecture forward. But which of the golden age (let's say active before 1914) architects continues to influence today's architects and architecture the most?"
You know Mark, this is truly a most interesting question to consider.
Personally, I see the answer to that question, at least over here, changing quite a bit in the last decade or less.
Somewhat unbelievably to me it seems as if the architects and the style that has been having the most influence very recently on some of the modern architects may be Macdonald/Raynor and their totally unique "middle-era" style.
I recognize that the look and influence on the likes of C&C, Doak, Hanse, DeVries et al must be something else, perhaps some interpretation of a heathland style but even though that may be the case they all seem to be most interested in the architecture of Macdonald/Raynor. Then there's the Love Co that has termed their interest and style Rosnor----eg some combination of Ross and Raynor. Personally those two styles seem to me to be something of a contradiction in terms.
This is a most interesting question, though, because there is very little question that a huge number of architects today are now beginning to cast their eyes back in time to that Golden Age and it's just so interesting to see which architects and which styles from that early time they're looking at to reinterpret in what they do today.
One thing this says to me, though, Mark, is if golf architecture is ever going to get to some new and more comprehensive level of naturalism than it ever has before (if this is even possible) it will probably always be a very hard row to hoe.
And why is that? That to me is the real question. I think it must have something to do with either an almost complete imbuing of landscape architecture principles in golf architecture at this point or perhaps it's simply as fundamental as the necessary requirements of golf itself.