The Rubbish of "Pro Golfer Designers"

[Melvyn Morrow]

What has that got to do with apathy

Melvyn

PS Does it really matter? 

[Kalen Braley]

I don't see why its a stretch to think Monty could be a draw to a course if his name is on it. This happens on many courses here in the States with guys like Freddie Couples who has a similar type arrangement if I understand his involvement correctly.

....and lest we forget, outside of Monty not being able to win the big ones, he was a very very good player and dominated European golf for years and years.  And if there was a European HoF, Monty would be a shoe-in right?

[Mike Sweeney]

Can someone document what Bobby Jones actually did at Augusta?

Just asking, as I really dont know if he was involved or not.

Maybe we should blame Chuck Taylor. He had to be one of the early celebrity designers that did not really design:

The story of Charles H. ("Chuck") Taylor, Hoosier,  basketball player, and master shoe salesman:

1901 - Born in Indiana.
1908 - Marquis M. Converse started the "Converse Rubber Company."
1917 - Converse Rubber Company brought out a shoe very much like today's "All Star."
1921 - Converse hired Chuck Taylor from the Akron Firestone Non-Skids basketball team. Chuck Taylor conducted basketball clinics for Converse.
1932 - Chuck Taylor got his signature on the basketball shoe now associated with his name.

[jeffwarne]

As I have stated before, I could escort Tom Doak and Bill Coore through the dining room, lounge and grill room of most any golf club and not a half dozen people would have any knowledge about either of them. If I parade Ben Crenshaw and Colin Montgomery around, we'll draw more attention than we can handle.

John,
You could do the same with Donald Ross too ,but people would still want to play his courses.
A good course built by a no-name(or a non recognizable face) will get played-look at Tidewater in Myrtle Beach-and frankly, nobody knew who Michael Strantz was when True Blue and Caladonia opened and they were received wonderfully by the public because they were good courses.

Now we just need to convince the guys with the money-the problem is they're usually getting their advice from corporate types who as John said, have never heard of most real golf architects.

[Bill_McBride]

What has that got to do with apathy

Melvyn

PS Does it really matter? 

What's worse, ignorance or apathy?

I don't know and I don't care.

[Lester George]

Forrest,

You know my number as well.

Jeff,

I remember Tidewater getting all the press when it opened and remember rumors that a real GCA had actually routed it and the owner/developer took the routing and "created" his masterpiece.  I was always intrigued by this and actually looked forward to playing it one day.

Well, this past November I finally got my chance.  All I can say is DREADFUL!
One of the worst golf courses I have ever had the the misfortune of playing.  The guy should stick to his day job because he sucks at golf architecture.

 

Lester

[jeffwarne]

Forrest,

You know my number as well.

Jeff,

I remember Tidewater getting all the press when it opened and remember rumors that a real GCA had actually routed it and the owner/developer took the routing and "created" his masterpiece.  I was always intrigued by this and actually looked forward to playing it one day.

Well, this past November I finally got my chance.  All I can say is DREADFUL!
One of the worst golf courses I have ever had the the misfortune of playing.  The guy should stick to his day job because he sucks at golf architecture.

 

Lester

Lester,
Maybe the owner will "credit" the architect if that becomes popular opinion.

[Bill_Yates]

Who signed off on all of the drawings?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Never thought of this until now, but do you suppose Old Tom sent one of his apprentice clubmakers around to design his courses?  If he followed the current big name model, he may very well have!

[jeffwarne]

I love the high ground taken by all of the non architect contributors here.  The purity of their thought and absolute committment to the game.  It is so easy to sit at a keyboard and pontificate on something for which you have no experience to inform your position, and further after writing all your thoughts you really have nothing to offer and certainly take no action on your part to correct what you deem here as some terrible crime.  It is like all the people who complain about all the money spent on this or that whether it be war, crime, etc, then they dutifully pay their taxes every spring.

huh
It'd be a small discussion group if "all of us with no experience and  with nothing to offer" didn't contribute-while all of the informed took Jeff's # and called him privately.
"all of the non architect contributors" is a bit of a sweeping statement-no?

[Eric_Terhorst]

I love the high ground taken by all of the non architect contributors here.  The purity of their thought and absolute committment to the game.  It is so easy to sit at a keyboard and pontificate on something for which you have no experience to inform your position, and further after writing all your thoughts you really have nothing to offer and certainly take no action on your part to correct what you deem here as some terrible crime.  It is like all the people who complain about all the money spent on this or that whether it be war, crime, etc, then they dutifully pay their taxes every spring.

KBM, I think I understand your sentiment.  But I wonder if it also isn't a bit disingenuous for an architect involved in a $10 billion mega-project in Dubai, the capital of hype if ever there was one, to complain about someone taking credit for his work?  Why expect anything else from such a project?   Why not just double or triple your usual price, deliver a good product, cash the checks, and move on?  Who cares at that point if Monty or any other golfer or an ego-centric developer wants to toot his own horn?   

[Melvyn Morrow]

Kelly

Many thanks for point out my errors and misguided thoughts. Whilst not an architect I do have some involvement in the search for what Old Tom did and did not do. Many clubs that have recently discovered their connection to him have been delighted. I believe a true historical records should be available for each club. That’s just MHO.

Jeff

There is a major difference in what you are actually saying in that today’s architects use associate designers to participate in the day to day operations. But in Old Tom’s day I don’t believe there were companies of architects or designers, although he employed people to work in his shop. Yes, he took some under his wing and showed the principles of 19th century design and some did undertake some responsibilities regards construction of greens formats but that was under construction not design and under his supervision, not just signing of a drawing. A course designed by Old Tom was just that unlike today when it may be designed by an associate of a company.

The question is who designed the course, the company employing the designer or the designer. For me there is but one answer the guy who actually designed the course should be credited with the work and not the company he works for. That I believe is the only honest way.

Who signs off the drawing is responsible for the legality of the design covering the technical/administration questions and IMHO should not be considered as the designer. Credit the person who does the design, not the person who owns the company. Bit old fashion in that respect, one should always honour the person who does the work. But lets not confuse the issue design is different to construction.

Of course this is an opinion from a NON ARCHITECT and therefore may not be acknowledged as serious contribution to the debate on this topic.

Melvyn

[Jim Nugent]

This reminds me of the tournament a few years back, where Monty improved his lie in a bunker, after play started again due to a rain delay.  Together, these incidents make me wonder how honest he is. 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jim

Not sure it's a question of honesty, but before accreditation of the course to anyone his claim should be investigated.

I cannot believe Colin would make a statement that could be so easily proven as incorrect, it does not seem to add up, so I would like to know more before I question Colin’s honesty. However looking at what was said I believe as I said earlier it would be madness to claim someone else’s work for your own in the light of our modern world.  But then I am not an architect and am sitting at a keyboard and pontificate something for which I have no experience. Oh well there goes another topic.    

Melvyn

[Mark Pearce]

What an extraordinary storm in a teacup.  It's an 8 year old article in the Daily Mail, for God's sake, apparently quoting another article with a quote from Monty that (knowing the Mail) is almost certainly out of context.  If anyone can find what Monty actually said and put it in context then I'll worry about it.  While we're debating a piece of gutter journalism I think I have better ways to waste my life.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Anytime two people collaborate on a golf design you may have problems on who did what and the values those parts mean in the general mix. I suspect Colin does think he did it, maybe he feels he oversaw that masterplan and argued some important points. Some think the routing is 90% , some think the green shapings are 90%. Most golf courses do end up collaborations over time because things evolve, committees or others add bunkers, plant trees that maybe the original designer did not want. Is Nicklaus the designer, Palmer, Player etc in all honesty any firm that does more than a course a year is a collaboration because a course takes pretty much a year and associates or managers are on site and will make changes. I have worked with another where I felt I did more his argument was "I am the boss" i have worked with another where he felt the same and it was more "i was the boss". Pro golfers = name = sale of real estate. They command a% often equal to 7 figures because their name will promote. Many know that a pro golfer wont design a better course than a proper golf course architect but its probably not most people. Sadly.

[Jim_Kennedy]

While we're debating a piece of gutter journalism I think I have better ways to waste my life.-MPearce

....and that would be how, commenting on this thread?    

[Robert Thompson]

I had a lengthy conversation about this subject with Tom Lehman. Most of his peers aren't designers or even consultants, he said, and he's spent his career as a designer trying to get past that. I'll say that Lehman spent a lot of time on site on the project he did in Canada, working with Tom McBroom. Richard Zokol recently collaborated with Rod Whitman, and I think there's little doubt that other pros (McCumber, Jerry Pate, Weiskopf) have made commitments to design.

My point is this -- there are a lot of big name architects, those we all know, who make very few site visits as well. I wouldn't colour the pros with one brush -- I think for every John Daly (who told a media conference that it was "nice to finally meet my designer," when opening a course in Niagara Falls) there's someone like Crenshaw or Nicklaus who puts a lot of effort into it. I also recall Mark O'Meara getting upset with me when I asked who was going to design his next course (he made one site visit on the one he was opening). It is truly a mixed bag.

This is a subject I'm very familiar with, having worked through the process of aligning Mike Weir with a designer (Ian Andrew) recently. I think pros can add value other than marketing if they are really interested. And if they aren't, it doesn't make a course bad. I think the Monty course outside Dublin is actually quite strong. I thought European PGA design did the work -- and it is a pretty solid course.

[John_Cullum]

The question is who designed the course, the company employing the designer or the designer.

Just who out there is asking that question?

[Bill_McBride]

I love the high ground taken by all of the non architect contributors here.  The purity of their thought and absolute committment to the game.  It is so easy to sit at a keyboard and pontificate on something for which you have no experience to inform your position, and further after writing all your thoughts you really have nothing to offer and certainly take no action on your part to correct what you deem here as some terrible crime.  It is like all the people who complain about all the money spent on this or that whether it be war, crime, etc, then they dutifully pay their taxes every spring.

That's what happens when Forrest rouses the rabble! 

[Forrest Richardson]

Tony: "The ASGCA has guidelines that touch on it, but seem to be all but ignored."

I'll disagree with that. With few exceptions you will find that ASGCA members are a good lot and they avoid the grey areas. If grey areas are entered, there is a process that can get to the bottom of questions. This is just one benefit of a professional organization.

-----

Mark: Geez!!

How about this: I, Forrest Richardson, being of reasonably sound mind and body, personally met with Desmond Muirhead (before his death) who showed me actual copies of newspaper accounts wherein Colin Mongomerie was quoted by British press agents as saying that he designed the Emirates Hills Golf Club. Further, Mr. Muirhead related that he heard from several people associated with the club that Mr. Montgomerie made numerous comments at a press event associated with a golf tournament that he was looking forward to other design assignments following the opening of Emirates Hills and his work there. Mr. Muirhead went on to complain that Mr. Montgomerie was a fraud for stating that he designed the Emirates Hills Golf Club and that such claims were among the biggest lies in golf.

Look, I can only say what I know. I suppose you can say that this is nothing to worry about...old news, not much concrete facts, etc.  However, my take is that things like this do matter. That people who appreciate golf courses have an opinion and, even if there is not much to the Colin account, there are plenty of other accounts to take its place.

So far, excellent perspective...even Mark's "black and white" take.

[Bill_McBride]

I had a lengthy conversation about this subject with Tom Lehman. Most of his peers aren't designers or even consultants, he said, and he's spent his career as a designer trying to get past that. I'll say that Lehman spent a lot of time on site on the project he did in Canada, working with Tom McBroom. Richard Zokol recently collaborated with Rod Whitman, and I think there's little doubt that other pros (McCumber, Jerry Pate, Weiskopf) have made commitments to design.

My point is this -- there are a lot of big name architects, those we all know, who make very few site visits as well. I wouldn't colour the pros with one brush -- I think for every John Daly (who told a media conference that it was "nice to finally meet my designer," when opening a course in Niagara Falls) there's someone like Crenshaw or Nicklaus who puts a lot of effort into it. I also recall Mark O'Meara getting upset with me when I asked who was going to design his next course (he made one site visit on the one he was opening). It is truly a mixed bag.

This is a subject I'm very familiar with, having worked through the process of aligning Mike Weir with a designer (Ian Andrew) recently. I think pros can add value other than marketing if they are really interested. And if they aren't, it doesn't make a course bad. I think the Monty course outside Dublin is actually quite strong. I thought European PGA design did the work -- and it is a pretty solid course.

Jerry Pate is mentioned above.   He operates a very successful turf and turf equipment (Toro) company in Pensacola, Florida, as well as a golf design company of which he is the president, with two staff designers, Steve Danq and son Jamey Pate.  Jerry is very involved in the design part of the business, hands on out in the field, at least so far as our project in Pensacola was concerned.  I don't believe he is one of the celebrity pros who may take credit for design work, he's actually involved in it all the time.

[Melvyn Morrow]

John

"Just who out there is asking that question?"

I believe it was me

Melvyn

[Michael Blake]

from the website:

http://www.themontgomerie.com/


'The Montgomerie, Dubai’s championship golf course was designed by Colin Montgomerie in association with Desmond Muirhead.  The course covers 265 acres which consist of 123 acres of turf, 49 acres of man-made lakes (a total of 14 lakes), 93 acres of landscaped gardens and is scattered with 81 large bunkers.'


...seems like the people in charge wanted Monty to get most of the credit as well.

[JMorgan]

The OED/2E defines plagiarism as "the wrongful appropriation or purloining and publication as one's own, of the ideas, or the expression of the ideas (literary, artistic, musical, mechanical, etc.) of another."  

Is this an instance of plagiarism?  Would course design attribution receive greater scrutiny if architects considered their work in the same context as, or subject to the same rules that govern, the appropriation of ideas in other fields?