[Forrest Richardson]

It may have been discussed before, but I am not sure we ever came to any conclusions.

• What golf architect(s) hold the title of "Most Rounds Played on Courses Designed" — this would obviously be the sum of quantity of courses + frequency at those courses (and, it would favor the older or deceased)

• What golf architect(s) hold the title of "Highest Rounds Averaged (per year) on Courses Designed" — this being a matter of trying to figure out of all an architect's body of work, which have created courses that get played the most on an annual basis?

[Tom_Doak]

Forrest:

Not sure where you are going with this.

Mr. Ross and Mr. Jones each built about 400 courses, many in year-round climate zones, so theirs would get played the most on an annual basis, I think.  Of course Mr. Ross's courses have been there for 30-40 years longer than Mr. Jones' ... I am not sure if you intended to figure that in or not.

Of my own limited work, the irony is that the most-played course would certainly be a lesser-known one, Heathland at The Legends, which used to play 50,000+ rounds per year.  (I am not sure if the numbers in Myrtle Beach have held up of late.)  After that, my most-played courses from one year to the next are probably Pacific Dunes and The Rawls Course.  Sadly, some of my best work is some of the least-played, due to financial problems or short seasons (St. Andrews Beach and Cape Kidnappers and Ballyneal among them).

Based on that, I would guess that an architect in Florida or California would be near the top of the "average rounds played per course" listing you are looking for in your second question.

[Ronald Montesano]

Reminds me of the Bob Seger song, Feel Like A Number.  What might these numbers prove?  How would they matter?  I'm willing to read/listen, but I don't see any correlation to importance, other than a trivial one.  The courses in Buffalo that get the most play are the city's munis.  They are in no way, shape or form close to the best of the lot.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I can say who would be on the bottom of both lists...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ronald,

While it might be trivia there is the school of thought that whoever designed those munis has done more for golf than someone who has designed only a few high end, lesser played courses.  It could be a valid stat in many ways, or at least just interesting.

I am thinking of the bakers dozen courses I have done around DFW.  If I can provide a half a million nice golf experiences each year (about 38K average play) I would be proud of that, even though none of these courses is rated in the top 100.  Would I have affected golf in DFW more than Tom Fazio who has 3 nice courses which probably play 15K rounds each, tops?

[Forrest Richardson]

I agree with Ross and Jones. This is more trivia.

But, the second question may be a good one to consider. And, yes, we should probably figure a way to account for seasonal courses. If we were able to come to a list for #2 it would be similar to determining a list of the film director who was most successful in creating movies people flocked to see, again and again.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Forrest,
I don't see how the answer to question 2 could be different than the answer to question 1.


....and eventually you'd come to the same erroneous conclusion from another thread, that Ted Robinson is 'best' because his courses get a lot of play.

[Forrest Richardson]

#1 is different because it is an aggregate. Sort of the "Most Played All-time, all courses."

#2 would be a popularity contest based on highest average rounds per year, regardless of how many courses or how old (or deceased) the designer is.

I am aware that the list developed may not be "most artful" or "most admired" or "most liked by the GCA crowd" — I wasn't really expecting that. although it would be interesting to discuss which golf architects might make these lists, and miraculously, whether there would be anyone on the lists that may fit the artful, admired or liked labels.

[Jim_Kennedy]

#2 would be a popularity contest based on highest average rounds per year, regardless of how many courses or how old (or deceased) the designer is.

Then the winner would be David Mackay, for Ala Wai, which does over 500 rounds per day, 365 days per year.

.....which illustrates just how fruitless, IMO, it would be to try and compile such a list.

[Forrest Richardson]

A few years ago I asked NGF about Ala Wai and I was informed that many of the "rounds" counted were 9-hole rounds. My recollection is that the annual number there is just about equal to Ken McDonald (Tempe, AZ) and Cave Creek (Phoenix, AZ) which reported a high of 135,000 annual 18-hole rounds in 2000.

Jim — You do not have to participate. But, as a response to your post I would say that the #2 question begs a designer who has created a minimum threshold of courses — maybe a dozen — and the average would be an aggregate average of all of their body of work.

I think it an interesting question: What designer(s) would top the list (question #2) of the most consistent to deliver courses that are played and played and played more than those of their counterparts?

[Phil_the_Author]

Forest,

In the case of the "Golden Age" designers, many of the courses that they designed are now thought of as done by others or who designed them has been forgotten altogether. Tillinghast, for example, wrote that he "designed and built several hundred courses" in his career. Today we only know of 89 original designs of his. There could be 100+ courses of his out there that don't know who created them. Wouldn't you say that cases like that could certainly skew the numbers?

What about a course like Augusta National? With limited membership playing limited rounds that certainly would skew Mackenzie's numbers.

I think the questions are good ones but unanswerable for those designing courses more than 80 years ago...

[Jim_Kennedy]

Forrest,
Consistently delivering courses that are played and played and played suggests nothing more than easy access, large population centers, fair prices, and year round good climate.

I don't think there is anything useful about what you are trying to find out and I don't think there is any way you can come up with criteria that would make it so. Sorry if you don't like my response.

[Forrest Richardson]

Any response is a good one, Jim. Shows you have opinions.

So, in your assessment — there would no element of "a good design" that might also contribute to a course played and played and played? What you are saying is interesting — that price and easy access are the only factors that the golfer responds to in terms of repeat or "favorite" play.

[Jim_Kennedy]

No, I just don't think you'd be able to cull that piece of information out of what you'd be gathering.

[Forrest Richardson]

May still be fun to try.

[Kalen Braley]

Forrest,

I get what you're saying here, but I'd have to agree with most of the others due to the McDonalds Corollary.  Just because McD's sells more hamburgers and fries than anyone else doesn't necessarily mean it can be correlated with "quality".  I would postulate that it has more to do with price points and convience in that they are located on almost every corner and offer a very cheap meal.

Back to golf though, there is also a sidebar to this, in over-crowded and under served places like California.....there just aren't many decent public offerings available.  So what is available is what will be played, like it or not, and this explains the massive amounts of rounds being played on courses that aren't much more than a 2 on the Doak scale. And who can blame the owners....why spend massive amounts of money to upgrade your course when demand already far outpaces supply.

[Forrest Richardson]

OK, maybe it should be discussed by only considering well regarded golf architects — or only courses that have been listed on "best of" lists?

Maybe the question should be thought of in other disciplines — such as, what movie directors constantly deliver movies that are enjoyed by the most people with few "dogs" in between? Or, what notable building architects have created buildings that have become not only well loved as architecture, but are well used and enjoyed by people other than architectural students or buffs?

[Adam Clayman]

Another twist could be to identify which designer inspired the most number of designers.

Perhaps it would be good fodder for your next meeting. Finding out the courses all the architects grew up playing, or, if there was one that they eventually did play that inspired them to take up the vocation.


Does the Old course win hands down for the aggregate most number of rounds played?

[Mike Benham]

Does the Old course win hands down for the aggregate most number of rounds played?

Perhaps not, it is closed one day a week ... over 400 years of golfing, that one day will add up to many many rounds not played ...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()