[PCCraig]

I’m watching the PGA Championship’s live stream online and listening to Michael Breed who is acting like an analyst for the PGA this week, and considering he has been on air non-stop for 20+ hours, I think he’s doing a nice job. During some small talk he mentioned that he used to be an Assistant at Augusta National and became a huge fan of Allister Mackenzie’s work, including Cypress Point and Pasatiempo.

Two weeks ago, while watching the PGA Tour playing the CB Macdonald-designed Old White, we were promised significant discussion on the different template hole…but got little. (We did however hear Nick Faldo give legit praise for the work done to the course and its architecture a few times).

My question is this, are any of the “talking heads” on the Golf Telecasts that are actually knowledgeable in golf course architecture? Or with the topic only interesting to such a narrow audience that the producers don’t think it’s worth wasting time talking or doing any features that would involve it?

[Phil McDade]

Pat:

I think many are, but these folks (and their producers) also know their audiences, and thus talk of Redans and Bottle holes would probably go over the head of 90 percent of the audience. Not that isn't worth trying

I find that two of the better on-course commentators are Judy Rankin and Dottie Pepper. They both played golf at a very high level, understand what's required and possible out there, and don't try to paint with too broad of a brushstroke in what they are describing.

But I also find Faldo and (a bit less so) Feherty entertaining.

[Will MacEwen]

Faxon?

[JC Jones]

Personally, I think there is nothing worse than a TV announcer talking architecture.

[John_Conley]

Gary Koch obviously, and hopefully Charlie Rymer.  Johnny Miller.  I'll let Jeff Brauer speak about Lanny Wadkins...I think he's one of the many that's done a course w/ Jeff. 

[David_Tepper]

Ian Baker-Finch knows about GCA.

[Matthew Sander]

My biggest issue with the TV crews' comments about architecture is that they are too broad sweeping and as a result sometimes misleading. This week there are many examples of this theme. The constant labeling of WS as a true links or that it looks like it was imported directly from Scotland is rarely corrected or explained further; there is rarely nuance in the discussion. It is probably directive from the networks not to spend too much time on a topic that might be too esoteric for many viewers. However, if people get the impression and it sticks that WS is a true links, then thier understading of WS as well as links golf ends up being incorrect. That is not going to bring the world to its knees, but a little accuracy in the commentary should be expected.

[JMEvensky]

Ian Baker-Finch knows about GCA.

Agreed.Seems like a lot of Aussies have an appreciation for good design--probably not a coincidence given where they grew up playing tournaments.

I would imagine the TV announcers' first job regarding the architecture is to praise the host course.The PGA Tour doesn't want an honest discussion if there's a chance the words "goat track" might get uttered.

[PCCraig]

If there are so many announcers that understand Architecture, then how come they don't talk about it more often on air? It would seem to me that one of the big things that sets televised golf apart from other sports is that it isn't played on a consistent field, which would mean the participants would have to adjust to each hole's strategy, obviously.

Perhaps it's time constraints, but how come the only thing you hear from an announcer when a player is getting ready for a shot is "157 to the pin, I think it's an 8 iron." Wouldn't it be more interesting if there was more discussion on what type of shot a player is hitting and why? Or is the lack of discussion a byproduct of the majority of the courses the PGA Tour plays and their general lack of strategy?

[Mike_Young]

I think several are, including Charlie but I think they have enough knowledge regarding such as to not agitate sponsors, USGA and owners....they realize that 99.8 percent of the listening audience could care less....AND they might be knowledgable enough to disagree with much of what is said on this site....

[Jud_T]

I would imagine the TV announcers' first job regarding the architecture is to praise the host course.The PGA Tour doesn't want an honest discussion if there's a chance the words "goat track" might get uttered.

This

[Matthew Sander]

I would imagine the TV announcers' first job regarding the architecture is to praise the host course.The PGA Tour doesn't want an honest discussion if there's a chance the words "goat track" might get uttered.

Good point, the closest you'll usually get to criticism of the host course is relative lack of praise for the venue. I have heard the crews that do the European Tour events be quite critical regarding some of their courses, especially those that have been altered.

[PCCraig]

Of course no one on TV would say "It's just a 7 iron for Tiger, he didn't have to think about that for long considering the lack of strategic options on this goat track."

But can't these announcers discuss the golf course and its strategy on some of the more interesting holes, and not be negative? If you were Herb Kohler, wouldn't you love it if an announcer is talking about all the strategy on your golf course and how interesting it is to watch the players decide their angles of attack?

[Jud_T]

Pat,

Agreed.  Another pet peeve is why a huge percentage of the coverage is just switching back and forth amongst guys putting.  More full shot coverage would lead to more discussion of strategy and maybe even architecture...

[Mac Plumart]

Some of the announcers know about architecture, no doubt about it.

Was is Rich Lerner who said "Lester Green" rennovated Old White?  He later corrected himself.

And this classic from Johnny Miller while announcing the Tour Championship at East Lake, "what is the name of the lake in middle of the property?"  To which, the reply was "East Lake, Johnny."  That was hilarious!!  Even Johnny laughed at himself.  

Anyway, I am just kidding around.  IBF seems to really know his stuff and Faldo seems to care about it.  Frankly, I'll take any little tid-bit I can get.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I go with Faldo as my new favorite announcer.  I think one of the most knowlegable analysts is Brandel Chamblee.  He just knows his stuff.

[Matthew Sander]

I just caught Peter Kostis lamenting the lack of linkslike playability of WS. He said "looks like a links, smells like a links, but it doesn't play like a links. If this course got fiery and fast and you had to bounce your ball around, boy would it be fun." One of the more honest assessments of conditions and architecture that I've heard...

[Phil McDade]

Matthew:

It can get fast out there; I'm certain it was really fast and firm in May, when all of Wisconsin golf was playing F&F. But we've had 2+ months of fairly frequent rains, a big rainstorm in Sheboygan the night before play commenced, and they'll be lucky to dodge even more rain this afternoon.

[Matthew Sander]

Phil,

The vagaries of living in the Midwest huh? I'm in the west burbs of Chicago and we've had a similar summer. Some stretches of really hot and dry weather coupled with periods of heavy rains and ridiculous humidity. Last summer was so different, pretty dry and it rarely got above 80.

It seems some of the guys on the other thread regarding WS are arguing that it is rarely if ever firm/fast there. I've not played there once let alone multiple times so I can't really weigh in. I would imagine that it could get pretty fast in the fall when there is still some warmth, but there is typically less rain and the grasses are finished with their prime growing season...

[PCCraig]

I just caught Peter Kostis lamenting the lack of linkslike playability of WS. He said "looks like a links, smells like a links, but it doesn't play like a links. If this course got fiery and fast and you had to bounce your ball around, boy would it be fun." One of the more honest assessments of conditions and architecture that I've heard...

That's great. And I agree with Phil in that I think they try to get it F&F, but without a sandy soil base and all the rain that the area has gotten it doesn't stand a chance this week of playing to its full F&F effect. However all things considered I wouldn't say it looks like it's playing slow.

[George Pazin]

Fwiw, I think many announcers discuss architecture quite frequently, they just don't necessarily do it explicitly. They frequently cite advantages gained by hitting a certain side of the fairway or green, they frequently say a guy has left himself in a really bad position to get up and down, or a guy has left himself an uphill putt, etc.

Guess there's subtle announcers, to be appreciated just like subtle golf courses...

Okay, that was a little overboard! But I still think the observations above are accurate.

[RJ_Daley]

I agree that comments like Kostis's above are about as much as you are going to get on announcers demonstrating their knowledge of golf course architecture.  Or, something like Faldo going on a bit about Lester's work at restoring a CB design.  That was a rare treat.

But let's face it.  They are announcing the playing of golf, not the designing of golf, or building of golf.  The discussion is always going to be dominated by comments on swing habits and changes, equipment, ball striking and putting techniques, along with personalities of players.  Only to the extent that the ball and impliments interact with the field of play- that is playing the game- will elements of what the field of play is designed like come into the commentary.  GCA is an afterthought to the announcers.  Ball striking, putting, course management and strategy, along with colorful descriptions of players are the announcer's primary focus, with GCA in a very secondary role as it relates to those activities. 

[Tim Martin]

Although an infrequent commentator Tom Weiskoph would have to be considered knowledgeable about golf course architecture. Along with his design partner Jay Moorish they have been pretty successful. Regardless of whether you like his work he has to be mentioned in this discussion. 

[Jason McNamara]

If there are so many announcers that understand Architecture, then how come they don't talk about it more often on air?

I have zero proof of this, but in my head I can sure imagine Frank Chirkinian saying
             "What the !@#$%^&*() are you doing talking about the course?"

[Mac Plumart]

Regarding Weiskopf, I believe he did an intro piece on the Old Course and some of the architectural aspects/merits of it at the beginning of each round.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()