Jack's Legacy on Golf Course Architecture

[Jim Colton]

What will they be saying about Jack's courses and his mark on golf course architecture 50, 100 years from now?  Which will be his most lasting, celebrated designs?

Discuss.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Desert Highlands in Scottsdale, AZ will be remembered as the major force behind real estate development in the Southwest.

Muirfield Village because it's probably his best and well known course due to The Memorial and Ryder Cup.

Sebonack because of the collaboration with Tom Doak and site of many major championships.

[PCCraig]

Valhalla has some great holes and is a consistent major tournament host.

[Scott Szabo]

Castle Pines has to be on the list.  I remember an article on it in Golf Digest (or another major publication) calling it the Augusta of the Rocky Mountains.  

There's not alot of love for Jack's design on this site, but the golfing public generally hold him in high esteem.  The number or courses he and his group are or were involved with suggest that he's probably the most marketable designer of all time.  Whether that always results in great design is debatable, but attaching his name to a club surely carries weight.

[Bill_McBride]

I truly dislike his course at PGA West, where he dug out some lakes and used the spoil to pile up three or four huge mounds.  He then cut shelves in front and back about half way up, thus creating a green with a bunker 20'-30' below the front and an elevated tee on the back side.  Yuck-a-rama.

I'm also not keen on Grand Cypress with its phony earthmoving and chocolate drop mounds.  I did like the New Course there, TOC tribute course.

Mayacama looks very good.  I wasn't thrilled with the Apache course at Desert Mountain or the Sunrise course at Las Campanas.  Everything was so predictable.

[Jim Nugent]

From my admittedly limited knowledge of how Jack works, I don't consider him a golf course architect per se.  He is more a manager with ultimate oversight powers.  

I would love to see Jack route a course by himself, and then spend the time needed to move the course through construction to finished product.  Really curious to see what he would turn out.  Until that day, I can't see him as a golf course architect.  

I bet his courses will not rise much in the rankings over the years.  His team has produced lots of really good courses.  But any inspired ones?  Doesn't seem like it.  His highest-rated courses are all collaborations, where the other architect did the routing.  

Maybe Dismal River will turn out an exception to that.  

[Scott Szabo]

Jim Nugent,

Is that true of Muirfield Village, arguably one of his greatest courses?

[Jim Nugent]

Jim Nugent,

Is that true of Muirfield Village, arguably one of his greatest courses?

I'm pretty sure Desmond Muirhead routed it and designed it.   

[Steve Kline]

Valhalla has some great holes and is a consistent major tournament host.

I've played Valhalla about 5 times now. It is a nice course and usually in good condition but it's by no means great. And, I think all of the changes made for the last Ryder Cup blow. None of the new greens have the same style, feel, etc. as the old ones. They stand out like sore thumbs.

[Scott Szabo]

Jim Nugent,

Is that true of Muirfield Village, arguably one of his greatest courses?

I'm pretty sure Desmond Muirhead routed it and designed it.   

Jim,

Did not know that.  It's touted as a Jack Nicklaus Signature course.  Thanks.

[astavrides]

I truly dislike his course at PGA West, where he dug out some lakes and used the spoil to pile up three or four huge mounds.  He then cut shelves in front and back about half way up, thus creating a green with a bunker 20'-30' below the front and an elevated tee on the back side.  Yuck-a-rama.

Which one?  The private one or the public one?

[Bill_McBride]

Castle Pines has to be on the list.  I remember an article on it in Golf Digest (or another major publication) calling it the Augusta of the Rocky Mountains.  

There's not alot of love for Jack's design on this site, but the golfing public generally hold him in high esteem.  The number or courses he and his group are or were involved with suggest that he's probably the most marketable designer of all time.  Whether that always results in great design is debatable, but attaching his name to a club surely carries weight.

Scott, how much of that "love" is because of his 18 majors?

[Kenny Baer]

Bill, don't want to offend but the guy has built over 250 golf courses; or at least has his name associated with that many.  No kidding he has some bad golf holes and bad golf courses; everyone does.

I am of the feeling that he is very solid but rarely spectacular; for the most part if you are playing a Nicklaus you know it will be pretty good.  I would take the average Nicklaus over Stranz, Dye, Rees Jones, and many others; as far as my favs go he is just more relaxed (Stranz) and traditional (Dye) without being completely bland (Rees Jones).

I personally think Muirfield Village is spectacular and might just be the best parkland built since ANGC; I could play there everyday and be more than happy.

[Bill_McBride]

I truly dislike his course at PGA West, where he dug out some lakes and used the spoil to pile up three or four huge mounds.  He then cut shelves in front and back about half way up, thus creating a green with a bunker 20'-30' below the front and an elevated tee on the back side.  Yuck-a-rama.

Which one?  The private one or the public one?

It's changed.  At one point it was the Nicklaus Private and became the Nicklaus resort.  Or maybe vice versa.  Maybe someone more familiar with PGA West and Palm Springs can say.  It's been quite a while.

[Mac Plumart]

Jim...

I'd have to say Jack's mark on golf course architecture is the birth of the player turned designer.  I am unsure if he is actually the first to do this, but he sure seems to be the most successful and most well-known.

His most celebrated course sure seems like it will be Muirfield Village.

Thus far, I've played 9 Nicklaus courses and not one would I consider bad.  But only two would I consider being great or on the verge of great.  They are Harbour Town and Dismal River.  But I think Harbour Town is really Pete Dye, but Nicklaus does share design credit in some circles.  And the property that Dismal is on is simply amazing, perhaps that adds to it.  But I also hear that Chris Cochran was really the designer at Dismal River.  And I haven't played Muirfield Village or Sebonack yet.

In the end, I don't know if Mr. Nicklaus is a great designer or not.  Per my experience and opinion, he is solid/good.  But I do think his legacy is that of the celebrity/signature designer which so many seem to be copying right now.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill, don't want to offend but the guy has built over 250 golf courses; or at least has his name associated with that many.  No kidding he has some bad golf holes and bad golf courses; everyone does.

I am of the feeling that he is very solid but rarely spectacular; for the most part if you are playing a Nicklaus you know it will be pretty good.  I would take the average Nicklaus over Stranz, Dye, Rees Jones, and many others; as far as my favs go he is just more relaxed (Stranz) and traditional (Dye) without being completely bland (Rees Jones).

I personally think Muirfield Village is spectacular and might just be the best parkland built since ANGC; I could play there everyday and be more than happy.

Kenny, I have not played any of the courses mentioned as his best.  The ones I have played have ranged from not so good to pedestrian to pretty good.  Nothing spectacular.  One I really didn't like.

On the other hand the Stranz courses I have played have been FUN.  I have never thought of a Nicklaus design as particularly "fun."  Ballyneal was "fun," to give you an example of what I find to be fun.

[Scott Szabo]

Castle Pines has to be on the list.  I remember an article on it in Golf Digest (or another major publication) calling it the Augusta of the Rocky Mountains.  

There's not alot of love for Jack's design on this site, but the golfing public generally hold him in high esteem.  The number or courses he and his group are or were involved with suggest that he's probably the most marketable designer of all time.  Whether that always results in great design is debatable, but attaching his name to a club surely carries weight.

Scott, how much of that "love" is because of his 18 majors?

Bill,

I'm not here to argue that - I'm sure it helps quite a bit with his courses being so marketable.  That's what i was trying to say with my last sentence above.  

I personally think that much of the dissent towards the Nicklaus Group is that they typically present a type of course that is not in favor with the group here, namely a difficult course which requires an aerial attack.  The ground game is usually not much of an option with his courses, at least none that I can think of off the top of my head.  I've only played a handful of his courses (Castle Pines, Breckenridge Golf Club and Ptarmigan Golf Club - all here in Colorado) and have found them all to be enjoyable.  There are holes at each that I don't particularly care for and there are some quite good ones as well.  

From a purely architectural standpoint, I think his courses are quite a bit behind those that C&C and Doak have been turning out recently.  I have yet to visit Dismal River and hope to someday.  

From a purely marketable standpoint, can you name another that would surpass him?

[Bill_McBride]

Jim...

I'd have to say Jack's mark on golf course architecture is the birth of the player turned designer.  I am unsure if he is actually the first to do this, but he sure seems to be the most successful and most well-known.

Mac, Melvyn might argue that Old Tom Morris might have predated Jack by 80 years or so.  Four time Open champion and designed dozens of courses throughout the British Isles.

[PCCraig]

Valhalla has some great holes and is a consistent major tournament host.

I've played Valhalla about 5 times now. It is a nice course and usually in good condition but it's by no means great. And, I think all of the changes made for the last Ryder Cup blow. None of the new greens have the same style, feel, etc. as the old ones. They stand out like sore thumbs.

I didn't say it was a great course. I said it had some great holes.

[Bill_McBride]

Castle Pines has to be on the list.  I remember an article on it in Golf Digest (or another major publication) calling it the Augusta of the Rocky Mountains.  

There's not alot of love for Jack's design on this site, but the golfing public generally hold him in high esteem.  The number or courses he and his group are or were involved with suggest that he's probably the most marketable designer of all time.  Whether that always results in great design is debatable, but attaching his name to a club surely carries weight.

Scott, how much of that "love" is because of his 18 majors?

Bill,

I'm not here to argue that - I'm sure it helps quite a bit with his courses being so marketable.  That's what i was trying to say with my last sentence above.  

I personally think that much of the dissent towards the Nicklaus Group is that they typically present a type of course that is not in favor with the group here, namely a difficult course which requires an aerial attack.  The ground game is usually not much of an option with his courses, at least none that I can think of off the top of my head.  I've only played a handful of his courses (Castle Pines, Breckenridge Golf Club and Ptarmigan Golf Club - all here in Colorado) and have found them all to be enjoyable.  There are holes at each that I don't particularly care for and there are some quite good ones as well.  

From a purely architectural standpoint, I think his courses are quite a bit behind those that C&C and Doak have been turning out recently.  I have yet to visit Dismal River and hope to someday.  

From a purely marketable standpoint, can you name another that would surpass him?

Tom Fazio?  No one else at this point.

Agree with your take on Jack's marketability being intertwined with his career record.

[Kenny Baer]

Bill,

I consider courses of that nature more goofy than fun; probably more of my own pshychogical problem than anything else.

I consider Ballyneal fun as well but it is also a great golf course by the way it sits on the land and offers various options without having to scream them at you; which is what I feel Stranz, Dye, and Engh often do; the archies that I am typically drawn to do not. That over the top style is just not really my cup of tea, which is probably why I am more apt to like a Nicklaus course than ______fill in the blank.

[Sean_A]

For better or worse I associate Jack's courses as filling a demand (somewhat created by himself) at the time.  Meaning, resort courses and high end private courses/housing courses.  I also associate Jack as a guy other archies can thank for pushing up archie fees, many were dragged along in a wake he partially created regardless if they agreed with his style or methods.  I don't think many courses will be remembered as wonderful architecture, but this is understandable given the time frame of when Jack really got going and that often times the architecture was of secondary importance to either a development or trying to sell memberships.  

Ciao  

[Michael Dugger]

Golf is a strange sport, and attaching a good or bad label to a golf course is even more bizarre of an endeavor.

The golf courses within the portfolio of Jack Nicklaus are all extremely high-quality.  Jack doesn't do too many mom and pops courses, and most of his designs benefit from a healthy budget.

A healthy budget allows for design freedom....and design security.  It usually means an ample parcel of real estate to route the course through.  It usually means problem or troubled areas of a property can be bulldozed into submission.  It means only the finest irrigation system, grass seed and maintenance crews will be used in the final product.

In many golfing circles, the issue of maintenance is one of the driving factors between a "good" course and a bad one.  From this perspective, Jack Nicklaus has been plucking the low hanging fruit, as the saying goes.

His courses are sound and functional, even brilliant at times, but in my opinion, most are somewhat lacking in the "it" factor that separate the wheat from the chaff.

I suspect his legacy will be like that of Robert Trent Jones Sr, a wildly successful designer that served a historical role in the history of golf and golf course architecture, but not a true maestro of the art form.        

[Nick Asbrock]

Any thoughts on one of his early designs.....Bear Creek in Murrieta Ca?

[Richard Choi]

Bill, I have not played that many of Jack's courses (6), but I found most of his courses to be pretty fun to play, especially Challenge at Manele. I can play that course everyday and not be bored.

I believe Jack delivers what the owner/developer wants, whether it is a championship course (Muirfield), or resort courses (far too many to mention), or for housing developments, or whatever. And he does it with class and generally high-level of finish. Personally, I don't think that is a bad thing.

And whether or not Jack actually routed a course is besides the point. It is his name on the course and we should respect that. We can go round and round on who designed exactly what on practically every course on the top 100 list. I think that is being quite unfair to Jack.