[Scott Warren]

Matt, you don't seem to get it.

Nicklaus and Fazio don't have to handle so many projects at once - they choose to. If the quality of their output suffers as a result that is how it is and they can only be judged by their results.

In regards to your post above, I am sure many designers "get it", but some elect to embrace a mass production model and others chose to work as craftsmen, giving less projects more attention.

It's ridiculous for you to expect people to crystal ball how some designers' work would be received if they worked entirely differently.

[Matt_Ward]

Scott:

Before telling we what I don't get -- re-read what I posted. I admitted that the gentlemen named follow their own business pattern and are judged because of it. Hello -- anybody home ? I simply opined that if JN and TF did far less the attention to detail would be there.

I don't need to "crystal ball" things -- Tom D said as much -- again -- before weighing in do some re-reading. It's there if you wish to see it.

[JC Jones]

Scott:

Before telling we what I don't get -- re-read what I posted. I admitted that the gentlemen named follow their own business pattern and are judged because of it. Hello -- anybody home ? I simply opined that if JN and TF did far less the attention to detail would be there.

I don't need to "crystal ball" things -- Tom D said as much -- again -- before weighing in do some re-reading. It's there if you wish to see it.

Many on here have posted that when Tom Fazio was doing fewer projects, he was spending more time on them and producing great work (see: World Woods).  

So, it seems to me that in order for him to build a big production house he probably would have to have been a good architect that built good courses, in the first place.

[Matt_Ward]

JC:

That's a fair point -- one such course -- Wild Dunes in the Charleston area was quite a layout -- very unique and special -- prior to the devestation that the hurricane inflicted. Also -- the course was a real joy to play prior to the mass clutter with all the houses.

TF for me is akin to Darth Vader -- he was seduced by the dark side (e.g. fame and $$) and his work simply became mass-produced with a few notable exceptions.

[SL_Solow]

Matt;  sorry for the delay in responding.  I think you may misstate my point slightly; I suggest there are 2 ways to evaluate architects and other artists; evaluation of their best work and evaluation based on the consistency of their effort.  The very best excel under both tests such as Ruth and Cobb in baseball.  But for artists with a more limited production, the importance of the best work increases.
As to Fazio, I think it is intuitively attractive to assume that if he took on fewer projects he would spend more time and thus produce better work.  But it may not be the case.  He already gets extraordinary budgets and from having talked to those who have worked on crews building his courses he pays great attention to detail.  It is, in my view, why he builds consistently beautiful courses regardless of the property he is given to work with at the start.  If one reads his book, it is impossible to ignore both his emphasis on the "look" of his courses and his failure to emphasize how they "play".  For me, this is the problem I find in many of his courses.  They look great, are fundamentally sound and are worthwhile.  But he rarely gets to the next level and I suspect it is a problem borne of philosophy, not merely a business planning or time management issue.

Responding to your baseball questions, I was born and raised a White Sox fan and share seasons tickets.  My preference is for players who have mutiple tools and are fundamentally sound with a bias toward players who can play defense although I appreciate all aspects of the game.  I can watch Ichiro anytime and am reminded of the beauty of great right fielders when he plays having seen a lot of Kaline and Clemente when I was young.  I need to see more of Tulowitzki but I have been intrigued so far.  The kids playing shortstop for the Rangers and my White Sox are wonderful in the field although I have yet to see a better double play combination than Fox and Aparicio (apologies to Belanger and Grich).  But enough o.t. talk.  November does lead to "hot stove" discussions.

[Matt_Ward]

SL:

Before TF became TF THE BRAND -- he did produce plenty of interesting designs that showed his craftmanship. Unfortunately, the FORCE seduced him !

His earlier efforts did show some clear strategic and interesting design elements. Frankly, TF gets dissed on this site anyway -- not by you and what you stated -- but by those who often times have played such a small smattering of his work that e-z and often erroneous generalizations become the norm.

[George Pazin]

SL:

Before TF became TF THE BRAND -- he did produce plenty of interesting designs that showed his craftmanship. Unfortunately, the FORCE seduced him !

His earlier efforts did show some clear strategic and interesting design elements. Frankly, TF gets dissed on this site anyway -- not by you and what you stated -- but by those who often times have played such a small smattering of his work that e-z and often erroneous generalizations become the norm.

This is an honest question, not an attempt to trip you up:

Do you know for certain that TF was the driving force - the router, the detail guy - behind the earlier courses you mention?

[SL_Solow]

Matt,  please be consistent in your clever analogy, is it the dark side or the force?  I understand your point and I appreciate that you have not lumped me in with those you believe, correctly or not, are generalizing from insufficient information.  However, I still believe a very good case can be made that Fazio's design preferences are not a result of the large number of sites he takes on but are really more philosophical in nature.  To the extent you see differences in his early work, and I assume you mean his early solo work and not the jobs he did with his Uncle, it is entirely possible that his thought processes evolved to where he believes that appearance is the most important part of the exercise and that strategy and other playing characteristics take a back seat.  Surely there is no lack of attention to detail in any of his designs, particularly the finishing touches in construction so it is odd that the only place he "cuts corners" to accomodate his workload is in the planning stages and there his planning regarding drainage and the like is first class.  Suprising that the shortcuts would only take place in areas that relate to philosophy of design.  I think he has in many cases become a modern "template" designer.  The differences is that his templates are not as interesting as some of his predecessors and because he has the equipment and budget to move a lot of dirt, he doesn't have to do as much to adapt them to existing terrain further reducing interest.  That said, don't mistake my view; he builds a lot of really nice golf courses.  I am disappointed that I rarely see him stretch to build something that goes to the next level.  Perhaps that wouldn"t fit the business plan.

[JMEvensky]

SL,baseball can never be OT,what could be more important?.And,Vizquel/Alomar trumps Fox/Aparicio.

I have limited experience playing TF courses,but I think you're right on the problem being philosophical rather than anything else.Given ample budget,designing a course that "looks hard,plays easy" would seem to be uninspired.

Maybe he only aspires to write very good prose leaving the poetry to other designers.

[SL_Solow]

JM;  point well taken and I should not have left out Alomar and Vizquel.  Alomar at his best had more range and was more spectacular but nobody was steadier than Fox and you will be amazed at the number of chances he handled.  As for Vizquel, I have a tremendous respect but for those of us who saw them both, Aparicio had both superior range and a far superior arm.  Given the larger modern glove and the superior playing surfaces, particularly turf, it is mind boggling to consider the fielding stats Aparicio might have amassed if he had played a generatio later;

Thanks for your views on Fazio as well.

[Matt_Ward]

George:

The answer is yes -- as his uncle faded into the background -- TF was the point man who did the heavy lifting before the BRAND became the major ingredient for what would come to pass.

SL:

Forgive me -- the dark side took hold of the young TF as he became the GCA equivalent of Darth Designer.

SL, you must have skipped my last post -- TF did do different designs in the early stages that were engaging and different. Not just postcard designs followed by more postcard designs. His Uncle George was the contact person -- TF did the actual work on site. George did the schmooze factor given his deep contact list.

TF, in my mind, simply saw the attention and with that added to his designers within his fold -- give them what they want and he did. I have seen TF do stuff outside that mold but it became common fodder -- here on this site and elsewhere -- that TF was really golf-lite.

SL, TF has done courses where he stretches himself -- they are not discussed here frequently but often times the general tone on this site is anti-TF in a big time way because so few people have played a wide smattering of his works.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()