If you were a mega developer and were going to build five golf courses

[Patrick_Mucci]

would you vary the architects and/or vary the theme of each course.

What do you envision for each of your five courses and who would you retain for each theme ?

AND, WHY ?

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat, shouldn't the land define this mythical "theme" that you are talking about? If you believe otherwise wouldn't your last name actually be Trump?

By the way, Bethpage with 3 new and a 4th redesigned didn't do so bad with one outstanding architect. If you were going to create 5 new courses AT ONE TIME why wouldn't you stick with the architect you first choose?

[Anthony Gray]

  delete

[Patrick_Mucci]

Philip Young,

That's certainly an option.

But, in today's market, especially for destination golfers, would you advocate for a monoarchitectural style ?

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

Today's golfers want the "best bang for the buck." They don't give two flips as to who the architect was, and frankly neither do I. The "name" means nothing if it doesn't produce. Unfortunately most golfers are lured to courses because of the hated "rankings" first and foremost where one or several courses are ranked in an area. Where they are not it is the reputation of the course that draws them. Let me give you an example.

After he completed his round on Thursday of the 1986 US Open at Shinnecock I got an odd chance to speak with Mark McCumber. He had played well, was on the leaderboard and would go on to finish second, yet among the first things he said to me without any prompting whatsoever was , "I understand there is a fantastic public course in the middle of the island. Have you ever played it?" He was, of course, talking about the Black. No mention of Tilly or anything, just the reputation of the course attracted him to the idea of playing it.

I would believe that the VAST majority of people play Pinehurst #2 because of its ranking/reputation and they don't give a flip about a man named Ross. They play the other courses there for the same reasons, quite often after being "advised by a friend" as to another to play.

You also seem to believe that a single architect would create five nearly identical courses, or as you put it, five with a "monoarchitectural style." I completely disagree with that premise. Would you consider the work done at Bandon by Doak to be courses showing a "monoarchitectural style" and therefor boring similarity of design? Tell me you wouldn't jump at the idea of hiring Tom to design 5 courses on one piece of property at the same time...

That is why I simply can't accept your premise...

[Anthony Gray]

  You have to have variety.No body is going to travel for the same thing.That is why Bandon is superior.It is what St Andrews is lacking,which may explain what happened to The Castle Course.It also helps to have different landscapes.

  Anthony

[Philippe Binette]

great golf architecture is about connecting with the site. so for five courses, if the site are all similar, it's a harder task.. if there's variety, it's a little easier that each course develop its caracter...

but

1) Depending on the location, I'd have a course that could host championship if there's none in the surroundings.
Probably in the 7200 yards lenght and a little more room for spectators.

2) I'd have a great but shorter course... maybe a bit more sporty like 6400 max from the tips

3) I'd have a "speed course" 5800 yards from the tips but still a stern test par 68, playable in 3h30 minutes max

4) a course maybe 6800 yards or so but wider and easier, still good architecture but more of a learning course

5) a solid course, best with what we've got

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

I'll play along, just for fun, by telling you what I actually recommended to a guy who had some great land near San Antonio and signed me to a multi-course deal.  (Unfortunately, his company name "Fantasy Golf Creations" turned out to be more prophetic than I hoped.....)

I proposed a course styled after the 1890's, 1920's, 1960's, and 2000+ futuristic style so golfers could experience all types of architecture.  Sort of an architects golf club spread over 4 courses.  Distances would range from 5000-6000+,-7000 and 8000 yards from the back tees of the four courses as you moved through time.

[jeffwarne]

Pat,

I'll play along, just for fun, by telling you what I actually recommended to a guy who had some great land near San Antonio and signed me to a multi-course deal.  (Unfortunately, his company name "Fantasy Golf Creations" turned out to be more prophetic than I hoped.....)

I proposed a course styled after the 1890's, 1920's, 1960's, and 2000+ futuristic style so golfers could experience all types of architecture.  Sort of an architects golf club spread over 4 courses.  Distances would range from 5000-6000+,-7000 and 8000 yards from the back tees of the four courses as you moved through time.

I'd interview 3-4 finalists, tell them I was going with one guy let them look at the land and what it offers, and see what they would suggest. (if nothing else I would learn a lot from each)
First of all it would certainly be cheaper to hire one architect and keep architects from trying to one up other courses, and hopefully create courses that would compliment each other and suit the land and what the (perhaps) variances in the land would offer.
i.e. one architect given an inferior piece of land wouldn't be tempted to artificially create something to try to draw attention to his course

[Adam Clayman]

Patrick, Even mega developers appreciate an economy of scale.

So, I think the answer would have to favor fewer cooks in the kitchen.

Although your premise is fun to think about, I doubt the way you've presented it, is a wise way to proceed.

Do you?

[Ryan Farrow]

Alright, we just did this only with 10........ Let me break it down. All 10 courses are on Lava Rock.


1. Tournament course. 7,800 yards (most of the back tees are for spectators as most tournaments will play around 7,400) Natural in style. embraces the lava rock.... but lots of areas of turf, proving great spectator areas. No ROUGH!

2.  Sandbelt Style course. 7,200 yards, green surrounds in closely mown turf, melboure/sandbelt style bunkers, eucalyptus trees, bunkers transition to bahai grasses and other yucca-like plantings.  (9 holes lit up for night golf)

3. Golden age course 7,400 yards  Parkland, lots of turf, grass faced, flat bottomed bunkers, square edged greens,  green sites and not green complexes. Lots of funky stuff

4. Par 3 course 18 holes range from 80 - 160 yards.  basically tees and green sites surrounded by lava rock. target par 3 golf.

5. Natural course  7,400 + yards, similar to the tournament course, same quality, same style but less spectator areas, more natural, more open, less tree cover, Addition of rough and fairway lines. very different feel.

6. Oakmont inspired layout, but short at 6600 yards , par 70. church pews, low key, simple design.

7. Modern style swoopy bunkers, catch basins, but embraces the sites lava rock, while featuring splashes of color.... lots of turf to whack it around... very player friendly

8. The second par 3 course,  features 2 pins on each green one easy, one difficult. modern bunker style lots of colorful trees and vegetation great for kids!

9. Pete Dye inspired layout,  6,100 yards     6 par 3's  another par 70. Railroad ties, funky sawgrass like shaping in spots, really sporty, really fun.

10. Sand Dunes.... 6,400 yards.... we built a Sand Dunes like course on Lava Rock.... possibly one of the coolest courses ever built. We have a major beach theme going, but the greens and fairways have a ton of movement, tees blend into fairways, only 2 heights of cut..... Green & Fairway cut.


How does that work for variety?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Phil Young,

I think one could reasonably establish a mono-style if they played Winged Foot West, Winged Foot East, Quaker Ridge, Fenway, Ridgewood (27), Baltusol Upper and Baltusrol Lower.

Bandon is attractive to me due to the variety.

Mike Keiser has been successful with diversification.

I can't speak for others, but traveling to Bandon would not be as appealing if one architect had designed all four courses, irrespective of the talents of the architect.

While I used to love going to Pinehurst every spring, the factors that brought me there were competing in the North-South Amateur, conducted on # 2, and, when necessary, qualifying on # 5.  I had little interest in playing # 1, # 3 and # 4, although I did play each once over a period of several decades.  After having played # 2 and # 5, I would have opted to play the Country Club of North Carolina before I played # 1, # 3 and # 4.   While all five courses were different, there was a similarity in the "style" that made playing dissimiilar courses attractive.

AWT was certainly a spectacular architect, but, there's something to be said for "strange" ...P.... experiences.

[Mike Nuzzo]

No one knew who Donald Ross, Tillinghast or anyone else was and yet Pinehurst and Bethpage were successful.
I'd go with a great local guy -  the best and closest.

Pat
If you have a project in mind I'd move to be the local guy...

More than likely the megadeveloper will design them himself.

I'd interview 3-4 finalists, tell them I was going with one guy let them look at the land and what it offers, and see what they would suggest. (if nothing else I would learn a lot from each)

Jeff - you want free work?
In this economy?
Are you trying to put architects out of business?

[jeffwarne]

No one knew who Donald Ross, Tillinghast or anyone else was and yet Pinehurst and Bethpage were successful.
I'd go with a great local guy -  the best and closest.

Pat
If you have a project in mind I'd move to be the local guy...

More than likely the megadeveloper will design them himself.

I'd interview 3-4 finalists, tell them I was going with one guy let them look at the land and what it offers, and see what they would suggest. (if nothing else I would learn a lot from each)

Jeff - you want free work?
In this economy?
Are you trying to put architects out of business?

Mike,
I'd like to think the candidate that got the job would use the local crack dealer strategy-the first sample(the interview) is free but now you're addicted.
I do it with students all the time.

[Garland Bayley]

I think the Bandon Dunes model works. 5 courses, 3 design teams, 2 design teams with distinctly different assignments on each of their two courses.

[Doug Siebert]

Patrick,

I don't see any reason one architect couldn't do all five courses if he was willing, do you?  A GOOD architect should be able to vary things enough that the courses aren't all clones of each other.  Surely one would be your showpiece "championship" course every developer dreams of someday holding a PGA event or even a US Open on.  One should be a beginner type course, so if you drag your family to a golf resort you have somewhere to play a day with those family members who aren't into golf like you are.  Not a par 3 course, but maybe a 4500 yard course that's about par 62 (no par 5s, obviously, those are really hard for beginners)  The other three?  Well, depends on the site, the budget, the mind of the architect and the type of crowd the developer is hoping to attract...

I'm curious what the architects think of this?  How much time efficiency would be gained by doing five courses on the same site - not at once, there's no reason they all have to open at the same time, but you might have them all at various stages in the process at once.  Obviously it would save in travel time, contracting with locals, etc.  You might be able to get away with only having one clubhouse and one cart barn, which would save some of the budget for the course

[David_Madison]

Pat,

Your premise makes sense, but there are a number of wonderful examples of highly varied architecture by the same designer on pretty much similar land at the same place. Mike Stranz with True Blue and Caledonia on Myrtle Beach; Tom Fazio at World Woods with Pine Barrons and Rolling Oaks; the previously mentioned Tom Doak at Bandon. One great architect is likely to give you five different flavors that all work together better to accomplish a more complete spectrum of goals than five different guys all doing their own thing so that each could shine. It just depends on the developer and how he sets things up and then manages the process, but either way could work.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I'd interview 3-4 finalists, tell them I was going with one guy let them look at the land and what it offers, and see what they would suggest. (if nothing else I would learn a lot from each)

Jeff - you want free work?
In this economy?
Are you trying to put architects out of business?

Mike,
I'd like to think the candidate that got the job would use the local crack dealer strategy-the first sample(the interview) is free but now you're addicted.
I do it with students all the time.

Yes they will - they are crack dealers.
But you also invited the police to shoot at the losers.

[Bruce Katona]

Why would I possibly want to build 5 courses?

Do I need the tax loss?

[jeffwarne]

I'd interview 3-4 finalists, tell them I was going with one guy let them look at the land and what it offers, and see what they would suggest. (if nothing else I would learn a lot from each)

Jeff - you want free work?
In this economy?
Are you trying to put architects out of business?

Mike,
I'd like to think the candidate that got the job would use the local crack dealer strategy-the first sample(the interview) is free but now you're addicted.
I do it with students all the time.

Yes they will - they are crack dealers.
But you also invited the police to shoot at the losers.

To back up a bit, surely you don't charge an owner to interview.
and wouldn't you agree he's going to learn something from you(especially a new to the business owner) during such a process?
and you about him?

edit-for two months I've been unable to get an emoticon, yet I typed three ? marks and the frowny mark came up

[Mark Chaplin]

Phillipe - speed courses of 5800yds it's the players who are slow rarelY the course. Traditional designs had the next tee close to the previous green.

Anthony Gray - as Cruden Bay advocate I'm surprised you say St Andrews is weak on variation. We are comparing courses build over 100 years ago with very little earth moved with modern high budget affairs. If the land is used perfectly there will be little variation.

[Tim Nugent]

Patrick,

I don't see any reason one architect couldn't do all five courses if he was willing, do you?  A GOOD architect should be able to vary things enough that the courses aren't all clones of each other.  Surely one would be your showpiece "championship" course every developer dreams of someday holding a PGA event or even a US Open on.  One should be a beginner type course, so if you drag your family to a golf resort you have somewhere to play a day with those family members who aren't into golf like you are.  Not a par 3 course, but maybe a 4500 yard course that's about par 62 (no par 5s, obviously, those are really hard for beginners)  The other three?  Well, depends on the site, the budget, the mind of the architect and the type of crowd the developer is hoping to attract...

I'm curious what the architects think of this?  How much time efficiency would be gained by doing five courses on the same site - not at once, there's no reason they all have to open at the same time, but you might have them all at various stages in the process at once.  Obviously it would save in travel time, contracting with locals, etc.  You might be able to get away with only having one clubhouse and one cart barn, which would save some of the budget for the course

Here's my take.  1st, if you go the multiple A route, 1st you have to decide what your final outcome will be. Either "Similar but Different" or "Markedly Different".  Let's take Bandon (everyone's poster child).  While they are different, the 3 design groups tend to all fall into the same Philosophical school.  Now if Mike went the other route, you may have had C&C replaced by Fazio and Doak by RTJII.  The development would take on a vastly different flavor.

The second aspect is who will build them.  Believe it or not, construction companies also carry an amount of continuity project-to-project, irregardless of the Architect.  1 architect and multiple builders will yield a different result than 1 architect, 1 builder.  Conversely, multiple architects but one builder will also yeild a much different end result than multiple multiple architects, multiple builders.

An example of this can be seen at Geneva National in Lake Geneva, Wis.  3 courses, Palmer, Treveno and Player.  The 1st 2 were different builders but the last 2 by the same builder.

Architectual ego will pit multiple architects against each other and may push them to new heights or to expand beyond their comfort zone.
But there will be a learning curve with each as they learn the constraints of the site, project, and other project members/professionals.
While it is easy for many journeyman architects to jump from style to style, as this is more of a superfictial element,  it is harder for them to break out
of the underlying design theory.  While many neophites look at courses and only see the style, only a select minority look beyond to the underlying design strategy and continuity. 
So, much would depend on whom the target market is.  All things to All People-shotgun approach or a Targeted Population approach?  Answer that question and the rest becomes much easier to decide.

[Andy Troeger]

I'm surprised we've made it this far without mention of Desert Mountain in Scottsdale with its six Nicklaus designed courses. I think Nicklaus did a pretty good job of creating variety between the courses. Renegade was the original and had two pins and often two greens per hole, Chiricahua is the most scenic and perhaps a bit more comparable to some other courses in the desert. Outlaw is more of a desert links and is the most walker friendly with a core routing. Cochise didn't really stand out to me, and I haven't played Geronimo or Apache. One thing they have in common is difficulty--the four I have played are all pretty tough tracks.

Personally, I'd probably prefer different designers for that many courses, but this model worked pretty well for DM.

[Niall C]

  You have to have variety.No body is going to travel for the same thing.That is why Bandon is superior.It is what St Andrews is lacking,which may explain what happened to The Castle Course.It also helps to have different landscapes.

  Anthony

Anthony

Did you type this while you were pulling teeth ? Maybe your comments goes back to Ian Andrews thread on Magazine Architecture. Visually there may be a certain sameness to the St Andrews courses but to me they are different in character with perhaps the Jubliee and the New being the closest in style to each other.

Niall

[Mike Nuzzo]

To back up a bit, surely you don't charge an owner to interview.
and wouldn't you agree he's going to learn something from you(especially a new to the business owner) during such a process?
and you about him?

edit-for two months I've been unable to get an emoticon, yet I typed three ? marks and the frowny mark came up

Whether I charge or not is not relevant.
Your intent is what I'm talking about.
You don't just want an interview - you want ideas also.
And you don't want to pay for those ideas.
I don't think that intent is reasonable.

The emoticons have always been here - the buttons are for those that don't know what makes one...