Crowd-sourcing Golf Course Architecture

[JMorgan]

Last week I met with a couple of folks from @ Radical Media about a non-golf related venture (not yet, at least), but came away with a bunch of ideas applicable, really, to any area of design, media, or content delivery. One of the company's latest pet productions is an online experiment in crowd-sourcing and viral media without advertising or PR. Jon Kamen, who founded the company back in the '80s, was approached by the director Chris Milk, and they got together with music producer Rick Rubin, and along with the Cash family created http://www.thejohnnycashproject.com as a first go at something bigger down the road.  The site takes Cash archival photos and allows anyone in the world to create one frame that becomes part of a final video, and records all kinds of information down to individual mouse strokes, time to completion, so on and so forth.

So, to wit, what of the notion of crowd-sourcing golf architecture? We're all familiar with the Golden Guys and how many of them would stop by a site to lend their free advices or strong opinions here and there.  But what if as a conscious decision, a landowner asked a bunch of well-established architects to crowd-source a golf course?

Architects, say you were given a plot of land and all of the information and resources necessary to build a course.  How well do you think a group of you working together would be able to pull it off with the same online and on-site tools? How could you see dividing up responsibility for building 18 holes?  How would approach routing, for instance, or green design?  or other aspects of project?  What do you see as the benefits and drawbacks? 

And, do you think a bunch of golf architecture fanatics without hands-on experience but with the typical discussant on this board's level of knowledge create a classic course in the same manner as say the amateur "gentlemen" designers of yon or the Ran's of today?

[Tom_Doak]

Dr. J:

I think if you did this experiment 50 times with amateurs as you posit in your last paragraph, you would come out with 2 great courses, 10 good ones, 20 okay courses, and probably 10 complete disasters.  Some would call those good odds ... but not many people who were putting $10 million or more into a project would agree.

As for the preceding question, unfortunately, the key in the modern world is who would the owner get to credit for his course?  If he got to call it a Coore-Crenshaw-Doak-Hanse-Hepner-Urbina course, and didn't have to pay any of us our normal fees, of course he would take that direction ... and we would be crazy to accept, because we would be undercutting our own business.

In general, I would rather do projects where I have a maximum of control of the finished product, if I'm going to put my name on it.  That doesn't mean I have to get paid $1 million before I'll consider a project; but anyone in this business who's been successful is selling their name as well as their time, whether we like it or not.

[Dan Herrmann]

Tom,
You're being kind - With amateurs, I'm betting that 40 out of 50 would be disasters.  We non-professionals have a tendency to significantly underestimate the skills - artistic and scientific - needed to design a successful golf course.

[Alex Miller]

Tom,
You're being kind - With amateurs, I'm betting that 40 out of 50 would be disasters.  We non-professionals have a tendency to significantly underestimate the skills - artistic and scientific - needed to design a successful golf course.

I think we will get to see what the results would be like with amateurs in the AAC thread. The courses there are likely to represent the group that would be used.

[Peter Pallotta]

Geez louise, you guys are smart!! I don't even understand the concept, let alone the question.

JM - good for you: I think we're about the same age, but while you're stepping boldly into the 21st century (and grasping the new paradigms), I'm feeling more and more like I'm stuck in the industrial revolution.

"Please sir, may I have some more?"

[Tom_Doak]

I suppose when I get old and sick of traveling, I would welcome the opportunity to do routings for courses in faraway places, and be happy to just do my best to solve the puzzles and let someone else go do all of the hard work.

For now, though, there is no way I want to just stop there and let somebody else try to turn those ideas into real golf holes.  It would drive me crazy thinking the course would have turned out better if I'd made a few trips to shepherd it along.  I suppose the opposite is also possible, but no decent golf course architect would believe it.

[Dan Herrmann]

KBM - Wow, that's well said.

[Philippe Binette]

A CAMEL IS A HORSE DESIGNED BY A COMMITEE

[Jud_T]

KBM,

It's funny- I was going over RR's record production credits to try and refute your reference, but in fact he only produced a handful of decent records out of 100+, a showing worse than the Cubs' middle relief...You'll have to school me on the Johnny Cash thing however...Personally, I'll take Jerry Lee Lewis any day of the week over JC.....

[Carl Johnson]

I suppose when I get old and sick of traveling, I would welcome the opportunity to do routings for courses in faraway places, and be happy to just do my best to solve the puzzles and let someone else go do all of the hard work.

For now, though, there is no way I want to just stop there and let somebody else try to turn those ideas into real golf holes.  It would drive me crazy thinking the course would have turned out better if I'd made a few trips to shepherd it along.  I suppose the opposite is also possible, but no decent golf course architect would believe it.

Which brings to mind Donald Ross.  With the post-death destruction of many of Ross's business records, we don't have as complete a history of his work as we would like, yet from what I've read he's credited with being the "architect" for a number of courses on sites he likely never visited.  He worked out routings and may have suggested details from topo drawings.  I also recall that while in some cases his own construction team built these courses, in other cases local [non-golf] contractors may have done the work.  I understand that Carolina Golf Club's original course (1929) in Charlotte may have been one of the latter (never visited, did not build).  Anyone care to comment on this Ross approach, as well as the question it begs, "Who should be given architectural" credit in these sorts of situations -- a question addressed frequently on this website, I am sure?

By way of further historical background that may be of interest to some, a recent local (Charlotte) self-published booklet by Sutt Alexander, Jr. about the early history of Carolina Golf Club says this about the Ross-visit issue.  [Sutt, Jr.'s grandmother, Louise Dunavant built the course on a family dairy farm she had inherited, and Sutt Jr.s' father, Sutt Sr., a son-in-law of Louise Dunavant, ran the course for many years when it was a public course.]  Sutt Jr. states: "I have been asked numerous times if Donald Ross also built the course or for that matter if he actually saw the dairy farm . . . .  My educated guess is no.  He did not build the course.  But I do think he visited the property.  The reason for my guess was among my grandmother's papers . . . .  It was a cancelled check for $3,200.00 payable to Donald Ross.  The check was endorsed by Ross and cashed at the Independence Trust Company in Charlotte. . . . Donald Ross lived in Pinehurst N.C. just over 100 miles from Charlotte and could have easily traveled to Charlotte by auto.  I personally cannot see my grandmother paying an architectural fee without making sure that the architect was not [sic] completely satisfied with the work."  Sutt Jr. goes on to suggest that the family-owned H.J. Dunavant Construction Company, also inherited, built the course.  Sutt Jr. concludes: "The company had no work [in 1928-29] and Mrs. Dunavant had $3,200.00 worth of Donald Ross golf course plans.  She had a strong will and my guess is that she put the two of them together."  From A Widow's Will, by William Sutton Alexander, Jr., 2010.

[Tim Nugent]

Go to the AAC #2 thread and look at the compilation plan Charlie put together and ask yourself how you could ever get a multitude of designs to fit together into one cohesive course that made any sense. 

[JMorgan]

Can't say I'm surprised by these thoughtful responses thusfar.  Good stuff. 

Let me change the parameters and say, instead of framing the questions in a for-profit scenario, the imaginary group of architects are asked to design a course for a non-profit golf organization as an on-going attempt to study golf course planning, construction, and maintenance. 

The fantasy organization hopes to learn more about the entire process for the annals of golf history -- how gca's approach design and build, what similarities, departures, quirks and nuances, unique solutions etc. each dude exhibits or uses to solve the problems, whether creative, economic, ecologic, and so on, and what happens with maintenance and costs over time? 

Moreover, while this association/foundation creates the program as a touchstone for the global golf industry as a whole, one of its primary goals is to educate students and young architects, aspiring turf managers, supers, greenkeepers, and junior golfers.

The designers all get credit where credit is due, as posterity can see the "brushstrokes" over time, and learn the how's and why's. 

Any value in this sort of on-going, technologically augmented charrette?   Good points?  Bad points?

[Charlie Goerges]

A CAMEL IS A HORSE DESIGNED BY A COMMITEE

Try taking a caravan of horses across the sahara. Maybe a horse is a camel designed by commitee!

[Tim Nugent]

Just because (and I'm sure TD will back me up on this) they are a non-for-profit business - we are not.  Besides, look at all the free knowledge we give here.  I can understand how someone would think it neat if we were to just turn over what we have spent decades learning but doubt it would evr happen.  "Ya gets what yas pay for".

[Tom_Doak]

J Morgan:

The Golf Association of Michigan actually once proposed your idea for an "association headquarters" course in Michigan.  Basically, they didn't want to deal with the politics of deciding what architect to hire, so they called me to see if I would co-design a course [i.e. design three holes] alongside Jerry Matthews, Art Hills, Ray Hearn, and Rick Smith!  (Can't remember who they considered the sixth Michigan architect at the time; this was too long ago for it to be Mike DeVries.)

I think they were surprised when I seemed unexcited by such an historic opportunity.  But, I told them the key was going to be who would route the course, as they had mutliple environmental issues on the ground, and you couldn't really do a routing by committee.  Even if they'd hired me to do the routing, though, I don't know if I would have wanted to take part in the project [which never did happen] ... to me, there's no point in building a golf course that is so disjointed.

I think Kelly is right, that breaking up a [bad] existing golf course and having different architects do different holes, might work better.  But, it still requires some anticipation of what the other guys are going to do ... or you might wind up with three Redan holes.

[Jeff_Brauer]

At least they wouldn't be consecutive Redan holes.....If that happened, I think the story would be that we want you to play them til you get it right - no high fade!  Draw it in!

[Sven Nilsen]

I suppose when I get old and sick of traveling, I would welcome the opportunity to do routings for courses in faraway places, and be happy to just do my best to solve the puzzles and let someone else go do all of the hard work.

For now, though, there is no way I want to just stop there and let somebody else try to turn those ideas into real golf holes.  It would drive me crazy thinking the course would have turned out better if I'd made a few trips to shepherd it along.  I suppose the opposite is also possible, but no decent golf course architect would believe it.

Which brings to mind Donald Ross.  With the post-death destruction of many of Ross's business records, we don't have as complete a history of his work as we would like, yet from what I've read he's credited with being the "architect" for a number of courses on sites he likely never visited.  He worked out routings and may have suggested details from topo drawings.  I also recall that while in some cases his own construction team built these courses, in other cases local [non-golf] contractors may have done the work.  I understand that Carolina Golf Club's original course (1929) in Charlotte may have been one of the latter (never visited, did not build).  Anyone care to comment on this Ross approach, as well as the question it begs, "Who should be given architectural" credit in these sorts of situations -- a question addressed frequently on this website, I am sure?

By way of further historical background that may be of interest to some, a recent local (Charlotte) self-published booklet by Sutt Alexander, Jr. about the early history of Carolina Golf Club says this about the Ross-visit issue.  [Sutt, Jr.'s grandmother, Louise Dunavant built the course on a family dairy farm she had inherited, and Sutt Jr.s' father, Sutt Sr., a son-in-law of Louise Dunavant, ran the course for many years when it was a public course.]  Sutt Jr. states: "I have been asked numerous times if Donald Ross also built the course or for that matter if he actually saw the dairy farm . . . .  My educated guess is no.  He did not build the course.  But I do think he visited the property.  The reason for my guess was among my grandmother's papers . . . .  It was a cancelled check for $3,200.00 payable to Donald Ross.  The check was endorsed by Ross and cashed at the Independence Trust Company in Charlotte. . . . Donald Ross lived in Pinehurst N.C. just over 100 miles from Charlotte and could have easily traveled to Charlotte by auto.  I personally cannot see my grandmother paying an architectural fee without making sure that the architect was not [sic] completely satisfied with the work."  Sutt Jr. goes on to suggest that the family-owned H.J. Dunavant Construction Company, also inherited, built the course.  Sutt Jr. concludes: "The company had no work [in 1928-29] and Mrs. Dunavant had $3,200.00 worth of Donald Ross golf course plans.  She had a strong will and my guess is that she put the two of them together."  From A Widow's Will, by William Sutton Alexander, Jr., 2010.

Carl:

Dragging this out of the archives to post an article that sheds a bit of light on the relationship between Ross and Mrs. Dunavant.

Jan. 15, 1933 Pampa Daily News -

[BCowan]

Sven,

   Great article.  The article stated that fairways and greens were irrigated.  I didn't know fairways were irrigated in 1933?  Still a very good article and success story.