[Mike_Young]

Yes, all the time, every day, since time immemorial.  

Next question.

Bob

  Who and where did it first happen?

  Anthony

I climbed into my Wayback machine at lunch and asked to be taken to the place where golf course plagiarism first occurred. There was a metalic groan, smoke poured out of the dashboard and a card appeared that read: "Does not compute."

Bob

  Call MIke Young and tell him some dork has a question..........if he's over the Tech game.

  Anthony

It first occurred when the second course copied the size of the cup on the first course that had it.

[Lester George]

SL,

From the definition you probably make a good point.  Let me clarify.  

If I draw a green for client 1 for his golf course and build it, I should be done with that drawing.  If I use that SAME drawing the next time someone is paying me to create a different golf course I can't imply to client 2 that he has a unique product.  I believe that is patently wrong.  Thats what I was taliking about in my example.

Plagiarism exists as define by you.  Copying happens.  Shortcutting your client becase you are to lazy or non-creative is even worse in my mind and that also happens.  

Lester

 

[Adrian_Stiff]

Lester thats just in your opinion its wrong to do that. I am kinda the the same as you, I tend to think of green design as writing songs and I each course is an album and I dont put um on two albums. Plenty churn out the samey stuff but its just their choice.

[astavrides]

Has plagerism ever happened with dental techniques? 

A more debatable question might be, 'has innovation ever happened in dentistry?'

Hmm,

Given "old school" dental tools.  I pick now!!   

probably worked ok on George Washington's teeth.

[Sam Morrow]

At Tour 18 they tore down the mini lighthouse and I think they took down the sign on the boxes telling of the real hole.

[Anthony Gray]

So from the posts we can asume their is plagerism and their is just plain plagiarism

[Tim Martin]

What about courses like Tour 18 or others that deliberately attempt to recreate (though often quite poorly) famous holes?

Or is that more like covering a song since everyone knows you're not trying to pass it off as your own work?

Matt-Wouldn`t you say that plagerism has the intent of passing something off as your own in a covert manner while Tour 18 is completely out front about it`s intent. It gives credit to the original designer and golf course. To replicate is certainly different than to plagerise.

[Lester George]

Adrian,

It is my opinion.  Your song analogy works until the artist tries to put the same song on two different albums.  It is okay unless he represents the song on the second album is NEW.

Lester

[Mike Hendren]

Ignoring the fact that plagiarism is limited to the written word, I'd say the most blatant example in golf course architecture is the a-hole who built the second bunker.

Bogey

[Mike_Young]

I'm usually being a smart-ass with my post on here but sincerely for a change...
Would it not stand to reason that if baseball fields, football fields, soccer fields are acceptable to being copied then why not golf holes?  The Macros of each game are contained in their playing fields but the micros may differ.  I don't think there is an argument to be had.

[BCrosby]

Mike -

Basketball, tennis - almost all sports other than golf - specify by rule what counts a conforming playing venue. You aren't playing tennis if you use a six foot net, etc. So for those sports, they aren't copying venues; they are simply following the rules of that sport.

Golf is different. There are no rules about what constitutes a hole. So the idea of copying a hole makes sense in golf in a way that it doesn't in other sports.

On another topic, sorry about Clumpson and the Dawgs. There will be better times.

Bob



 

[Joe Bausch]

I don't know about plagerism in golf, but there was certainly Plager-ism in hockey.

Wasn't there a bunch of Plager brothers in the NHL?  Or was that the Sutters?  Okay, sutterism in hockey.

 

[Dan Kelly]

I don't know about plagerism in golf, but there was certainly Plager-ism in hockey.

Wasn't there a bunch of Plager brothers in the NHL

Bill.

Bob.

Barclay.

Blues brothers.

[Tim Nugent]

Adrian,

It is my opinion.  Your song analogy works until the artist tries to put the same song on two different albums.  It is okay unless he represents the song on the second album is NEW.

Lester

Lester, take that one step further, what about Cover songs?  Many artist have done covers and put them on their albums.  Or what about the "Live" albums, which are nothing but previously released songs?  Of course those songs are slightly different due to the environment in which they are recorded. Or in the case of Covers, the artists "take" on the songs.

[Andy Stamm]

Obviously we're struggling because the concept of plagiarism doesn't apply precisely to golf course design, so we have different ideas about what plagiarism would be.

What about this, someone claiming another's work as his own, i.e. stating in a book or interview that he was the architect of/responsible for x, when actually he wasn't? Don't we have examples of two architects taking credit for the same course? And of course architects have been known to hold themselves out as having designed a course when in fact it was (entirely or largely) completed by an 'associate,' and I don't mean an employee working under the architect's direction but rather a different architect working independently. Collaborative work is one thing, but a business arrangement where another architect does the work independently is another thing entirely.

[Bill_McBride]

I'm usually being a smart-ass with my post on here but sincerely for a change...
Would it not stand to reason that if baseball fields, football fields, soccer fields are acceptable to being copied then why not golf holes?  The Macros of each game are contained in their playing fields but the micros may differ.  I don't think there is an argument to be had.

Hold on there!   The joy and beauty of golf is that it's played on a unique playing field is that each is different from all the others.   Baseball stadia are too, but the dimensions of the infield, etc, are always the same.  Every tennis court, every croquet ground, all the same.   It's what makes golf such a special sport.   

This means explicit copies are bad.   Concepts, ideas, put on the ground as templates, are fine.   

[Niall C]

I have a story to tell about one gca accussed of copying anothers ideas. A few years back a friend of mine was the captain of a local members club that was thinking of redesigning a green on one of their par 3's. Knowing my interest in golf course architecture he asked me if I knew anyone who could assist. I happily passed on the details of another friend who is a gca. This friend then met with the Captain and his Committee to discuss. The club also met with another two gca's.

My friend put a lot of effort into getting the job including creating a flythrough so that the club got a better feel for how it would play. The hole played up a gradual incline and my friend designed an angled green with a step in the middle and a single bunker on the fronting flank. Not an earth shattering design but one that fitted in nicely with the surrounds and the rest of the course.

On the back of this work and the way he put it across my friend got the job. One member of the Committee who had introduced one of the other gca's objected and tried to get my friend replaced by the second gca. His main objection was that my friend had copied the hole design from the other gca whose design was similar. Now apart from the fact that my friend hadn't seen the other guys design, both designs were of a general type that fitted in well with the green location. If you asked 10 gca's to design a green there its probable that several of them would have come up with pretty similar general designs. Nothing wrong with that. What I found amazing was that the second gca, through this Committee member, was trying to promote the idea that his design had been ripped off.

I'm glad to say my friend was retained to do the job.

Niall 

[Matthew Petersen]

What about courses like Tour 18 or others that deliberately attempt to recreate (though often quite poorly) famous holes?

Or is that more like covering a song since everyone knows you're not trying to pass it off as your own work?

Matt-Wouldn`t you say that plagerism has the intent of passing something off as your own in a covert manner while Tour 18 is completely out front about it`s intent. It gives credit to the original designer and golf course. To repicate is certainly different than to plagerise.

Tim,

Yes, I think you're right. It does feel more like someone covering a song or otherwise using something but without permission. In this case it's more copyright infringement (which is essentially what Tour 18 was in fact sued for) than plagiarism.

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

I'm usually being a smart-ass with my post on here but sincerely for a change...
Would it not stand to reason that if baseball fields, football fields, soccer fields are acceptable to being copied then why not golf holes?  The Macros of each game are contained in their playing fields but the micros may differ.  I don't think there is an argument to be had.


The difference is that no one is claiming to be the designer of the playing fields.

When a golf course is built, there is someone, an architect or other person, claiming to be the designer...and not likely disclosing that some or all of the holes are template holes, whether exact copies or not.

I consider that plagierism, but I guess someone "Brighter" than myself could possibly disagree.

[Mike_Young]

Bob and others,
I still argue that a golf playing filed is no different than the other examples such as baseball or football.  All golf is the same.  You have a teeing ground, a 4.25 inch cup and through the green.  Baseball has specific dimensions within non specific dimensions.  Football fields have different fall from the center of the field.  I'm going to stick with my theory.

 Andy ,
As far as anyone claiming another's work as his own....go to the ASGCA website and see how many guys list five courses as having designed them and their name is no where to be found on them.  Usually it goes over ok until the guy leaves the firm then the fun begins.

[Ian Andrew]

I think music contains a good analogy. Often elements of another song are easy to identify within a song that is more current. The difference often lies in how they adapt what is similar and then fill the remainder of the space with lyric or change. I think architecture is similar.

I travel, not to play golf, but to collect ideas that I can adapt as the situation arises. The more ideas, the more choice I have in each situation.

If you would like to call me a thief, do, because that’s how I do things. I’m comfortable with the fact that I take ideas from others and adapt them when they offer a solution to a specific place. I don’t lift holes, but I do regularly lift tie-ins, grassing ideas and other things you may not consider when you play.

[Tim Nugent]

...I travel, not to play golf, but to collect ideas that I can adapt as the situation arises. The more ideas, the more choice I have in each situation.

If you would like to call me a thief, do, because that’s how I do things. I’m comfortable with the fact that I take ideas from others and adapt them when they offer a solution to a specific place. I don’t lift holes, but I do regularly lift tie-ins, grassing ideas and other things you may not consider when you play.

Ian, I would call that EXPERIENCED.  On the flip-side, don't you just love it when, at a different Architect's course, you see something like you did in a similar situation.  Like Niall said, often times architects will unknowingly arrive at a similar solution simply because it's what fits the parameters.

[Bill Brightly]

Dick,

Thanks for modifying your original post, which implied that any use of template features equals plagerism. You've now limited what you call plagerism to an architect who copies holes and does not disclose it. I agree with that!

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Bill:
It is just how you decide to take it in when you read it. The two posts are not really different.

Ian:
Very well said, and you have managed to explain what I was trying to say very well.

[SL_Solow]

Mike;  I think your analysis holds up reasonably well with baseball.  We all know teams that tailor their rosters to the quirks in their ballparks where they play half 0f their games; e.g the green monster in Fenway, the short right field porch in Yankee Stadium, the emphasis on pitching back in the day when Comiskey Park and Giffith Stadium were death valleys to home run hitters.  Less analagous in football where the amount of pitch rarely varies enough to make a difference.  Can you think of a team that calls plays differently because of the playing field?  Tennis even less so as the dimensions are identical, only the surface; grass, clay or hardcourts, varies.  Basketball about the least although at the high school level there are some tiny gyms with undersized floors and no room behind the baskets.  Pressure defense can be very effective at these venues.  I do remember playing a match in tennis long ago where there was a severe slope from one side of the net downhill to the other.  Made for interesting serving and on that day the wind was blowing straight down the court.  It was pre tiebreaker and my hazy memory recalls the first set went to 18-16 in large part due to the slope.

But golf is the only game where each hole is unique except for the size of the hole and each player is free to plan his attack constrained only by the rules and without the influence of his opponent.  That is one of the reasons why so many of us prefer width because it increases this aspect of the game.  Tighter corridors limit the choices and make the play more uniform.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()