[Melvyn Morrow]

I have been a big fan of old Jack though the years, enjoying his golf, but know little of his design ability.

I have been told by friends and acquaintance that the number of courses actually designed by the big man is rather small, being produced by his Design Company in general. Although some say he signs off all the designs, but my understanding there is no way that credit then for the design can be accredited to him, only his company.

So does his design’s cut mustard, are they that good?

I also understand that it is common practice to sell these courses as a JN course when in fact it seems to be little to do with his flare re design. The courses are created by his company BUT perhaps not by the man. Is there not something wrong in that and perhaps why I would love to see each course or modified course be accredited to an individual(s), under the banner of a company, fine but the designers names needs to be known – after all is the order not being placed upon the understanding that it will be a JN course, not designed by a company with the name JN.

While many architects/designers do not consider it important, many golfers do, so do historians and many club’s themselves. The only argument against that I can see is that ‘The Design Houses’ get business with a big name but he does not do the design himself, which seems unfair and perhaps pointless in seeking a NAME to design your course. BY naming the designer we can follow that individuals work and see that all records are correct, be it credited by say JN or TD Design House, we will still know the real designer. Seems only fair and honest in our new world full of equality, or is that another smoke screen and is it all about making as much money as you can, even if you hoodwink the public at large (– do things ever change?).  

So a double question, wonder if I will get any responses from Design House Proprietors

Melvyn

[Bill_McBride]

A couple of quick thoughts.   First, the company divides their projects into "Nicklaus Signature Designs," with apparently more direct input from JN, and company projects.   Next, he's been at this for quite a long time, so suspect he's much more involved than say, Johnny Miller.  I could have picked a bad example there.  As to your last question, this is a public forum, I doubt you'll see a lot of open criticism of the old Golden Bear!

[Melvyn Morrow]

Bill

Thanks, as for criticism, I am not looking for that but sites like this MUST be used to promote constructive criticism with an explanation as to the reason for the comment in the first place. Otherwise how do we move forward, how does JN get to understand his ultimate clients.

Constructive criticism takes the debate and learning curve forward, the problem is that many want to indulge in personal criticism which is very argumentative and ultimately destructive for site like GCA.com.

WE need  - Designers need feedback, even the kindest comment can be defined as potential criticism.  After all are we not adults and here to discuss golf design in all its glory be it good or poor, ops was that a criticism?

I’m certain you take my drift.

Melvyn   

PS Are we not poorer for not indulging in open HONEST debate, well I think so.

[Michael Goldstein]

Quantity over quality. 

Like most forces in golf, it's all about the $

[Mac Plumart]

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45764.0.html

Good thread similar to this awhile back.

[David Whitmer]

There is a golf course on the west side of Cincinnati, near where I live, that bills itself as designed by the Jack Nicklaus Design Group (which is correct...as far as I know he never set foot on the property). It is a public track, and when most people speak of it they simply say "it's a Nicklaus design." Whether they know it wasn't Jack himself and don't care, or whether they assume it was Jack, I don't know. I'm guessing that the last name of Nicklaus in the advertising probably gets some first-timers to play the golf course, but I suspect they will only come back if they have a good experience, no matter who actually designed it.

I have only played maybe 10 courses designed by Jack, but overall I like his designs. To me they are fun to play. They are not overly difficult or penal, but they test most every aspect of my game. Many people say Jack is partly to blame for courses spending so much money on maintenance...I don't know enough about that to comment (although it seems to me the courses' owners would be more to blame, for they agree to it and they do it).

Muirfield Village is one of my favorite courses to play. I always have a great deal of fun at Valhalla; though it might not be the best course I have ever played, it's not bad either. I thought May River was very, very solid. Do I like 'em all, and think all are great? No. The Country Club at Muirfield is pedestrian, as is Country Club of the North, Bay Creek, and Wynstone. I had alot of fun playing the courses at Desert Mountain (maybe it was the fact that for the first time I was playing desert golf...very unlike golf in the midwest).

I guess my feelings about Jack's designs that I have played are: some are very good, and most others are just okay. And that to me is not a bad thing. He had a playing career that is second-to-none, and he has gone on to design some really nice golf courses that many people have enjoyed and continue to enjoy. To me that adds up to a phenomenal golfing life.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

"Nicklaus Design has over 350 courses open for play in more than 30 countries with another 100 in development."

It's very hard to summarize his product as his staff has changed over the years as has his personal involvement. Suffice it to say that his older work can be generalized as being somewhat difficult to play and his newer work shows a softer trend.

My advice: Play some of his courses and see for yourself. Expand your horizons.

[David_Tepper]

Another recent thread - "The Evolution of Nicklaus as a Designer." Nicklaus and his courses have been discussed here at some length a number of times over the past several years.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,48918.0.html

[Tim Gavrich]

My home course here in South Carolina is a Nicklaus "Signature" course called Pawleys Plantation.  It was originally built to be a private club, opening in 1988, but 1989's Hurricane Hugo and the resultant devastation it brought to the SC coast changed the model, and PP has been a semi-private/resort type course.  I guess I'm biased, but I think it's one of the three best golf courses on the entire Grand Strand. I say that with the caveat that a lot of golfers don't enjoy it because it is also one of the toughest courses down here.  Lots of players end up playing too long a set of tees at PAwleys, which can lead to very high scores and lengthier rounds, in general.  But it has a whole mess of good holes, including two wonderful "switchback" par fours at #8 and #16.

Here's a brief photo tour I did of it a while ago: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,33954.0.html

[Jeff_Brauer]

Don't have time right now, but it does strike me that there could be some deeper analysis than "Big Design Shop", probably centered around how his pro career affected his design philosophy vs a landscape architect type, etc.

It's an important subject because Jack has influenenced design for better or worse, probably most (off the top of my head) in demanding better conditions for his clients and perhaps (and until recently in his work) designing too much for the pro mentality, when those guys make up less than 1, maybe less than 0.01% of golfers.

That said, his emphasis on fairness is, like it or not here, probably a good thing, although in my view, just a continuation of what has transpired slowly in golf design since the first round of golf and the first complaint of "that's unfair!"  I recall JN telling me once that it was his philosophy that the golf course should never hert the player, only the player should hurt himself with poor shots.

But, that is just off the top of my head.

[David_Elvins]

I also understand that it is common practice to sell these courses as a JN course when in fact it seems to be little to do with his flare re design. The courses are created by his company BUT perhaps not by the man. Is there not something wrong in that and perhaps why I would love to see each course or modified course be accredited to an individual(s), under the banner of a company, fine but the designers names needs to be known – after all is the order not being placed upon the understanding that it will be a JN course, not designed by a company with the name JN.

No different to The Old Course, Melvyn, where God was the designer of record but was rarely on site during construction, leaving most of the hands on work to Old Tom. 

[Peter Pallotta]

My two cents:  I think JN's playing and design experiences melded in such a way as to put the focus on "getting the ball to the pin".  And in order to put the focus there, and to demand and reward the smart thinking and quality shot making that this focus entailed, JN also made sure that the golfer could always "see the pin" - literally and figuratively. So in this sense his courses are straightforward, i.e. the strategy/sensible steps to "get to the pin" are there for everyone to see; but JN's playing days taught him (as he watched opponents throw up on themselves in the heat of major championships) that golfers wouldn't always take the sensible steps, and that ego and pressure and lack of skill would cause them to make poor choices/shots and cause them problems even when the course was right there in front of them. As a designer, I think JN realized that he didn't have to do too much, i.e. that laying out the basic/fundamental/age old challenges both strategic and shot making was where his responsibility lies.  I think of him - as a player - at Augusta when he was 58 years old and not really long enough to play the course well - and yet he still finished 6th! And he did that, from what i saw, by playing the course like the wise old man that he was, i.e. driving the ball to the spots with the best angles of approach to the greens/pin, and then playing fine mid-long iron shots that, if they didn't come off perfectly, almost always missed on the correct/safe side. All of which to say, I think JN takes a "bird's eye view" of golf courses and the role of architects, a kind of meta-level approach (for lack of a better term), or maybe a kind of stripped down/essential approach that retains only the most essential/basic elements and principles of smart and strategic golf, and then ensures that these basic elements are presented -- through excellent/uniform maintenance and conditioning etc -- to the golfer in an appealing way (according to his own Augusta-influenced tastes).  And in this he has been very influential: the bird's eye view allows him to design/build many courses on many different kinds of sites, and the stripped down approach makes the courses accessible/understandable to not only anyone who golfs but to anyone who has even watched golf (eg the back nine of the Masters on CBS). Not surprisingly, many clients and other architects would find this "accessibility" an appealing thought and approach.

Peter    

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jeff

There is a big difference in fair or is that we today translate it to mean ‘easy’. 

Nothing wrong with giving high handicappers options but not at the cost of making it all easy, ops sorry fair. Wide fairways give options for beginners while letting the average golfer get on with his game. It is about design, it’s also a responsibility to maintain the game of golf in good order and that my friend I believe is based upon maintaining the challenge and testing the golfer irrespective of his skill level.

I feel this is one reason why it is important to understand individual designs and their MO. The cost of Green Fees are not cheap, so surely it must be important that the clubs/courses name their designer(s). I care not if JN is the head of the company, I would like to know who was actually was responsible for the design -  that I am being asked to spend good money to play over. That seems fair, it would also be honest while perhaps a JN company, the designer gets the credit for a good or poor design – I believe golfer are entitled to know.

As for producing courses with a high maintenance footprint, that is and should very much be dead in the water these days. Gone are the boom years between WW2 and the year 2000, we expect value for money, courses more in touch with the game and certainly with the surrounding countryside. We need to re think this policy of strip the land then reshape and reforming it in the eye of the designer, producing an unsustainable course with maintenance nightmare.

So we need to know who the designers are that are rising to the challenge, not the good Old Guys who had at times more money than sense producing what some appear to be Palace Gardens costing a fortune to maintain.

If I was in the market to have my own course, the last thing I would do is lumber myself with a name that is not going to get involved but send down one of his many designers to do the job, sorry that too 19800ish, my budget is no longer designed to accommodate the pretty but only the practical.

The financial markets have changed the way many business are run, they had to change, so golf design has to change and I believe it’s a good thing. We need to get back to basics relearn the great ideas of the past, re-introduce penal into the game while looking for sustainable sites fit for the purpose of golf. Until then we are getting exactly what we deserve, expensive rounds, expensive Fees and high maintenance costs. So come on name names, list the designers, it has to be part of the way forward if the Names no longer design.

In fact one has to ask the question, well that is if one is really interested in the game of golf and certainly GCA – are the big design houses and the Names well past their sell by date, not having learnt from the changing environment.

Melvyn

[Andy Troeger]

"Nicklaus Design has over 350 courses open for play in more than 30 countries with another 100 in development."

It's very hard to summarize his product as his staff has changed over the years as has his personal involvement. Suffice it to say that his older work can be generalized as being somewhat difficult to play and his newer work shows a softer trend.

My advice: Play some of his courses and see for yourself. Expand your horizons.

Steve,
Don't agree with this generalization at all. His newer courses are even harder than the older ones from my experience. Idaho Club, Concession, Old Corkscrew, Promontory, and Red Ledges are all SUPER difficult. **Good call Bill, Dove Mountain is really hard too (although probably easier than most of those others, believe it or not!).

But, I agree with your advice. A lot of his stuff is pretty good, some of it is very good.

[Bill_McBride]

"Nicklaus Design has over 350 courses open for play in more than 30 countries with another 100 in development."

It's very hard to summarize his product as his staff has changed over the years as has his personal involvement. Suffice it to say that his older work can be generalized as being somewhat difficult to play and his newer work shows a softer trend.

My advice: Play some of his courses and see for yourself. Expand your horizons.

Steve, how about those greens at Dove Mountain?   

[Melvyn Morrow]

David

Not forgetting the sheep.

If you asked Old Tom he would tell you God was there all the time. While HE does not walk and talk to me, he did with Old Tom

Melvyn

[Jason Topp]

I find his designs uniquely demanding on aerial iron shots.  The ability to hit the ball a specific distance on a specific line and stop it quickly is more important on his courses that any other designer I have much experience with.  

His most interesting designs are very difficult.

[Matthew Petersen]

"Nicklaus Design has over 350 courses open for play in more than 30 countries with another 100 in development."

It's very hard to summarize his product as his staff has changed over the years as has his personal involvement. Suffice it to say that his older work can be generalized as being somewhat difficult to play and his newer work shows a softer trend.

My advice: Play some of his courses and see for yourself. Expand your horizons.

Steve, how about those greens at Dove Mountain?   

While there are certainly some severe slopes on those greens, I actually found them very playable. The greens are large enough that even though many of the tiers are severe it's unlikely you'll have to traverse too many huge humps on a putt. Also I don't recall seeing any green that you couldn't putt around, if you were on your game. I actually loved those greens.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I said that "his newer work shows a softer TREND." That doesn't mean that every one of his new SIGNATURE courses is softer.   From what I understand, his course at May River near Hilton Head, praised here many times, is evidence of this trend. JN is at the mercy of his client. He's not going to produce a course that comes at a 115 slope from the tips. However, he has said in the past that he would never produce a resort course as difficult as La Paloma in Tucson. Perhaps he has produced some in recent years. I haven't played them all. Cabo del Sol and Palmilla were good experiences for me.

Bill,

As we found out, Dove Mountain is not one of his "softer" courses; however it was specifically designed to host a  WGC event and the greens were "softened" after the first year because of complaints from the pros and it's still difficult for mid handicappers.

[Andy Troeger]

Steve,
Like Dye, not every one of Nicklaus' courses (signature or otherwise) are excessively difficult. The courses at Las Campanas in New Mexico, Superstition Mtn Prospector in AZ, and Cougar Canyon in CO are all pretty playable, however, I don't think there's any trend in Jack's recent work that's softer. Just exceptions to the rule, perhaps. All those courses I mentioned are built in the last five or so years and have slopes between 148 and 155 from the tips.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Andy,

I like Superstition Mountain and if it were on the other side of town, I'd join.

I don't play from the tips. I tend to like courses that come in around 130 or so from whatever tees I decide to play on any given day.

[Jud_T]

What's he like as a designer?  Profitable...  Anyone who put his name to The Bear at Grand Traverse Resort has an asterisk next to his name in my book...

[Jason Connor]

Interesting take from Tim.  I've played Pawley's a number of times and from my personal perspective would put it at least #5 on Pawley's Island, not just the Grand Strand (behind Heritage, the two Stranz, and I think Willowbrook is on Pawleys, right?)

Maybe it's because the Nicklaus courses I've played are all very pretty and very green and I'm biased against that.  But they always look too sculpted to me.  Plus I really don't like those two par threes on the little wood walk way. They just seem uninteresting one shoters without options. 

Sometimes if you have enough money to hire Jack, you have enough money to moves tons of earth, and hence the course never looks at natural as my eye prefers.

I've also played Rocky Gap, a Maryland resort course, often.  It's fun, good elevation changes, but nothing particularly memorable.

I haven't played any of his first designs, yet.

[Mike_Young]

GOOD
I think his involvement took the  design business to another level.  I think the man is extremely smart and focused and was able to hire very good people.  I have never played a Jim Lipe or Jay Moorish course I did not like.  He also had a few other associates over the years that were good but their attitudes were so pompous they couldn't sell snatch to a troop train. But his work was heavily influenced by his associates and they might say he influenced them.  And I'm sure he did.  I think the main thing he did to change design was placing emphasis on hitting the ball a specific distance where before the key was to keep the ball below the hole.  This is why he had the diagonal greens and tiers IMHO.  So for me, he has proven himself to be very good as a designer.  True he might not have done all of what many of us one man shops do but he was somehow able to coordinate keeping a lot of balls in the air.  But at the end of the day....forget his desing....this giuy is the best that has played the game over time...Tiger will not catch him and TW may not ever do a design....

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I generally agree with Mike Youngs observations. I do feel jack went through a long period where he got the best sites.. I always felt he underachieved in a big way. I recent years there are more really good jack courses getting built. I hope that trend continues as we go through the overseas expansion in Asia.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()