AAC III- Public Voting Results are IN!

[Steve Lang]

  Good Luck Boys! 

Alex, the exercise was fun, if not hard on these old eyes to see the topo lines... thanks again for setting it up; and very special thanks to Jim Colton for his analytical work.

You should also report the "what-if only non-contestants votes counted" finalists, even though they represent < 1% of the discussion group, as they are the most unbiased.

Cheers

[Jim Colton]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

Garland,

  I'm not sure I follow you, but I also recognized the trend that you pointed out. I was disappointed that two of the simpler ones that I voted for, especially #25, didn't make the grade.

[Daryn_Soldan]

Alex - Thanks again for all the work you've done pulling this together. It was fun to finally sit down and take a detailed look at the entries when finding my top 5... lots of good stuff in there.

Jim - Your input has been awesome. The flyovers really add a lot. Looking at the number of views they've gotten, I just wish more folks would have taken the time to watch them. They're very telling... both the good and bad!

Garland - I agree... the better and/or more detailed graphic representations seemed to rank higher. I also thought a few of the simpler entries were among the best and wished they had made it thru. In fact, looking thru the results, I only voted for one of the 8 finalists! Not sure what that says about my voting

Is this the place/time for discussion about entries? I'll be happy to share thoughts on specific entries but am not sure if that should still be directed toward the Google doc for each or publicly on this thread. Thanks!

- Daryn

[Garland Bayley]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

Garland,

  I'm not sure I follow you, but I also recognized the trend that you pointed out. I was disappointed that two of the simpler ones that I voted for, especially #25, didn't make the grade.

Jim,

We agree on #25. I thought it was every bit as good as the #1 vote getter.

[Jim Colton]

Topic of the day: Biggest "all-star" snub?

[Anders Rytter]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

Garland,

  I'm not sure I follow you, but I also recognized the trend that you pointed out. I was disappointed that two of the simpler ones that I voted for, especially #25, didn't make the grade.

#25 was the last one I dropped from my list. But i had a hard time picking only 5. Very close among the top 10.

[Alex Miller]

I voted for #25. Don't blame me! 

I'm going to start another thread that features the final 8 entries, but I think this one could keep going if it still has momentum.

I've got a very busy day ahead so I won't be at my computer at all.

[Anders Rytter]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

GJ, I had the original map underneath and looked at all rountings on the blank map without graphics.  

[Garland Bayley]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

GJ, I had the original map underneath and looked at all rountings on the blank map without graphics.  

Not sure what that means, but I think it sounds like you know how to use the technology to see the routings against the topography that I don't know how to do. I actually roughly redrew some on a blank map, locating them as well as possible given recognizable features nearby.

[Anders Rytter]

Here is a good way to see the finalists side-by-side: http://golfaac.blogspot.com/search/label/Finalist

It looks suspiciously like you balloteers like well done computer graphics.
Some of those computer graphics completely obscured the underlying topography shown on the map. How hard did you work to try and figure out exactly where things were located in the topography? Or, did you just have a big advantage over me, by having worked over much of the map in doing you own designs?

GJ, I had the original map underneath and looked at all rountings on the blank map without graphics.  

Not sure what that means, but I think it sounds like you know how to use the technology to see the routings against the topography that I don't know how to do. I actually roughly redrew some on a blank map, locating them as well as possible given recognizable features nearby.

Sorry, poor description. I Had the individual routings "on top" of the blank map on my computer and used transparancy to fit the routings on to the topo.

[Brett_Morrissy]

Alex,
What's next, how many judges, how long will it take- was it another 3 weeks?
Is it appropriate to publish the list of votes, before the judges have completed their judging?

[Cliff Walston]

First, amazing job by Jim, Alex, and all the participants.  I can't imagine the number of man hours contained in this contest from all participants and contest hosts.  As I was going through them all, I wondered what factors, like computer skills and design style, would play a role.  Here are my thoughts from a relative newbie and first time voter...

Questions and comments:

I see in Alex's post he noted 34 ballots.  I was told I was ballot 49.  Did some get lost in the mix, or does that reflect the fact that some entrants were assigned ballot numbers but ultimately did not vote?  Just curious.

Also, I went back and looked at all my votes that made the finals and they had visible topo lines.  I do think certain things played larger roles for some people than others.  For example, the fly bys really made a difference to me in determining blind shots, perspectives on approaches, etc.  I think the computer heavy ones showed up a lot better on the flybys, which add in the contour since it was underlying the map but may not come through on the routing.  Maybe I shouldn't have considered that since it wasn't part of the original project, but it helped me interpret the topo lines better and understand the contours with greater specificity. 

As noted above, I really liked 25 too, but its lack of green definition ultimately swayed me against choosing it.  It didn't feel finished to me.  Same with 5.  But that doesn't mean they aren't great.  I just felt I had to fill in the details in a way I didn't with others.  With so many great entrants, it was hard not to go with others.

My favorite format was very light shading to define fairways, greens, etc. with visible topo lines i the background, ala 13, 20, 21, and 8, etc.  They had the perfect combination for me. 

What factors weighed in on your consideration?

[Alex Miller]

I did not want to have ballot numbers to be based on WHEN votes were received, so random numbers from 1-50 were used.

Will comment more later

[Cliff Walston]

Alex,

Thanks for the quick response.  I was just curious.

Cliff

[Alex Miller]

Alex,
What's next, how many judges, how long will it take- was it another 3 weeks?
Is it appropriate to publish the list of votes, before the judges have completed their judging?

The judging period is not strictly defined, but 3-4 weeks is what I'm expecting. We can discuss the finalists and other entries in detail, as well as a certain tournament in Augusta in the meantime. No reason to compete for discussion of the judging while The Masters is going on. 


I wanted the votes published now for some transparency in the process. I made the finals, as dictated by the votes, and at the very least it seemed inappropriate to not have the voting be visible. This way people can check that their ballot was counted and correctly!

Besides, I doubt the judges would consider our opinions superior to their own anyway  . The finalists have been given a couple of days to gather any extra material that may not have been sent to me previously. The judges will be sent the entries and instructions for judging on Wednesday and I will post a copy of what I send them on here.

[Dieter Jones]

No all star snub from me either. I voted for 25 and also Number 8 which were both light on the graphics. I would love to see the full version Of both of these courses if they exist.

[Thomas Dai]

Firstly, Alex and Jim, a big well done for all the work you've put in.

Secondly, I couldn't help but look at the entries and then compare them with Ed Olen's thread http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,43053.0.html which pulls together a great deal of old historic maps and routing plans. I wonder, without any slight intended, how many of these older style maps/routings would have got through the AAC III voting process? Some of them, even of top courses, seem very basic.

Thirdly, regarding the AAC III computer generated simulations/fly-overs, is this the kind of thing that architechs when bidding for work are routinely asked or expected to put in with their bids? If so, would it be possible, without breaching any commercial, business or confidentially ethics etc, to see what a professionally generated scheme would look like?

All the best.

[Alex Miller]

Firstly, Alex and Jim, a big well done for all the work you've put in.

Secondly, I couldn't help but look at the entries and then compare them with Ed Olen's thread http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,43053.0.html which pulls together a great deal of old historic maps and routing plans. I wonder, without any slight intended, how many of these older style maps/routings would have got through the AAC III voting process? Some of them, even of top courses, seem very basic.

Thirdly, regarding the AAC III computer generated simulations/fly-overs, is this the kind of thing that architechs when bidding for work are routinely asked or expected to put in with their bids? If so, would it be possible, without breaching any commercial, business or confidentially ethics etc, to see what a professionally generated scheme would look like?

All the best.

Thomas,

I can't comment on what is typical in a professional proposal, but I think you other question is an interesting one.

Those old style routing maps, while very cool, probably weren't meant to appeal to a group of voters. I can't say exactly how many, but I'd bet the vast majority were already hired for the job to build the golf courses depicted on those maps, so the purpose of the drawings seems very different from the ones in this contest.

That said, I think newer routing maps may provide more information when showing other details of the course.