If they designed a course...

[Jack_Marr]

that satisfied the posters on gca, do you think anyone else in the world would like it?

[tonyt]

I am honestly not in tune with the American psyche on this question, but using the dry summer look (or at least, only very green when the rains make it so), is a meld that most of the Australian population would happily accept, because it is all most of us know.

Our corporate part time golfers love their deep green, but even they don't notice brown in the summer. Others are happy for natural colours all year. Indeed, freshly cut santa anna couch fairway grass has white protruding stems diluting the green colour anyway.

As for the design characteristics, I think we are too hard on the average golfer. Many of those who don't get it, will happily get it (or at least accept it) if it is told to them by someone they feel is an authority on the issue. The greater danger of quirky or "treehouse loved" architectural features is the average Joe's own judgement without background info or help.

[paul cowley]

.....well ,if a course could be designed that satisfied the diverse group here , i think two things could occur ;

   1]  people would flee in horror from the frankenstienian ,goldbergian ,medusian abomination. this panicked mass would create such a vacuum that ,....2] the course would then implode ,creating a sinkhole of unfathomable depth of despair ,confusion and kaoss.


 .......please recognize that these are my thoughts only ,not nessesarily those of the group.......

[A_Clay_Man]

Is this a retorical question?

By definition, the they you speak of are not a collective voice. But given the implication of your question, I would think it would be a hands down success and serve to better educate those lemmings who need a Martha Stewart type to tell them what they like and/or want.

All one needs to do to closely approximate this question/model is to get to Gothenburg, Ne. and golf with a wild horse virgin. Upon completion of the round I gaurantee their opinion will be quite strong with an anticipated approval rate of 99.9%.

[Jack_Marr]

My point it that many of the courses slated here are ones loved by the public. They're not designed for a small group of trainspotters, it wouldn't make financial sense. Many of the great designers of yesteryear also designed crap courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jack Marr,

Could you list some of the crap courses designed by:

Charles Blair MacDonald
Seth Raynor
Charles Banks
Devereux Emmet
Walter Travis
Albert W Tillinghast
Alister MacKenzie

I want to see if I've played any of them yet.

[Norbert P]

"If They Designed a Course that satisfied the posters on gca, do you think anyone else in the world would like it?

 Jack, great idea that you have there just waiting to be exploited.  Think "TPC" but instead, upon collective approval of us self-proclaimed pundits of righteous golf architecture and the unlimited facets of what we like about the cosmic encapsulation of ... blah blah blah... we allow the suffix, GCA to be honorarily afixed to said golf layout.  Thus, a marketing niche is fulfilled.   E.g.  Wildhorse, GCA.

 Joey Overwater might say, "GCA"?  Why, that's one o' them golf courses for the puritanical thugs that know more than the Pros, the Supers and the Architects.  Am I worthy?"

  Ran, I suggest you call your lawyer and get a marketing team on this.

  Jack Marr, you're a genious.  Must be that pot still whiskey.

  BTW, It doesn't matter if they'd like it.  They could tell their friends they played a REAL golf course and come here and find out why they were supposed to like it.  

[Joel_Stewart]

You look at the success of Bandon Dunes, Pacific Dunes and Rustic Canyon on the public side and Friars Head and Sand Hills and I believe you will answer your question.  All of these courses recently built in the face of a slowing economy, some in remote locations, with other courses going bankrupt almost daily.