[Peter Pallotta]

Ian - yours is a generous spirit. Thanks.
Sven - that's a terrific question. It seems reasonable to answer "yes, the land does dictate the style".  But then I think of the wide variety of courses (in terms of playability) and styles (in terms of aesthetics) that were all built on linksland/sandy soil in GB&I, and I'm not sure anymore. Carnoustie is not St Andrews nor is Muirfield like Dornoch. I think the trouble with the 'formula' is that it seems to be dictating not only a certain style but also a certain *kind* of golf course.
That of course is no crime; but it does seem worth pointing out ie raising for discussion on occasion.
Best

[Sean_A]

But that's just the point, Ian: the site ISN'T telling C&C what to do anymore, the FORMULA is...or so it seems.

And what makes you say that?

George

I think because so many courses from these top stables look the same....there must be a formula in play.  Pietro is definitely on to something, but in the end it may not be all that important if folks are generally happy and convinced things are better than the 80s.

I am not saying its a good or bad thing, but I know I would prefer to see something a bit different.  P Dye was able to do this on more than one occasion and he seems to have done quite well in the business.  That said, I really do think Doak would and will do some stuff which stands apart from his well known work....The Loop is evidence of this.  I know he has talked about wanting to do some courses with very few bunkers, even no bunkers.  The will is there on the part of some designers,  but they must all earn a crust.

Ciao

[Sven Nilsen]

If all of these "formula" courses, however different or not in style they may be, are closer to the carnousties, muirfields and dornochs than the courses that were built leading up to this age, I'm fine with it.


That being said, I'm not so sure I'm sold on the similarity of what we're seeing built.  Maybe they all look the same because there's no housing and the water feature is no longer so omnipresent.  But to my eye, the Warren Course is not Sand Hills which is not Lost Farms.  And when we start throwing in other designers and other business models (like an Angels Crossing, Mystic Hills, bandon Crossings or Shepherds Crook), there seems to be enough spice in the mix for anyone's tastes.

[George Pazin]

But that's just the point, Ian: the site ISN'T telling C&C what to do anymore, the FORMULA is...or so it seems.

I don't agree with this at all. The way I've always explained Coore and Crenshaw's style to those unfamiliar with their work is that, for better or worse, they take exactly what the site gives. I've always suspected that this feeling had to do with Bill Coore's routing style and the idea that he routes by walking the property, almost blindly, letting the land lead him down paths that feel intuitive until eventually a vision of the routing comes into his uniquely gifted mind. I've probably completely romanticized the actual process he follows, but that's basically how I've always interpreted it. No one builds courses where the walk feels more intuitive, or where the holes fit the land they're on quite as well as Coore and Crenshaw. The downside is that sometimes the most intuitive routing produces long runs of holes that feel just a bit too repetitious, but the walk always feels like it explores the property in just the right way.


Going back to my friend Mike Hendren's post that really got this thread rolling after 10 or so pages, this is almost the opposite of the feeling that I get at Lawsonia. The routing there feels a lot less "natural" to me, starting with the first tee shot, then the odd way that the 2nd, 3rd, 7th, and 8th holes seem to burrow as far into the corners of the property as possible before reversing course like a Roomba working its way around the corners of a room, or the way the 11th just juts out almost randomly into the middle of a field before the hairpin turn that takes us back out 13 before we start doing the Roomba thing again as 15 and 16 almost belligerently insist on turning right and smashing up against the treeline instead of just taking the obvious path in front of them. If Lawsonia was still a dairy farm instead of a golf course, the cows would never walk the property quite the way that Langford routed it. And while holes like 2, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 16-18 seem to fit the land they're on like a glove in almost the way a C&C hole does, holes like 1, 6, 7, 12, and 15 seem to totally ignore the conventions of what an architect would intuitively build on the land they occupy. And maybe that sounds like a bad thing, but it's one of my favorite things about the course. It has a delightful audacity and, while not particularly difficult, it presents an awful lot of uncomfortable shots in part because it does the unexpected or unintuitive so frequently. It's not dissimilar to Crystal Downs in that way.


I haven't played Sand Valley, but I have admired the intuitiveness of Coore and Crenshaw's work while also wishing it wasn't always quite so perfectly married to that intuitiveness. I like to think maybe I understand some of what Mike might have been getting at originally, but then again, it's also possible that I'm just feeling the effects of the season of Love Actually, eggnog, and "Son, step away from the keyboard" again.

Helluva post, though I have mixed feelings about the inclusion of Love Actually.


 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Not sure the site entirely tells Bill and Ben what to do....certainly, the site together with their preferences develops the routing, although other gca's would probably route differently, due to say, less emphasis on walking, or less tolerance for quirky holes.


On the other hand, CC COULD choose to do RTJ or someone else bunkers as a tribute, well after the routing, rather than their now typical jagged edge bunkers.  Can you imagine Robert Bruce Harris bunkers on a CC golf course?  Of course not, but no technical reason it couldn't happen.


And, it goes back to that creative vs. commercial tension....they (and Mike K) know the jagged edges work to draw customers whereas they don't know if RBH bunkers would (probably have evidence that they wouldn't.....)  The safe choice is to keep with the jagged edge bunkers. 


That is probably why I can't think of a situation where an established architect has been the author of "the next big thing" although if anyone could point out an example, this would be the group!  It takes a young'un who wants to prove himself different than an old'un who wants to maintain his track record.

[Mike_Young]

[quote author=Jeff_Brauer link=topic=57622.msg1523307#msg1523307 date=1482786144


That is probably why I can't think of a situation where an established architect has been the author of "the next big thing" although if anyone could point out an example, this would be the group!  It takes a young'un who wants to prove himself different than an old'un who wants to maintain his track record.


The key to doing something new is having one of the big magazines behind it...If Golf Digest gets behind a guy and tells the devloper he will get "Best New" then a developer can feel comfortable doing something different.    The closest thing I have seen to really different in the last 20 years has been Jim Engh...it's not me but the guy has done one helluva job marketing his product and people must like it...   

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,


I see a lot of Dick Nugent influence in Jim's work, and maybe some came from his days at IMG or wherever it was he was the in house designer.  But, all those combinations did make for a bold new style when he went out on his own, I agree.  Dick was big and bold, but Jim added the "muscle bunker" style.


To be honest, I have been friends with Ron Whitten and other golf writers for years, and never once would I seek out (or expect) any kind of pre-approval of my design style for a new course.  Or any sort of implied guarantee a course would make the list, much less win.   Would be interested if we have evidence that it happened for someone like Faz, Rees, or any architect who has won one of their awards.  I haven't heard if it has, although there is always the big schmooze for those awards, of course.


The closest was when Ron played Quarry on the grand opening, was impressed, and assured me that he would make an effort to get panelists to such an out of the way place, because he felt it would do well.  That was more for the integrity of their process than my benefit, but I did benefit! 

[Mike_Young]

Mike,


I see a lot of Dick Nugent influence in Jim's work, and maybe some came from his days at IMG or wherever it was he was the in house designer.  But, all those combinations did make for a bold new style when he went out on his own, I agree.  Dick was big and bold, but Jim added the "muscle bunker" style.


To be honest, I have been friends with Ron Whitten and other golf writers for years, and never once would I seek out (or expect) any kind of pre-approval of my design style for a new course.  Or any sort of implied guarantee a course would make the list, much less win.   Would be interested if we have evidence that it happened for someone like Faz, Rees, or any architect who has won one of their awards.  I haven't heard if it has, although there is always the big schmooze for those awards, of course.


The closest was when Ron played Quarry on the grand opening, was impressed, and assured me that he would make an effort to get panelists to such an out of the way place, because he felt it would do well.  That was more for the integrity of their process than my benefit, but I did benefit!

Jeff,
I never said you would seek such....doubt you will ever find proof but Sh*t happens....and I don't think I ever mentioned an individual....There is a lot on the line with big RE developments...you got to lock up what you can and magazines are easy....cheers.

[Jaeger Kovich]

Yup, all those catch basins and bird baths in greens sure are different! 

[Tim Gavrich]

Perhaps this thread heralds the end of the "honeymoon period" of Minimalist golf course architecture. A "seven year itch" type of thing, if you will.


Me, I don't believe we're anywhere near a point in the playing-out of this GCA philosophy such that we need to get really exercised about seeking out a new one just for the sake of it. To the extent it may seem that way given the general rota of courses most often discussed here, it behooves us to remember that the total number of courses like this is still a long way from representing even a significant minority of all golf courses. It seems that even those who seem a bit weary of the alleged emerging sameness of C&C courses would agree that that sameness is better than the sameness that ruled GCA for much of the latter half of the 20th century.


It's not that I reject the efforts of mold-breakers - Jim Engh's Creek Club at Reynolds Lake Oconee in GA was the most fascinating golf course I saw in 2016 - it's just that if you're going to go in a new direction, you'd better come out guns a-blazin'. And the nature of truly visionary creative work is that it is very, very, very rare.


We should welcome minimalist GCA as a "new normal" and hope it stays around for a good long while, IMHO.

[K Rafkin]

Lots of talk about doing something "new" and "off formula".  Would someone please enlighten me as to when Ross, Raynor, MacKenzie, etc altered their style and started doing something new?  Half the time when you're on one of their courses and it feels completely different, it ends up actually not being their course.  It seems to me that the better modern architects have gone off formula far more often than the heralded architects of yesteryear. 

[Tom_Doak]

It seems to me that the better modern architects have gone off formula far more often than the heralded architects of yesteryear.

Probably so.  If the old-timers went off formula it was probably because the construction foreman did so, and they weren't likely to do so if they wanted to build another course for the same architect after that!


We in the modern era, making more visits to see our projects under construction, are probably more likely to get bored with what we've been doing and try something different.

[Jaeger Kovich]

When Ross got to Pinehurst they were on sand greens by the end, well you know what #2 evolved into.


Everything that Mac and Raynor did to essentially creat or better yet "build" golf hadn't been done before.


You really don't think they were doing anything different?

[Ryan Farrow]

If I am not mistaken, Old McDonald was pretty innovative, right? Yes, it had wide fairways and big greens, but I don't see much wrong with one finding their tee shot and not spending 20 minutes a round searching for golf balls in tall grass.


Now Mr. Keiser starts building a multi course resort in Wisconsin and we get upset that it is a big golf course that was built on a big site with big contours. Could it be that course 3,4, or 5 may be something very different? Could we take a deep breath and wait for course 1 to get a full season in the books until we start picking apart why it wasn't what you wished it could be? That is all I ask.




George, to answer your question, no, I do not think the guys at the top are all that different, but they have their quirks. For example, if you leave a pile of trash sitting in the fairway when Mr. Coore walks around on a site visit, chances are it will turn into a golf course feature of some sort. The final products are similar and many of the same people have worked on each others courses. You are not getting the answer you want because it is not that obvious and sexy and frankly, .000001% of golfers would ever notice the difference. And that is OK. Lets just enjoy the courses that are being built because the truth is, they are not being built near us, and most of them are private.

[Mike_Young]

.

[PCCraig]

So, is the 2nd course reallynamed "Mammoth Dunes??"

[Morgan Clawson]

They must have settled on that name now, as its being used on their website.  Definitely some unique logo possibilities with that name.

So, is the 2nd course reallynamed "Mammoth Dunes??"

 

[Mike Hendren]

Me?  I would have gone with "Bodacious Dunes."

[Jason Way]

Before y'all go too far down the "they looked up 'large' in the thesaurus" joke road, I suspect that the name is a reference to the fact that Sand Valley is located immediately west of what was a massive glacier that covered much of Wisconsin.

There is a trail that runs through the entire state along the boundary line of that glacier called the Ice Age Trail (http://www.iceagetrail.org/ice-age-trail/).  Both Michael and Craig are enthusiasts of that trail, and the rich natural history that it represents, so my assumption is that the name is an homage to the natural history of the site.

[Jason Way]

P.S. In case you haven't heard about it, KemperSports is running an opening-day giveaway that is pretty neat. 

https://kemperclub.com/contests/sand-valley-opening-day-experience/

You gotta be in it to win it.


Also, throwing a link to Morgan's Mammoth Dunes preview thread in here as a bread crumb for folks to follow later -> http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,64124.0.html

[Morgan Clawson]

Good insight Jason.   I like the tie-in.

Before y'all go too far down the "they looked up 'large' in the thesaurus" joke road, I suspect that the name is a reference to the fact that Sand Valley is located immediately west of what was a massive glacier that covered much of Wisconsin.

There is a trail that runs through the entire state along the boundary line of that glacier called the Ice Age Trail (http://www.iceagetrail.org/ice-age-trail/).  Both Michael and Craig are enthusiasts of that trail, and the rich natural history that it represents, so my assumption is that the name is an homage to the natural history of the site.

[Phil McDade]

A long out-take from the Madison WI paper (bias alert -- the writer is a friend of mine) on the prospects and challenges that Sand Valley represents for the nearby rural communities in central Wisconsin:


http://host.madison.com/wsj/business/sand-golf-and-hopes-for-an-economic-boom-in-central/article_5acf774b-0ad5-5737-a2b1-24d0dd29efb5.html

[Tim_Cronin]

Well-reported story. How long does it take to build a big tank for jet fuel? Sound like the airport needs it yesterday.

[Morgan Clawson]

Anyone have a guess about the % of play at Bandon Dunes Resort that comes from people flying directly into Bandon airport?  Paging Sven...

[Dan Moore]

A well done article. I'm looking forward to the Official Opening May 2nd. It's been interesting to see the site evolve from wall to wall trees to what it is today. There is great variety in the land used by Course 2 and the other land as yet untapped. Driving in to the property after miles and miles of flat terrain it's hard to believe what you see and there is really nothing else like it in the MW.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()