[T.J. Sturges]

Over the years I was always amazed at how architects like Rees Jones, Tom Fazio, and Nicklaus and Company were continually awarded plum projects in this country when in my view, their collective portfolio(s) of work was not appealing.   Then Ran created this site and I found out that many people (early "regulars" here) felt the same way I did.  But yet, the work was still being awarded to the Jones, Fazios and Nicklauses.  Somebody must like their work, I thought....but who?

Then Ran's site gets covered in Sports Illustrated and lots more people begin to visit here.  Now, lots of people visit the site who DO appreciate the work of Rees, Fazio et al.  While I don't necessarily agree with them that these guys are doing the best work in the industry, hearing their opinions is a real education for me, and the diversity of opinion present at this site now is healthy.  

Ran has never had Tom Fazio, Rees Jones or Mr. Nicklaus featured in his interview section.  My belief was that they might not feel comfortable here because there might be the perception that the people who frequented this site did not appreciate their work.  I think that is no longer the case.  Wouldn't it be good for one's education for any of these gentlemen to be featured in one of the monthly interviews?  Certainly Rees has his fans here.  Fazio has many here who like his work, and it would obviously be an honor to have Mr. Nicklaus interviewed here.

Do any of you Golf Digest panelists types have the clout to help Ran arrange to interview one of these guys?  

[THuckaby2]

That's asking a lot... Though the room is bigger here now and yes, there are more varied opinions, but I'd still have to say it would take some amount of bravery for any of them to come in here, as much as we would all learn from them.  Talk about coming into hostile territory - might as well ask Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy to speak at the next Republican convention....

Heck of an idea, I'd love to see it.

But why would any of those three want the abuse?

TH

[RJ_Daley]

Ted, my name ought to imply that I have clout.  But alas, I can no longer even fix a parking ticket!

I do think your wish to see one of the architects so mentioned is a good idea.  I heard JN making comments a night or two ago about his new course opening at "The Bull" out the back door of Black Wolf Run.  Jack aquitted himself nicely when asked how he felt about his course being next to the great Dyabolicol one's.  His comments indicated that he had no trepidation or uneasy feeling, and felt his design philosophy can stand on its own as different and with merit.  In feeling that way, and as we all know how proud and allegedly hard headed JN can be, I think he would do quite well to have a good old fashion sit down interview on GCA, and take on all seriously or sincerely posed questions by some of our regulars.  Now, I don't feel I know enough about Faz or Rees to think that same way...

[cary lichtenstein]

Both Nicklaus and Tom Fazio have written books on golf architecture. I think they would decline, but someone must know them well enough to ask.

[Tom_Doak]

Well, I know all three of them a little bit ... as does Jeff Brauer ... but what exactly would you want me to ask?

I think if Ran submitted a list of twenty good questions to them he ought to be able to get one or two to respond.  But they've have to be questions that went beyond what was already covered by their books, or you'd just get the same answers that are already in print.  (And they'd better not be as pointed as Brad Klein's opening question to Arthur Hills at that Donald Ross Society dinner years ago!!)

Then again, Jeff Brauer hasn't been interviewed yet, and he's already shown a willingness to participate.  Maybe you should start with him, and others in the ASGCA.  If they participated, and they weren't raked over the coals, maybe Rees and Tom would be more likely to join in.  

[A_Clay_Man]

How do we know they don't already post?

I'd love to hear JN expound on his last response(that I saw) about architecture. When asked, he replied "Variety, variety variety." while in a TV interview that's fine, but somehow I think it would awesome to hear him speak(ok write) frankly about his evolution and whether he thinks he is at the top of his game designwise, or is his best ahead of him?

[T.J. Sturges]

How about Matt Ward coming up with the 18 questions for Rees Jones...  Are you up to it Matt?

TS

[TEPaul]

Ted:

I don't know a thing about Jack Nicklaus and what he'd be willing to say on here but Tom Fazio I very much do, indirectly, and the answer is he's not interested. Why? Well, I'll give most everyone on this site one collective guess.

As for Rees, I did ask him if he'd think about coming on here a few years ago and he said he's not interested in fairly certain terms. And I asked him again not more than two weeks ago and he said he's not interested. Does anyone really need to ask why?

But if that day does come at some point, I believe it will have to be preceded by a little less intolerance from some on here for different types and styles of architecture.

To have that happen some on here will really need to accept the fact of that used and reused cliche that;

"Golf and its architecture is a great big thing and there really is room in it for everyone."

But is that attitude true on here? Will it ever be?

[T.J. Sturges]

Tom,

Having been away from the site for about a year (which makes returning to the site extremely interesting...I would attempt to explain it by describing what it is like to see a child grow everyday...not much change is noticed...versus coming home a year later and finding your son a foot taller) I think it is markedly different here than it was a couple of years ago.  There is not only tolerance for Rees and Fazio here, they have their fans here.  

Your comments about Fazio and Rees are interesting.  When you say you have discussed the possibility with them coming on here, am I to understand that both are fairly aware of this site?  How aware are they?  Do either lurk here?  Do they monitor what goes on here?

TS

[A_Clay_Man]

It is hard to believe that a collective attitude can be perceived by anyone, especially more recently.

Just because some are more vocal and have the luxury of Dilatante status, doesn't mean others should be afraid to joust. Which wouldn't be jousting because even those on the extremes of the spectrum seem to be quite civil, especially to newer industry types who decide to post. It's only the familiarity that breeds contempt, right? Plus, some people don't want to open themselves up to some of the mean spirited cyber-morons who reside on the planet. I've felt since my first visit here that Golf is different and the likelyhood of someone with nafarious intent was minimal.

[THuckaby2]

TJS:

Do you really find it that way - more tolerance for Rees/Fazio?  Wow... I sure don't notice that... I think the intolerance for them is as great as ever... But then again, I never left here...

Very interesting.

TH

[Paul_Turner]

If they did participate on GCA, there would be less unfair criticism of their work.  

Saying you're simply "not interested" is a cop out, in my opinion

[T_MacWood]

I agree with Ted there is much more tolerance and diversity of opinion. I also agree with TE that is extremely unlikely that Rees and Fazio would agree to an interview. Unfortunate because an interview is not the same as actually joining the discusion...Ran is diplomatic, but pointed in his questions.

Architects today, especially most super successful architects, are not used to criticism and have fairly thin skin. This is in contrast to the good old days when architects expected thoughtful criticism, many times from their peers. A much different atmosphere that IMO helped to advance the art.

[Jamie_Duffner]

I would love to see all three come on here and be interviewed.  I also think that there has been more tolerance of their work, particularly Fazio.  I regularly read posts that are very complimentary of Fazio.  

I for one have talked about the good work Rees did at Bethpage, given the time and budget constraints.  The guy did want to spruce up a few greens and he came out solidly on the Tillie side in the Tillie/Burbeck debates.  

As for Jack, he has about the most eclectic portfolio of courses of any architect, living or dead.  I think that causes a lot of us to have this love/hate thing for Jack's work.  Some, perhaps a lot is excellent, some of it you just scratch your head, and that's putting it nicely.  Jack also seems to have high appreciation for the golden age archies.

Fazio is very critical of the golden age archies.  He's simply unimpressed.  I've read several quotes to that effect.  I think it would be very interesting to have him defend that position.  It would probably be very enlightening.

[Tom_Doak]

Well, there's part of the problem right there ... if you all think that Tom Fazio has to "defend" his opinions to you.

In general, I think it's fair to assume that the three architects mentioned are "not interested" because they are right where they want to be in the business, and have no need to convert anyone over to their fan club.  They also realize that while there may be a lot of interesting talk going on here, it doesn't really relate to much business ... and they're more interested in p.r. activities which increase their business.

Yes, maybe someone somewhere is more interested in hiring me or Mike DeVries because of the discussion of our work on GCA.  But that's maybe one job, probably working for someone who's looking for an alternative because he can't afford to hire a big name.  And one job is nothing to the guys you're talking about.

[ForkaB]

Well said, Tom.

I would guess that Fazio has one Behr-fluent flunky monitoring this site with a mission to report back if he sees anything interesting--much like the NSA has its Arabic speaking "guys" at Fort Meade who spend all their days listening to telephone intercepts from the Riyadh cental exchange hoping to catch a vocal "glimpse" of Osama bin Laden, or Saddam himself, or whatever.

Those who want a Fazio/Nicklaus/Ress interview--beware what you wish for, for it might come true!  See the Pete Dye interview on this site for elucidation.........

[THuckaby2]

Too funny Rich - I was thinking of the Pete Dye interview also!  What would make anyone believe a Fazio or Rees interview would go any differently?

TH

[T.J. Sturges]

To: T. Doak

Tom,

Interesting comments you make about "can't afford to hire a big name".  I think most of us would say that you and your firm have a big name now.  On a scale of 1 to 10, if we give Fazio a "10" for his "big name", how would you rate yourself in this category in 2003?  And, when you say that the big 3 "are right where they want to be in the business, and have no need to convert anyone over to their fan club", how do you think they acheived this?  What PR activities did they employ that resulted in this position in the industry?

TS

PS:  To R. Goodale:  That Pete interview was riveting wasn't it!

[Ben_Hogan_NJ]

I am one of the newer followers/readers of this site and generally do have a higher tolerance/appreciation for layouts by people like Fazio & Nicklaus.  I think Rees has done good work at the Black and other courses doctoring them up but don't care for most of his originals.

I met JN a few years ago and he was asked about his varied portfolio and he said that is a product of the diversity in what his clients are asking for.  Some want a championship caliber course, others want a forgiving course for more senior members, etc.  

Do other architects vary their style/approach (as JN claimed he does/did) or design as they see fit given the land they are given?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tom,

Are you saying that you and Mike D, etc. are often the 'fallback' architects, when the big names can't be afforded or turn something down?  I know Gil wasn't the first choice at Rustic Canyon, so I know it happens.  Does that evr get to you or do you look at it as an opportunity/incentive to show the owners they made a better choice anyways?


Rich,

Good point on the Pete Dye interview, easily the worst one on GCA.com.  It doesn't have anything to do with Ran or the site (it was more fledgling then), I've seen another interview of his that was just as 'succinct'.  I think it was even in a big mag.

All,

I think if any of the big 3 architects would agree to this, it would be Nicklaus, because I just get a hunch he may not know about the site.  Talk about a busy guy not to know about us.  Play senior tour some, play architect/PR guy, play husband/father/grandfather, appearances, TV stuff, etc.  He may have heard of GCA through Jim Lipe or another current of former project architect who post/lurk here, but maybe not.

As for Rees and Fazio, they both for sure know about this site and have made comments as to their 'dislike' of us, so I know they wouldn't (Tom I confirmed Rees).  Both were quoted in the SI arcticle as not being big fans of us.  Faz likes to play the "I don't care" angle toward us, though I bet it's more than that, and Rees obviously has a reason not to like us (he's the biggest bipolar discussion topic here) despite being at least acquaintances with the two Doyens.

[Tom_Doak]

Ted,

Maybe I'm about a 5 on the "big name" scale now, still nowhere near those three.  I'm working on some things that might change that, but mostly what it takes is time ... they keep getting more familiar, and we keep learning.

My point was more that I'm still a 5 (or less) on the design fee scale, and I would guess that's more of a factor to the people reading GCA.  I think it's a safe bet that the guy who owns Bayberry Land doesn't spend a lot of time lurking here.

Scott,

I don't really think of myself as a "fallback" architect, certainly not anymore.  From the beginning of my career, certain people have gravitated to me because they like the way I think ... while others are repulsed.  Which is fine, because I'm trying to find a couple of great jobs a year, not to corner the market on golf architecture.  But certainly, price is a factor.

Years ago, a friend of mine knew the developers of a very high-profile project -- The Preserve -- and arranged for me to get in touch with them.  The developer was nice enough to see me, but he explained that I shouldn't waste my time ... the real estate there was so valuable that they felt they HAD to hire one of the big names, because there was so much at stake.  I don't agree with that, but I understand it ... they're happy with what they got, but they didn't blow anyone away.

Likewise, there are A LOT of projects which need to sell property or memberships before they put anything in the ground, and the big names sell tickets.  And if they went out on a limb and hired me (or Mike D. or someone else), those projects might never happen anyway ... I've got a couple like that which are stalled right now, and it's partly due to the fact that I'm not a big name.  So I understand that.

(Although, if you took the half-million or more you'd save by not hiring one of the big names, and put it into marketing, I think I could make any decent architect into a big name.)

On the other hand, I'm not sure I'd want to be a big name.  Some of their clients hire them because they think they're the best, but a lot of their work comes from developers who DON'T have a great site and who need their name to sell the project's potential.  I'm glad not to spend years of my life on those kinds of deals.

[Jamie_Duffner]

Isn't the point of an interview to ask someone to "defend" certain philosophies, styles, positions, etc?  Perhaps I should word it "explain why he feels that way."

There in lies the problem.  If Fazio, Nicklaus, and Rees feel they do not need to explain themselves or at least expand on a position, then it's arrogance.  They are building these courses and asking us to pay a lot of money to play them, so asking them why they feel a certain way is not out of line.  If they feel that they do not owe anyone a little commentary, then they've got the problem.

I also think that they could enlighten us on their points of view.  I would like to learn more about their design philosophy, what better way than in an interview.

[Tom_Doak]

Mr. Hogan:

Why did you go to New Jersey when you died?  Do you know a fan of mine there, Matt Ward?

As to changing styles to fit the needs of an individual project, I think that's a bit more in vogue today than ten years ago.  A lot of big-name architects have tried diligently to set themselves a style that would make clients comfortable they know what they're getting ... Jack Nicklaus probably needs to do this less than most, because he appeals to his clients on many other levels.

I think my style varies, and I try to find projects which will let me do different things.

[Jamie_Duffner]

Tom - wouldn't you say that Jack and Fazio are tens because of the sheer number of projects they do?  Would you even want to be a ten, if that meant 10 -15 projects a year?  I'm not sure you can be a 10 on this scale unless your name is on several projects a year.

You can mass produce wine and make yourself a household name, or you can be that special small vineyard that produces exquisite wine.  It's where you want to be and how you want to conduct your business.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tom, For whats its worth, I think your a ten.

Scott, Where did you get that Gil was second choice for Rustic Canyon?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()