DMK Claims Media Seduced Him Into Excessive Design

[Niall C]

Ally

I've only ever walked the Castle course in part but it is clear there is a hell of a drop from the top of the course to the bottom. Given the slope it's hard to imagine that some bold shaping wouldn't be required at least somewhere to make it work.

Niall

[Sean_A]

Ally

I've only ever walked the Castle course in part but it is clear there is a hell of a drop from the top of the course to the bottom. Given the slope it's hard to imagine that some bold shaping wouldn't be required at least somewhere to make it work.

Niall

Castle Course may well not have survived another 40 years without the changes.  Unlike films, courses cost money to keep alive. Studios just "write" off a non-earner film and cover the cost with other films.  Not many courses have that luxury.


Ciao

[Niall C]

Sean

According to many on here, the Eden has been brutalised and destroyed by the work of Donald Steel, yet I'll bet it's still one of the more popular and played courses in Fife. Despite what we "know it all" gca'ers think, there is still the mass ranks of golfers out there who are happy to accept it for what it is and enjoy the experience. For instance, a pal of mine still talks about playing out of a greenside bunker to about 3 feet and then watching as his ball slid off the green and 30 yards back down the fairway. He had a great day out and while he wouldn't want to play it in a medal, he loved it simply as a day out.

Niall

[Sean_A]

Yes, Eden has been raped, but its still good, affordable golf...a good trip filler or if I lived within 2 hours or so worth playing once a year.


Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally

I've only ever walked the Castle course in part but it is clear there is a hell of a drop from the top of the course to the bottom. Given the slope it's hard to imagine that some bold shaping wouldn't be required at least somewhere to make it work.

Niall

Yes, I think so too Niall. It was a pretty uninspiring, flat fall as well.

I guess what I was getting at is that 75% of architects would have built a bunch of side slope holes held together with barely concealed containment mounding on the flanks. That was the way. And whilst DMK might not have been a pioneer in the same way as Doak and C&C, at least he was significantly advancing the art with The Castle Course from that fairly mundane style that we saw in Europe through the 80's and 90's. A goodly portion of that might have been down to Mick McShane who also worked at Kingsbarns and just recently is helping Christian Althaus come up with some interesting looking stuff. It's not "minimalist" but it is "naturalist" and I'd take it every time over most of what is produced on this side of the Atlantic.

One thing I do think they got a little wrong on The Castle Course is that the shaping further up the hill should have softened and got more subtle so that it tied in to the farming fields across the road. But then we might not have got the 5th which is one of my favourite holes on the course with a cool green site which I believe has been changed since I last was there, more's the pity.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

David is right that most modern courses are too difficult.  Heck, some people even think my courses are too difficult!  [It seems to be the same subset of guys who are still bitter about the anchoring rule. ]


I have seen this all of my life in this business.  There are multiple reasons:


1. architects who are very good players, who must not realize how hard they're making it for everyone else;
2. young architects who are not very good players, trying to show the good players how clever they are;
3. architects of all ages who are desperate to win in the GOLF DIGEST formula and get their courses on magazine covers;
4. sons of famous architects trying to show they can out-do their dads; and
5. clients who tell their architect to make a course tournament-tough even though a tournament is never going to be played there.


I'm sure there are even more categories than this.  I guess David is trying to put himself in category (3) but at the same time trying to change the agency of the statement -- that it was somehow the media's fault, instead of his own fault for trying to please the media.  [If that's really what he said, of course.  The media and the political and business establishment have been giving lessons in changing agency about their own failures for some time now.  "Mistakes were made," without anyone in power ever taking the fall for them.]


One of the things I realized about Pete Dye, in hindsight, was how lucky he was to have Alice Dye there all the time as a sounding board and second opinion, to tell him when he was going overboard.  Every young architect could use someone like that!  But usually they've got the opposite -- friends urging them on to do even more outrageous things.


As a result, I changed my m.o. many years ago, and started letting my associates build the first version of a green without being hands-on myself, so I could become the editor and tone them down as needed.  If I start building wild contours myself, I'm defensive of them, but if they're not "mine" it is easy to feel more detached and make the right call.  The only really severe green at The Loop is the one I went back in and jazzed up in the spring after we'd shaped it the fall before, and I didn't have time to reflect and soften it a little.

This piece of writing is why I am so p,eased to be able to call Tom a friend...this is just an educational piece of brilliant writing....thank you mate

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I have played Cape Kidnappers, St Andrew's Beach, Barnbougle and Queenwood ( a number of times) and Tom is certainly right to hint that his relative success post Bandon and Pacific was not just down to David's courses being private. Queenwood is a decent course but hardly memorable. It has too many indifferent holes - for example, five par 5's, only one of which is a good hole. A driveable par four that does not really invite you to go for it etc It suffers from the fact that it has a set of greens that combine too much undulation and speed for the average golfer. The set-up is further aggravated by the fact that the club has 15+ tour pro's as members and I always have the feeling that the course is set up for them rather than normal members. 


David's latest UK effort, Beaverbrook, is a much better course, and true to the lessons he espouses. Better site, better fitted to the land, more width, better set of greens, better bunkering, more good holes - overall more enjoyable to play.


Philip

Let's not forget the SITE..As I am sure Tom would be the first to point out...
Queenwood versus   Barnbougle or Kidnappers....I wonder which courses will garner the most attention

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I don't know if this is the place....but for some reason I feel compelled to say...


...how much pleasure it gives me to have such "access" to the thoughts of posters like Messrs Andrew & Doak (and many others like Jeff Brauer +++). I'm really, really interested in golf & the design/construction of golf courses. But you guys are out there doing it & leaving courses that will hopefully be there for your childrens' children to enjoy. For you to post so frankly as you have here (& elsewhere) makes me feel better about trawling through some of the less uplifting threads we get here. Thank you for taking the time to share.


+1

[Jaeger Kovich]

It's not "minimalist" but it is "naturalist"



What does that even mean?!

[Ally Mcintosh]

It's not "minimalist" but it is "naturalist"



What does that even mean?!

Would have thought it self-explanatory, Jaeger. One who succeeds in making something look natural without taking a minimal approach.

[Jaeger Kovich]

It's not "minimalist" but it is "naturalist"



What does that even mean?!

Would have thought it self-explanatory, Jaeger. One who succeeds in making something look natural without taking a minimal approach.

That's what I thought you meant, thanks. j

[Jason Way]

Just posted a brief interview with DMK on my blog, along with quite a few photos of his courses around the world. 


https://geekedongolf.com/2016/12/21/the-evolving-artist-an-interview-with-david-mclay-kidd/


I have only played Bandon Dunes, so it was interesting for me to see his work laid out side by side in this format.  I find that exercise thought provoking with other architects where I have played multiple courses.  I did a similar style post with several of Tom's courses that I played last year (https://geekedongolf.com/2015/09/07/a-doaky-season/) - comparing and contrasting is interesting to me, especially when it is below freezing outside.


Back to the interview - not sure that there is anything terribly new or earth-shattering in it, but he did write a few nuggets that piqued my interest, as did the tone.  Thought you might enjoy the read given some of the other threads that are kicking around right now.

[George Pazin]

In a recent architecture panel at Sunningdale in NY, I openly shared that from 1989 to around 1999 I was a decidedly average architect. To most of you I still am.  The one advantage with getting older is I no longer care what others think, nor do I have any desire to be at the pinnacle of this business. I've watched it up close, it's not as easy as you think.


David wanted to be at the top. He was really ambitious. And you could argue that he made it too. That position comes with a lot of pressure and criticism. In 1989, I was 24 and did not come from a golf course construction background, although I did have of construction experience. By 1999 I was 34 and a year away from the project that changed my trajectory. I built plenty of courses in between and was technically competent, but still had no clue about what I was trying to build when given my own opportunity.


I apprenticed and was fortunately edited. David learnt, made choices and perhaps a few mistakes in front of the golfing world's eyes. He evolved and has a different opinion on what is good. Now he has to weather the past work. The difference is mine are well hidden renovations.    So, I feel for where he's at.


I hope that provides perspective.


But I think his criticism of the media was a horrible mistake in judgement.


Every time I made a compromise, each time I approved a shape or green contour, I always had the choice to do something different. Every decision I ever made is on me. Likewise, each thing he built anything, it's on him. Part of going from good to great is ability, but just as much is recognizing something is either not good enough or poorly conceived. The greatest lesson and final lesson most need is self-restraint. There's always an alternative ... and one of them is to not accept a commission.


I am nobody without the constant help of the media that I have received. I owe them my career and to a certain extend if David sat back and thought about it, that is the case for him too.


I like what I see from the early photos of Sand Hills. I hope David has found the sweet spot in design and life. This is not an easy business. People question your every decision. The competition for work is very intense. And in today's day and age there is not a lot of media opportunities left.


Anyone who makes a living at golf course design is very, very lucky. There is not a single architect who has got to that place without someone else's help. Often it's a key person in the media that thinks you deserve additional opportunities.


Signed,


The still Decidedly Average Architect

Maybe the best post I've ever seen on here.