Something new or unconventional and the resulting risk of love/hate!

[Randy Thompson]

In another thread Tom mentions that when the market gives mixed reviews for a new course, where some absolutely love the course and others absolutely hate it, signifies that the architect is taking chances. Couldn`t agree more and for me taking chances is usually the results of something new or unconventional. The road less traveled! Not a good idea to do if your trying to break into the market and without a doubt if you already have a strong reputation you can get away with more and be forgiven by some. For the rest of us it`s risky and one must constantly evaluate, when and how much. First, you must be fortunate enough to have the confidence of the clientele to allow your creative juices to come out in your work. There is a time and place for everything in life but there is more involved and lots to consider before coming out of the box and you must be prepared if it`s something new, get ready to be hammered. If it’s well thought out, you may gradually get the acceptance, if not, expect and accept changes! I am told the Eifel tower was built for the world fair and the organizers and powers to be hated it and at one point in time, the decision was made to remove it after the world’s fair! Paris, I believe is the city with the largest quantity of tourism in the world and the first thing that pops in to my mind when I hear the word Paris is the Eifel tower. It will be interesting to evaluate Trinity Forest the new C&C layout in Dallas especially if there is lot of Love/Hate evaluations. The same happened with TPC of Jacksonville the first ten years but I still think it helped Mr. Dye`s legacy. What will the professional say following the first Bryon Nelson and how many changes will be incorporated over the next five to ten years. Can`t wait to see it in February that’s for sure.
 

[Jason Topp]

Thanks Randy.  I played Trinity Forest this summer and my first thought was to wonder how the pros will react to the place.  It will be difficult to learn in a couple of practice rounds.  The ground is so firm that it would not take much of a change in wind to alter the spot a good tee shot finishes by 50 yards.  The greens are so big and complex that I do not see how one comes up with a plan for dealing with them in the limited time tour pros have to acclimate themselves.  I suspect the ground contours will not show up on television making the course appear bland when on the ground it is very complex.


I suspect tour pros will dislike the place at first.  Hopefully the tournament will stay there 10 years so we can see how opinions evolve.



 

[Tom_Doak]

The greens are so big and complex that I do not see how one comes up with a plan for dealing with them in the limited time tour pros have to acclimate themselves.

 

I'd heard that some of the greens were very small ?

[Thomas Dai]

Reading this reminded me of the Field of Dreams movie.
“If you build it they will come” and all that.
How much is this true in modern developments/design etc?
Atb

[Tom_Doak]

Thomas:  Trinity Forest is less than 5 miles from downtown Dallas.  It's hardly a cornfield in Iowa.


You do raise the interesting question of whether it's better to take design risks on a remote project, or in the spotlight in the big city on national TV.  Certainly, the latter is a much bigger risk, and offers more opportunity to change people's minds if you get it right -- but by the same token, many such projects would react quickly to make a change if a feature was heavily criticized.


When I got the idea of building the "Sitwell Park" green at Barnbougle, I said to someone there that the best part was if people liked it, it would attract attention to an otherwise remote project; and if they didn't like it, no big deal because hardly anyone would ever see it anyway     I wasn't quite serious about that, but I do think that the further out in the boonies your project is, the more you ought to take chances to attract people to see it.

[Rick Lane]

Thomas:  Trinity Forest is less than 5 miles from downtown Dallas.  It's hardly a cornfield in Iowa.


You do raise the interesting question of whether it's better to take design risks on a remote project, or in the spotlight in the big city on national TV.  Certainly, the latter is a much bigger risk, and offers more opportunity to change people's minds if you get it right -- but by the same token, many such projects would react quickly to make a change if a feature was heavily criticized.


When I got the idea of building the "Sitwell Park" green at Barnbougle, I said to someone there that the best part was if people liked it, it would attract attention to an otherwise remote project; and if they didn't like it, no big deal because hardly anyone would ever see it anyway     I wasn't quite serious about that, but I do think that the further out in the boonies your project is, the more you ought to take chances to attract people to see it.

This is the theme of the Buck Club discussion, in a way....

[Kalen Braley]

Thomas:  Trinity Forest is less than 5 miles from downtown Dallas.  It's hardly a cornfield in Iowa.


You do raise the interesting question of whether it's better to take design risks on a remote project, or in the spotlight in the big city on national TV.  Certainly, the latter is a much bigger risk, and offers more opportunity to change people's minds if you get it right -- but by the same token, many such projects would react quickly to make a change if a feature was heavily criticized.


When I got the idea of building the "Sitwell Park" green at Barnbougle, I said to someone there that the best part was if people liked it, it would attract attention to an otherwise remote project; and if they didn't like it, no big deal because hardly anyone would ever see it anyway     I wasn't quite serious about that, but I do think that the further out in the boonies your project is, the more you ought to take chances to attract people to see it.

This is the theme of the Buck Club discussion, in a way....

Rick,


I don't think Barnbougle and TBC are remotely comparable in that way.  One is in one of the most remote spots in the world, and the other proposed venue is 45 minutes from an International airport no more than 4 hours away from any major city in the continental US.


TBC will not be remote, its just not in a "traditional" high end golf destination.

[Rick Lane]

Thomas:  Trinity Forest is less than 5 miles from downtown Dallas.  It's hardly a cornfield in Iowa.


You do raise the interesting question of whether it's better to take design risks on a remote project, or in the spotlight in the big city on national TV.  Certainly, the latter is a much bigger risk, and offers more opportunity to change people's minds if you get it right -- but by the same token, many such projects would react quickly to make a change if a feature was heavily criticized.


When I got the idea of building the "Sitwell Park" green at Barnbougle, I said to someone there that the best part was if people liked it, it would attract attention to an otherwise remote project; and if they didn't like it, no big deal because hardly anyone would ever see it anyway     I wasn't quite serious about that, but I do think that the further out in the boonies your project is, the more you ought to take chances to attract people to see it.

This is the theme of the Buck Club discussion, in a way....

Rick,


I don't think Barnbougle and TBC are remotely comparable in that way.  One is in one of the most remote spots in the world, and the other proposed venue is 45 minutes from an International airport no more than 4 hours away from any major city in the continental US.


TBC will not be remote, its just not in a "traditional" high end golf destination.

Oh for sure not the same.   I was really referring to Toms last sentence, and how taking chances might be what is needed to attract people reminded me of that thread.   Zac seems to understand that he needs to build something special at TBC, and boy am I rooting for him there.     

[Tom_Doak]

We started with a discussion of "something new or unconventional," and after five posts got to the promotion of a course that is looking to emulate the style of Seth Raynor?

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,


It could be argued that a course of Raynor template holes would be pretty unique out here in the West, especially with some squared off greens and bunkers..you just don't see that on the left coast much.


I'm sure you can give some examples, but I can't think of any existing courses done in this style west of the Rockies...

[Ira Fishman]

Well maybe this goes back to part of the original question or at least to the part of the thread about remote courses being able perhaps to take more risk.  My twist on it: do we tend to overvalue courses that take real effort to get to just because it is human nature to want to affirm our own decisions about putting in effort?  For example, we loved the whole Bandon experience; thought Pacific Dunes and Bandon Trails outstanding, Old Mac great fun, and Bandon Dunes very good.  But in retrospect after the trip, I keep concluding that Pasatiempo is better than all of them.  That certainly is not how I felt initially on the flight home, but think I have realized that the whole adventure of getting to and being at Bandon put a thumb on the scale of how I viewed the courses.  I had no problem posting here that I was disappointed in Kapalua Plantation, but in that case, I was in Hawaii for business so there was no extra logistical, financial, or psychological effort to get there.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

It could be argued that a course of Raynor template holes would be pretty unique out here in the West, especially with some squared off greens and bunkers..you just don't see that on the left coast much.

It may well be "pretty unique out here in the West," but is that the same as something NEW or UNCONVENTIONAL ?  The MacRaynor approach is neither of those in my view.  There are a couple of architects building courses just like that in other parts of the country now, and of course we know where they got their ideas from.

[Tom_Doak]

Well maybe this goes back to part of the original question or at least to the part of the thread about remote courses being able perhaps to take more risk.  My twist on it: do we tend to overvalue courses that take real effort to get to just because it is human nature to want to affirm our own decisions about putting in effort?  For example, we loved the whole Bandon experience; thought Pacific Dunes and Bandon Trails outstanding, Old Mac great fun, and Bandon Dunes very good.  But in retrospect after the trip, I keep concluding that Pasatiempo is better than all of them.  That certainly is not how I felt initially on the flight home, but think I have realized that the whole adventure of getting to and being at Bandon put a thumb on the scale of how I viewed the courses.  I had no problem posting here that I was disappointed in Kapalua Plantation, but in that case, I was in Hawaii for business so there was no extra logistical, financial, or psychological effort to get there.

Ira:  It's okay that you prefer Pasatiempo, but that doesn't make it the correct opinion.  Ocean views aside, a lot of people are going to favor real links conditions over a steep California hillside.


Your premise that people who travel to a faraway place are therefore invested in believing the trip was worthwhile is basic human nature.  But so, too, are those who value a course attached to a famous old designer, or anyplace where they've had to pay a lot to play.


That said, some of the success of the Bandon courses in the rankings is due to the huge amount of paid and free publicity the resort has generated in recent years, which is the equivalent of advertising on a massive scale that older courses cannot compete with.  Even here on GCA, I'd guess the number of Bandon threads outnumber the Pasatiempo threads by more than four to one.  Perhaps you should develop three new courses in succession next door to Pasatiempo to help correct the imbalance!

[Randy Thompson]

I find it interesting that C&C didn`t particpate in the Rio circus for what I asume was because of the high risk factor associated with to many hands in the soup or was it the risk of the Country? This seems just as risky for the same soup reason and with the added risk of a normal piece of property, when they are use to superior properties! Then you throw into the formula that most tour players think they are all qualified golf course archtiects. Most will use the media to convey this message to the general public by critizing everything and anything. It is my understanding they were given a lot of freedom but that doesn`t mean if the player`s bitch, there won`t be changes or tweeks!

[Ira Fishman]

Well maybe this goes back to part of the original question or at least to the part of the thread about remote courses being able perhaps to take more risk.  My twist on it: do we tend to overvalue courses that take real effort to get to just because it is human nature to want to affirm our own decisions about putting in effort?  For example, we loved the whole Bandon experience; thought Pacific Dunes and Bandon Trails outstanding, Old Mac great fun, and Bandon Dunes very good.  But in retrospect after the trip, I keep concluding that Pasatiempo is better than all of them.  That certainly is not how I felt initially on the flight home, but think I have realized that the whole adventure of getting to and being at Bandon put a thumb on the scale of how I viewed the courses.  I had no problem posting here that I was disappointed in Kapalua Plantation, but in that case, I was in Hawaii for business so there was no extra logistical, financial, or psychological effort to get there.

Ira:  It's okay that you prefer Pasatiempo, but that doesn't make it the correct opinion.  Ocean views aside, a lot of people are going to favor real links conditions over a steep California hillside.


Your premise that people who travel to a faraway place are therefore invested in believing the trip was worthwhile is basic human nature.  But so, too, are those who value a course attached to a famous old designer, or anyplace where they've had to pay a lot to play.


That said, some of the success of the Bandon courses in the rankings is due to the huge amount of paid and free publicity the resort has generated in recent years, which is the equivalent of advertising on a massive scale that older courses cannot compete with.  Even here on GCA, I'd guess the number of Bandon threads outnumber the Pasatiempo threads by more than four to one.  Perhaps you should develop three new courses in succession next door to Pasatiempo to help correct the imbalance!

Tom, I know it is okay.  Opinions are just opinions.  Staying within the confines of GCA versus Art, Literature, Music, Architecture, etc, my question is whether the quest to be there influences the Opinion. 


Ira