This question is in response to Jeff Brauer's thread with Joe Hancock on Flynn- Alison - etc templates.
I have always felt that the term Bulldozer Operator was so far from the truth in the context of what these shapers do on golf course construction sites that I have been involved with. Anyone referring to these artists as Bulldozer Operators seems disingenuous.
.......The designers of Winter Park wore two hats, designers and shapers, its a successful combination. It's the more cost efficient way to go. Cities will see this, Mike Keiser figured this out 20 years ago. Dave Axland and Dan Proctor built Wild Horse and several other projects, designing and shaping simultaneously.
Jim,
I refer to golf course bulldozer operators as shapers, too. Not sure why I picked that word, over the more traditional word, but certainly meant no disrespect to those artists who have made us all look good over the years.
That said, my main point stands. While you might not agree, if you take a talented architect (albeit one with some tendencies) and mix his/her talents with a similarly talented shaper, with some tendencies, you in essence have two talented people putting some deep thought into a green from different perspectives. While mixing two people who never have worked together before (or rarely) there is no guarantee of even better results, but it happens more often than not.
What's funny, in this world of big contractors and shapers often being contract employees who work all over, and for many architects, is they often bring what they think are the best ideas from other architects. And, sometimes architects are influenced whether they know it or not, by the last good course they played.
I have been on site where, for shorthand communications, I might refer to a certain green, and the shaper might slip in "Fazio did this in a similar situation" and we work out where to go from there. We sometimes joke that the architectural credit ought to go to me, maybe one of my associates, the shaper, the guy he worked for last, etc.
Years ago, on two projects being built simultaneously, I tried giving the same green plan to two different companies building the golf courses. The same plan came out extremely differently, thanks to the shapers. Yeah, the bunkers were in the same place, green angled the same (which is pretty important to me) but they looked completely different.
So, yes, the shaper is as important as the architect in most cases. Another way to prove that? Back in the days of everyone working in Asia, shapers usually got first class tickets, architects sometimes got business class tickets.
BTW, loved Winter Park, and think you will, too.