[Ben Hollerbach]

The recent discussion about the state of Royal New Kent and Stonehouse prompted me to reminisce about my lone round at RNK a decade ago.


Oh how frustrated I was playing that course and the fact that it actively went out of its way to deceive you, only to walk off the 18th green eager to go around again. Able to literally look back on the round and understand what camouflage was deployed to confuse me as a player made me that much more excited to play it again and I understood the genius in the design.


Strantz's work is bold, creative, and rather original; but whats going to happen to it over time? As unique as his course are and so different from anything else in the golfing landscape why has someone else not picked up his design mantle and kept pushing forward? Are there any specific design elements from Strantz that have trickled into other designers tool boxes? Did he not have anyone on his team to carry on the style and philosophy? Would working in the style of Strantz be a good way for a young designer to establish a foothold in the industry, or was he simply a once in a generation architect?

[Matt MacIver]

Great question, which I’m not qualified to answer but I’ll try anyway.  I think he wasn’t afraid to move some earth in the name of interest and playability first and then tie it in artistically.  I’ve only played four of his courses (Tot Hill, Tobacco, Bulls Bay, Caledonia) and can remember several holes that I’d never seen before - bold, outlandish but mostly playable — sometimes a bit too heroic but for me that’s the fun part but I can see why others might say gimmicky or tricked up instead.  I remember running the ball on the ground at all four courses, and I’m not sure the courses were particularly in the type of condition that it was the preferred shot, but it was for me and it looked so Fun that I had to try. 

[Mike Sweeney]

I played True Blue over the holidays and this thread had some interesting updated conversations about MS:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,54725.0.html


Mike Whitaker had a detailed before/after on True Blue changes on this thread:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,19512.50.html

[Jeff Schley]

Left us too soon first and foremost.

As to his design he doesn't have nearly the amount of course designs as others so it is an abbreviated work, compared to what he could have done.  When he passed in 2005 golf courses were still all steam ahead for 3 more years and he would have had 10 or more courses with hefty price tags to have his way with the land.

I have only played Caledonia and True Blue which are solid courses, we played Caledonia after a rainstorm and wow that course plays tough in soggy conditions.  True Blue alittle more open, but Caledonia seemed to be carved out of swamp land.

I can appreciate bunkers, but my only criticism was there was a little too much sand for amateur golfers so the rounds were slow.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

[Tim Martin]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

[Robin_Hiseman]

Strantz didn't chew tobacco.
 

[Scott Weersing]

Would working in the style of Strantz be a good way for a young designer to establish a foothold in the industry, or was he simply a once in a generation architect?
[/size][/color]
[/size]I would put Strantz in the once in a generation architect who tried, and succeeded, to make every hole a signature hole. His designs are not really sustainable from a maintenance perspective because of too many and too large of traps. Yes, it works at Tobacco Road because it is so different than the rest of the Pinehurst courses. [/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]The Strantz courses would be great for a student to go see because you can show them, here is what happens if you try to overdo every hole. [/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]

[Tom_Doak]

As to his design he doesn't have nearly the amount of course designs as others so it is an abbreviated work, compared to what he could have done.  When he passed in 2005 golf courses were still all steam ahead for 3 more years and he would have had 10 or more courses with hefty price tags to have his way with the land.

This is wrong.  One thing that made Mike different was how he worked.  He would only agree to build one project at a time, and be on site 3-4 days per week himself, with a small crew he brought along.  If you wanted to hire him, you had to wait for him, which is a very tough business model to pull off.  (Clients can be pretty insistent about their own timetables.). He was only going to build 1-1.5 courses per year, so it's doubly sad he didn't have a longer career, and we could see how his work would have evolved over time.

[Kalen Braley]

http://www.golf.com/courses-and-travel/mike-strantz-golf-course-designer

[Jeff_Brauer]

For what it's worth, when I was designing the Quarry at Giant's Ridge, I took the owner's rep to Tobacco Road as well as Fazio's World Woods course to give them an idea of what the Quarry could look like.  They had been hesitant, but agreed to go with the TR/WW look, providing it leaned more to the Fazio and less to the Strantz in difficulty.  Not sure I got there, but there is a design influence, given he had no protégés' to carry on his work.


The discussion about great artist who didn't care about difficulty has me thinking about the legacy of Robert Von Hagge, who had a different style, but similar priorities.

[George Pazin]

For what it's worth, when I was designing the Quarry at Giant's Ridge, I took the owner's rep to Tobacco Road as well as Fazio's World Woods course to give them an idea of what the Quarry could look like.  They had been hesitant, but agreed to go with the TR/WW look, providing it leaned more to the Fazio and less to the Strantz in difficulty.  Not sure I got there, but there is a design influence, given he had no protégés' to carry on his work.


The discussion about great artist who didn't care about difficulty has me thinking about the legacy of Robert Von Hagge, who had a different style, but similar priorities.

My apologies for not knowing, but I've only played a few Fazios and one Strantz - which is which in terms of difficulty?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Strantz hard, Fazio, easier.  Mike didn't let things like long forced carries, massive hazards, wild green contours or anything else that looked fabulous hold him back in design.  Fazio avoids most of the things that kill average golfers almost to a fault.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

Relax.


If someone's death from oral cancer can lead to awareness for others, and it saves lives, then that would be an incredible legacy I would want.

Can you think of anything MORE important?

MPCC? Is that the easy answer?

The guy died at age 50 because he did not go to the doctor when his tongue ached. He should be alive today.

I would bet his family would be thrilled if his death created oral cancer screening awareness for others.

#falseassumptions
#moretoitthangolf
#ignoranceisadisease
#hashtagnonsenseisacrutch

[Tim Martin]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

Relax.


If someone's death from oral cancer can lead to awareness for others, and it saves lives, then that would be an incredible legacy I would want.

Can you think of anything MORE important?

MPCC? Is that the easy answer?

The guy died at age 50 because he did not go to the doctor when his tongue ached. He should be alive today.

I would bet his family would be thrilled if his death created oral cancer screening awareness for others.

#falseassumptions
#moretoitthangolf
#ignoranceisadisease
#hashtagnonsenseisacrutch

Ian-I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want you to write my eulogy. It’s like saying Mickey Mantle’s legacy was alcoholism. Have some grace pal.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

Relax.


If someone's death from oral cancer can lead to awareness for others, and it saves lives, then that would be an incredible legacy I would want.

Can you think of anything MORE important?

MPCC? Is that the easy answer?

The guy died at age 50 because he did not go to the doctor when his tongue ached. He should be alive today.

I would bet his family would be thrilled if his death created oral cancer screening awareness for others.

#falseassumptions
#moretoitthangolf
#ignoranceisadisease
#hashtagnonsenseisacrutch

Ian-I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want you to write my eulogy. It’s like saying Mickey Mantle’s legacy was alcoholism. Have some grace pal.

OMG...ok...we are far apart philosophically and you are personalizing something that was solely written as my opinion. Cancer, in my opinion, is infinitely more important than golf course architecture.


In MY opinion, if I had a legacy that could be either remembered for 1) saving lives or 2) influencing tradesmen/artists/engineers who move dirt so that people can recreate, well, I'll choose #1. You are free to to choose #2 and that's cool.


Let's go back in our corners as I do not wish to engage with you. Understood?

[Tim Martin]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

Relax.


If someone's death from oral cancer can lead to awareness for others, and it saves lives, then that would be an incredible legacy I would want.

Can you think of anything MORE important?

MPCC? Is that the easy answer?

The guy died at age 50 because he did not go to the doctor when his tongue ached. He should be alive today.

I would bet his family would be thrilled if his death created oral cancer screening awareness for others.

#falseassumptions
#moretoitthangolf
#ignoranceisadisease
#hashtagnonsenseisacrutch

Ian-I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want you to write my eulogy. It’s like saying Mickey Mantle’s legacy was alcoholism. Have some grace pal.

OMG...ok...we are far apart philosophically and you are personalizing something that was solely written as my opinion. Cancer, in my opinion, is infinitely more important than golf course architecture.


In MY opinion, if I had a legacy that could be either remembered for 1) saving lives or 2) influencing tradesmen/artists/engineers who move dirt so that people can recreate, well, I'll choose #1. You are free to to choose #2 and that's cool.


Let's go back in our corners as I do not wish to engage with you. Understood?

Ian-This is a golf architecture website and without question the premise of the thread was to discuss his legacy in those terms. You missed the point pal.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I'll say the same thing I said to my son when I found his tin of Skoll:


Chewing tobacco can give you cancer and kill you.

That’s his legacy?    #Poorform

Relax.


If someone's death from oral cancer can lead to awareness for others, and it saves lives, then that would be an incredible legacy I would want.

Can you think of anything MORE important?

MPCC? Is that the easy answer?

The guy died at age 50 because he did not go to the doctor when his tongue ached. He should be alive today.

I would bet his family would be thrilled if his death created oral cancer screening awareness for others.

#falseassumptions
#moretoitthangolf
#ignoranceisadisease
#hashtagnonsenseisacrutch

Ian-I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want you to write my eulogy. It’s like saying Mickey Mantle’s legacy was alcoholism. Have some grace pal.

OMG...ok...we are far apart philosophically and you are personalizing something that was solely written as my opinion. Cancer, in my opinion, is infinitely more important than golf course architecture.


In MY opinion, if I had a legacy that could be either remembered for 1) saving lives or 2) influencing tradesmen/artists/engineers who move dirt so that people can recreate, well, I'll choose #1. You are free to to choose #2 and that's cool.


Let's go back in our corners as I do not wish to engage with you. Understood?

Ian-This is a golf architecture website and without question the premise of the thread was to discuss his legacy in those terms. You missed the point pal.

Not really.


You're just stuck on yours and I respect that. MY VERSION of HIS legacy has now been articulated. He died WAY too young because he ignored his symptoms. This is personal to me. This is about GCA to you. And that's where we differ. Fair enough.


Sorry I did not neatly conform to your cookie-cutter expectations. I will lower my field of vision to fit into your narrow box of understanding when I see your name next to a thread in the future...., pal....

[Paul Carey]

I am not so sure that Strantz's work was all hard.  He used visual intimidation very effectively but often the fairways and greens give you much more room than it appears.  The second, third, etc. time around his courses are significantly easier.  Also, he typically used very wide fairways so the tee shot demands to be on the correct side but he didn't punish the offline tee other than a difficult angle.  A high handicap golfer can typically chart his way around his courses fairly effectively.


Two outstanding courses in the lowcountry where I live are Bulls Bay (my club) and Chechessee Creek by Coore and Crenshaw where I play occasionally as well( I love both).  No comparison Chechessee is 3-4 shots harder. 

Strantz hard, Fazio, easier.  Mike didn't let things like long forced carries, massive hazards, wild green contours or anything else that looked fabulous hold him back in design.  Fazio avoids most of the things that kill average golfers almost to a fault.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Ian,


From someone who has lost two very close individuals to Leukemia and helped to build a foundation that help others in similar circumstances, I appreciate and thank you for your passion around oral cancer awareness. When it comes to recognizing how these diseases can be better screened and how we can all support those battling cancer, we could all us some more awareness.


I'd appreciate if we could return to discussing Strantz impact on golf course architecture and what can be learned and taken from his small but impactful portfolio of work.


Thank you.






For all,


If you were asked to put together a list of Architects/Courses one must study as a foundation to understand the game, where on the list would Strantz fall? Is his work often overlooked in the spectrum of designers?


For the architects,


Have you ever directed a younger associate to visit and study Strantz's work as a way to boost their perspective into design?

[Frank M]

This is personal to me. This is about GCA to you. And that's where we differ.

Are you suggesting GCA can’t be personal? .

[Ian Mackenzie]

This is personal to me. This is about GCA to you. And that's where we differ.

Are you suggesting GCA can’t be personal?


Out of curiosity, did you know Mike Strantz personally?


Finally, are you a wizard? I think you would have to be to suggest he would be alive today if he had had his tongue checked earlier.


The situation is the situation with Mr. Strantz, but when it comes to your statement—made on a golf forum no less—I find it in rather poor taste.

Sorry if I offended you.
That's a quote from Mike Strantz' wife. Again, sorry, I will footnote my references in the future.


And please, spare me your drivel "on a golf forum no less". Look at all the "OT" nonsense today alone. 50% of what is written here has nothing to do with GCA. And I'm discussing cancer prevention, not the usual banal writings of a hobby forum.


Ben, I'm sorry for the distraction.
I'm sorry if I offended people with my view of Mike Strantz' legacy. I hope you all hede your physician's advice and get screened.


My wife is alive today because we caught hers early and acted. I'm guilty of personalizing this. Sorry.

[Mike_Young]

As to Strantz architecture. 
TD mentions he only did 1-1.5 course per year.  I also think he only worked for a couple of owners except for MPCC. 
I'm not sure how his work would have been portrayed over the long haul.  A few supt changes and I could see a lot of course changes for maintenance.
He definitely liked the process and was an artist.  From his artistic sketches to his shaping it was intricate.  I have used one of his shapers (Jones Brothers) and irrigation person from that crew(Maverick Golf Construction) and they were great.  The gentleman who owned Bulls Bay gave them the opportunity to continue as a construction company for a while after Mke's death.  I think they had been fortunate while working for Mike not to have to be limited by budgets so it was a different world. 
There was a lot to like about his work.  For me it was the various elements that make up the course that stood out, such as "aging" of cart path and various mediums of cart path or bridging or bunkering, fairway transitions  and even drainage.   But I'm not sure the shot values and playability were on the same level as the artistic endeavor of his works.  And IMHO it is rare to find courses that stand the test of time unless their intended personality  can be maintained  over the years. 

[John Kavanaugh]

I can only hope that any of you appreciate Mike Young half as much as I do when he is gone as I do today.

[Joe Hancock]

I can only hope that any of you appreciate Mike Young half as much as I do when he is gone as I do today.

This is actually a quite complicated math problem. I’d take a shot at it if it was multiple choice.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()