The Death of Discussion: Consensus vs Groupthink Part 2

[John Kavanaugh]

The rater portal doesn’t help matters. Most of my buddies go from list to list to list.

[John Kirk]

Money plays a significant role, too.  Immaculate playing conditions with fast, smooth greens and perfect bunker conditions are highly coveted.  Massive investment to update great old courses also narrows the competition.

[Mark_Fine]

Ben,
With all due respect, I still though not as often try to create interesting thought provoking threads (some Ira will say are repeated) but over 25 years of posting that will be the case but hopefully one or two newbies will benefit from it.  My main problem is if Tom Doak doesn’t agree with me, then the whole herd here moves in his direction as of course he knows best (but that is not group think is it) 


Jeff Brauer, don’t sell yourself short.  You have had a career most Golf Architects could only dream of having.  What I learned after 20 plus years in this business is that you need a few lucky breaks and a few people to take a chance on you.  Some get them and some don’t. And those lucky breaks are all relative and range from Mike Keiser calling you to design his next course to some no name local course owner asking you for help to notch up their design.  All these breaks/opportunities can set you on your way.  I personally never expected to become the next Pete Dye or … but to have helped make a positive difference on dozens and dozens of different courses over the years is something I could only dream of. Turning a passion into a career is not always easy or possible and most will be naysayers you can’t do it.


There is tons of repetition on this site but mostly only for those who have been on it forever.  If you have heard it before and have nothing constructive to say, just skip the thread.  The biggest change I have noticed over the years is when there is disagreement here, there is now much more disrespect and that is the turnoff to many. 


I would love to see more of the people who are we’ll traveled and have seen and experienced many of the courses we talk about chime in, but they often shy away as they really don’t need the abuse.  That is something I would like to see tempered and maybe we will get them to participate.  Can you imagine the reception a new poster would get if they said, “I am a veteran GD panelist and would love to participate in your forum!”  They would sadly get abused and last about a day before stepping away.  Trust me they have.  If we don’t want so much group think and ass kissers we need more varied opinions and thoughts on this site.  Then we might just get the more varied and candid discussion many of us are looking for. 


John,
I did that PV thread to see how much candid feedback we would get on a course widely viewed at the pinnacle of design.  Have look at it again. I also suggested I believe on the GD thread which you followed through on about posting the overlap on all the top lists. Most of us knew it was significant though few will admit it because they think the GD list is so bad   

[John Kirk]

Hi Mark,


I can't easily find the link for that thread.  Can you post a link or at least give me some key words to help me try and find it?

Thanks.

[John Kirk]

I seem to keep prattling.  Let me share a personal sentiment.

I am disappointed that Old Barnwell did not win the award for GD's Best New Private course.  I have a couple of friends who are OB members and the photos look amazing to me.  By all accounts the course is big and difficult and daring and artistic.  It even sounds like it's hard to lose a ball there.  In photos it looks like it deserves the Oscar.  An award like this would bring attention to the skill and creativity of Brian Schneider and Blake Conant, and arguably open up their career to new opportunities.

Old Barnwell and The Lido debuted in Golf Magazine's Top 100 at #51 and #30 this year, respectively.  It's no surprise there is disappointment for those with so much at stake.

[Tom_Doak]

Ben:


I'm sorry if you are upset or think that I am dismissing your years of study of the topic.  I'm not, I respect it.  I've put in about 45 years now myself -- 50 years if you count reading old books and playing Pebble Beach! 


Do I think I'm doing things the right way?  I sure do.


But.  One of the best lessons I got from Pete Dye was that, "Everything in golf is a matter of opinion.  There is no right way to swing a club, there is no right way to grow grass, and there is no right way to design a golf hole."


His follow up was that since this was true, we have to be confident in our approach -- confident enough to judge the results for ourselves.  It isn't quite like competing at golf where there is a number to show for your work, or like being a superintendent where the results are also subjective but less so, but our end result is on a scale few other jobs can match.  And if we are happy with our work, we can take the criticisms of others in stride.


Being a student of design doesn't give you the chance to prove what you've come to understand, or your ability to apply it, and I understand how frustrating that can be.  Only hard-won opportunities and hard work result in a golf course that others can opine on.  I am lucky to have the chance.

[Mark_Fine]

John,
Look at reply 71 on the Golf Digest Best New Thread. 

[John Kavanaugh]

I believe the quality of discussion has gone down since the elimination of the downvote.

[Ben Sims]

Thanks Tom. I like analogies and I’ll use a couple now.

I recently started a new sport from scratch. It’s really hard. I have good hands and even though I feel good about my legs, skating is hard. But like our experience here at GCA.com, I’m out there with a 10-year NHL defenseman watching me eat shit all over the place. I wonder what that is like for him.

I wonder what it’s like for you, hanging around with a bunch of middle-aged well-meaning try-hards. Can’t be easy.

My opinion is that the groupthink or consensus (doesn’t matter for the purposes of this post) is a product of your patience and involvement here. Having concise and persuasive arguments for years has piled up. Those things Ally calls tropes were heresy 20 years ago.

Whatever staleness or lack of interest happens here at GCA.com, I assure you the groupthink I’ve learned here is still the weird viewpoint in most of the places I hang out. Sure, not in Aiken or Dornoch. But the first tee at most places I play? Over a beer with my local golf buddies? Yeah, I’m the outlier by a lot.

GCA.com is the place I come to reaffirm some of these ideas. I need smart people to provide consensus so I can carry a galvanized idea out into the golf world.

[Tim Martin]

I believe the quality of discussion has gone down since the elimination of the downvote.

[John Kirk]

John,
Look at reply 71 on the Golf Digest Best New Thread.

Thanks Mark,

I will take a look at it soon.

[Sean_A]

Thanks Tom. I like analogies and I’ll use a couple now.

I recently started a new sport from scratch. It’s really hard. I have good hands and even though I feel good about my legs, skating is hard. But like our experience here at GCA.com, I’m out there with a 10-year NHL defenseman watching me eat shit all over the place. I wonder what that is like for him.

I wonder what it’s like for you, hanging around with a bunch of middle-aged well-meaning try-hards. Can’t be easy.

My opinion is that the groupthink or consensus (doesn’t matter for the purposes of this post) is a product of your patience and involvement here. Having concise and persuasive arguments for years has piled up. Those things Ally calls tropes were heresy 20 years ago.

Whatever staleness or lack of interest happens here at GCA.com, I assure you the groupthink I’ve learned here is still the weird viewpoint in most of the places I hang out. Sure, not in Aiken or Dornoch. But the first tee at most places I play? Over a beer with my local golf buddies? Yeah, I’m the outlier by a lot.

GCA.com is the place I come to reaffirm some of these ideas. I need smart people to provide consensus so I can carry a galvanized idea out into the golf world.

This is true. Some folks act as though wide fairways etc have taken over the golf world. In fact, these type of renaissance (intentional small r) courses are very much in the minority in my experience. Went to the Netherlands last year, all top notch inland courses I played had tree issues. Even a C&C I played has tree issues. Most courses do and usually tree issues means compromised grass lines etc. Trees, less than generous fairways, silly rough etc are very much the norm.

Ciao

[Niall C]

My main problem is if Tom Doak doesn’t agree with me, then the whole herd here moves in his direction as of course he knows best (but that is not group think is it) 

Mark


I think your main problem is that when you start a thread and throw out an idea and people respond by challenging that idea, you often don't engage and fight your corner but tend to either deflect or ignore. Sometimes I think the only people you engage with are the ones who agree with you. Them and Tom D.


Niall

[Mark_Fine]

Niall,
Well I sure don’t mean to be disrespectful and hopefully don’t come across that way.  But yes I will defend my position just as one would in a debate but I do appreciate and respect different perspectives and enjoy lively discussion. 

I do like to start threads that might often not be what the majority’s view might be such a one like I believe trees can be a great hazard and will make a strong comeback. Or one like there are no ugly top 100 golf courses and how important the visual aspect of design is to greatness,….  I will defend some of these positions strongly but the idea is to get people thinking outside the consensus     Maybe that is why Tom Doak often disagrees with me.  If I always said the obvious, it doesn’t spark lively discussion.

[Andrew Harvie]

Niall,
Well I sure don’t mean to be disrespectful and hopefully don’t come across that way.  But yes I will defend my position just as one would in a debate but I do appreciate and respect different perspectives and enjoy lively discussion. 

I do like to start threads that might often not be what the majority’s view might be such a one like I believe trees can be a great hazard and will make a strong comeback. Or one like there are no ugly top 100 golf courses and how important the visual aspect of design is to greatness,….  I will defend some of these positions strongly but the idea is to get people thinking outside the consensus     Maybe that is why Tom Doak often disagrees with me.  If I always said the obvious, it doesn’t spark lively discussion.

I suspect in 100 years, when people are researching golf architecture from this period in time, having the ability to look back and see Mark Fine and Tom Doak discussing a topic in an internet forum will be a fascinating discovery for someone interested in the golf architecture deep in research (if this website isn't still going at that time, that is ). I think we, as posters, take it for granted, but thank you for posting—and that goes for every architect in here. It's invaluable to have those opinions and perspectives, especially as you're practising the craft in real-time!

[Niall C]

Andrew


I'm sure they will but I'm not sure who else they will see Mark discuss things with. Every thread he starts seems to be aimed at getting a reaction from Tom D and at times it seems that's all who he seems to be interested in engaging with. Doesn't make him a bad person or invalidate what he's trying to say but you do wonder sometimes whether it's worth posting a response. Possibly that's just me but there you go.


Niall

[Mark_Fine]

Niall,
You are giving Tom Doak too much respect    I sure don’t start threads just to disagree with him.  My threads are always related to golf course architecture and meant to get people thinking whether they agree with me or not or care to respond.  At the same time if I take a strong defensive position on the point I am making, I learn a lot from those to take an opposing position.  It is get to hear different perspectives.  Mike Malone and I for example sometimes differ on opinions (we are both avid Flynn supporters) but I appreciate his perspective and love to hear it.

[Kalen Braley]

Mark,

As a counterpoint to Niall, I generally like your threads and think you are one of the few who combats groupthink in the forum,  whether its intentional or not 

P.S.  I also appreciate Matt S's perspectives; its nice to get a fresh set of eyes in here and he's one of the few who challenges the status quo more often that not.

[Mark_Fine]

Thanks Kalen.  As I said, I do like to challenge what is often seen as the consensus.  As I have said before (sorry again Ira  ) but if it is not broken, you didn’t look hard enough, fix it anyway 

[Tom_Doak]

Thanks Kalen.  As I said, I do like to challenge what is often seen as the consensus.  As I have said before (sorry again Ira  ) but if it is not broken, you didn’t look hard enough, fix it anyway 

Mark:


Since Jeff Brauer used to say one of my main skills was marketing, I thought I would use my expertise to change your above saying just a little and help you out with a new slogan for your business:


"If it's not broken, just hire me."

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
Good slogan!  I like it a lot.  Right or wrong, I have always considered myself an innovator and liked to surround myself with people who are not content with the status quo.  I believe anything can be improved. This includes golf courses/golf course design. 


I know you don’t like to agree with me but you of all people might want to think about this a little bit deeper   


Maybe this will help, “If you think it is perfect, you didn’t look hard enough, find a way to make it better 


Fly Eagles Fly!!!

[Ally Mcintosh]

In some walks of life, Mark, that mantra is a good one. Particularly when talking about oneself. In business we hear this all the time as well: A growth mindset.


But with a lot of golf courses, it’s an absolutely awful starting point. The burden of proof has to be on those who promote change. How about “If it’s not broken, leave it alone and shut the gate on your way out”?

[Simon Barrington]

In some walks of life, Mark, that mantra is a good one. Particularly when talking about oneself. In business we hear this all the time as well: A growth mindset.

But with a lot of golf courses, it’s an absolutely awful starting point. The burden of proof has to be on those who promote change. How about “If it’s not broken, leave it alone and shut the gate on your way out”?

Could not agree more Ally,

(UK) Golf Clubs are full of decision makers who may have followed that mantra/dogma to gain success in their lives in other fields, but without the sensitivity and GCA knowledge required to be custodians of their most important asset (their course).
Too often they are an open door for change (they may even be the ones opening that door towards self-inflicted damage).
Mediocre (and therefore hungry) architects and associated suppliers (sometimes loosely or even directly commercially connected) too happily walk through that open door (they have families to feed, I get that)

In recent years the composition of some memberships and Committees/Boards has changed so much, along with generational windfalls in finances which burn a hole in the pocket of those seeking change.

I never understand why a (newer) golfer is attracted to a historic club and course and joins because it was all they sought (it is not as if other options are not available). Then after a period of time for some reason (usually self engrandisment) they agitate and seek power to change that very thing they were attracted to in the first place. Sometimes this is simply to try and "keep up with the Jones's" locally.

Yes of course we should strive for improvement, but if the course has some genuine proven and researched architectural merit, the level of the bar for change needs to be set far far higher, especially so if that heritage is documented as by noted architect(s).

Change can occur but only after carefully researched understanding of what was there, and importantly why, has been shared with the entire membership for an informed decision on the same. Too often that is omitted or even blocked from being part of the decison making process, and consequently the architectural merit and heritage is damaged (sometimes irreparably).

There has been so much "meh" or worse "damaging" work going on in the UK over recent years and is still on-going.
The formulaic pastiche bunkering epidemic is the most visual part of this, these are equivalent to the damaging mass tree planting "beautification schemes" of the 1970's & 80's. I predict a wave of more thoughtful restorations and renovations is to come in 10-15 years time to rectify this "homogenisation" of so many courses to get back their intent, character, authenticity and uniqueness.

There are some notable UK projects (started or coming) getting wider appreciation that may start to move the needle the right way again (The Addington, St George's Hill, Hadley Wood, Woodhall Spa, Ganton, Burnham & Berrow etc.)

It is encumbent on those that care about such things (those on here perhaps?) to praise the good, educate, and alter the perception of what is really great work. It's hard to do so, but vital to protect what is special that remains out there (or that might be recovered).

Cheers

[Mark_Fine]

Simon,
You said:


“ I predict a wave of more thoughtful restorations and renovations is to come in 10-15 years time to rectify this "homogenisation" of so many courses to get back their intent, character, authenticity and uniqueness.”

I think you will be correct about this statement. I will try to comment more later but I am heading out to a project now and don’t have time to post. 


But just quickly, most architects would never want anyone but themselves to touch their work.  We all totally get that so I understand the comments.  Didn’t Mackenzie talk about golf courses being screwed up by committees.  He was often right about that. 


Eagles are the champions!!

[Mark Pearce]

I was delighted that none of this year's BUDA participants were critical of the renovations at Elie.  The work done there by Robin Hiseman's colleague Ross McMurray was, in my layman's opinion, excellent.  So excellent, in fact, that last Summer I found myself in discussions with other members trying to work out exactly which bunkers had moved.  Elie wasn't broken but did need to make today's young, long players think a bit more.  I think Ross managed that without changing the feel of the course at all.  And that, for me, is success.

[Tags:]

Tags: