What is more important?

[Jon Wiggett]

Several GCA’s have said that a good golf course design is almost always controversial. So faced with a project where the designer has the option to build something that is very accectable for the market at the moment but feels that a more controversial design that he prefers will make the course much more famous and maybe profitable in the long term, what should he do?    

[Jeff_Brauer]

Good question, and its a tough call.  Sometimes controversial does mean famous and profitable, and sometimes it means selling it on the auction block.  Only time tells which is which, although you up your chances by doing a good design in general.

I have 'sandbagged" a few owners into building better courses than they felt the market needed, and none has regretted it. Controversial?  Not sure about that.

[JESII]

I have 'sandbagged" a few owners into building better courses than they felt the market needed, and none has regretted it.

I love that line.

[Matt_Ward]

Jon:

You have to help me out when you say building a course that is "very acceptable" and one that is "more controversial."

I don't know what you mean when you say such terms. It would help if you defined both situations with clear examples that you believe would fit each instance.

One person's "acceptable" can easily be someone else's "controversial and vice versa.

Thanks ...

[Jon Wiggett]

Hi Matt,

by acceptable I am really thinking about the holes and courses that you sometimes see that never offend or excite. In my neck of the woods in Switzerland there are such courses by the dozen. The Architect or who ever has removed all things that might be 'unfair' or upseting. What is more important creating a challanging course or one that no one can really complain about (except maybe it is not challanging). Hope this helps, it is not so easy to put in a few words