That dreaded "middle architect"

[Ted Sturges]

There are countless examples of classic courses hiring an architect in the 70's to "modernize" their golf course.  A prime example I can think of is Camargo bringing in Robert Von Hagge in 1963.  Tom Doak's firm came in 3 decades later to "erase" the Von Hagge fingerprints and restore the course to the Seth Raynor original design principles.  Tom Doak and others have spent good parts of their careers "fixing" the work done by the dreaded "middle architect" and putting the courses back to the way they were originally designed.  Those middle architects created a great deal of work for others to do.

But what if the "middle architect" is the original architect?  What comes to mind for me (living in Indianapolis) is how Crooked Stick looked in the 60's, how it has been "modernized" by Mr. Dye himself. Will someone eventually make a name for himself by "restoring" work back to original Dye design specifications, that was in fact changed by Mr. Dye himself?

TS

[Ron Farris]

Yes, Dye courses will be restored, destroyed, and mangled.

[John Kavanaugh]

Thank God that railroad ties do not last forever.  It would be hard to make a Dye course worse.

[Randy Thompson]

Ted,
Uff! Von Hagge in 1963 was recently out on his own. I have hard time grasping that a club would hire somebody relatively new without an established track record and let him loose to implement whatever change he saw fit. I would imagine back then it was similar to now and when you get involved in a re-do you do more listening in what the clubs want than you do telling them what they need. Unless of course you have built a market perception that you really really know what your talking about and that normally takes decades. Even then, you still have to educate as a teacher and sell like a top salesman. IMO a lot of the sutff being restored in the last decade, were poor design changes made by different club officials(directly or indirectly) rather than, middle architects.

[Tom_Doak]

Ted,
Uff! Von Hagge in 1963 was recently out on his own. I have hard time grasping that a club would hire somebody relatively new without an established track record and let him loose to implement whatever change he saw fit. I would imagine back then it was similar to now and when you get involved in a re-do you do more listening in what the clubs want than you do telling them what they need. Unless of course you have built a market perception that you really really know what your talking about and that normally takes decades. Even then, you still have to educate as a teacher and sell like a top salesman. IMO a lot of the sutff being restored in the last decade, were poor design changes made by different club officials(directly or indirectly) rather than, middle architects.

Randy:

Not in that particular case.  The story was that while Dick Wilson was working on Coldstream across town, his associate came to Camargo and told them they had fallen behind the times and needed to modernize.  Pete Dye told them at the time they were crazy to mess with Raynor's work, but they went ahead anyway; Pete sent me twenty years later when they called him back.

I don't really know how Mr. von Hagge justified his work as "modernization", since he did not lengthen Camargo much at all ... all he really did was to take Raynor's bunkers and style them up by bringing in fill and making odd shapes and capes and bays up the banks of those steep Raynor faces.  I still have some pictures of it somewhere ... I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but this work surely did not fit my eye.

[David_Elvins]

I wonder how many courses had a pond added to one of the last three holes during the 50s-70s.

[Randy Thompson]

Ted,
Uff! Von Hagge in 1963 was recently out on his own. I have hard time grasping that a club would hire somebody relatively new without an established track record and let him loose to implement whatever change he saw fit. I would imagine back then it was similar to now and when you get involved in a re-do you do more listening in what the clubs want than you do telling them what they need. Unless of course you have built a market perception that you really really know what your talking about and that normally takes decades. Even then, you still have to educate as a teacher and sell like a top salesman. IMO a lot of the sutff being restored in the last decade, were poor design changes made by different club officials(directly or indirectly) rather than, middle architects.

Randy:

Not in that particular case.  The story was that while Dick Wilson was working on Coldstream across town, his associate came to Camargo and told them they had fallen behind the times and needed to modernize.  Pete Dye told them at the time they were crazy to mess with Raynor's work, but they went ahead anyway; Pete sent me twenty years later when they called him back.

I don't really know how Mr. von Hagge justified his work as "modernization", since he did not lengthen Camargo much at all ... all he really did was to take Raynor's bunkers and style them up by bringing in fill and making odd shapes and capes and bays up the banks of those steep Raynor faces.  I still have some pictures of it somewhere ... I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but this work surely did not fit my eye.

Tom,
Interesing, you obviously are in a better position to give insight in this particular case and I appreciate you sharing that insight. Impressive, that although his work didnīt fit your eye, you still showed him the respect that I feel he deserves by refering to him as, Mr von Hagge. Well done!

[Adam Clayman]

Ted, I suspect Poppy Hills will fit the bill as one where the middle was the same as the original.

There's a funny story about it, but due to sense and sensibilities, I won't share in public.

Have fun in Inverness.

[Ted Sturges]

Interesting responses, and thanks for the clarification Tom Doak.  But...my original post asked a question nobody addressed.  My question was, "what if the middle architect was the original architect?".  I don't think Crooked Stick is the only example of Mr. Dye continuing to "update" one of his courses over the years.  Not that the ratings panelists have established themselves as "authorities", but it is at least a little interesting to note that Crooked Stick has consistently dropped in the rankings over the years, while The Golf Club (where Mr. Dye has not "updated" the course) has remained highly regarded on these types of rankings lists.  One can definitely make the argument that Crooked Stick was better in the 60's and 70's than it is today.  Will someone, someday be hired by CS to "restore" the course to what it was in its early days?  Will someone be hired to "erase" the fingerprints of the middle architect there? 

TS

[Tom_Doak]

Ted:

I'm one of those people who thought Crooked Stick was better [or at least, more interesting] when I first saw it in 1981, than after Mr. Dye changed it.  It was really something of an experimental design, with particular holes that paid homage to Ross and Tillinghast and Macdonald and MacKenzie, though not intentionally a replica course in any way.  It was a bit disjointed as a result, but it made for an interesting study.  The nines were also built two years apart due to financing issues, which gave Pete time to think about things and change his ideas a bit before he proceeded with the front nine, which I believe was the later of the two.

However, Crooked Stick is so personal to Pete Dye, that I can't imagine anyone ever thinking about changing the course away from what Mr. Dye has done there, until everyone who knew him is dead and gone.  I certainly never would.  I thought it was a shame that he erased some of that experimentation, but I believe Pete saw some of it [especially the original 17th] as flawed work and something that he always wanted to fix.  And who the hell would argue with the designer himself?  There were a couple such things at High Pointe, too, and I'm of two minds as to what I should do about those if I ever get to resuscitate it.

Perhaps, sixty years from now when things are booming again, some up and coming young architect will rationalize that he's gotta pay the bills, and some idiot green chairman [hopefully not one of your grandkids] will think he's doing the right thing to change it all back ... although the world will have to be a very different place, if they're going to put back all those 4% and 5% hole locations they used to have before 1991.  But I fear for their souls.