home course survey

[Mike McGuire]

Gentlemen -

I would like to find out which holes at my home course give pleasure to the greatest number of players.

I am thinking of a simple survey. Rank the holes from favorite to least favorite. I could then use a spreadsheet to look for patterns etc. Perhaps a column for handicap or....?

Maybe the results would be helpful in deciding which holes to renovate.

My course is a schtzophrenic Langford/1930 -Gill/1960

Does anyone have any ideas on how to word/do/not do this?

What if the Gill holes prove to be more popular?

Thanks for the help

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gentlemen -

I would like to find out which holes at my home course give pleasure to the greatest number of players.

I am thinking of a simple survey. Rank the holes from favorite to least favorite. I could then use a spreadsheet to look for patterns etc. Perhaps a column for handicap or....?

Maybe the results would be helpful in deciding which holes to renovate.

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS EXERCISES YOU COULD EMBARK ON, DESIGN BY POPULARITY.

WHAT A FORMULA FOR FAILURE AND THE DISFIGUREMENT OF YOUR CURRENT GOLF COURSE.  

DESIGN BY COMMITTEE[/COLOR]

My course is a schtzophrenic Langford/1930 -Gill/1960

Does anyone have any ideas on how to word/do/not do this?


DON'T DO IT ![/color]

What if the Gill holes prove to be more popular?

Thanks for the help

Mike

[RJ_Daley]

Is this WBCC?  Aren't there some component of Gill remodeled by Hill holes?  Generally, resist remodelling Langford with anyone except someone intimately familiar with his work and style.  

What if they rank the Gill holes higher than Langford?  I think this falls into the good court room tactics we sometimes hear.  Never ask a question you don't already know what the answer is.

I guess I'd try to have a few categories on each hole and a 1-5 scale, don't like the feature at all 1; to I think the feature is great design 5...

tee shot variety and challenge
options off tee i.e. line of charm, carry hazards, width and slopes
hazards ratio of challenge to approach length and angles
alternate strategies
fairway presentation and contours
interesting green (contours, tie ins, relationship to hazards in surrounds)
pin locations and variety

[TEPaul]

"What if the Gill holes prove to be more popular?"

So what if they do? Do you think the club is more interested in an architect's name or more interested in playing holes every day that they like?

This is a question that I hope Tom MacWood answers. If he stays true to his constant theme he probably should say he thinks the Langford holes should be preserved because they're more historically significant to an expert golf reseacher/writer from Ohio despite the fact he may never have seen the course and it really doesn't matter what the membership of the golf club thinks!  

[Tyler Kearns]

Mike,

Follow Mr. Mucci's suggestions, and do not plan renovations based on popularity. Perhaps a detailed survey could be sent to the membership along with their monthy statement, and the responses could then be given to a golf architect, who would then plan changes (if necessary) with consideration & judicious professional opinion given to the results. I would hate to see a golf course altered solely based on the results of a membership survey - but it is a start, and a gauge of the level of satisfaction the members have for their course. A golf architect must be consulted to filter through the survey results and see the course personally to decide which answers have true merit. Popularity could only be used as a means of deciding which of many smaller projects to begin with if a multi-year renovation scheme is approved by the governing body of the club.

TK

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tyler Kearns,

I learned years ago that surveys sent to members indicated one thing.

Rudderless management/leaders.

[Mike McGuire]

 Patrick mucci wrote:

Tyler Kearns,

I learned years ago that surveys sent to members indicated one thing.

Rudderless management/leaders.

 (how do you do that box thing around the previous post?)

Patrick:

Perhaps I should have commented in the "Restorations most elusive element - maintaing the vision thread", for I'm asking a related question.  My limited elegance in communication is imposssible to conceal.

I should/could have asked "If it is obvious (to the expert architect) what should be done, what tools are usefull to get the membership to agree on a heading" ?

[Tyler Kearns]

Pat,

From a financial perspective, I can only hazard to guess that renovation & restoration work at well established clubs is not in the best fiscal interest of the club - it's not going to attract new membership or yield more meal consumption at the club. Architecturally, it's another story altogether, but let's be honest, most golfers do not care much about golf architecture - and if they'll feel it in their wallet, they are even less inclined to care.

A survey sent to the membership does not need to be followed strictly. Why send it? To find out where the desires of the membership and the professional opinion of the architect overlap. How much selling of the master plan he'll need to do. It would certainly be much easier and more efficient to work alongside a benevolent autocrat, but that's not the norm. Memberships are increasingly diverse (playing ability), and if money is being allocated for renovations, all categories want to contribute their $.02 and that can be accomplished by survey. I think one of an architect's primary goals is to try and accomodate the many needs of the membership, while staying true to his architectural vision for the course.

TK

[Tyler Kearns]

Patrick mucci wrote:

Tyler Kearns,

I learned years ago that surveys sent to members indicated one thing.

Rudderless management/leaders.

 (how do you do that box thing around the previous post?)

Mike,

Hit the quote icon in the top right hand corner of the desired reply box, to the left of the modify & delete icons.

TK

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike McGuire,

Please don't take any of this as personal. I'm just trying to answer, or at least give an opinion on the root of the question.

I have to agree with Patrick. Any survey asking for a grading of golf holes, 1-18 is pure ridiculous. What makes it even more puzzling is when a person like Tom Paul, a person who is generally negative on any kind of rankings, would support it.

No, I see this as a pure disaster in the making, and the chances of Gill building better golf holes then Biddle, well you do the math. I'm not going to say that he isn't capable, but the chances are pretty weighted.

Instead of a survey, tell your green committee to elect one person who is willing to take the time to commit to a "master history" if you will. He'll have to be good at research, digging-up materials on the history of the course, and generally be able to be the authority whose voice should be listened to when it comes to direction at the club.

Do a definitive guide to each and every golf hole and how it has changed throughout the years so you can show your band of merry committemem what mistakes they and their predecssors have made in the past, and that has gotten the course into the condition that it is currently-in. Don't get me wrong, you guys all might like the course exactly as it is, but just the thought of you calling for such a survey is reason enough to understand that like most courses like it--your all screwed-up BY COMMITTEE.

Get aerial photos; search for pictures and articles about the course. You'll have a blast while doing it and the members will undoubtedly look to you as the person that knows the history of the course better then anyone. This adds to them wanting you to oversee it, or any political position you might be going for with-in the club's inner-workings.

Good luck with it all. Your going to need it!

[Patrick_Mucci]

I should/could have asked "If it is obvious (to the expert architect) what should be done, what tools are usefull to get the membership to agree on a heading" ?

If the membership doesn't know what they want, they'll probably end up getting what they don't want.

Why does their need to be a heading ?

What's wrong with your course as it is ?

Design or playability problems usually manifest themselves to the broad base of the membership, hence, the membership is already aware of them.  If that is the case, then interviewing several architects and telling them what the club's COLLECTIVE architectural or playability problems are would seem to make sense, with the club eventually selecting A CONSULTING ARCHITECT WHO IS KEPT ON RETAINER.

Make sure that you understand that if you present an issue to five different architects, you may get five different opinions on the issue.

My concern with your original post was that you seemed to have made a decision that something was wrong, but, you didn't know what it was, and wanted to engage in a survey to see what the members would like to see changed.

That's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard of.[/color]

I think, when it comes to country/golf clubs that you may be young, inexperienced and naive, and I don't mean that in a condescending or unpleasant way.

Surveys at clubs are a terrible idea and reflect that the leadership isn't already in touch with the needs of the members, or that the leadership lacks vision and wisdom.

While noone knows the single formula for success, surely, the formula for failure is to try to please everybody.

[Jeff Goldman]

Mike,

I have not seen WB, but have heard that it has some outstanding Langford features.  Do you have any pictures?  Anyways, if you are concerned about losing the Langford holes, you could try letting the members know how highly Langford is thought of, that Lawsonia in the middle of nowhere is highly ranked, that they are blessed to have original Langford work after so much of his work has been changed, and that they should be proud to have 9 classic holes by him, which makes the club more exclusive for it.  Then, if they are going to be changed, invite us out to see it before it goes!  

Jeff Goldman

[Tyler Kearns]

I think, when it comes to country/golf clubs that you may be young, inexperienced and naive, and I don't mean that in a condescending or unpleasant way.

Surveys at clubs are a terrible idea and reflect that the leadership isn't already in touch with the needs of the members, or that the leadership lacks vision and wisdom.

While noone knows the single formula for success, surely, the formula for failure is to try to please everybody.[/b]

Pat,

Figuring the bold type of your last reply was directed at me, I would agree to being naive regarding the politics of country club golf. I play golf, and try to avoid the politics - unless they are regarding the architecture of the course.

Architects are problem-solvers, but if they try to please everybody without a sound design philosophy to guide the work, it will fail miserably. Within the framework of an architectural vision, it would seem foolish to ignore the demands of the membership if they do not compromise the overall integrity of the project. I'm not suggesting adding a new forward tee because one member cannot carry a creek that bisects the centreline of the hole. A much broader concensus needs to be achieved, and if the resulting work would "give the greatest pleasure to the greatest number" (Alister Mackenzie) than it is probably a good idea.

TK

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tyler,

Architects are problem-solvers, but if they try to please everybody without a sound design philosophy to guide the work, it will fail miserably.

What architects, working today, don't have a sound design philosophy ?[/color]

Within the framework of an architectural vision, it would seem foolish to ignore the demands of the membership if they do not compromise the overall integrity of the project.
How  can the demands of the entire membership NOT compromise the overall integrity of the project ?[/color]

I'm not suggesting adding a new forward tee because one member cannot carry a creek that bisects the centreline of the hole.

A much broader concensus needs to be achieved, and if the resulting work would "give the greatest pleasure to the greatest number" (Alister Mackenzie) than it is probably a good idea.

And you think that surveys will tell the architect how he should design the golf course for the entire membership.

That's an interesting perspective.

Let me be the first to suggest that you stick to just playing golf.[/color]

[Tyler Kearns]

Pat,

I can't do the green type thing you do so well, so I'll try to answer your questions numerically.

1. I never said that any golf architects working today does not have a sound design philosophy, I was simply trying to express that no architect would cater whimsically to every need expressed by the membership - something you incinuated earlier. I'm actually agreeing with you here, no architect would look at a survey of the membership and piece together a renovation without an overall design strategy.

2. a) Once again, I never said appease all the membership at any cost, in this case, the integrity of the project. The architect should have the ability to filter the opinions of the membership through his well-trained and expert opinion. He is not contracturally binded to the survey! I'm not 100% sold on the idea of a survey, but it doesn't necessarily hurt the proposed work.
    b) The will of the membership is not by law diametrically opposed to the ideas of the architect.

3. Wouldn't it belittle an architect if he let a survey "design" for him. Why hire an architect if his professional opinion will not be consulted? I never stated that the architect is contracturally obliged to replicate the survey results on the ground.

TK

[Patrick_Mucci]

1. I never said that any golf architects working today does not have a sound design philosophy, I was simply trying to express that no architect would cater whimsically to every need expressed by the membership -
something you incinuated earlier.

Would you cite, exactly, where I'm alleged to have insinuated this ?[/color]

2. a) Once again, I never said appease all the membership at any cost, in this case, the integrity of the project.

The architect should have the ability to filter the opinions of the membership through his well-trained and expert opinion.

Why should the architect listen to any opinions ?
He is the professional that they hired.
Shouldn't they be listening to HIS opinions ?[/color]

He is not contracturally binded to the survey! I'm not 100% sold on the idea of a survey, but it doesn't necessarily hurt the proposed work.

Sure it does.
It conveys the thought that the membership can help design the golf course, that special interest groups will have a say in the design of the course.  It's a TERRIBLE concept.

Architects forge a tactical challenge without any leanings toward any special interest groups within a club.

The next time that you hear that a family member needs brain surgery, bypass surgery or an organ transplant, send out a survey to everyone you know to see how the doctor should go about his work.  I'm sure you'll get good results, and the professional will welcome all of the various suggestions.[/color]
 
b) The will of the membership is not by law diametrically opposed to the ideas of the architect.

As I said before, you're very naive.[/color]

3. Wouldn't it belittle an architect if he let a survey "design" for him. Why hire an architect if his professional opinion will not be consulted? I never stated that the architect is contracturally obliged to replicate the survey results on the ground.

So let's say that you send out a survey to your members, all 500 of them, and that all 500 respond.  And, let's say that the architect has provided a rendering that is completely at odds with the result of the survey.  THEN WHAT ?

Get a new architect that agrees with your membership's design ideas ?

Do you go to a great number of doctors for consultation on a  serious medical problem until you find one doctor that agrees with your families opinion ?


Tyler, you don't get it.
It doesn't work and causes more problems then it solves.
[/color]

[Tyler Kearns]

"Would you cite, exactly, where I'm alleged to have insinuated this ?"

And you think that surveys will tell the architect how he should design the golf course for the entire membership.

"Why should the architect listen to any opinions ?"

Because it is not his money that is being spent. It seems a little un-professional to not at least listen to the concerns of the membership. When an architect presents a planned renovation to a golf club, it is not subjected to a pass/fail vote, it will slowly evolve over time through discussion with those involved at the club. If issues brought up by membership are short-sighted or plain old wrong, the architect will tactfully express that it is not in the best interest of the club.

"He is the professional that they hired.
Shouldn't they be listening to HIS opinions ?"

Absolutely, I have not said anything to the contrary.

I said; "He is not contracturally binded to the survey!"

"Sure it does.
It conveys the thought that the membership can help design the golf course, that special interest groups will have a say in the design of the course.  It's a TERRIBLE concept."

I do not think an architect would agree to be contracturally bound to the survey results. It would tie his hands and limit any type of creative freedom. Why can't the survey simply gauge how willing the membership would be to a possible renovation at the club, and the extent of said work?

I said: "b) The will of the membership is not by law diametrically opposed to the ideas of the architect."

"As I said before, you're very naive."

I did not know they had proven that as fact! Based on your logic, architects who specialize in restoration work (Ron Forse/Brian Silva for example) are constantly trying to sell restoration to a club. Have they not built up a reputation of sensitive restoration that leads golf clubs to hire them to fulfill their mandate to restore their course to its past glory?  

"So let's say that you send out a survey to your members, all 500 of them, and that all 500 respond.  And, let's say that the architect has provided a rendering that is completely at odds with the result of the survey.  THEN WHAT ?"

The scenario you present is obviously a worst case situation, but the decision rests with the architect. Does he value his own professional opinion and forge ahead to try and convince the membership that his plans are in the best interest of the club? Or does he sell-out because he needs to feed his family? Or walk away? The leadership of the golf club is comprised of members, and just because they have been elected to the board does not necessarily mean that they will not oppose the will of the architect. Because of this, the scenario you present can happen whether a survey is distributed or not.

TK

[Tyler Kearns]

Why should the architect listen to any opinions ?
He is the professional that they hired.
Shouldn't they be listening to HIS opinions ?[/b][/color]

So using this logic, you'de give an architect "carte blanche" to deisgn a new home for your family, and/or renovate your exist house.

TK

[Patrick_Mucci]

Why should the architect listen to any opinions ?
He is the professional that they hired.
Shouldn't they be listening to HIS opinions ?[/color]

So using this logic, you'de give an architect "carte blanche" to deisgn a new home for your family, and/or renovate your exist house.

That's YOUR convoluted logic, not mine.

You keep insisting that sending the membership a survey is the way to go, and it isn't.

You didn't answer my question regarding the resolution of the conflict between your survey results and the architect's plan.

HOW would you resolve that ?[/color]

TK

[Tyler Kearns]

The scenario you present is obviously a worst case situation, but the decision rests with the architect. Does he value his own professional opinion and forge ahead to try and convince the membership that his plans are in the best interest of the club? Or does he sell-out because he needs to feed his family? Or walk away?

TK

[Tyler Kearns]

Pat,

I'm only suggesting that sending a survey is A WAY to go, not THE way to go.

TK

[Mike McGuire]

This topic appears to have run its course.

Unofficialy I have Mr. Mucci winning 2 & 1

How about a survey on which trees to remove....?

Thanks for all your input. Invaluable as allways

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike McQuire,

I'd rather cut down all the trees, THEN send out a survey to see which ones the members thought we should have kept.