News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Matt_Ward

Re:Templates
« Reply #25 on: May 20, 2007, 04:19:00 PM »
Jeff:

It's easy for architects / designers to simply give the masses what they want. You can see that today with fast food and what it has provided the American consumer. No doubt there are practicing architects who don't have the rolodex of contacts and need to keep the checks coming and will provide whatever their client(s) want.

I can understand that primary motivation but I don't have to swallow it whole. Yes, I am in a somewhat different position than the average Joe / Jill who tee it up on the same grouping of courses year after year.

I see my position and vantage point as a way to assess what is happening in the overall nature of golf design. No doubt there will be designers whose niche is really about designing very playable and very user-friendly situations. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

Yet, I do look at different designers and try to evaluate them in terms of their overall growth and the wherewithal to deliver when they do have the benefits of good land and a fair amount on the budget side.

I have weighed in against the likes of Tom Fazio and other architects when I see the proverbial "mail in" effort. To be fair to TF -- there are other names that do likewise and should be held up for reviews in no less the same manner.

Frankly, I see enough architects in the same light as comedians. You hear the same jokes and get the same audience reaction. Therefore, you keep saying the same jokes because the reaction is nearly always guaranteed. From my prospective I like to see if an architect understands the value of "art" in their efforts and seeks to broaden their work beyond what is considered "safe" and "financially viable." No doubt plenty of people in the profession of designing courses would be quick to throw away the promotion of new and art oriented designs if checks for the simple and predictable stuff keep coming in week after week. I see my role and that of others here on GCA and elsewhere to provide a critical assessment in whether the bar of the "art" in architecture is indeed moving forward and going deeper than what is being accepted by the general masses who in many ways think of fast food as being cuisine.

Mike Sweeney

Re:Templates
« Reply #26 on: May 20, 2007, 05:44:57 PM »

But I don't like the idea of it turning into a true template where the entire hole is repeated.  I went around Vaquero in Dallas yesterday and their fourth hole is a Tom Fazio ode to the tenth at Riviera, but with 1/10th the guts of the original ... the green was bigger and less tilted, there was less open ground out to the right to lure you that way, it was a little longer and less driveable.

That's the possibility of templates in today's world ... a total abdication of originality.  Defend it at your peril.


Tom,

Intersting comments as I believe you begin work at Old Macdonald in June?? I never had a view that you would have a "copy" hole on the par four and fives, but when you get to the par threes, aren't your options for diversity somewhat limited? I personally would want to see a bunker/fortified short hole with a wild green. Other than your personal stamp on the green, how many ways can you do a short hole? Same with Redan?

Also wouldn't a big part of the challenge of building a Bottle hole be finding a perfect location in the routing?


paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Templates
« Reply #27 on: May 20, 2007, 06:19:54 PM »
Oh, I don't think Tom will have a problem with Old Macdonald.
I will be very interested in his interpretation of whatever CB was trying to create.....it might even be an improvement over some of the original inspirations.

You can't beat the site and atmosphere...which give it style points before its even out of the blocks.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2007, 06:22:21 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Templates
« Reply #28 on: May 20, 2007, 07:26:50 PM »
Mike:

Yes, Old Macdonald is a bit of a struggle for me ... the only reason I agreed to do it is because there are a lot of holes in that mix which I haven't built a version of before.  We will give them our very best shot and then resolve to leave them alone on future courses, for a while at least.

I have built 4-5 Redans previously and this next one may well be the last, so hopefully we will get it right.  For sure, it will be downwind, with a cross-bunker well short of the green like the original and a bit of downslope on the back of it, so that the run-up approach will often be required.  I hope we do justice to the genre.

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Templates
« Reply #29 on: May 20, 2007, 07:41:44 PM »
See ...with that kind of approach and attitude it should be really good....a hard fought, stressful, consuming piece of cake.

....and in a great underdog position to be the best out there...because most don't expect it to be better than the rest....just a nice card filler.

I'm going with the longer odds.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2007, 07:42:12 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Jim Nugent

Re:Templates
« Reply #30 on: May 20, 2007, 11:59:22 PM »
Mike:

Yes, Old Macdonald is a bit of a struggle for me ... the only reason I agreed to do it is because there are a lot of holes in that mix which I haven't built a version of before.  We will give them our very best shot and then resolve to leave them alone on future courses, for a while at least.

I have built 4-5 Redans previously and this next one may well be the last, so hopefully we will get it right.  For sure, it will be downwind, with a cross-bunker well short of the green like the original and a bit of downslope on the back of it, so that the run-up approach will often be required.  I hope we do justice to the genre.

Tom, do you have the Redan routed yet?  How about the rest of the course?  

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Templates
« Reply #31 on: May 21, 2007, 01:19:13 AM »
Mike:

Yes, Old Macdonald is a bit of a struggle for me ... the only reason I agreed to do it is because there are a lot of holes in that mix which I haven't built a version of before.  We will give them our very best shot and then resolve to leave them alone on future courses, for a while at least.

I have built 4-5 Redans previously and this next one may well be the last, so hopefully we will get it right.  For sure, it will be downwind, with a cross-bunker well short of the green like the original and a bit of downslope on the back of it, so that the run-up approach will often be required.  I hope we do justice to the genre.

Tom,

Sounds a lot like my pre-design and design thought process - thinking about ideas and then looking for both land features AND wind conditions that make sense to make a hole play the way "it should" (a JN phrase I always hate to hear, but will use here)  
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back