Can't We Just NOT Get Along? RTJ and Wilson As Case Examples

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sports Illustrated in 1962 ran an article on the design business, specifically RTJ and Dick Wilson.

Click on this sentence for the link to this entertaining article.

It starts with their critical comments of the each other's work.  Do architects still offer public comments like these, or have they gone for self-censorship?  If the latter, doesn't that keep the golfing public -- and clients -- uneducated and in the dark on what good architecture is supposed to be?  How can an ignorant public and misguided clients be a good thing?

Would healthy debate and criticism among and by professionals who know what they're talking about improve the quality of golf for all?

Article excerpt:

"Wilson is a fine architect," says Jones charitably, "but he tends to mimic a bit too much. He uses some holes over and over again, and he builds too many doglegs. On some courses he'll dogleg 14 of the 18 holes."

"Jones is a nice fella and a good friend of mine," says Wilson, just as charitably. "But as far as his work is concerned, I think he gives an impression of too many straight lines. Straight lines are something you want to get away from."

"Wilson copies a lot of our ideas," says Jones, jabbing away relentlessly. "The long tees, the flanked trapping. We got a lot of fun out of this last year when we were putting in the Country Club of Miami and Wilson was near by building Doral. He'd come over to our course, take a look at some of the things we were doing, then run back and put the same things in at Doral. And another thing, I could design a course that everyone would think had been done by Wilson, but he couldn't ever build a Jones course."

"For heaven's sake!" (or words to that effect), says Wilson. "If I'd wanted to copy anything I'd have picked a better course than the Country Club of Miami. I never copied a golf hole in my life, even one of my own. Besides, Jones's work is too much on the artificial, manufactured side to suit me. It doesn't fit the ground as well as it should because he hasn't made enough effort to fit it. Even from the very first his work never showed this effort. Look at it like this. You can put a beautiful woman in an expensive dress, but if the dress doesn't fit, neither the woman nor the dress is going to look any good at all. It's the same with building a golf course. You got to cut the course to fit the property."

Thanks,
Mark

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mark,

A very enjoyable read.

For proof that Wilson wasn't much of a prophet, I refer to the "plastic pipe will never work" comment!  It didn't work at Royal Montreal, either because the system had excessive velocities or because early PVC pipe was weak, probably the former.

Overall, your question of "does less inter-architecting critcism deny the public of an education?" The answer is, IMHO, not much is lost.  Whenever any gca talks about his competitors work, most of the talk can be boiled down to "That's not how I would do it."  We tend to look at the differences in philosophy.  Funny thing is, in many ways, Wilson and RTJ courses are all sort of lumped together in a view of the "50's style" that was considered great then and mediocre now. (best courses of both excluded)

BTW, I would agree with Jones that Wilson did copy his "flanking bunkers and long tees."  Long tees by necessity as the game grew.  Flanking bunkers, I just can't think of another example of that previous to Jones at Oakland Hills.  And, he wrote an article about that concurrent with the redesign.  To think flanking every landing area was a revolutionary idea!  Perhaps RTJ should have seen how that worked at country club after country club, rather than open after open, before making it a staple of design.

I also agree that Wilson used to many doglegs, but did Jones adopt that?  Hazeltine was infamous for them, and I recall too many at the few RTJ courses I have played as well.  (Count me in the "doesn't like too many or too sharp dogleg camp)

I wonder if Wilson would have gotten more acclaim by doing something completely opposite of Jones rather than adopting his mindset (Augusta Par 5's are only par 4.5? - now that was a staple of the Jones/Mac design their that has remained in spades)

I think Wilson's swipe at Jones straight lines was grounded in his field mentality.  Only in the field could you remove trees on a gracefully curving line to replicate nature. Even today, I am amazed at how little thought goes into many clearing lines that turn out dead straight.

[wsmorrison]

Jones is way off base if he thinks long tees were his idea.  They were around 40-50 years before his comments.  One only has to look at Flynn's tees at Merion and elsewhere to determine that the feature didn't start with RTJ. 

[Jeff_Mingay]

Thanks for this link, Mark. I'd heard about this article, but had not read it, until today. Very interesting.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

RTJ's remarks about doglegs might have been triggered by a recent visit to Deepdale, where they're the rule rather than the exception.

I was/am a great fan of Wilson, having played a few of his courses.

One can't overlook Wilson's influences, his early employer.

Merion and Shinnecock certainly have their share of doglegs.

[Mike_Young]

Am I correct that Wilson never got into ASGCA?  Didn't RTJ have something to do with that.  Don't think joe Lee did either.....I have always heard they had a continuous running battle.....
BTW....Wilson is one of my favorites.....

[Gary Slatter]

Mark, thanks for the link.  Also nice to see favourable mention of Dick Wilson on this site.  I have always liked Dick Wilson designs and can't recall one of them having being improved on when redone.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Great article.  I am always struck by how some issues change so little over time. 

I was lucky enough to have played Hole in the Wall in Naples over the two decades my father was a member.  While pretty narrow in spots it provided proof of Willsons desire to make the golf course appear more difficult than it really was, although I was never able to score very well as the narrow fairways, particularly on the front nine, the small putting surfaces and the wind conspired to make par tantalizingly near while remaining out of reach. 

I also wonder whether Wilson's volatile nature was in good part due to his infamous consumption of spirits.  He needed good design associates to get through some projects. 

Finally, what can be said about Pine Tree?  Has anyone played it?  I admit that before today I had never heard of the golf course.  The website makes it seem very exclusive.

http://www.pinetreegolfclub.net/index.htm

[Mike_Young]

WH,
I think Pinetree could pass as the best golf course in FL.

Mike

[Clyde Johnston]

Am I correct that Wilson never got into ASGCA?  Didn't RTJ have something to do with that.  Don't think joe Lee did either.....I have always heard they had a continuous running battle.....
BTW....Wilson is one of my favorites.....

Wilson and Lee were never members of ASGCA. I also don't recall any stories about RTJ keeping Wilson out of ASGCA.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Pine Tree looks fantastic. Was it Ron Forse and Jim Nagle who redid the bunkers, recently? They look great in the photos at the club's web site. I presume many other Dick Wilson-designed courses are do for a thoughtful retrofit.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Clyde and Mike,

I do recall some rumors that RTJ kept Wilson out, or that Wilson stayed out because of their rivalry. I don't think we will ever know for sure.

As to Lee, VonHagge, and other Wilson proteges (up to Kelly Blake Moran) I suspect they still are reluctant to join ASGCA on account of bad feelings passed down by Wilson.  That has started to change, with some Von Hagge associates (Rick Baril who posts here every so often) having joined.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Jeff

Getting back to a comment you made in your initial reply, why wouldn't it be good for architects to be more frank in their public comments relating to architecture?

Private / whisper campaigns + non-architectural criticisms: the harm of those types of comments I understand.

But is the objection to public architectural criticisms that it may hurt an architect's business, and if so then isn't the real problem the architectural ignorance of clients?  In which case, wouldn't sunshine / open forums of discussion help educate them?

If the comments are made in a publication, then by putting them out there the subject is given the opportunity to be made aware of those comments and to reply.

Mark

[Tom_Doak]

Mark:

There are four reasons I know of why different golf course architects hated The Confidential Guide (and would presumably hate any other organized form of critique):

1.  Golf architecture is a VERY personal endeavour and personal criticism always stings at first, whether you later agree with it or not.

2.  Some architects believe golf architecture is a profession a la engineering, where the main goal is simply to build something that drains and functions and meets the budget ... to them, criticism on aesthetic or even golfing grounds is unwarranted.

3.  Some architects believe that golf architecture is entirely a matter of opinion, and that criticism has basis only for one individual at a time.

4.  Some architects are just happy to have a career in the business, and react violently to anyone who might suggest that others' work is superior, because it might affect their chances for future employment.  I believe this last reason is the basis of most architects refusing to say anything critical of others "on the record." 

Off the record, of course, is an entirely different story.  Dick Wilson didn't care for these niceties (or else he was in a bar when he made his comments) and so the gloves came off and Jones and others weren't afraid to fire back (especially since Wilson wasn't a member of the ASGCA).

[Craig Van Egmond]

Mark,

            Thanks for posting the link for that article, what an interesting read, hard to believe that was over 45 years ago. The more I hear/read about Dick Wilson the more I like him.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Tom

Thanks for the reply.

Re #1: "In making a course which is likely to be of a permanent character, it is absolutely essential that it be constructed not simply on up-to-date lines but rather ahead of the times.  Do not slavishly copy existing features in other links, try and make features which other clubs attempt to copy.  If you have done your work originally you are bound to be criticized." -- Alister MacKenzie

Re #2: Santiago Calatrava.

Re #3: an argument favoring criticism.  Interesting for its juxtaposition to objection #2!

Re #4: then are magazine course rankings "criticism"? Sure sounds like it -- well, they're more like drive-by criticism: a slap offered without explanation.

Mark

[Mike_Young]

TD,
There is a 5th reason also.....

5.  Some of those architects actually take themselves seriously.....  

[Kalen Braley]

Seems like both of these guys are just spewing the same FUD that any salesperson would do about thier competitor.  I don't see it as anything unusual except that most people wouldn't take it personally, but would just understand its apart of the game.