Just released on Golfweek.com:


(GOLFWEEK STAFF)

Preliminary plans for the fourth course at Bandon Dunes Golf Resort in Bandon, Ore., call for Tom Doak and his design associate, Jim Urbina, to do a retro-classical course. The new layout, to be called "Old Macdonald," will be based on themes and design principles that evoke the work of legendary architect Charles Blair Macdonald, whose most famous work (nearly a century ago) was National Golf Links of America in Southampton, N.Y.

The new course is to be located immediately to the east of the resort's Doak-designed Pacific Dunes layout. In an attempt to promote the kind of collaborative effort that was often a part of classic design, Bandon Dunes principal owner and developer Mike Keiser, is assembling a team of design consultants.

Among the members of that consulting team will be Macdonald-biographer George Bahto; former National Golf Links of America superintendent, Karl Olson, now the head greenkeeper at Desert Forest Golf Club in Carefree, Az.; and Golfweek architecture editor Bradley S. Klein. Other design experts are expected to be named to the consulting team, which has its first meeting at the end of October.

Klein, who has been with Golfweek since 1988, has written five books on golf course

design, including, "Discovering Donald Ross," winner of the USGA International Book Award for 2001.

Congrats to Brad, Uncle George and Karl Olson for being part of this soon to be famous project.

This is really shaping up to be an exciting project.  It seems appropriate that a course honoring the work of MacDonald and Raynor, will be built on perhaps America's best linksland.  

MacDonald and Raynor have their gem in the northeast on coastal Long Island and Team MacDonald will have their gem in the northwest on coastal Oregon.

I look forward to the end result but frankly, I don't think it is so bold.  There are already dozens of homage courses to CB Macdonald.  They were built by Raynor, Banks and Langford.  Conceptual remakes have already been made.  You really want another Biarritz, Short, etc.?  

While I like the idea of collaboration, I think most architects, especially Doak, already practice collaboration in their own original efforts.  Not to be too much of a damper, but I would rather have seen the works of another architect, especially one not so well known in America.  Rod Whitman for talent and experience or some up and comer.  That would be another bold stroke by Keiser.  Or another approach would be to let Tom Doak have absolute freedom.  That would end up being both bold and likely great.

As I said on the other thread, I think that such a wide range of experts will need a grand arbitruer to make final decisions.  I think that arb is George.  I also took a flier at who the other 9 on the team could be and named many constructors and archies.  Maybe they don't exactly need that many more archies. But, I also think it is good to have Brad, and Karl Olson.  A super that knows the nuances of maintaining those features really helps.  And, while Brad dabbled in design as a collaborator, he isn't an archie, just a critic/commentator and well steeped in the traditions. Why not Geoff Shack as well?  Oh hell Tommy, why not go up there and make'em all an offer for your input that they can't refuse!

I forsee many long nights around a bottle of favorite beverages whilst working on this one!  So, maybe you ought to have TEP there too.

I'd imagine that, to most, it rings more of McKinsey than MacDonald..

Great line, Shivas... although having worked with McKinsey on a project, I think you are selling them short on their ability to apply tired, formulaic thinking to just about any problem... and get incredibly well-paid for their efforts.

Not that I know Tom Doak apart from a few exchanges here, but having seen a number of his courses and read a couple hundred of his posts, I would venture that he probably has more creative problem-solving abilities in his pinkie-finger than the average McKinsey consultant.

Beyond the final product, I think the most interesting thing about this project is Brad Klein and Tom Doak working on the same project. From my recollection they have expressed a number of sharp differences on various subjects in the last year.

Neither of them are need of a history lesson from the other. That, of course, doesn't guarantee that none will be offered.  

Perhaps a project blog is in order?

I disagree strongly with my good friends, Wayne and Shiv. I think in today's environment it is a very bold move, both the team concept and the tribute concept. (And, if anyone cares, I think the principals at Black Creek were equally bold.)

I could only help if they were doing an Ayn Rand tribute course.

 

Wayne:

I hate to disagree with you, but how many of those other Macdonald style courses have been built on sand dune terrain on the Oregon coast?

This is a site that Mr. Macdonald would have loved to work on, and we are determined to make it something of which he would be proud.  And you can rest assured that I would not have taken the assignment if I didn't think we could do something really special.

Tom,
What are your thoughts about how the public will receive a Macdonald style design?  I know I've taken many different golfers to Raynor/Macdonald courses like The National, Fishers, Camargo, Yale, even Chicago Golf and some unfortuately just don't get it.  I show them a bunker like on the second at Yale (greenside left) and they look at me like, what is that?  It will be interesting to see what the masses think?  It is a bold move by Mike to go with a bold architect like Macdonald.  I can't wait to see how things turn out!!
Mark

Mark:

NO style of golf architecture is universally loved by all players.  Macdonald's seems to be as popular and successful as any, though.  The bottom line is that if we build a bunch of great golf holes that are fun to play, people will like the course, no matter whose name goes on it.

Jim:

No one is talking about minimalism on this course.  But the first and foremost thing we do is to try to fit the golf holes to the ground as best we can, the same as Macdonald did.  We will look for the best place to build a Redan and an Alps and the other holes that Macdonald favored, and then go from there.  There's already a big dune ridge (continuing on from #17 and 18 at Pacific Dunes) which is a good foundation for the Alps and Sahara holes, so we don't have to build anything really big for those ... in fact I doubt we will have to move any more dirt to build the course than Mr. Macdonald moved at National 100 years ago, an amount which was perceived as big (in its day) but would be small by modern standards.

Tom -- do you have much or any of the routing already in mind, including where the Redan, Short, Cape etc holes will go?  I'm guessing yes, or you would not have agreed to do to the project.

Also, will you build enough elasticity into Old Mac for it to host top pro or amateur tournaments?    

This seems like a dream GCA project.  An NGLA west but with its own unique signature and identity, put together by some of the top minds in the business.      

I am sure it is a site that any architect would love to work on and not exclusive to Macdonald.  In fact, I firmly believe that other designers would be more ideal.  Part of my feeling why it is a mistake is that I do not embrace a manufactured look, even minimized to an extent as it was at NGLA, Fisher's Island (I've only seen photos), Westhampton and parts of The Creek.

On coastal dunes land, my  own preference would be to see a course built based upon principals of naturalism rather than an earlier engineered look.  But it is a resort with multiple courses and, like Disney World, all the rides should not be the same.  I am sure the collaborative spirit will result in something special.  Odd though that the collaborative spirit that existed in the Philadelphia School was not chosen as a model.  Ironic that the architect being paid homage to was authoritative and far from a collaborative spirit.  I recognize Macdonald's genius and lasting influence on golf in America but do not recognize this as an outstanding idea.  Which of the Macdonald/Raynor/Banks courses still in existance is the farthest West?

"The bottom line is that if we build a bunch of great golf holes that are fun to play, people will like the course, no matter whose name goes on it."

I agree and believe this sort of statement underminds the merits of the decision making.  Keiser probably has such a high regard for Macdonald's work that it for that reason the homage course is being built.  I think he has a right to spend his money as he pleases, but in the resort market, how many golfers in that segment know of Macdonald and will be swayed by an homage course to him?  His courses are generally very private and not well visited.  So I ask, will this concept create an ideal marketing   product?  I don't see how.  I do see how so many on this site think it is a great idea though.  I don't agree.  

Will it succeed?  I am sure it will, but not because of the Macdonald angle but rather because of the team assembled, the site's location and the pre-existing resort and surely from the oversight by the owner.

Hey Tom, I've done a detailed routing, too, and every hole fits perfectly. But it's all Ross holes. Do you think anyone will notice?

I hope Ron Whitten now sees the folly in not allowing Erin Hills a chance to compete on the Golf Digest greatest list...I'm sure MacDougle Dunes is a lock for any and all future top 100's..