[Bill Brightly]

Can anyone please give me some info about this?

Where is it located? Far Hills. NJ?

How does one go about researching a course? (I am a USGA member, as is my club.)

Do you need to make an appointment?

Is there one key staff member to contact?

[TEPaul]

Bill:

The so-called USGA Architecture Archive is still in the process of being set up. It will be part of the new Arnold Palmer History Center building that is still under construction and just behind Golf House in Far Hills (expected opening for mid summer '08). Hopefully the meat of it will eventually get on the Internet via the USGA's website.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
Which will be finished first, the archives or your Flynn book  

When the archives finally opens, I sure hope it is more "reseacher friendly" then the library is now.
Mark

[Andrew Mitchell]

Does anyone know if the R&A have a similar facility in the UK?

[Tony_Muldoon]

Bill:

The so-called USGA Architecture Archive is still in the process of being set up. It will be part of the new Arnold Palmer History Center building that is still under construction and just behind Golf House in Far Hills (expected opening for mid summer '08). Hopefully the meat of it will eventually get on the Internet via the USGA's website.

http://www.usga.org/aboutus/museum/library/segl.html

You can already search what's been put up there.  Can be time consuming but I've found it really interesting.

Don't know if R&A have anything or plans.

[TEPaul]

"When the archives finally opens, I sure hope it is more "reseacher friendly" then the library is now."

Mark:

I'd have to say that is the primary motivating reason for it. If you or anyone else has anything at all you'd like to suggest or recommend in that particular vein, now and in the next number of months is very likely the time to do it.

TonyM:

At this point, the so-called SEGL on the USGA's website is not exactly part of this new USGA Architecture Archive. It may be rolled into it somehow and at some point but the SEGL preceded this USGA Architecture Archive initiative and was done some time ago as a tribute to the USGA's former librarian, Janet Segal.

I'm also quite sure that the R&A has nothing similar to what is hoped for ultimately with this new USGA Architecture Archive. I doubt anything like what I hope it will be exists anywhere.

Obviously the USGA, for a whole variety of reasons will never be able to actually physically possess all the architectural material and information it appears it would like to offer someday through the magic of the Internet via such things as hyperlinking et al.

I guess one could say the eventual hope for it would be as the ultimate information highway (or "one stop shopping", as it were) for all things to do with golf course architecture and particularly its history and evolution.

At least that's my eventual hope for it.  

I think there's little question the USGA, at this time, would like to ultimatiely offer this service all over the world through the INTERNET. The timing and extent of it will probably be determined by the amount of use and interest there is in it.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
As you probably know, it has gotten to the point where you are not even allowed to take digital pictures of many things let alone scan or make a photo copy.  This makes it very difficult to do meaningful research.  I'm sure others who use the place a lot will shed their own opinions.  If Mike Hurdzan for example does end up deciding to loan and/or donate copies of those Flynn plans he has, will they be accessible or not?  Same goes for others that might donate old articles or drawings.  I just loaned Dave Maberry some of my Ross drawings to have scanned for the Tuffs library.  I trust they will now be available and accessible for others researching there who want to use them.  The USGA archives needs to do the same.  

I know Forrest is on the committee for the archives and I have voiced my concerns to him.  He heard me complaining all through out the research process for our hazards book.  

[TEPaul]

Mark:

As I said, the very things you just mentioned are the very reasons this new USGA Architecture Archive is being created. The Flynn collection of architectural drawings that is now back in the hands of Mike Hurzdan is expected to be perhaps the first significant offering. Mike is on the "work group" that has been charged with setting this thing up.

[BCrosby]

Mark -

The USGA archives plans to provide the kind of access to historical materials that you describe. It is still early days, however. Executive Board approval for the project was only recently obtained, so many details remain to be finalized.

One of those issues will be copyright. As you will appreciate, there are some privately owned materials where the owners want the certainty that they will not be reproduced for commercial purposes. There appear to be software programs that should handle the issue. All of that is currently being explored.

The ultimate goal is to create a resource for architectural research and information that is can be accessed by the public. I'm very excited about it. There was almost universal agreement that it is needed. I know of nothing else like it going on anywhere else.

Bob  

[TEPaul]

It is also my hope, and I think it will be seen to be a natural fit someday very soon, that one of the more important elements and entities in this USGA Information Highway on all things golf architecture (via the USGA's website), will be GOLFCLUBATLAS.com itself, at least in an historical context.

[JMorgan]

... and in the meantime, if you've got some extra cash burning a hole in your pocket, you can take this off their hands:

http://www.turpinrealtors.com/Menu/Showcase_Properties/bernards_township/carriage_house.htm

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bill, you may want to contact the library first before you make the trip if you're not going to research anything but your club.

Otherwise, it's a chance to become acquainted with some great past and present material -- although as the others have said, it's not the end-all be-all in its current state.

[TEPaul]

One of the initial rallying cries for this USGA Architectural Archives was at the USGA annual meeting in Atlanta Ga. I guess that was in January '06 (right Bob?).

It was at a massive meeting of the USGA's Museum and Library committee. During that meeting there were various phone hookups for people who could not be in Atlanta at that time.

Someone on a phone hookup (I'm still not sure who it was) mentioned to the committee that what this thing should accomplish should be an entity that if one searched GOOGLE for golf architecture information, particularly historically, the USGA's Architecture Archive should come up first on the first page.

Presently the USGA in this area may not come up on GOOGLE until the 10th or 20th page.

The USGA now wants to do a whole lot better than that in this area.

[BCrosby]

TEP is right.

As you note, something worth exploring is using either GCA or the USGA website as a kind of Wikipedia for golf architecture.

I don't have the computer skills to set that up, but a permament entry on, say, The Road Hole would be fascinating. Over time people could revise, add, delete, etc.

You get the "wisdom of crowds" working for you.

Which is exactly what good GCA threads already do.

Bob

[TEPaul]

Bob and others:

Since we all can be assured that the USGA and it's Museum and Library will be reading this very thread, I'd like to take the thread, for a moment, into that area you just mentioned---eg the concept of WIKIPEDIA and its contemporaneous information and opinion offerings.

I'm far less computer literate and knowledgeable than you are Bob, and although the WIKIPEDIA structure and such is most valuable in many ways, the constant opinion offerings on it are contemporaneous and something about that sort of bothers me when it comes to a higher form or degree of accuracy with historical information.

Please convince me that is not of much concern. I'd like to think I feel that way simply because I don't really understand WIKIPEDIA or how there could be some kind of backup via it for real truth and accuracy of historical facts and opinions.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom & Bob,

There are very few people who can even begin to appreciate just how much work is involved in scanning and making available even a portion of research materials from an archive such as the USGA holds.

Most on here know what we have been trying to do on the Tillinghast Association website with slowly making available all of Tilly's writings. It has been a physically and mentally daunting labor of love that has truly exhausted a few of those working on it... and what we are hoping to make available is not even 1/10,000th of what the USGA is attempting to do both via the internet and in person when the new museum facility is opened. It really will be a staggering accomplishment when completed.

The only suggestion that I would like to see happen is for greater accesibility to the already existing on-line USGA photographic archives. Presently only members of the media may view these, and then only if they are members of a "recognized" media outlet. Writers who are working on book projects and members of clubs who seek photographs of their club from years gone by in order to aid in restoration projects can not gain access.

This is something that should be addressed now and not wait.

[Mike_Cirba]

I think there has to be a way to divorce fact from opinion, or it will turn into a hobgoblin of confusion.  

Of course, trying to determine exactly what is fact when one looks historically is always debateable.  

Doesn't Wikipedia allow entries to be marked as either "challenged", or "speculative", or something like that?

I also think it needs to be much broader than just topics like the "Road Hole", and I'd love to see it all inclusive of every level of the game and architecture.

[Eric Franzen]

Bob and others:
 I'd like to think I feel that way simply because I don't really understand WIKIPEDIA or how there could be some kind of backup via it for real truth and accuracy of historical facts and opinions.

That would be solved by letting someone moderate the submissions.

[BCrosby]

Tom -

I'm no computer wiz. To the contrary. But the premise of Wikipedia is the old J.S. Mill notion that the marketplace of ideas will tease out, eventually, the best ones.

We can fuss about whether Mill is right about that (I have my doubts), but that is the basic idea.

My understanding is that Wikipedia has ways to referee the clearly wacko contributions. But I am not sure how that process works. I'll look into it.

What's curious is that we get clearly wacko comments at GCA all the time. They aren't deleted. We just learn to ignore them. At least that is what I do. I'd guess Wikipedia has more structure than that, however.

Bob

[Mike_Cirba]

That would be solved by letting someone moderate the submissions.

Eric,

With all due respect, I believe that person would soon be avalanched in paperwork if this becomes as broad and comprehensive as many of us would like.

[JMorgan]

glass bead

[Eric Franzen]

That would be solved by letting someone moderate the submissions.

Eric,

With all due respect, I believe that person would soon be avalanched in paperwork if this becomes as broad and comprehensive as many of us would like.

The "someone" that I mentioned is usually on projects like this an assigned group of moderators that helps out on a voluntary basis.

[Mike_Cirba]

Eric/James,

I'm all for independent verification, but if the amount of material is anything like what I'm guessing, I think it may be a humungous task to verify every entry.

Perhaps unverified entries could be marked as such until they pass final review?

The other problem I see is how would those folks do verification?

For instance, if based on my research I submit an entry claiming that the first 18 holes of Gilbertsville GC in eastern PA was designed by John Benincasa in 1972, with 9 holes added in 1999 by Jim Blaukovitch, how am I supposed to provide proof?  

I mention this because it was one of the more interesting architectural research efforts I did in the past, and I finally tracked down Mr. Benincasa to Florida, but it was very circuitous and I finally received verbal confirmation from him.  I'd be surprised if he's still alive based on his age at the time we spoke.  

Or, does anyone care?    

[Mark_Fine]

Bob,
You are right about copyrights!  Every photo, drawing, ...we used in our book needed a one page form filled out by the owner for our publisher Wiley before Forrest and I could get it published.  

Philip,
It must be a daunting task because the amount of information at The Golf House can be overwelming.  The problem as pointed out above is that it is very difficult to take any of it with you.  Forrest and I mentioned our gratitude to a staff person (Patty Moran) at the USGA who greatly assisted our research.  Without her, our book would still be just a nice idea.  

[BCrosby]

JMorgan -

The sticky issues at Wikipedia (or at GCA) are rarely simple factual issues. I've learned the hard way a couple of times that someone in the treehose has got the facts and they will correct you pronto. Which is, of course, a good thing.

The sticky issues are almost always interperative. Those aren't solved by a fact checker.

Within bounds, different interpretations ought to be encouraged.

What I'm not sure about is how a blog (or Wikipedia) sets those bounds without squeezing the life out of the discussions.

Bob  

[JMorgan]

Mike, the amount of information is certainly daunting -- moreso in the initial stages -- but it's nothing compared to the entire Wikipedia.  If you had a staff of fact checkers assigned to certain topics or categories, there should be no reason why the USGA could not keep the database both current and accurate.  Money very well-spent IMO.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()