Quote from: Johnny M on January 11, 2008, 03:41:06 PM

Kelly-I think the reaction is due to the fact that he is being forced to do a 7000 yd course, whether it fits the property or not.

Tom isn't being forced into doing anything he doesn't want to do.  He is being asked to submit a proposal.  

If he doesn't want to design a course 7,000 yards long, don't submit a proposal, seems pretty simple to me.  It's his high horse, let him sit on it.

I'm with Mike on this one.  Let's face it, the customer ought to be able to make that kind of a precondition before hiring his/her/its architect.  If they have to sell memberships, they will want to market in the most appealing way possible.  Strictly from a marketing standpoint, you are probably eliminating a big percentage of potential new members who aren't willing to pony up big money to join a new golf club if the course has to be billed as "sporty" or a "throwback" or "built at a 'reasonble' 6750 yards.

Despite the tone in Tom's post, I'm sure he's really not a yardage dilettante and wouldn't turn down work simply on that basis.

To follow up my post from a couple of weeks back, just to let you all know, I heard back from the "golf guy" hired by that client a couple of weeks back.  

They want a full design and shaping proposal from us to do the course, AS LONG AS we are amenable to making the golf course at least 7,000 yards.  I'm assured that it is imperative that their course be 7,000 yards long in order to achieve their goals of being considered a top private club in their market.  I guess my own past body of work can't be entered into evidence, because they know their market better than I do.

Not being in the business, do you receive a profitable retainer for the proposal work, or is even that contingent on drawing up a 7,000 yard course?  If the best course comes out at 6,700 yards, couldn't you add a few back tees to satisfy the "golf guy"?
You need to decide whether your rapport with the "golf guy" and his assertions are too much of an impediment to work well together.  Do you think he is set in his ways to the point that your opinion, no matter how valid, will have little influence on him?
Lastly, in my experience you have little to gain by going around him and discussing these issues directly with the "developer" as some others have suggested.  I assume the "golf guy" was hired for a reason.

How exactly would that stick it to anyone?

How exactly would that stick it to anyone?

Kind of like the members of Sebonack know that everytime they play the 18th it should have been a par 4.

How exactly would that stick it to anyone?

Possibilities:
1. Zeros are more expensive to print.
2. "000" is the mark of the devil in the client's culture.
3. Everybody knows memberships sell easier at 6,999.

....maybe build it as 7,000 yds.....but make it a par 73.

... or just make each stroke on your course worth .875 instead of 1.0 ...

Evan- I do think many tour sites are boring, but they are boring because they are poorly designed, not because of how far people hit the ball. The great courses will always be great, no matter how far we can hit the ball.

Johnny- I still don't want to see the players hit driver, wedge to all the holes.  It takes the drama out of it no matter how great the course is.  That's my opinion anyway.  Some people like seeing 25 under winning tournaments.  I don't care what people shoot, as long as they earn it with outstanding play and not because they hit 14 short irons into holes.  

This is such an interesting question. I appreciate Tom's feeling about building the best course possible, even if it is under 7000 yards. He is right that the 7000 yard mandate is ill-conceived.

On the otherhand, a very large percentage of the golfing public will look at the scorecard to see the total length from the back tees, even if they would NEVER play from there. It is a fact of life in the game of golf today. I think 25+ hanicaps who play the forward tees are still proud to tell others what the length of their course is "from the tips."

Sorry to all you purists, but I think the owner needs to recognize what factors will be important to the entire range of prospectice cash-paying members, no matter how much we may dislike it.

Tom,

How do you feel the course that you have designed that are over 7000 yards compare to those that you have desinged under 7000 yards?  Do they have a different feel?  Do you think of them differently?

David:

Good question.  I'm not totally against the idea of 7000 yards.  I must have designed 8-10 courses that long -- let's see, there's Black Forest, Apache Stronghold, The Rawls Course (? not sure), Cape Kidnappers, Ballyneal, Sebonack, The Renaissance Club, Rock Creek, and Wicked Pony.  Many of those are at altitude, though, so they don't PLAY 7000 yards.

Sometimes, it's just what works out best, and sometimes, it's what the client wants ... Cape K and Sebonack and The Renaissance Club talk seriously about a professional event and have the connections to host one, while the client for Wicked Pony is a former college player who likes his courses pretty long, plus he's at altitude.

Beechtree actually opened at 6999 yards ... that's what it measured when finished, we had never talked about its length, but the owner put in a new tee on 18 to get over the hump.  

It's the part in Bill Brightly's second paragraph that bothers me so damned much.  Most of the people who decry courses under 7,000 yards couldn't break 90 from back there -- but they are driving architecture with their uneducated dollars.

Plus, it's often the case that to get up to 7000, you have to ruin a potentially excellent short par-4 or 5 to make it 100 yards longer to get the number.

It seems to me the measured yardage at many 7000+ yard courses is often nothing more than a manufactured number for marketing purposes and does not reflect the true distance of the course.  Same thing with course rating and slope.  When I see a new club that boasts 7000+ yards, a 74+ rating and a 145+ slope, it is a turn off.  I assume those numbers are just for show.  Those courses often won't play as long or be as challenging as the 6500 yard, 72 rating, 120 slope Donald Ross course I belong to.

Ed

Tom,
It seems to me that part of your issue is with the arbitrary number of 7,000.  Tell them that you will only do it if they market it as "Over 6400 meters".

If a client asked for a course design and said that he would like the course to play "very long," instead of pegging that number, would it bother you as much?  That is certainly a matter of taste, but if a client wants it to play long, then that would seem to be a reasonable request.  Maybe he thinks he wants to host big tournaments.  Who knows? Obviously, if the land could not handle that with a good routing, then you might have to say no.

It is interesting to look back at when the golden age courses were designed.  It seems to me that many of the classics must have played a lot longer than today's 7,000 yards, given the equipment.  I shudder to think about a 230 yard Biarritz par three with a hickory shaft and a Gutty in my hand.