[rgkeller]

Keller,

You are being ridiculous.  To pick on Keiser and try to call him out for the way he is choosing to run his business is, quite frankly, low down B.S.

As I look around at the next 25 million dollar desert course or another TPC I can't help but feel Mike Keiser is quite a bit  different from most developers.

I wish I could understand why you are so against this project.  Do you have a concern in the world for all of the other projects we see happening around the country, or the basic state of gca in general?

Maybe you do hate all the other projects as well, for surely they are in the name of money grubbing if what Mike Keiser is doing with this third course is all about the almighty buck!

I think it's pretty weak.  Keiser is one of the good guys, and so is Coorshaw.  Granted, the land isn't as great as the first two courses, but it's still going to be a damn good product!  

It'll be a great golf course, not to sell housing lots.  NOt to win awards.  Not to churn out a million rounds a year........it's about the golf experience.  GOLF, just the golf.  

So I guess I can't count on you to get me an invitation to the grand opening of the Australian Bunkers Course at Bandon Dunes.

[SPDB]

I love this guy and I love the new name of the course.

[Michael Dugger]

Whatever  Ah, I mean you can assume such.

You aren't capable of having a rational conversation, Keller, instead you choose to sling mud and then hide behind a bunch of short and snide comments.

Ever hear of another course on the Oregon Coast called Sand Pines??

[TEPaul]

This notion on here of sand-capping fairways being contrary to minimalist architecture is laughable. If there's something wrong with a site a good architect needs to know how to enhance it. In this case it sounds like an inherent soil problem. To fix that is pretty basic and pretty necessary and to claim that's irresponsible manufacturing and contrary to  naturalistic architecture or even the minimalistic architectural look Coore and Crenshaw have proven they know how to produce is just stupid commentary, in my book. How about the soil content at Talking Stick? Wasn't that a disaster naturally? Didn't they have to take the whole thing and reprocess it and replace it? What if they hadn't? The course probably would've been a disaster to build or play.

As for them trying to do something like Mackenzie bunkering-- so what? Does someone think they have to do the same kind of bunkering everytime out, on every project and every site? Coore once told me they were thinking of doing a form or Tillinghast bunkering at Talking Stick, I think it was. I don't know about that because I've never seen the place but I sure was surprised initially to see the bunkering they did at Hidden Creek. It basically looked like it just popped out of the ground in some parts of the course so I asked him what they were doing and he said they were doing a tribute to the Heathland look of bunkering some of which is so long ago and that's the way they did it then--so they were going with that basic look in New Jersey as a tribute to heathland architecture.

That's why they're so damn good---they keep stretching themselves. They're interested in doing different things. Does anyone expect them to do the same thing everywhere they go? It seems like every time someone tries to categorize them they're on to something else. Watch them and learn and give up on some of those shop-worn cliches.

Now Pat's going to get all upset because he'll figure this is too much praise for one architect--this is rampant "most favored son status"!

Bullshit---they're just really great architects so why not just say it!

[RJ_Daley]

rgkeller, I'm trying real hard to understand and respect your point of view.  But honestly, all I am getting is that you have contrary feelings about C&C being given some sort of "trust credibility upfront" on this project, based on a consensus of their fans who regularly write here on GCA.  You object to defining them as minimalist (as you define and understand the term).  You have some cynicisim about Kaiser building another course and expanding his golf/resort enterprise, profitably.  It sounds like you may not want to see another course in that complex.  Would you object if I got the property across the road and did an Aussie style course and used just Axeland and Proctor, if I wouldn't call it minimalist?  You are skeptical about the possible aussie style of bunkering, if indeed that is what they are going for (which we really don't know for sure).  

And your backround or depth of knowledge about GCA, or the facts of this project is what?  Quite a splash after some 60 posts?  Don't get me wrong, you have every right to say your piece and give your opinion, as we all do.  But, you seem to enjoy the adversarial and endless cross-examination method rather than discourse.  "But I could be wrong..."

[Michael Dugger]

RJ Daley

You aren't capable of having a rational conversation, Keller, instead you choose to sling mud and then hide behind a bunch of short and snide comments.

Ditto, again, don't waste your time

[SPDB]

Tom

In each of those examples you seem to cite ideas which sprang from either Coore or Crenshaw (or one of their charges), or they were tipped off by a yelp from Cooreshaw, not from the developer.

What if doing MacKenzie imitation wasn't their idea? Then, assuming they weren't planning on the same thing, it becomes a forced style, no?

Bear in mind I'm not saying they can't do it, only that I would rather they arrived at the conclusion themselves, or independent of the same conclusion arrived at by Keiser.

this is all speculation, mind you, based on that article.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

Assuming that Keiser is so enamored of Mac's australian bunkering that he wants C&C to employ it in the third course, will this condition hamstring their ability to produce the course that they see?

You did say this, didn't you

So, I guess I read and comprehended it before I posted my response.

To repeat, I have every confidence that C&C can produce whatever Mike Keiser envisions, with RJ's caveate.

[rgkeller]

And your backround or depth of knowledge about GCA, or the facts of this project is what?  Quite a splash after some 60 posts?  Don't get me wrong, you have every right to say your piece and give your opinion, as we all do.  But, you seem to enjoy the adversarial and endless cross-examination method rather than discourse.  "But I could be wrong..."

Well, I do confess that I have spent much more time playing golf than keeping up with the various personalities, points of view and prejudices of GCA posters. So I have little to offer in depth of knowledge about this board.

I am a fan of golf courses that "play" well. I have found that courses that "play" well are those that fit the land that they occupy and that are designed with an understanding of the weather to which the courses are subject and the grasses that prosper in the climate and the soil.  My pet peeves are trees and flowers on a golf course and bunkers at the turning point of a dogleg.

My favorite courses are those that feature greens than lie on the land rather than of artificial construct. Greens with "hole positions" and swales created by bulldozers leave me cold while those greens with undulations that are part and parcel of  the surrounding terrain give me goosebumps. The greatest green I have ever played is the fourth at Garden City.

When courses and locations proudly take the mantle of greatness, then they have an obligation to that appellation if they wish to keep it.

Pinehurst was once a great golf location. Bandon Dunes is one now.

[SPDB]

Ahh Pat,
Like so many other things, the devil is in the details. A mere glossing over can't constitute read[ing] and comprehend[ing]"

If you read it fully you would have noticed that I said, and you quote, " hamstring their ability to produce the course that they see" (note the emphasis). By that I mean, it is entirely possible that C&C could look at the site and see gnarly bunkers along the lines, not crisp edged Mac bunkers. Thus, if that were the case, their ability to build the course they saw would be hamstrung.

My post, of course, says nothing, as you suggest it does, that they can't build whatever bunkers Keiser wishes, including Fazio Desert Style Bunkers (FDSB's).

Do you see the difference?

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Pazin,

Patrick....is defending someone judging architects based on a article written during the early stages of construction!!

Would you cite for me, specifically, and feel free to quote me, where I defended someone judging architects based on an article ?

MDugger,

Were any of the ponds at the courses you allude to manufactured ?

A pond is a body of water that is artificially confined, which would seem to exclude Seminole, and perhaps others.

If you think the Bandon Resort is all about the golf, perhaps you should re-read the master plan filed on it's behalf.
A contributor was kind enough to provide it.  It might open up your eyes with regard to the reality of the situation.
There's a lot more then golf going on.

rgkeller,

Do not let Mdugger sidetrack you with trips up the coast to Sandpines, he doesn't even know where it is.  
He previously posted pictures which he purported were of Sandpines and the immediate, adjacent property, Pictures of coastal dunes with the Ocean in the backround, which it turned out were taken miles and miles away. He must have been lost and tight for time when he took his pictures and posted them, figuring that us easterner wouldn't know the difference.

Sandpines is not on the coast as is Bandon/Pacific Dunes.  The two sites are incomparable.
But, I find it strange that he is now saying this new site isn't as good as BandonDunes/PacificDunes and that perhaps C&C should be given some leeway for that, just like he gave leeway to others who designed on sites not as glorious as Bandon and Pacific Dunes.

TEPaul,

Noone said that C&C weren't excellent architects.
Could you cite who said that ??

It appears that what rgkeller is saying is that perhaps a double standard or blind eye exists when it comes to looking at their work, and that they are given leeway and permited to roam outside of a perameter that is wrapped tightly around other architects necks.

And, if it's okay for them to sandcap fairways and have the work defined as minimalist, then the same leeway has to be given to other architects who move massive amounts of dirt/sand in an attempt to accomplish the same result.

You can't have it both ways, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I have every confidence that Mike Keiser with C&C will design and build a very good golf course.

If you only pick ideal sites for your work, you can be choosey, but when you have to work with less then an ideal site, perhaps your design and construction methods will become more varied, more flexible, like others.

My curiosity is, what will he build on the fourth site, and who will he choose to design it.

[Michael Dugger]

Ok Keller,

So you are saying that you think this 3rd course at Bandon Dunes Resort is going to suck.  Thus, once Keiser builds Bandon Dunes Resort course #4, #5, #6, #7 and #8 the place is going to be another Pinehurst, in your book?

Have you been to Bandon?

Do you know what the site in question entails?

Do you think Coore and Crenshaw will screw it up?

Do you like TPC Sawgrass?  All the top soil there was turned upside down to provide a fertile bed? Seemed to work out ok.

The addition of top soil does not mean that the basic lay of the land is altered.  The article stated that Axland said there are some nice undulations in the fairways underneath all the trees.  I suspect the subgrade will remain basically intact.  I also suspect C & C will incorporate EVERY natural advantage that the land offers into the final product, including green sites.

[RJ_Daley]

Welll gee, that pretty much sounds like you could get along with damned near anyone in these here parts!

Have you seen pictures of C&Cs Austin CC.  I'm guessing that they start with something better at Bandon than they did at Austin, yet one would almost have to say Austin is pretty minimalist, (from pics only that I've seen).  But, they must have had to do some soil ammendments or stripping, and sand push-ups to achieve the greens there.  Yet, those greens look (going by the pics) like they were just laid on the ground.  If you can, would you say if you get the impression Austin is minimalist?

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

Do you think, that when they looked at a densely wooded site, like Hidden Creek, that they saw gnarly bunkers

Give me a break.

They built the bunkers the way they wanted to, irrespective of the site.  That's their style.

P.S.  I may get out to The Creek this weekend, and will bring my camera for ground level shots.

Were you aware, that when you play one of the great skyline greens in the world, the 18th at NGLA, that you can see trees behind the green and to the left, from certain angles in the fairway ?  Would that disqualify # 18 at NGLA as a skyline green in your opinion ??

[rgkeller]

Quote from: mdugger on Today at 07:09:18pm
 
You aren't capable of having a rational conversation, Keller, instead you choose to sling mud and then hide behind a bunch of short and snide comments.
 
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ok Keller,

So you are saying that you think this 3rd course at Bandon Dunes Resort is going to suck.

I must have missed it, but where did rgkeller make that statement ?

Do you like TPC Sawgrass?  All the top soil there was turned upside down to provide a fertile bed? Seemed to work out ok.

You're not trying to tell me that you're going to equate rototilling with sandcapping, are you ??  

[rgkeller]

"Do you like TPC Sawgrass?  All the top soil there was turned upside down to provide a fertile bed? Seemed to work out ok."

I ABHOR the TPC at Sawgrass.

[Michael Dugger]

Pat, my boy, nice to see you join the fray.

If a pond is tastefully done I wonder why it matters if it is manufactured or not.  

Surely in the past it isn't manufactured or not manufactured that matters two shits to you, why bring this up now?
When it comes to evaluating a final product, a la the Mucci party line, I'd say that if the demands of the project require a pond then I guess we must look at the whole picture in evaluating things, nevermind if it is tastefully done.  I love the pond Rees built at Sandpines, the irregular edges really inspire me.

Yes that is all mumbo jambalaya.

I wish Rees would have won the commision for the third course, if you really want to know the truth.

[TEPaul]

SPDB said:

"Tom
In each of those examples you seem to cite ideas which sprang from either Coore or Crenshaw (or one of their charges), or they were tipped off by a yelp from Cooreshaw, not from the developer.
What if doing MacKenzie imitation wasn't their idea? Then, assuming they weren't planning on the same thing, it becomes a forced style, no?
Bear in mind I'm not saying they can't do it, only that I would rather they arrived at the conclusion themselves, or independent of the same conclusion arrived at by Keiser.
this is all speculation, mind you, based on that article."

Sean:

I definitely should probably not say something like this but some of you guys seem like you're trying to make huge mountains out of molehills here with Ben Crenshaw and Bill Coore and their company.

You're asking whose idea something was? To do Mackenzie style bunkering in Bandon Oregon or not? And who it was who came up with the idea--the client or the architect? Who cares?  

One of the most interesting things I've ever seen in modern golf course architecture is what it takes exactly to get on the same page with Coore and Crenshaw. In my opinion, it's a fascinating process that every golf project client ought to experience--they'd definitely learn a very valuable lesson.  

PatM swears by cliches like; "You take the King's shilling you do the King's bidding". Oh yeah, well try telling that to Coore and Crenshaw and you might see their taillights. I think getting on the same page with them and getting them on the same page with you is a fascinating education in architecture and a few other things. For any of you out there who know any of their clients--just ask them about that---and you'll both hear and learn something very interesting!

[Mike Erdmann]

Everyone who has looked at that property has commented that it is inferior to the first two pieces of land.  

Well, then count me as the first to say it's not an inferior piece of land.  It's certainly different from the dunesland of the first two courses, but not inferior at all.  The land the third course sits on has variety that the first two courses don't have.  It's really got three different ecosystems.  You start in dramatic dunes, move into the forest which has wonderful ground contours evident once the scrub and trees are removed.  In the forest are a couple of stunning ponds/wetlands that the course winds around, and then over the 100' high dune before heading back into the dunesland for the final two finishing holes.  Having seen the entire routing and walked a good part of it, C&C wind in and out of these different ecosystems.  And that opinion is shared by a friend in the architecture business, who as we walked the routing together, commented that it has the potential to be the best course of the three.

Think about it....knowing the inevitable comparisons that will take place, would Coore & Crenshaw have taken the job if they thought they were building the worst course at Bandon Dunes?

[Norbert P]

  Mike Keiser is/was inspired by Austrailia.  Nothing wrong with that.  

  C & C (or associates) have built a test green and test bunker.  Nothing wrong with that.  

  The weather in Bandon can be severe; with the destructive forces of torrential rain and howling winds.  Sand is great but it's very unstable and the rootzone of grass is thin.  Shite happens.  

  I think it's quite prudent to test some features, especially when they will have two mini-microclimes of western dune ridge exposed weather and the leeward inland ridge old forest.

What's going to happen with the styling of one side balancing/contrasting to the other?  I can't speculate on the correctness of its continuity or diversity but I can ponder the fascinating possibilities.  

  The yurts are calling me again.

[TEPaul]

If you boys out there in golf course architecture Internet land are smart and curious you should ask Mike Erdmann some questions about what he's seen of that Bandon new course site that C&C are just beginning. It's good to see what you did at this stage Mike--I'll guarantee you'll probably never forget it when you see how things progress. This and what you see in the future there may be one of your best educations in architecture. All this other "minimalist", "sand-capping", "manufacturing" pap will be a distant memory in no time!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

If you only take two projects a year, you can choose your site and your employer.

When you're well to do it's easy to turn down jobs with bad sites, and employers with bad ideas.  Try doing it when you've got a wife and three kids to feed and $ 14,500 in your bank account.

Ask Tom Doak about Atlantic City and doing the King's bidding.

Walking away from a project or showing your taillights is a luxury reserved for the well to do.

If Mike Keiser has a concept in mind, unless an overwhelmingly prudent argument can be made to the contrary, I think he's going to get what he wants.
He seems to have done wonderfully so far, and I don't see anything that will impede his continued success, including his choice of architects.

MDugger,

Have you ever been to Seminole ?
Have you ever been to Pine Valley ?
Have you ever been to NGLA ?
Have you ever been to Shinnecock ?

I suspect that the answer is NO.

So how do you make the evaluation that the ponds at those clubs are tastefully done

How do you know that the lines on those ponds are no better or no worse then the lines on the pond at Sandpines ?

You need to know what you're talking about, and have the facts at your disposal BEFORE you put yourself in a position where you're about to make a judgement on ponds that you've NEVER SEEN.

Since noone has seen the pond/lake to be constructed, I'd have to go with Brad Klein  

[peter_p]

Sand capping fairways has already been done in Bandon, so that shouldn't be an issue dividing the current and future courses there. It was definitely done on PD's 13th, and 99% certainty for PD#4 as I was there before and during construction. I wouldn't be suprised if it occured on 5 and 16 at BD if you look at the quality of the surfaces near the edge of the bluffs.
If Keiser is looking for RM style bunkers on the new course they'll only survive on the holes through the forest because of the winds. You don't see RM style bunkers when you get down to the Mornington Peninsula. I think a different style will be necessary in the dune holes and it will be interesting to see the marriage of styles between windy and sheltered areas.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Erdmann,

MDugger wasn't talking about the property immediately adjacent to Bandon Dunes.

He was talking about inferior property 20 miles south and inland.

He just gets confused from time to time  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()