Fazio's GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTUE

[Jeff_Brauer]

TEPaul,

I'll be glad to explain any details you find difficult.  I woke up this morning figuring I would be blasted a bit for presenting a balanced view of Fazios work here. Its better to get "You're no Ernest Hemingway" rather than "You're no Donald Ross!"

Jeff

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff;

Thanks for presenting that professional, objective, detailed synopsis.  I think you hit the nail on the head, leaving readers to form their own conclusions.  

Personally, I've found Mr. Fazio's work a real mixed-bag.  While I've delighted in playing courses like World Woods Pine Barrens, his Osprey Ridge course at Disney, and even Oyster Bay on LI (where he did a fine job on a very tight property), I've found several others wanting.  

I can start with the course he built in my neighborhood, Hartefeld National which hosted a Seniors event.  There are a handful of good holes, but most of the rest of the course is simply playably BORING.  Talk about a great property and missed opportunity...Oy!  

It's a public course, and I can tell you that I felt unbelievably patronized by his work there.  No matter what kind of borderline mediocre shot I hit, it didn't seem to matter.  If I hit what I thought was a great shot, I basically ended up in a position similar to where I would be if I had not.  When all results end up essentially the same, you have non-strategic golf.

If this is mindless Fazio-bashing, then count me in.

[TEPaul]

You're a good man Jeff Brauer!

It's nice of you to say you come on here looking for ideas although you realize most of us don't really understand many of the other parts of the business.

Of course a lot of people, certainly me, who aren't in the business, dream about the ideal scenario, as you said. And I certainly know nothing about the business or really even construction, drainage etc. But it is fun to conceive of things and then have guys like you around to tell us if they really would work or not.

I've had a ball routing a couple of these properties around here, but since I don't know anything about the construction side I can really only do them naturally. To me that's the fun and satisfying thing though since I think the holes really look great in their natural form. But I think I've been doing this on some pretty special land.

But what if the sites didn't offer those natural possibilities and I was an architect? I guess I wouldn't be a very good one with my lack of knowledge in how to use the tools of the trade. I like what you said or implied that using that equipment and maybe not being a "minimalist" can't only be looked at as the easy way out, as is sometimes implied by some on this site. It also has to be looked at, as you say, as a means of solving problems.

I think there should be a real balance in this knowledge and its application though. I'm afraid I tend to think that Fazio is so good at understanding the possibilities of the tools of his trade and also being fortunate enough to have the budgets to do almost anything with his tools, that he may tend to just overlook some natural possibilities rather than take some chances with them. It sometimes seems that even if he was given an interesting canvas (natural possibility holes) that he would almost prefer that they were a blank canvas.

You, on the other hand, may be in a better position than Fazio, since you say most of your budgets are lower. It seems like that would give you more of an opportunity to work with the natural possibilities. If your client said to you, I want something standard here so as not to take a chance with my players, you could say, well give me another million bucks and I will push that hill or that ridge around and mold it into anything you want it to be!

I've read most of Fazio's book now and he makes no excuses about his abilities with his tools. I can't say I blame him. I thought it was interesting what he said about enviromental restrictions and problems and that he looked at them as more of a challenge than a pain in the ass and maybe he could even make things better than the natural state of affairs enviromentally.

I still wish he would use more of the natural possibilities though. I guess I wish he wasn't so accomplished with the tools of his trade. And I wish he would give the golfer a little more credit for being able to accept some of the "off-beat" which is so much of the fun and interest of much of the old architecture.

I'm going to send you a couple of routing plans. They will probably never get done but it will be interesting to see what you think of them anyway. You couldn't use them because I'm sure they're too outrageous. If somebody saw them and said to me; "Are you crazy, look at all that fairway acreage?", I would say get out of my face, if you want something really interesting you've got to pay for it. I can say that because I'm not in the business so what does it matter.

But sometimes it does matter even to me, Jeff. With that Ardrossan project we worked so long on it came down in the end to me and the land owner who we and our course were going to have to co-exist with for the foreseeable future. We had the ultimate meeting with the entire family and all those that run my club and the lawyers and stuff. I layed out the routing on the table and everything was going great and after a while the principle owner said that hole cuts my cattle off from their barn and I can't accept that hole. So everyone turns to me and after a while I said I'm sorry but I can't give that hole up. Any other one maybe but that one I think if ever built could be one of the greats-I've actually spent scores of hours looking at it.

So I don't know, they told me to get the best people and get the best that was there for the club. So I don't regret it and I think I probably did the right thing and I think we will be there someday. But I love that land and I love that hole and a lot of others on the routing too and it really hurt to give up the dream and have to stop it that way. But still it can't be as tough as some of the things you all go through who are really in the business.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TEPaul,

My usual practice reading posts and threads is to hit the end button and scroll back up to the top of the last post.  I know from its length just who posted, although this weekend and morning there was SOME drama - I couldn't tell if it was yours or mine!

Send me those routings and I'll mark them up with a red pen just like your old english teacher. Not to beat a dead horse from another thread, but I'll bet with more experience, you would have studied that plan, and have been able to come up with a routing with holes you like even better. I'll also bet that if took out that old plan right now, after some months/years of not looking at it, you would probably ask yourself "Why didn't I see this possibility before!"  Try it if you still have the plans.

Like the old football coaches say - There's always a way to beat 'em.  If they stack the run, go to the short pass, etc.  Same is true when a hole must get the Lizzie Borden treatment for some unfair reason.

Jeff

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff;

If it's the hole I think it is, I can see why Tom Paul wasn't willing to compromise.  

You won't believe your eyes when you look at the hole on the Ardrossan property, and you may question his sanity.  

But, having seen it in person, it's quite unique and would be ultra-cool if ever built.  In fact, it's such a wild natural hole, I think you could just cut a hole in the natural greensite, mow a little, and play it right now.  

[TEPaul]

Jeff:

There are no more possibilities for me on that Ardrossan routing and looking at it on the topo doesn't do it justice-you have to see it in person. Somebody has to critique it in person. All you can really see on the topo routing is it's a little wild and there is width up the kazoo.

I had to have spent 300-400 hundreds hours on that site over the months and have looked at everything every which way to Sunday.

There are a couple of cows out there that still think they are married to me. They're pretty smart animals, you know, and I think they know that a solid week together in Pennsylvania constitutes common law marriage.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TEPaul,

Well, I guess if we don't think its fair to rate a hole we have never seen or played, that should apply to holes never built as well. On first reading, it seemed your deal was so close, and worth giving another try. It occurred to me that the cow thing may have also been the last straw in breaking what may have been an unworkable co-existence between you and the farmer.

I shouldn't have made a snap judgement, but was trying to make a point. I'll try it this way - I often ask my associates what they would do to make a routing (green design, concept or strategy, etc.) just 1-2% better.  I certainly don't expect to get an answer of "nothing, its perfect", and rarely do.  In fact, almost always, something can be made better with just a little more study, another point brought our here often - it takes time to develop a good design.

Were there any dead horses out in that field? I will beat one, again trying to make the point about an architect (under contract) responsibilities.  Usually, you are obligated to help the owner make a deal work (after all time and expense put in, etc.) and not anything else.  And almost always, there is a way to make a routing work. We face more difficult environmental and legal obstacles than cows on most projects - although I had one that required leaving cow trails open.

It may involve giving up a favorite hole, but there is always more than one way to skin a cat! Someone once wrote that many golf coures have been ruined in an effort to save one favorite or signature hole.

Having said that, if I had been commissioned to assist you and you didn't want the course without that hole, then you wouldn't build that course no matter how much I implored you I could come up with an equal or better routing.  So, the owner wins again!

Not trying to make light of your obviously difficult situation.

Jeff

[TEPaul]

Jeff:

I didn't mean to imply that the particular routing I spoke about couldn't be improved on. It's just that I don't know what else to do from here and I personally don't see the need to unless someone else can prove otherwise. But no archtiect has seen it except for Bill Coore and a little Gil Hanse. Bill basically gave the green light but more in a general spatial sense which is what I was after.

This was probably a project that was much different than most. We were analyzing a piece of property that was bigger than we would need. We were trying to find the best parts of the property for golf and the rest would remain with the farm. Originally I called it sort of routing for a general spatial outline for the golf club and course. There were actually a number of routings done. Gil Hanse did one for the owner with no input from us. I really felt that the owner was trying to put us in a box by giving us the land that was not the best available for golf. But you know how that goes when someone might have other plans than golf.

Bill Coore did a couple of preliminary routings across the whole place, again, basically to analyze what the best for golf would be. Bill did not want to get too specific with a routing at that point. That just isn't the way he operates.

So I took from a lot of stuff, but mostly Bill's ideas and finished off a routing. There were also two problem areas in a routing context but I think they got solved really well and I think Bill does too. Actually this is a complicated property to route due to some historic buildings and some other natural features.

But the point is there is no reason to compromise on quality now. We aren't in any hurry to move and we don't need to so that's an atmosphere where the club would only do it if they could get something really good-the best that property had to offer.

So there is no rush and we can do it later when there are some expected changes on the farm's end.

But anyway there is a complete routing right now and I think it looks really good. This is amazing land because you can just walk the routing and visualize the holes right in front of you. Of course an architect using this routing could do anything he wants to and I would expect Bill would but I could also see him saying you really don't have to.

[Ed_Baker]

Just bringing this thread back to the top at the request of FAROUCK a new contributor.

There you go FAROUCK read and post away! Welcome to GCA.

All the best,
Ed

[john_stiles]

let this topic re: fazio's book .......go and fall away .....

not a book for a golf library ... put it under 300 acre gardening ....... just got tired of looking at photos to really get into the book .. a book for periodic reading at the bookstore .. save your money to play a fazio course

john stiles

[Willie_Dow]

This is addressed to Brian Morgan in Scotland:
Your pictures of Merion in 1981, which detail the bunkers as your theme in the photography of golf course classic architecture, should be included here, if anyone is willing to wait till the end of the story.
He could put together a better picture of what we have been addressing, without an answer, from Fazio's concepts in "pictures"!

[T_MacWood]

Jim Lewis
Maybe you missed this thread from earlier in the year. I thought it was a fair review of the book from many differing perspectives. After reading several interviews including the one in Golfweek, I'd now describe his attitude toward older work as disdain.

What struck me was his effort to point out why the G.A. work is flawed, usually clothed by how much he enjoys the work of Ross, Tillinghast and MacKenzie, however .... And his view is many times based on historically inaccurate information, which his reader I'm affraid swallows. He also is obviously concerned with criticism,

There is just a lot they did back then that would not be acceptable today from a quality standpoint. Like blind holes. You saw a lot of them on the older courses, but today those would not be acceptable to many people. You have places like Cypress Point, which have two par-3s in a row and two par-5s in a row. Great courses, right? But how would people building a golf course today like that? Probably not very many.

If you go to different older courses, you often have several good holes, several medium holes and several average holes (what is the difference between an average and medium hole?). But if you have several average holes in this current environment, you lose a lot. Architects get grief about one weak hole, and something like that can be taken as a great failure. People are so highly critical today, and its a problem.

I ain't no doctor, but I get the impression he has an inferiority complex.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

Thanks a lot for those quotes from Fazio's book, saves me finding them. I guess my recollection of the things he said about some of the old stuff was much worse than I thought.

It's pretty clear that he is, in fact, "disparaging" the older architecture and not any old "older architecture", he's clearly disparaging Cypress Point of all courses.

There it is; he asks how many people building a course today would like a Cypress Point--probably not very many!!

Yeah right, Tom! That's the most idiotic statement I've ever run across! Who building a course today would NOT like Cypress Point?

Jesus Christmas--what a remark!

[Adam_Messix]

It's interesting that Fazio would comment like this considering that The Cliffs at Keowee Vineyards (probably one of his better efforts in the last 5 years) has back to back par 5s (14 and 15) followed by back to back par 3s (16 and 17)  Fazio had a large piece of property to work with for this course which makes this doubly surprising.  

[TEPaul]

Adam:

You're not kidding that's interesting or doubly interesting! I guess he forgot about the Cliffs of Keowee--he must not have spent much time there, huh?

I hope the owner of Keowee didn't read Fazio's book! He would certainly be scratching his head over Fazio's Cypress remark, don't you think?

[Tags:]

Tags: