Replica courses article in Links Magazine

[A.G._Crockett]

In the new issue of Links Magazine, which got to my house yesterday, there is a very good article on the subject of "replica" courses.  I tried to find it on their website, and couldn't (though I did get a great screensaver!)  BTW, Geoff Shackelford wrote a sidebar to the article as well.

I enjoyed the article thoroughly, and wondered who else out there might have read it and what your feelings were.

[Dan Kelly]

A_G_Crockett --

Got to my house yesterday, too.

I didn't get around to reading the story -- but did look at the cover pretty closely, and had the first thought (a quick one, too) that I've ever had about Replica courses.

That thought was: Why not? So long as the USGA doesn't start playing its Opens there ... why not?

I'm sure someone here will be able to set my mind straight on this!

[THuckaby2]

Hmmmm... not that I care much one way or the other about this, and I read the article and enjoyed it, and have played a few replica courses that I also enjoyed...

But Dan, you of all people have no problem with this?  What happened to the high principles re copyright?  Reward for individual effort for research?  Are the principles gone so quickly?

If so, look for me to ransack your column and publish a Best of Dan Kehly out here, changing the words just enough like the letters in your name so that so you'd lose if you sue me.  I'll say it's "inspired by a great MN columnist."

Just pulling your chain, really.  But this was surprising....  

TH

[Jack]

I got the issue today. Haven't read the article yet but I am predisposed to not like replication of golf courses.

I also thought Disney's plan to build a civil war theme park in the middle of the actual civil war sites was a bad idea too.

I also dislike Las Vegas.

I think I may alienate a few people with this post.

So be it.  

[Chris_Clouser]

What if the USGA hosted the Open at a site that was replica course of the great holes in the UK?

What kind of reaction do you think that would get?

[Steve L.]

Heck, lets play the US Open on the replica course made up of great US Open holes...!  From #1 Winged Foot all the way through to...?

[Jack]

I am now absolutely convinced that I am a first class hypocrite.

My aesthetic sensibilities tell  me to disparage replicas.

however,

I would sell  my first born into a life of servitude to play a good replication of Augusta and if I knocked it on in 2 on either 13 or 15 everyone who I have ever known in my life would soon know about it.

[Dan Kelly]

All I said was: Why not?

Tom IV --

I know you're just griefin' me -- but I'll answer you, anyway: If I thought these "replica" courses were taking one penny away from the courses being "replicated" or the designers of those courses, I would oppose them with my usual strident implacability. If I thought there was one person on Earth who, given the choice between playing the Road Hole and some "replica" of the Road Hole, would choose the "replica," I'd oppose the "replica" courses with my usual strident implacability.

But I don't think either of those things. I think (subject to being corrected, by someone who knows better) that these courses are harmless novelties, and that those who play them probably have some fun doing so -- as much fun as they might have from your typical new course catering to the kinds of people who'll never have the opportunity to see the real Road Hole or to play a shot over or into the real Rae's Creek (or even over or into the real Cypress Hedge!).

JakaB --

In re: "Why do people want life to be so damn easy...take a pill for a hard-on or play a classic hole out of context of history and exclusitivity.   Buy a happy meal and use the Hamburgler as an ass plug...or work hard and earn your happiness.....its becoming a happy world my friend and I don't seem to be in a hurry to jump aboard."

Nor am I, sir! Nor am I.

The only one of those things I've done (not that I wouldn't do others of them, if I had no better option!) is to work hard to earn my happiness.

But neither am I in a hurry to condemn those with ideas different from mine. I've never played a "replica" course, and if I had the money to build a golf course, I certainly wouldn't build a "replica" course -- but I'm just not seeing how anyone is being harmed if people play classic holes "out of context of history and exclusitivity." That's not how you want to play them, and that's not how I want to play them -- but if some other clown wants to play them that way, it's no skin off my nose (or true golf's, either, in my view).

Look at it this way: Every clown who's over at the "replica" course isn't clogging the way ahead of you!

[A.G._Crockett]

What I found interesting about the article was the author's (Wexler?) contention that the early designers in America, MacDonald especially and then Raynor, et. al., frequently copied holes from G.B., at least in a general sense.  I had not read that anywhere before, though it makes perfect sense.  

I took the author's premise to be that the "revival" of replica courses after the RTJ period of "long and strong" design is exactly that; a revival.  Although the newer courses are more or less exact replicas, rather than what might be called artist's renderings, the author contends that it has always been thus...

I really, really liked his tounge-in-cheek comments about the Bear's Best courses, since here in Atlanta I've be wrestling with whether or not to pay a lot of money to play a course designed by a guy I don't really like made up of replicas of holes that I'm not really familiar with!

[THuckaby2]

If I thought there was one person on Earth who, given the choice between playing the Road Hole and some "replica" of the Road Hole, would choose the "replica," I'd oppose the "replica" courses with my usual strident implacability.

Dan - prepare to be stridently implacable.  The article discusses just this as a real possibility.  You may not believe it, and I'm not 100% sure it's true, but it sure is possible that quite a few people play a "faux" Road Hole and decide to save their money and that's good enough.  I can think of many people I know for whom this would be VERY possible....

TH

[Michael Dugger]

Read it, it was ok.  I always liked the looks of Royal Links in Vegas, although I about shit when I read that they charge nearly $225 bucks to play.  You've got to be kidding.  ONly in Vegas.  In a sense all golf course architecture is replication.  I'm sure some yaywho is going to come in and make beef with that statement but it has been discussed on here many times, "Are there any original ideas left?"  Invariably someone is going to chime in with their idea for a 'reverse biarritz' or what have you, but really, now.  Par sixes.  700 yard holes.  

[Jack]

I am busted.

You and I know I really don't want to belong to Augusta.
I would be very disillusioned.
My place is among those I can feel superior to ( there aren't many left but they know who they are ).

Some of my favorite places in this world are on the east end of Long Island. I visit there often. I have decided I will never live there. You can't own beauty. You can't possess a sunset.

I will sleep well tonight just knowing that Augusta is still there.
I will never play at Augusta.

I may sneak on to Shinnecock someday and play a few holes till the ranger has me arrested.

Jack,

Why not just work a little harder and become a member of Augusta....if you want something why not simply make the sacrifices to achieve it...or just admit its not really what you want....If you need a plan...here it is:   Sell everything you own and go the the Atlanta area and do simple acts of kindness to strangers asking for nothing in return....make a number of peoples lives a little better while never seeking publicity or advertising your good deeds.   Eventually despite your best attempts to remain quiet you will be discovered and rise through the ranks of society until everyone will want to know Jack.   Riches will be bestowed upon you and that elusive invite will find its way to your door....Sure you'll go to Hell because you only did your good deeds to gain entry into a country club....but even Satan couldn't hold 15 green with a three wood...so the fires will burn a little brighter on the days of your fond memories of the real and only AGNC.

[ForkaB]

Jack

Tour 18 in Houston (the only replica course I have played--outside of NGLA, of course) has a great Amen corner that is apparently pretty authentic, except for the beer babes who will take your picture teeing off on #12........

Dna (that's a tyop, but I like it!)

They used to have a replica of the lighthouse on their replica of Harbour Town's 18th, but they got sued by Sea Pines and had to demolish it.

[Dan Kelly]

Another quick thought, inspired by Mr. Huckaby, about "copyrights" and "replicas" -- a thought that I think JakaB will appreciate:

Building a replica hole, it seems to me, is the moral equivalent of quoting another person's book. So long as one transcribes the quotation accurately (or as accurately as possible), and so long as one attributes the quotation properly, and so long as the quoting doesn't go at such length as to steal the original's very essence, few will find fault with the quoter. Some may well observe, and properly so, that the quotee deserves more credit for the quoted thought than the quoter deserves -- but very, very few of us, if any, will find the act of quoting repugnant on its face.

Check this out, JakaB! Here's what I think you're saying -- in the words of the oft-quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson: "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."

(Reminds me of an old New Yorker cartoon, with a guy saying: "Well, of course you may quote me. I'm oft-quoted." Sorry I couldn't have been reminded of a cartoon I drew myself.)

[THuckaby2]

Dan:  interesting comparison, but as Rich pointed out, the "quotees" don't want to be quoted, in the case of these courses.  I refer you to the lawsuits filed by several courses against the original Tour 18....

And I can't say as I blame them.

Words can be quoted, exactly.

Golf holes cannot.  There are certain elements that will always be missing.

TH

[Dan Kelly]

Dan:  interesting comparison, but as Rich pointed out, the "quotees" don't want to be quoted, in the case of these courses.  I refer you to the lawsuits filed by several courses against the original Tour 18....

And I can't say as I blame them.

I don't blame them, either. I just think they got their undies in a bundle for no good reason.

I was attempting an analogy (not a pure equation) between a quotation and a replica hole -- and am (and was!) aware that "certain elements ... will always be missing." I was attempting to acknowledge that fact with the words "as closely as possible."

Oh, well.

As for the need to be stridently implacable: If there are really people who, given the choice between the Road Hole and a "replica" Road Hole, would choose the "replica," then (a) the world is even more screwed up than I'd imagined, and even fuller of clueless goofballs, and (b) I want them thousands of miles away from the Road Hole. I want them in Houston or someplace, playing Tour 18.

So, I've changed my view: If there really are such people, let's make sure they have what they want, lest they get in the way of what we want!

[Advice for Jack]

Hey Jack if you want to play Shinney really bad simply take a week of vacation and go out there and caddy.  They send caddies off the first tee at 4:00 if they are empty which can be quite often in May.  Nothing is impossible.

[THuckaby2]

Dan:

I'm glad you've changed your view.

Because I truly believe many people MIGHT be able to afford a trip to the UK, or to Pebble, or whatever, and decide not to do so, decide "close enough" when they play these replica holes.  There's absolutely no data on this, it's just a feeling I have.  And I wouldn't call these people goofballs, nor tell them to stay in Houston - I'd say keep at it, maybe some day things will work out, but I sure understand financial realities.

I also believe neither Pebble nor St. Andrews nor any of these places is hurting for money, so they can afford to miss these people.

But the principle does exist, in any case.

TH

[rpurd]

I've played the tour 18 course outside of Dallas.  I could see some basic resemblances for the holes, but for the most part just a good round of golf.  The greens were very fast....even too fast in some instances (#10 there which I believe is the church pew hole at Oakmont had a green running at least 14 with a sharp slant......one of my partners who is a 3 handicap 7 putted the green).

[Craig_Rokke]

After reading the article, I concluded that Silva's Black Creek
sounds like an interesting place to play. Has anyone had the chance and done so?

There is little original thought in golf hole concepts these days--everything is at least loosely based on something that's already been done before. Replica courses are fine with me, even if some examples border on cheesy. The golf world is a big one, and there's room for replica courses.

I think the best approach in this arena is to shoot for the flavor of a particular architect, and adapt it to that particular site. there are fewer limitations that way, and less holes that
are forced upon the land.

I usually look forward to LINKS, but boy, I really had to dig through this issue for some beef. Just a pile of golf trip/golf retirement promotional material. I do enjoy Wexler's writing, however.

[Jack]

Thanks.

I may do it.

Hey Jack if you want to play Shinney really bad simply take a week of vacation and go out there and caddy.  They send caddies off the first tee at 4:00 if they are empty which can be quite often in May.  Nothing is impossible.

[Daryl "Turboe" Boe]

I have played both Tour 18 courses in outings connected with trade shows, played Golden Ocalla (I like the way they mixed in a few replica holes with the original ones), and have played the front 9 of Black Creek (after playing Lookout in the morning) and I must say that they were each enjoyable in their own way.  Not all because of the architectural significance, but doggonnit they were FUN.  And isnt that the reason that about 99% of the normal golfers play.

Jack,

Regarding playing Augusta's replica holes.  While playing in an outing at the Power Generation Show in Houston at Tour 18 a number of years ago I hit my shot at the #12 Augusta replica stiff.  It rolled directly at the hole and stopped about 2 inches short of falling in.  Now it wasnt the real Augusta, but do you think that each year when the Masters broadcast came on that I might not have mentioned that to anyone within earshot and gotten a warm feeling inside.  You bet I would have!  In fact I still seem to find opportunities if I am watching the broadcast with friends.

Anyway other than being looked down upon by the starch pants purists, what the heck can you find wrong with them.  

I love wine, and my neighbors wife always has White Zin around their kitchen.  Probably not what I would be stocking in my house, but I dont deny her the right to consume it or criticize her for it.  I may tease her husband when she is not around, but never to her face.  

Replica courses exist for a reason.  There are people who want to play them.  That is why I love capitalism, if people dont want them, they wont be around for very long.

[Mike_Sweeney]

I enjoyed Royal Links in Vegas and Architects Golf Club in New Jersey, and while they are both "Replica" courses, they have completely different styles. When you drive up to Royal Links which has the goofiest looking Scottish castle as a clubhouse , it is very clear that you are playing Vegas-style Scottish golf. PB Dye made the holes as true replicas to the point where they have actually constructed a Wall for the 17th at TOC. To date all of my overseas golf has been in Ireland, so it was fun to get some Vegas style exposure to Scotland, but clearly it is not the same experience as I had at Carne (Ireland) on a 40 mph windy day.

Architects Golf Club in NJ www.thearchitectsclub.com has a totally different feel. It is a "Tribute" course to 14 or so golf architects. There are no replica holes, Stephen Kay and Ron Whitten tried to recreate a certain style of each architect, but they did not copy a hole. It starts out with Old Tom Morris and end up with RT Jones. Here is a picture from the Seth Raynor Par 3 #8
 It is also priced more realistically, and I am sure that I will play it again as I travel that way frequently. Again I enjoyed it, and it did not seem as goofy as Royal Links

[Tom Doak]

As everyone knows, I hate replica courses because they're a cop-out.  They're also a waste of construction cost -- certainly an architect ought to be able to come up with a good golf hole without moving as much earth as it takes to re-create Rae's Creek.

I understand why they're popular, and why they will proliferate, but it's a terrible thing.  And, can someone who builds replica courses call themselves a "golf course architect"?  I'd like to know what everyone thinks.

Dan's point about quotations is also interesting.  Nearly every month now I pick up some magazine or other and read an interview with a golf course architect I've never heard of, who may or may not have ever built a golf course.  What do they all have in common?  They quote Alister MacKenzie or George Thomas like they are dear old friends.

[Bye]

Tom,
So are the Kay and Silva courses (Black Creek, Architects) ok while the others are not? Kay, Silva and Forse are the current day Raynor's, stamping out the same formula on every course, even doing tribute courses.

Is this wrong? Where do you draw the line?