[Bill Brightly]

OK, you are the greens chairman at an"old dead guy" course that has been substantially "modernized" over the years...
You have convinced enough of the members and the board to restore the course, hired the architect, and established a budget.

What's the role now? Make sure the bills get paid and get out of  the way, or provide detailed input to the decisions the architect will make?

[Dave_Miller]

OK, you are the greens chairman at an"old dead guy" course that has been substantially "modernized" over the years...
You have convinced enough of the members and the board to restore the course, hired the architect, and established a budget.

What's the role now? Make sure the bills get paid and get out of  the way, or provide detailed input to the decisions the architect will make?

First the membership has to define what they want to restore to.  Original drawings and plans. As builts, photos from opening or over the years.  
A lot of research is needed to understand exactly what is being done.
This is not carte blanch for the Green Chairman or a small group of members to change the course to their vision.
It is also not carte blanch for another architect to come and put his signature on the course or say what his vision would have been when the course was first built.
History of the course and the changes over the years are very important but you have to define what is meant by restoration.
Fairways and Greens,
DAve

[Bill Brightly]

We have arial photos from the 30's, 40's and 60's, as well as the original concept drawings. (Many fairway bunkers were never put in, some were removed, and others were re-built in a manner that varies from other courses our dead guy built. )The green complexes, thankfully, are wonderful and still in tact.

It is generally accepted that our tee shots on par 4's and 5's are now boring, "hit it as long and straight as you can", with few risk/reward options.

The choices will mainly come down to what fairway bunkers we put in or change. Obviously, where we put them, and how we build them, will have a great impact on the strategy decisions golfers will have to make. So when I say "restore" I mean re-create the strategic decisions that our old dead guy wanted us to make.

[JESII]

You probably need to start with as much detailed research material as possible to determine exactly what this particular restoration entails. You then need to be active and vocal with the architect to assure that the clubs wishes are followed as strictly as logistics will allow. You will then be able to clearly verbalize to the membership what is going on and why. Just my opinion by the way.

[SL_Solow]

Returning to your original question, I have been there, albeit in the role of club President.  My experience leads me to strongly recommend that you select an architect who shares your vision and who has earned your trust.  The same advice extends to the selection of a construction company.  There will inevitably be disputes among the members.  If you or any member of your committee is perceived as being the "shadow" architect it will prolong the dispute.  However, if the expert has the ability to act within a framework approved by the committee and the members, you will be able to concentrate on getting the job done. Disputes will be resolved by invoking the name of the agreed expert. There will be plenty for you to do in making site visits, expediting scheduling, managing expectations etc.  But you should leave the real work to your experts.  Just hire carefully.

[cary lichtenstein]

First, who are you?

Real Name please, introduce yourself to all of us.

[Jim Thompson]

I think the first thing you need to do is recognize that restoring a "great dead guy course" to its original state would only serve to create an out of date golf course.  I think you have to put in your mind, given what the dead guy originally did with the course, what you believe he would do today.  For many holes you would be able to do thing very close to what the original was, however holes with significant elevation changes may have to be severley changed to make the best "dead guy esque" hole for todays game.

Cheers!

JT

[Ian Andrew]

From my blog:

The chairperson’s task is to organize and hold regular meetings of the committee and superintendent to discuss new ideas or to deal with any problems that have arisen. The greens chair or committee representative should also be present for any meeting with the golf architect, and should be able to make to make quick decisions when changes arise in the field. An effective chairman and committee can develop and implement plans that can be enjoyed by golfers for generations. Conversely, an ineffectual committee can drag the course down, through meddling or poor decision making. Being a chairman or member of the Green Committee is not a popularity contest. Tough decisions frequently must be made regarding disruptive and expensive programs and projects, and thick skin and an ample dose of conviction are required.

[Tom_Doak]

The whole problem with the current "restoration" kick is that everyone (except maybe Ian) made the assumption that the green chairman ought to be involved in some architectural project.  I understand that it was part of the hypothetical case, but no one questioned this.

The green chairman's primary role is the first sentence of Ian's description, plus, to keep the membership off the superintendent's back.

If there is a restoration project, the green chairman should provide answers to the architect's questions ... and the architect should have questions for him, about the club's general direction and perhaps about specific features and their value today.  But the green chairman should not have to provide unsolicited input, unless you have selected the wrong architect.

[Troy Alderson]

The whole problem with the current "restoration" kick is that everyone (except maybe Ian) made the assumption that the green chairman ought to be involved in some architectural project.  I understand that it was part of the hypothetical case, but no one questioned this.

The green chairman's primary role is the first sentence of Ian's description, plus, to keep the membership off the superintendent's back.

If there is a restoration project, the green chairman should provide answers to the architect's questions ... and the architect should have questions for him, about the club's general direction and perhaps about specific features and their value today.  But the green chairman should not have to provide unsolicited input, unless you have selected the wrong architect.

Tom,

In your professional opinion does that apply to general managers and any other executive?  

The membership and greens committee then appears to only provide the decision to remodel/restore, correct?

Troy

[Tom_Doak]

Troy:

I meant that the green chairman should not be actively making suggestions to the architect.  Too often on these projects, the chairman wants the architect to do his bidding, instead of letting the architect tell the membership what he thinks the right thing is.  And yes, that would go for the club manager and president as well.

I don't mean that the green chairman should just shut up and go away.  He is usually the key liaison between the architect and the club, and he should be conversant with the rationale behind all of the architectural decisions that have been made.

The membership speaks when it votes to proceed with a project or not.  If the members want to approve the plan on a line-item-veto basis and/or submit other work to be done, the architect should turn and run!

[Troy Alderson]

Tom,

So the greens committee chairman would present to the membership what the architect has laid out.  

But why wouldn't the membership have some say?  A general idea for the architect to work off.  "We would like ... type golf course with few/many bunkers, big/small greens, wide/narrow fairways, etc.

Isn't the final layout presented to the membership or green committee for final approval?

Troy

[Tom_Doak]

Troy:

Architecture is not democracy.

The time for member input (and chairman input) is at the very beginning of the project when they are choosing an architect.  That's their chance to find someone who is on the same page and understands their general desires.  But once they've hired an architect, it's time to let him (or her) do the job.  Micromanagement gets you crap.

If we are talking about restoration then there is not much discussion to be had about the number of bunkers, size of fairways, etc. -- those are known quantities.  If we are talking about renovation, then clearly there will be a general conversation about goals and styles and so forth at the beginning.  

[Troy Alderson]

Tom,

Thank you for the lesson.  I will keep that in mind when that opportunity presents itself to me.

Troy

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Spoken like a true architect.

And, I understand where you're coming from.

But, think back to all of the disfigurations that have occured to classic golf courses over the years at the hands of "ARCHITECTS"

Maybe, had the Green Chairman taken a more active role, those disfigurations might have been avoided or muted.

When one is ill and seeks a remedy within the medical profession, one discovers that Surgeons feel that surgery is the solution.  Other physicians feel that drugs are the solution.
Other physicians feel that alternative medicine may be the solution, and still other physicians feel that other remedies can cure your ills.

As the patient, you are left as, and have to be, your own patient advocate, doing your due diligence, and making informed, fact based decisions, with a little gut guidance thrown in.

Sometimes Green Chairman inherit issues.
Other times they create them.

In a sense, they must be the advocate for the golf club.

All too often Green Chairman view golf strictly in the context of their game.

A good Green Chairman must view golf through the eyes of the entire membership.

They must protect the golf course from radical ideas.

Their responsibility is architectural, agronomic, financial, political, etc., etc..

Long after the architect has left the property, they as members will be held accountable for the work that occured on the golf course on THEIR WATCH.  And, their lives, as members will not be the same for years to come.

I've seen Master plans that are SO RADICAL that you wouldn't believe them.   Is the Green Chairman to rubber stamp the architect's work, or, is he, with the superintendent, the last line of defense the club has before it spends millions and gets a product that they'll have to live with for 20 years ?

It's not as simple as you, or proponents of views opposite of yours, would think.

It's a complex issue, with a great amount of responsibility on all parties shoulders.

You and I may have philosophical differences on this issue, but, giving anyone carte blanche or complete, discretionary, creative license is something I couldn't endorse.

Remember, in the context of a restoration, renovation or modernization, you're a surgeon  

[Anthony Butler]

Tom Doak,

Spoken like a true architect.

And, I understand where you're coming from.

But, think back to all of the disfigurations that have occured to classic golf courses over the years at the hands of "ARCHITECTS"

Maybe, had the Green Chairman taken a more active role, those disfigurations might have been avoided or muted.

When one is ill and seeks a remedy within the medical profession, one discovers that Surgeons feel that surgery is the solution.  Other physicians feel that drugs are the solution.
Other physicians feel that alternative medicine may be the solution, and still other physicians feel that other remedies can cure your ills.

As the patient, you are left as, and have to be, your own patient advocate, doing your due diligence, and making informed, fact based decisions, with a little gut guidance thrown in.

Sometimes Green Chairman inherit issues.
Other times they create them.

In a sense, they must be the advocate for the golf club.

All too often Green Chairman view golf strictly in the context of their game.

A good Green Chairman must view golf through the eyes of the entire membership.

They must protect the golf course from radical ideas.

Their responsibility is architectural, agronomic, financial, political, etc., etc..

Long after the architect has left the property, they as members will be held accountable for the work that occured on the golf course on THEIR WATCH.  And, their lives, as members will not be the same for years to come.

I've seen Master plans that are SO RADICAL that you wouldn't believe them.   Is the Green Chairman to rubber stamp the architect's work, or, is he, with the superintendent, the last line of defense the club has before it spends millions and gets a product that they'll have to live with for 20 years ?

It's not as simple as you, or proponents of views opposite of yours, would think.

It's a complex issue, with a great amount of responsibility on all parties shoulders.

You and I may have philosophical differences on this issue, but, giving anyone carte blanche or complete, discretionary, creative license is something I couldn't endorse.

Remember, in the context of a restoration, renovation or modernization, you're a surgeon  

To Tom's point, once you've decided to have surgery and chosen the surgeon wouldn't you let them do their thing? (Surgeons also don't have to put up with advice while they're working, due to the customer being unconscious...)

Continuing your medical analogy, Patrick, if Tom is a surgeon, I guess the course superintendent is the physician. Although if you chose surgery their role is more of a rehabilitation therapist, correct?

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

The Role of the Greens Chairman...

1)  Find Alligator Hide - wrap self in it.
2)  Purchase Kevlar Body Armor - Place over alligator hide.
3)  Find inexhaustible supply of small squeezable flesh colored foam ear plugs - similar to type found at NHRA Drag Strips - Place in ears.  Keep supply handy, especially during the weekend games and the post-round 19th hole bitch sessions.
4)  Schedule a lot of meetings with the membership to discuss goals, plans, process, etc.  Write down all suggestions and store in file 13.
5)  Blackmail club president and treasurer into 50% more budget and a timeline 2 years longer than necessary.
6)  Make friends with Greens Chairmen at surrounding clubs.  Keep them involved with process and give them access to the site so that you can play at their clubs while yours is out-of-action.
7)  Turn budget over to chosen architect & construction team, light a candle daily, and face PVGC 5 times daily in prayer.
 Hide all plans so that the membership can not chime in.  Speak in vague references to perserving and protecting the original design intent while forests are denuded and carry bunkers are installed.  Resist urge to show plans to club board for similar reasons.
9)  Accept the architect's vision totally - you only have to play there and pay the bills.
10)  Head to Betty Ford for a rejuvenation.  Return and resume copious consumption - nobody likes a quitter.
11)  Take the bows on opening day like the proud father.  (In reality, Mom did all of the work in the birthing room)  
12)  Move to a non-golfing country...

Just kidding...

JWK

[Ian Andrew]

Pat,

Even after a committee selects an architect, they can dismiss him if they don't like the direction. The architect can't do a thing until a board approves the work and finances it. They have complete control over the process.

[TEPaul]

Threadkiller:

The proper role of the Green Chairman is pretty simple really, particularly if one is to be realistic about it.

The idea is to recognize that no matter what you do everyone is going to hate you anyway because most everyone who plays golf thinks they're a good architect.

So you need to recognize that since you're so hated you probably have only a limited amount of time to be the Green Chairman and since you obviously think you're an excellent architect too and you've got the temporary power, the idea is to redesign the golf course as much as you possible can before they throw you out.

The basic idea is to leave the biggest mark you possibly can on the architecture of the golf course.

That's the sign of a successful Green Chairman. And if you're lucky enough to graduate from the Green Chairman to the President of the golf club you might have a shot at being a truly great green chairman. If you can manage to do something like completly reroute the entire course you may even go down in history.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

TEPaul -

"The basic idea is to leave the biggest mark you possibly can on the architecture of the golf course."
 
As opposed to the Hypocratic Oath:  Do no harm...

The only re-route that I can think of that has been a total success might be TOC at St. Andrews...

;>

JWK

[JESII]

That just means someone is due to come up with a great one. Let's get to work boys.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul -

"The basic idea is to leave the biggest mark you possibly can on the architecture of the golf course."
As opposed to the Hypocratic Oath:  Do no harm...
The only re-route that I can think of that has been a total success might be TOC at St. Andrews..."

Threadkiller:

There you go--now you're getting the picture.

TOC was rerouted by the world's first green chairman in 1850---the incomparable Sir Algernon Packaderm Playfair who set the pace for all future green chairmen by getting Alan Robertson to completely reroute TOC. Sir Al was a bit naive though since he only decreed that the course be played backwards. If he'd been thinking he would've had AlanR redesign all the original greens into tees and all the original tees into greens too.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

TEP -

A pity that A.R. could not forsee the Pro V1...

Imagine the how big the falling out that A.R. would have had with Old Tom if Old Tom had been using the ProV1 as opposed to the NXT...

Interesting that Titleist can poke ironic fun at themselves...

JWK

[TEPaul]

Threadkiller:

Actually of all the people on this website the one who would make the most ideal green chairman is undeniably Patrick Mucci. He has that attribute that makes green chairmen what they're best known for----he absolutely refuses to acknowledge that anyone might be right about anything other than himself.

[Dave_Miller]

 

 This is not carte blanch for the Green Chairman or a small group of members to change the course to their vision.
It is also not carte blanch for another architect to come and put his signature on the course or say what his vision would have been when the course was first built.

History of the course and the changes over the years are very important but you have to define what is meant by restoration.
Fairways and Greens,
Dave

The true role of the Green Chairman and Green Committee is to oversee the maintenance of the golf Course and to provide the Super the tools he needs.  
They can provide general guidelines such as we would like rough for everyday play at a certain height, etc.

The Green Chairman does not and should not have the authority to restore the course to his wishes.

The Membership needs to make an informed decision as to what they want and let the Architect do it.  

Sometimes the Architect can get carried away and this needs to be carefully watched but for the most part the Architect will follow the guidelines.

Fairways and Greens,
Dave

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()