What if No Architects Participate in GCA….

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ian,

Stay the heck away from mediocre.....I am trying to corner that market.......

[Garland Bayley]

Ian,

Stay the heck away from mediocre.....I am trying to corner that market.......

LOL, do people still use that? or is it major yucks?

Oh well, if I bore, disgust, or otherwise offend by posting about MW and the distance ball, then I apologize. I have tried starting several threads to discuss architecture, but I don't seem to have the knack (or others find me disgusting). I posted my homework from the Grounds for Golf book a week ago hoping for feedback and it went almost nowhere. I got only one review and I value that very much.

Ian, don't go. I have posted before and will repeat, you and Tom Doak are at the top of my list to be hall of fame posters.

We recently lost Kelly Blake Moran, which saddens me very much. I found his posts very interesting and I was in love with what I read and saw about his latest opening of Lederach. Crazy thoughts cross my mind like travelling from OR to PA to save money on what appears to be a great public golf course.

What can I say about Eckstein? I hope no one would take him/her seriously enough to quit the site. I got IMs from people I don't know from Adam asking me to roast the .... because I happened to be on the same thread he was posting to.

[Ian Andrew]

Garland,

I'm not going anywhere. I did not know that Kelly doesn't post anymore which is too bad since I enjoyed Kelly's comments a great deal. He took the time to think about what he posted and he wasn't afraid to be provocative at times. That is the voice you don't want to lose.

My point is if Tom Doak, Jeff Brauer, Forrest Richardson, Kelly Blake Moran, Paul Cowley, etc. don't post. Will the dicussion have the same depth. It's not just the architects either, this extends to the writers like Brad Klein and the supers like Donnie Beck too. You have to decide whether you want as many of the industry people here or not.

If you knew that some, or possibly all have mentioned they wonder why they come here some days, would some of you change your tone?

What I liked early on was I was spurred to go and read a lot more books and to go and see a lot of courses that were not initially on the radar at the time. This site helped educate me that what I was doing was not good enough. It lead eventually to me starting my own business. That's how important this site can be for some - but I can't wade through the layers of shit to find the same information anymore. I'm not against OT topics - but don't come here just to talk or argue with your friends for fun - use the your email or go to a chat room.

GolfClubAtlas.com is presented to promote the frank commentary on the world's finest golf courses.

[Bill Gayne]

Without the architects there would still be frank commentary, it just wouldn't be very knowledgeable or experienced. I can offer frank commentary but it's of limited value because I lack the real life experience of designing and building courses.

I find the threads hard to follow and nearly impossible to participate simply because of time constraints but I still do learn from the posting of the architects, supers, and writers.

Maybe another question woud be: What if only architects participate in GCA?

[Tom_Doak]

Bill:

If it were only architects participating in GCA.com I suspect there would be no one defending my posts at all ... it might be like one of those Bruce Lee movies.    Either that, or everyone would be so civil that no one would ever ask a tough question.

But, I totally agree with Ian's belief that much of the discussion here lately is about personalities and not ideas.  I realized the site was going downhill when Pat Mucci tried to start his series on the "20 great hazards" from Mark and Forrest's book, and we didn't even get through the discussion of one hole before it fell apart.

I don't think the site should be confined to esoteric discussions of universal concepts -- I will happily leave those to Jeff Brauer and Jim Urbina -- but I do think there needs to be much more discussion about the merits of individual golf holes and much less generalization about the merits of individual golf course architects.

And if Ian quits the site, I'm right behind him.  [Sorry Ian if you have to field 100 calls from ASGCA members next week begging you to quit, but I know you'll do the right thing.]

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

I agree that discussing individual holes is fine.  For most, discussing something concrete to show an esoteric theory is easier.  We all imagine a particular hole when thinking of architectural ideas to some degree, I suspect.

I wonder how many people here are golf course fans vs. golf course architecture fans?  And, is there a difference?

[Forrest Richardson]

Imagining Tom D. as Bruce Lee is — all by itself — worth having a variety of architects participate.

Until Ian mentioned me I have been pretty much out of the "mediocre" discussion, except for a brief retort to try and clear Jack Snyder's name. (I am not so interested in claring my name. I have finally taken Desmond Muirhead's advice that he passed on a few years before his death: [in an Oxford-educated accent...] "I don't give a damn what people think. I really don't you know. I used to, but those days are gone. I could care less now. And that's the truth!"

While I thought the tone of Eckstein's topic was a bit harsh, I must defend such posts. I always go back to the cocktail party — which is what GCA is...an informal discussion among people with a common interset. Having attended my share of cocktail gatherings I can report that there are odd-balls everywhere...and the world will never give up its inventory of people who cannot control their thoughts...or temper them to match the essence of the moment. Eckstein, I feel, may well be one of these individuals. We can all picture what he/she might be like at a gathering of interesting people — how he/she might fumble while talking, saying just the wrong thing at the wrong moment. All the while, he/she has decent ideas...but just an odd way of expressing them.

Ian — you bring up a good question in this post. I think the site would suffer, but I doubt that ALL architects would leave. In fact, if a few of us did say "goodbye" it is likely that we might be replaced with new blood. I think that our (what...maybe a dozen of us?) presence may actually drive a few away. Either they don't feel they can "compete" with some of our comments, or perhaps they feel it would somehow associate them with our likes. That is an opinion, of course.

This is an interesting discussion here. I hope it fosters a return of posts back to where many of us (not just architects) know that the direction should head: Thought-provoking and frank discussion about golf architecture, etc.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Since when is Ian going to quit...
My response was based on the fact that I thought he'd not leave.  If Ian and Tom go, that would really hurt the content of the group.

Separately, I'm not so sure I'm thrilled about Jeff B. already coming up with reasons why someone would like my first solo effort - and it has nothing to do with my talents...

[Forrest Richardson]

Mike — I already like your first design.

[paul cowley]

....without getting too maudlin, being able to communicate and exchange ideas with other designers, or just sitting back and listening has become one of the more enjoyable reasons I choose to participate here......its a partial communion with ones peer group and I find it a respite from my day to day demands that can be all too consuming....it allows me to switch gears without totally abandoning the design arena.
I rarely take things too seriously here nor do I try too seriously to impress....I would much prefer putting that energy in the dirt, which is a much more comfortable and direct way of communicating my ideas...definitely more my medium.

But back to that peer thing .....I find the association here to be a little akin to the relationships I am forming with all the very diverse [and competing] personalities sprinkled among the ASGCA conclave....[Tom, Mike and KBM take notice, although this is early in the year for my recruiting campaign].

.... I think the key to this place, and to many other things beyond the essentials we hold dearly, is to not take it [or oneself] too seriously.

....fortunately, once one has met Forrest, Ian and Jeff, they make taking this advice very easy to do.....sometimes I have a hard time taking them seriously at all   [in fact when they stand next to each other they look just like those three grinning emoticons I just typed]...[I wonder if it will be the same with that Doak bloke?]

[Forrest Richardson]

Paul — I think Ian, Jeff and I would be the following (order has been randomly selected):

 

As for Tom D. — I think he would be the:

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Separately, I'm not so sure I'm thrilled about Jeff B. already coming up with reasons why someone would like my first solo effort - and it has nothing to do with my talents...

Mike,

I am not commenting on your talent, which I think is great.  Just the idea that this board relishes the idea of new gcas' over older established ones, for the reasons noted.  Of course, they may also want to see new design paradigms as well.

[Anthony Butler]

Looking at this issue through the lens of my own business, (Advertising) I've had my work and my agency's work praised and trashed in the trade press. Pieces I really liked never got recognized by major award shows, and other things I was lukewarm about won multiple awards. After the first 10 articles and award shows, you learn to take the rough with the smooth. In most cases, whatever recognition I received never radically changed my perception of the weakness or strength of the work.

If, on the other hand, it was something I had worked on for a year, it would not make me happy to hear a bunch of wiseacres outside the business trash that work. Particularly if they didn't understand the obstacles and limitations faced during its creation. In my business, these people are collectively known as a consumer focus group.

If I were a golf course architect I would view the discussion group at golfclubatlas.com as a particularly large and unruly focus group...  

There's a couple of useful things an architect might get from this site. They get to hear from a geographically diverse group of people (with varying skill levels) what they like and don't like in golf course design. Secondly, specific critiques on individual courses and holes (theirs + others) from a fairly well-travelled and well connected group of golfers. As for the time it takes to separate the wheat from the chaff, that's an individual decision for each architect to make.

***In my experience most relevant comments are posted in the first 5-6 pages of any thread. After that, they often become about different personalities criticizing each other's comprehension skills.***

The main subject matter for the rest of us on this site will never disappear, unless all golf courses existing and future cease to exist. Of course, if the actual creators of this subject matter excuse themselves, the discussion group on golfclubatlas.com could become a gigantic echo chamber filled with half-facts, unsubstantiated opinions and virtual pissing matches decided not by the quality of argument but by how many of the top 100 GD courses you have played.

I sure hope this doesn't happen... I will try to do my bit to ensure everyone gets what they need out of the site.

[George Pazin]

I definitely think the site would be immeasurably less interesting, less enjoyable and less useful without the architects participating (I'd further extend that to all industry participants). That's why I chose to defend Tom D's comments in the Ballyneal thread last week (and was myself criticised and ridiculed for doing so, not that I really care, it's just indicative of the types of people out there).

I hate when anyone questions anyone else's motives (unless of course they are responding to a personal attack). I don't see where anyone gets off thinking his own motives are somehow more pure than another's. (I could also make a similar comment about reading comprehension, golf knowledge, etc.)

If I could make a couple little suggestions to the architects (and other industry people) out there:

- realize that they are going to be bozos and try to ignore them (or at least not get dragged into the type of personal battle I did last week! Do as I say....)

- more importantly, don't be afraid to call BS on those of us who spout off without really understanding the nuts and bolts of what is going on. You can do it politely while still informing and educating the rest of us.

In regard to the quality of content on the site, many of us look to the architects to lead the way, so don't be hesitant to start topics yourself. Everyone knows it's a lot easier to be a critic than to have original ideas yourself, which is probably why a lot of people on this site focus on criticising or discussing golf courses, without delving into the other aspects of architecture. That is where we need your help!

Lastly, thanks to all the industry guys out there who contribute your time and thoughts to the site. Don't let distractions like Michelle Wie or things like juvenile personal attacks stop you from sharing your passion with the rest of us. You are truly appreciated, whether we take the time to thank you or not.

 

[Forrest Richardson]

George — We probably owe you bigger and more deserved thanks. After all, those of us who design courses get paid for this — in a way. I think it keeps us thinking...and it challenges us to look at stuff from other angles. Those armchair architects out there (at least I think... ) are not being paid....right?

[paul cowley]

....digressing, but I hope that Eckstein lands on Go and gets out of jail free.

This site is not called Golf Club ATLAS for nothing....hunker down, SHRUG it off, get back in THE GAME!....y' :)ll.

[cary lichtenstein]

This is an incredibily sad thread...the low point of my 3/4 years on GCA.

[John Kavanaugh]

This is an incredibily sad thread...the low point of my 3/4 years on GCA.

Cary,

It would have been more help if you got sad on threads like when people thought Nicklaus wasn't qualified to build Dismal River without seeing Sand Hills...Or sad when Ron Whitten was chased off the site...Or sad when the modern California school of architecture was thrown to the dogs without any discussion at all...There were plenty of times to be sad when it was less convenient...Ask yourself why a guy like Don Knott doesn't post..that's sad..

[Forrest Richardson]

Don Knott doesn't post because I had a restraining order served on him in 2002.

[Dan Kelly]

sad when Ron Whitten was chased off the site...

When Ron Whitten was chased off the site?

If I remember right (please correct me if I'm wrong):

Ron Whitten left the site (or, at least, ceased posting) when a number of us were asking him to provide evidence for his attribution of Bethpage Black to Mr. Burbeck, over Mr. Tillinghast.

If being challenged to back up one's claims constitutes "being chased off," here or elsewhere, we're in a heap o' trouble!

[John Kavanaugh]

Dan,

If you don't think everything Golf Digest is bashed on this site you have not been paying attention.  Burbeck was simply the last straw.

[cary lichtenstein]

I'm thinking of taking a break from CGA for awhile, spending way too much time on it or at least start skipping some of the negative threads.

I seriously doubt if I were a golf course architect, other than the favored few, that I would take the abuse dished out here.

[BCrosby]

So Dan Kelly hasn't been payng attention? Everything Whitten has done has been trashed at GCA? Bold words. Bold words.

Just off the top of my head, Dan and others were paying attention at least enough to praise (i) Whitten's articles on the changes at ANGC over the last several years, (ii) Whitten's criticisms of various US Open and PGA set-ups, (iii) Whitten's championing of Engh, Brauer and other lesser known architects, (iv) Whitten's insights into Fazio's work over the last couple of years, and so forth.

So tell us again who has not been paying attention?

GCA is like a letters to the editor box at a large magazine. You get all kinds. People in the public spotlight need to deal with it. I think, by and large, they do.

Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

Bob,

Must be me not paying attention...Except for noticing the latest bash of him on the Bloomfield thread didn't even get his name right.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Bob,

Must be me not paying attention...Except for noticing the latest bash of him on the Bloomfield thread didn't even get his name right.  

Tim Gavrich bash consisted of "disagree respectfully with Rod Whitten", and then went on in some detail outlining the different facets and perceived failings of the course in question.  

Other than some sloppy typing, I thought that was a gentlemanly way to disagree, and if that's bashing, John, then maybe I don't see it.