[Tom_Doak]

I guess I need to make a correction.

When you are basing your travel decisions on the name of an old dead guy, you get to make the decision based on the sum total of their work and everything you know about them.  Individual courses may vary and DO vary but there is still an overall view.

The problem with relying on the name of a living designer [and paying the market price] is that you have to rely on them continuing to build the same sort of quality projects that earned them their status to begin with.  And it's clear from recent history that many "names" get too big, get spread too thin, and the quality of their work goes downhill once they start making the big bucks.  Their business managers are too busy raking in the cash.

Andrew [presumably not the son of Peter]:  I can tell you that my "name" was worth very little based on my books ... my design fee has gone way up only in the last three years.

James [presumably son of Tony]:  Your dad has done some fine work and has lots of fans; that isn't going to change Andrew's list of favorites, so don't take it personally.  It wasn't so long ago I had to make the same arguments you are making in order to get work, so I understand where you're coming from.  Just don't lump me in with some of the other names down there.  I don't work down there often, but when I do, I work as hard as anybody.

[George Pazin]

Tom, have the folks at Beechtree or Quails Crossing said anything to you about increased business since you've become more of a name? Or were they already running close to max?

[Tom_Doak]

George:

Neither course has ever run "close to the max" and I haven't heard there being any significant difference in play.

Name value is only good for getting people to a course for the first time.  After that, they will return based on how they like it ... if they like it, your name value for them transfers to other courses you've designed.

Now, if Beechtree was in Portland or Seattle, I'm sure it would have gotten a lot more attention after Pacific Dunes.  But not many people from Baltimore go out to Oregon to play and then look to see if I've done any work in their local area.

[John Kavanaugh]

Tom, have the folks at Beechtree or Quails Crossing said anything to you about increased business since you've become more of a name? Or were they already running close to max?

George,

At Quail Crossing you now see many more references to the greatness of Doak than were around a few years ago.  Yes..the success of Pacific Dunes has been responsible for more play.  

[Tom_Doak]

John:  I'm sure the course makes more references to me, but you think the golfers really care?  Did it cause more people to take a second look?  Or is the course just being better operated now?

[John Kavanaugh]

Tom,

There is now a buzz about the Doak course in town that was never there before...Quail Crossing did just now finish their clubhouse and it is nice...It really is a course more fun to study than to play and nobody studies courses by nobodies..

I understand you hated your time in southern Indiana and it shows in the small details...kinda sad.  It along with the new course by Liddy makes for some really nice affordable golf...Now if Liddy would just find some fame we might become a destination..

[Tom_Doak]

John:

I didn't "hate" my time there but it was a tough place to work.  The first two times I was on site, in the summer to route the course it was 104 and humid; the first day of construction it was six below zero!  The soils were tough to work with, it rained a lot and we had a couple of tornadoes to boot.

And the client almost fired us 3/4 of the way through when The Confidential Guide came out and I had trashed another of their projects back in Michigan!

So, it was difficult but not awful.  I didn't decide to move there but I'd love to see how the course has matured ... it's been about five years since I played it.

[John Kavanaugh]

If you want to come incognito let me know...If you want the key to the city and a parade that also could be arranged.  I think you would be happy with how the course is maintained....now the pro, she scares the bezeezus out of me..

[Michael Moore]

John:  I'm sure the course makes more references to me, but you think the golfers really care?  Did it cause more people to take a second look?

Tom Doak -

At Beechtree I got paired up with a couple of just-retired good old boys from suburban Baltimore. We were all delighted to be spending a gorgeous Monday out on the golf course, especially them because A-they were not grinding over anything other than the hot dog girl and B- they had been given passes by someone. They were both accomplished naturalists and punctuated our tour with such observations as "Look at that red tailed hawk getting his ass chewed by a grackle!"

Finally on the awesome fourteenth green, one of them looked me in they eye and said "Why did you come all the way from Maine to play here? You should have played Bulle Rock. Now there's a course. Bulle Rock makes this place look like on of your municipal courses back home." [NOTE - after seeing Bulle Rock on TV it is on the hit list for the 2007 trip.]

And I said "Well, I wanted to play a Tom Doak course."

And I got no response to that.

Some of my hosts thought this was a sad story, but I see nothing sad in playing a free round of golf with a dear friend as you both enter retirement.

[Chris Kane]

James Cashmore, so far you've embarrassed yourself with each post you make on this thread.  Could you explain how Andrew is biased?  Seems to me he's outlined a set of criteria and then explored the issue objectively within the Australian context.

When you're spending a lot of time and money to play a course, the quality needs to be very high to justify it.  Not many architects in Australia pass that benchmark yet.

[Matt_Ward]

I posted this thread for one clear reason -- too many people go celebrity chasing when they play golf. I can understand that because time is money and money is not rolling around that easy for many.

It's no different than certain people will only go to see certain movies if person "X" is directing it.

Unfortunately, too much of what exists on GCA deals with only a smattering of people. No doubt they are very talented and they have ideed produced stellar results in certain instances.

However, no architect hits home runs with each design. Clearly, a "name" architect is often used to sell homes and the like. The golf aspect is still important but more of a partnership with the former than a stand alone reality in the latter.

I can only imagine the envy and outright knashing of teeth that other less known architects take with the amount of discussion that centers around a limited number of people.

Yes, I know it's hard to envision playing a place that doesn't have a "name" attached to its marquee but that's what makes the search that much more rewarding when one does.

[Tim Pitner]

For better or worse, I would not have driven 3 hours each way (in a single day) to play Ballyneal by myself if Tom Doak or someone else whose work I particularly like hadn't designed it.  Of course, the photos of the course may have influenced me too.  But, then again, no one but Tom Doak would have designed the particular courses that exists there.

[Andrew Thomson]

I can tell you that my "name" was worth very little based on my books ... my design fee has gone way up only in the last three years.

fair enough.  But would it also be fair to say that, the fee has gone up on the back fo some excellent work,  not through the sale of real-estate or an existing 'big name'?

However, no architect hits home runs with each design. Clearly, a "name" architect is often used to sell homes and the like.

I listed Doak and Clayton.  I haven't yet played a course from either where the sale of real estate was the measure of the project, and I hope I never do.

Honestly, I'll play damn near anything once.

so will I, but I won't travel to do so unless I have a fair idea its worth it!

[Mark_F]

Could you explain how Andrew is biased?

Because he has chosen two artchitects who have only designed one and one point seven-five courses respectively?

Thommo can hardly be called an educated golf architecture afficionado - after all, he likes the 13th at St Andrews Beach.

Perhaps it is you showing the bias, Chris.  Would your vitriol be so acidic if Cashmore Senior hadn't worked at your home club?
 

[Andrew Thomson]

Mark,

I swear Cape Kidnappers was also designed by Tom D?

[Chris Kane]

Perhaps it is you showing the bias, Chris.  Would your vitriol be so acidic if Cashmore Senior hadn't worked at your home club?

If he did good work, he'd be a favourite here.

[Greg Tallman]

A name designer is rather important for any course built to generate revenue be it green fees, real estate or resort development.

The ROI for a name designer is generally an attractive financial proposition given the marketing power of the name.

Not too many would risk $10-20 million on a designer who, while perhaps talented, does not provide instant credibility with 90% of the golfing population. I know many will take issue with the use of the word credibility, likely arguing the exact opposite, but we are speaking of courses trying to generate revenue.

The "extra $500,000" referenced in the original post might well provide a savvy developer with many times that in marketing value.

That said were I independently wealthy and wanting to create a great golf course I would be inclined to look at any number of the "underlings" of some of the top firms and give them a shot... lots of talented guys(and gals) out there reinforcing a handful of "names."  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()