[JSPayne]

I believe that without competition architecture is overpriced landscaping.

Something about this "quote from the master" struck me as I immediately read it.....profound? Irritating? Luncay? 

I'm still pondering why this thought of John's struck a cord with me. Could he be right?

Please discuss.

EDIT: Typo.....had to fix it, I'm a perfectionist. 

[Anthony Gray]

If it were true then you would have to explain routing.

       Anthony

[George Pazin]

Seems like it would depend on how one defines competition, and the individual golfer.

[JSPayne]

If it were true then you would have to explain routing.

       Anthony

To guide your walk through the landscaping, much as any path or purposeful selection of plant material and placement would in immense gardens such as many found in Europe?

Ahh......this may be getting too abstract.....I can feel my brain melting. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Without cars, asphalt is overpriced road building.......

Seriously, studies show that about 99% of golfers play for fun, camraderie, etc. and competition is not their thing.  So, does architecture exist for those .00001% who golf for competition?

[John Kavanaugh]

Without cars, asphalt is overpriced road building.......

Seriously, studies show that about 99% of golfers play for fun, camraderie, etc. and competition is not their thing.  So, does architecture exist for those .00001% who golf for competition?

As soon as you attempt to make a par you are competing against a standard accepted by far more than .00001% of those who golf.

[Tim Gerrish]

I think architecture is what makes it fun, full of camaraderie, etc.

[JSPayne]

Seriously though Jeff....of that 99%, how many of them go out and play 18 and don't keep score, or compare those scores with each other? Unless you're just walking and smacking the ball without a care in the world, seems to me your competing (albeit not agressively always) against yourself, or "par", or your "comrades."

Sure, my number one reason for being out there is because I love the outdoors, the game itself, and the friendships, but I still keep score.  

I don't think John's remark is a bash on GCA or architects......it's just his rational for why golf courses exist. And why we spend so much money making and maintaining them. And me being a guy that spends alot of money to take care of one, his words make me wonder.......

Superintendents are often faced with finding the balance between creating a "beautiful landscape" and a field of competition. Comments such as John's just sometimes make you reevaluate where your priorities should lie when budgets get pinced and something's gotta give......focus on playability for the sake of competition or focus on what looks nice?

[Peter Pallotta]

As soon as you attempt to make a par you are competing against a standard accepted by far more than .00001% of those who golf.

Yes, precisely. But said attempt is not in the least affected by the play of your notional opponent, i.e. the other golfer(s), and instead is wholly dependent on and occurs within a (practical) relation to the ground on which the hole sits and the strategy that was designed into it, a  (theoretical) relation to the concept of par, and an (eternal) relation to the miasma of broken dreams, misplaced ego, hopeless hopes and desperate fears of the average golfer.  Is it too much to ask that this little and personal human drama take place on a field of play that appears at least to have the impersonal and grand scale of Nature itself (seemingly untouched by the directed and results-driven consciousness of an architect)?

Really, what do you think? Too much to ask?   

Peter

[John Kavanaugh]

Peter,

Of the many types of people who I hate, I really hate the golfer whose idea of competition is hitting shots at architecture to see if they work so he can prove the architect was wrong.  The reason I hate this guy is because the architect may have never intended that shot be attempted anyway.

[Peter Pallotta]

John - I don't know if you're mocking, attacking, or agreeing with me, but in any case I'm still laughing. That was very funny. But surely this golfer you describe is in the very small minority.  No one who strives to par every hole -- and, rightly or wrongly, that's what I strive for and that's how I measure my progress/improvement over time -- is hitting shots at the architecture in that sense? Especially as anyone with any sense realizes that the architect didn't "intend" at least half the shots that a golfer encounters during a round, even though some architects might "allow" for those possibilities.

Peter   

[John Kavanaugh]

John - I don't know if you're mocking, attacking, or agreeing with me, but in any case I'm still laughing. That was very funny. But surely this golfer you describe is in the very small minority.  No one who strives to par every hole -- and, rightly or wrongly, that's what I strive for and that's how I measure my progress/improvement over time -- is hitting shots at the architecture in that sense? Especially as anyone with any sense realizes that the architect didn't "intend" at least half the shots that a golfer encounters during a round, even though some architects might "allow" for those possibilities.

Peter   

Peter,

I have heard many golfers on this site talk of the joy they receive by hitting shots at the architecture to test its merit.  By doing so they remove all pretense of their own physical talent and put the burden of proof on the architect.  They are perverse intellectual cowards.

[Bob_Huntley]

Peter,

Of the many types of people who I hate, I really hate the golfer whose idea of competition is hitting shots at architecture to see if they work so he can prove the architect was wrong.  The reason I hate this guy is because the architect may have never intended that shot be attempted anyway.

John,

Leslie, my wife, was in a friend's house when she mentioned that she hated the look of some modern building in the neighborhood. At that the hostess' child said "We don't use that word in this house." It was a salutary lesson, there is a better word.


Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

Bob,

To not believe in hate is like not believing in the Devil.  I think it is an important concept and a word that fits the feeling very well.

[Ian Andrew]

[Sean_A]

JakaB

"As soon as you attempt to make a par you are competing against a standard accepted by far more than .00001% of those who golf."

Par is a method for keeping score.  If folks are using the idea of par as a goal and nobody else is playing, that isn't a competition.  That is practicing with a goal in mind.  If other folks are playing, par is irrelevant as it doesn't indicate a winning or losing score.  I would change your line of thinking to as soon as one tries to earn the lowest score possible....  Remember, par is only a name for a score, just as bogey, birdie, double bogey and albatross are.  The only difference is par is a score expected of an expert player - of course, these days, par doesn't win many tournaments among expert players.  Personally, I wish the idea of par were never invented because it has been the source or more misconception in the game than about any other concept.

"The reason I hate this guy is because they architect may have never intended that shot be attempted anyway."

Do archies really design shots they never intend to be attempted? Sure, I can understand that archies don't think people will try to skip shots off water and other crazy stuff (it does happen), but if there is grass does an archie really think thoughts like "I am not intending anybody to attempt this shot"?  

"I believe that without competition architecture is overpriced landscaping."

So a guy can't go out on his own and enjoy architecture?


Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

Sean,

Haven't you ever gone out to play by yourself and made two birdies in a row and really want to make that third or fourth until the run eventually ends.  I think that is competition, not goal achieving.

I once had a guy tell me that an architect screwed up because he attempted a number of six irons from 90 yds that did not work.  What he does not understand is that same shot works from 200 yds because the ball must already have momentum at the 90 yd mark to utilize the ground contour properly.  The intent of the hole is to hit wedge from 90 yds.  Putter will also work from 90 yds...his conclusion was pure idiocy that I continue to prove wrong year after year.

[JESII]

I always assumed golf course architecture was the architects way of competing with me...in that respect, if you're not trying to get the ball in the hole as soon as possible, you're not playing golf...

As a comparison to landscape architecture, I can't think of many places I would rather take a walk than on a golf course...

[TEPaul]

Quote from: John Kavanaugh on Today at 04:31:59 pm
I believe that without competition architecture is overpriced landscaping.


Something about this "quote from the master" struck me as I immediately read it.....profound? Irritating? Luncay? 

I'm still pondering why this thought of John's struck a cord with me. Could he be right?

Please discuss.




Mr. Payne:

You ask if it's profound, irritating or lunacy? I would point out that golf and golf course architecture is a great big thing and there really is room in it for everyone!

Otherwise known as "The Big World" theory----there are all kinds of people with all kinds of taste out there all the way from really good taste to really bad taste and golf and golf architecture amazingly has and probably should have the capacity to accommodate them all.

I doubt one could say the same thing for tennis and tennis courts!

[JESII]

Tom,

You have migrated from a really good amateur player to a really intelligent and interested observer of the game. Do you get anything out of golf course architecture that is immune from the competitive side of golf and would not be labeled "high cost landscaping"?

[John Kavanaugh]

I doubt one could say the same thing for tennis and tennis courts!

Tom,

I have built around a dozen or so tennis courts and visited or played many more.  They are as diverse if not more than golf courses.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

"They are perverse intellectual cowards". -Kavanaugh

...."his conclusion was pure idiocy that I continue to prove wrong year after year". - Kavanaugh

JK,
You need to hang out with more of those 'finest minds in golf'.

[Ted Kramer]

John - I don't know if you're mocking, attacking, or agreeing with me, but in any case I'm still laughing. That was very funny. But surely this golfer you describe is in the very small minority.  No one who strives to par every hole -- and, rightly or wrongly, that's what I strive for and that's how I measure my progress/improvement over time -- is hitting shots at the architecture in that sense? Especially as anyone with any sense realizes that the architect didn't "intend" at least half the shots that a golfer encounters during a round, even though some architects might "allow" for those possibilities.

Peter   

Peter,

I have heard many golfers on this site talk of the joy they receive by hitting shots at the architecture to test its merit.  By doing so they remove all pretense of their own physical talent and put the burden of proof on the architect.  They are perverse intellectual cowards.

Classic.

-Ted

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
I have built around a dozen or so tennis courts and visited or played many more.  They are as diverse if not more than golf courses."


JohnK;

EUREKA, my friend!! I believe you have just discovered the problem with your taste in golf course architecture!! 

[John Kavanaugh]

Tom,

I still recall the time some twenty years ago I played tennis on my first artificial clay court on the top of an office building in the center of Washington, DC.  Or watching Serena play Venus in the finals at the US Open at Forest Hills.  Or the first time I layed out the elevations for a tennis court we were building on hubs at five foot centers and my uncle asked me where the road grader was going to fit to move the dirt.  I seriously doubt that if any two tennis courts in the world play the same.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()