News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jack Nickldoak
« on: February 28, 2009, 10:39:49 PM »
(and, is it fair to say...) that following their collaboration at Sebonack, Doak seems to have changed Nicklaus more than Nicklaus changed Doak?

Does that say good things about Nicklaus? About Doak? Both?


Kyle Harris

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2009, 10:41:15 PM »
I think I'd be more impressed if Tom Doak went out and won 18 majors.

John Moore II

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2009, 10:49:50 PM »
If I had to guess, Jack has changed his style a bit because courses like Pac Dunes, etc. with the rugged looks and less 'preppy' stuff is what people want to see now. If minimal/natural courses were not 'in style' I think we'd have seen no change in how Jack works.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2009, 10:54:39 PM »
I don't know, I think Jack and his group may have been evolving in that direction somewhat anyway, but the Sebonac project accelerated the evolution. I haven't seen a lot of Nicklaus work, so I could be off the deep end with that supposition. I don't recall Tom mentioning much that he picked up from Jack and his team, but I would imagine one of the greatest golfers ever must have had some useful insights that could be incorporated into any architects work.
   I do know that I am very interested in seeing the Women's Open in a few years at Sebonac.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Andy Troeger

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2009, 11:26:55 PM »
Its easier to see with Nicklaus because their volume is so much higher and its a lot easier to see trends based on that. I get the idea Doak had some influence on the recent work, but Jack seems determined to challenge the pros and find a different way to combat the technology advances for strong players with his recent efforts. Tough greens are a good way to do that--but Nicklaus' stuff is MUCH more difficult than anything Doak has done that I'm aware of.

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2009, 07:51:22 AM »
The biggest issue on this site is how so many think they have to pit one architect's style against another....IMHO it would be much better if both styles and their growth could be appreciated.  Of course one may like appreciate one more than the other but the question of who benefited most...I don't get.  There are a lot of great artist out there whose style I just don't get...but somebody does.....and same goes for here.....
Now ......if you wish to compare something then compare the intercompany designs of some of these firms....for me..I really like the work of Jim Lipe that I have seen and can tell in most cases where he was lead on the JN projects.....and I bet the same holds true for TFazio..I just don't know enough about his work....
Oh Well....comments on a rainy sunday morning.... ;)
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Carl Rogers

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2009, 09:02:45 AM »
Doesn't this week's match play tournament and its treatment of the the greens, green complexes and the necessary slower green speeds tell everyone that Mr. Nicklaus (and/or his organization) was influenced by Tom D & Renaissance Design?
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 08:32:28 PM by Carl Rogers »

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #7 on: March 01, 2009, 10:00:23 AM »
I think I'd be more impressed if Tom Doak went out and won 18 majors.

Nice one, Kyle! I agree  ;D
jeffmingay.com

TEPaul

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #8 on: March 01, 2009, 10:27:44 AM »
To me the most fascinating thing about Sebonac is that Pascucci actually managed to get two companies as seemingly diverse and different as Nicklaus's and Doak's to collaborate. I do pretty much know what the circumstances were and the timing of it as well as a couple of other factors probably pretty much had to play out exactly as they did or this type of thing likely never would have or could have happened.

In the final analysis, good for Mike Pascucci!

Word on the street is this kind of ultra diverse combo and collaboration may become something of an architectural fad of the future. We now have Hanse and Love, we may even have Hanse and Trump ;) and I've heard rumors that someone is about to get C&C to collaborate with Fazio.

Personally, I think all this diverse collaboration is a wonderful thing and it might even be in the spirit of our new administration. The fad will have run its course when David Fay starts relying on Geoff Shackelford for advice on how to run the USGA in the future! We can then call the new spirit of our national golf association the "Shackelfay" years.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 10:30:30 AM by TEPaul »

Damon Groves

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #9 on: March 01, 2009, 10:43:57 AM »
Doesn't this week's match play tournament and its treatment of the the greens, green complexes and the necessary slower green speeds tell everyone that Mr. Nicklaus (and/or his organization) was influnced by Tom D & Renaissance Design?

I agree. Seems the greens at the Ritz Carlton Dove Canyon are very much in the style of Ballyneal.

TEPaul

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2009, 10:59:31 AM »
Matt Cohn:


Frankly, I prefer the name T.J. Doaklaus to Jack Nickldoak.


And I hate that stupid feel-good name "The Ritz Carlton Dove Canyon" course. I think they should rename it "Varmint Gultch at the Ritz" and attribute the design style of it thusly; By the Nicklaus Co. with some seriously blatant architectural plagarism from the Doak Renaissance Design Co.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 11:05:20 AM by TEPaul »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2009, 11:25:17 AM »
Don't we all recall JN being quoted as saying he learned how to do "random contours" from Doak?  I thought that was actually a pretty major statement from Jack.

I would think Doak learned something from JN and crew, too.  I wouldn't think Doak would necessarily come on here and openly admit anything other than minor influence, but that is just MHO.  Not bashing TD. In my one collaboration (with Jay Morrish) I came away thinking I would learn something, but in the end it was just good fun and I am not sure either of us changed the others mind on much of anything.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Mike Wagner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2009, 12:17:36 PM »
Given the economy, wouldn't it make sense that Jack drift towards a more "player friendly" stlyle?  I would imagine owner/developers are demanding great courses enjoyable for all level of players.

Given the choice of a trip to Bandon or a typical Nicklaus venue with an array of handicaps, the group as a whole will choose Bandon every time.  Everyone has a chance, everyone has fun, and the high handicaps are usually not forced to hit the shots only the low handicaps are capable of.

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2009, 03:26:04 PM »
Fountainhead

Nicklaus is a huge commercial success because of his name.

Doak is an artistic success because few designers are more passionate about their work than he is.

It is what it is. 

I'm sure Tom would L-O-V-E to have had a crack at 1/10 of the pieces of property the Nicklaus firm has worked on.

And I'm sure Jack would probably like a few more accolades from the likes of us here at gca.com
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2009, 05:08:35 PM »
I've been sitting at lunch in Bandon watching some of the final match with Jim Urbina and Brian Slawnik and Jonathan Reisetter, and we are all generally impressed with the golf course.  I've never seen Jack build so many holes where you hit it to point A on the green and use a contour to feed it to point B.

Do I think we've influenced his work?  Yes.  I think Ed Getka is right that he was evolving a bit in that direction anyway [deciding that the only way to defend par anymore is with green contours], but I think we accelerated that evolution.  I say that mostly because the collaboration at Sebonack is the only outside influence he's had for a while ... Sebonack is still the only course I've worked on that Jack has ever seen, and his 3-hour tour of Friars Head is the only look he's had at Coore & Crenshaw's work.  So, I would disagree with John K. Moore that his style is changing because that's what's popular right now ... I don't think he would have paid any attention to that otherwise.

Have we been influenced by working with Jack?  Yes, although not in such obvious stylistic ways.  I think we are doing even bolder work now as a result of working with Jack [and that Jack is doing bolder work as a result of working with us], although I am not really sure if that's a good thing or not ... I wish subtlety were more appreciated in the modern era.  I certainly learned more about what it takes to really challenge great players, although in general that is not as important to our range of clients (or to me personally) as it is to Jack's clients (and to Jack).  That's why we appeal to different people, as Mike Young notes.

When I was collecting opinions from other people before agreeing to the deal at Sebonack, one of our mutual acquaintances told me that Jack would take a lot of things from our collaboration and apply it to future projects, because he was very smart and very observant.  At the time I dismissed that comment as the friend kissing my butt, but in hindsight, it was the truth.

Really though, in the last couple of years I've seen what I thought were influences from our work and Bill's work in courses being built by lots of different architects ... everyone from Tom Fazio to Tom Lehman.  Neither one of those guys has even seen one of my courses either, as far as I know ... but their associates have, or some of our former interns are working on the shaping.  So we may just have more influence now because there are more potential connections to be made.

JMorgan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2009, 05:19:05 PM »
>mag.ludi<
« Last Edit: March 02, 2009, 04:14:43 AM by JMorgan »

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2009, 05:28:41 PM »
Tom,
We'll all heard the comment about "the only way to defend par is with green contours".  I presume that you believe that this always makes for a better golf course.

I will play Dove Mountain in a month or so and am anxious to see those greens.  Many look like Nicklaus made them wild for the sake of wild but we all know that TV is not a good way to judge golf courses.  I just wonder how much fun the average golfer or even decent golfer has on greens like that?  What do you think?
Mark
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 08:39:43 PM by Mark_Fine »

Chuck Brown

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2009, 07:37:30 PM »
It seems silly for me to add anything to the original question, now that Tom Doak has rather authoritatively answered it.  What he says makes all the sense in the world to me.

I am rather delighted that this question was aksed, because as I watched the Match Play this week, I was struck by how many attractive shots and strategic choices this course produced.

It even seemed to me that the tour players' walks, from last-green-to-next-tee, seemed well-tailored to the needs of the players and caddies.  The Ritz Carlton at Dove Mountain looks to be a very, very well-designed golf course, at least for those elite players whose games are increasingly incomprehensible to most of us. 

I thought it would be an almost deliberately provocative topic to start a thread on its own, defending the Nicklaus design at Dove Mountain; this is an exceedingly thoughtful discussion group, but a lot of what we rightly defend as enduring principles of golf course design are turned upside down by many of the Nicklaus Design desert courses.

I was eager to hear what others might have thought after five days of High-Def coverage of this brand-new golf course.  I thought it was pretty cool.  Much room for criticism and discussion, of course, but I am at least happy that the layout produced some good golf to watch.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 10:22:32 PM by Chuck Brown »

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2009, 08:58:04 PM »
Tom,
We'll all heard the comment about "the only way to defend par is with green contours".  I presume that you believe that this always makes for a better golf course.

I will play Dove Mountain in a month or so and am anxious to see those greens.  Many look like Nicklaus made them wild for the sake of wild but we all know that TV is not a good way to judge golf courses.  I just wonder how much fun the average golfer or even decent golfer has on greens like that?  What do you think?
Mark

Mark, I think it's going to be even more important here than anywhere else I can think of to play the appropriate tees (maybe Oakmont too?).  The forced carries and the shot requirements into those greens could mean a very long day for a 12 handicapper who's not very long anymore.  (Yes, I'm talking about me!)  There will be a lot of difficult pitch shots just trying to avoid doubles otherwise, and maybe even from the right tees.

The way Ogilvie played the course points out just what marvelous players those guys are.

Rob Rigg

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2009, 09:24:31 PM »
Was JN's strategic bunkering as prevalent before Sebonack?

Along with the greens, that stood out to me as a great element of the Dove Mountain design.

The short par 14th is also a great hole with the fore bunker that must be carried off the tee. Probably much more difficult for the average golfer than the pro, but a well placed bunker nonetheless.

The short grass around the greens also seemed a bit "un-Jack" to me but I have seen only a couple of his courses first hand so am not sure about that one.

Based on only seeing DM on the TV, it certainly looks like Jack and team have elevated their game having learned from past experiences and opportunities.

Since they design so many courses, this is a strong positive for the game and fans of GCA (and probably brings a bit of a smile to the face of TD and C&C)

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2009, 09:26:49 PM »
Bill,
That is kind of my point - wild contours on greens like we saw at Dove Mountain might defend par, but are they really fun to play.  I played a new course recently in South Carolina that had crazy greens and yes they defended par but many just seemed goofy and over the top.  I play off a 1 or 2 handicap and managed my way around but my three playing partners all said it just wasn't any fun and wouldn't want to go back.  It looks to me that if you get those greens at Dove Mountain rolling at any speed, many golfers might not finish.

I love contour in greens but when they start getting really wild (not just a few but almost all 18), you have to wonder how many golfers really enjoy three and four putting every other hole and or never hitting greens with approaches or even chip shots?  I guess I have become much more conscious of this of late. 
Mark
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 09:44:06 PM by Mark_Fine »

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #21 on: March 01, 2009, 10:26:03 PM »
Bill,
That is kind of my point - wild contours on greens like we saw at Dove Mountain might defend par, but are they really fun to play.  I played a new course recently in South Carolina that had crazy greens and yes they defended par but many just seemed goofy and over the top.  I play off a 1 or 2 handicap and managed my way around but my three playing partners all said it just wasn't any fun and wouldn't want to go back.  It looks to me that if you get those greens at Dove Mountain rolling at any speed, many golfers might not finish.

I love contour in greens but when they start getting really wild (not just a few but almost all 18), you have to wonder how many golfers really enjoy three and four putting every other hole and or never hitting greens with approaches or even chip shots?  I guess I have become much more conscious of this of late. 
Mark

Not so bad if they have the discipline to keep the greens at 8 instead of giving in to the masochists who insist on 11.  At >9 those Dove Mountain greens would be unplayable for guys like me.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #22 on: March 01, 2009, 11:50:27 PM »
As vague as this statement is, I did feel like I was seeing some influence of the look of the approaches (understanding the vagueness of TV) to the look of some of the approaches to BallyNeal.  There were similarly placed bunkers (though not the same bunkering style, obviously) and the greens did seem more contoured and related to interesting slopes in the greens surrounds, along with shorter grass heights in the surrounds designed to get the runaways and false fronts and sides from the built up greens. 

I liked what I saw or was able to see in the limitted TV. 

I also noted that the two guys that made it to the finals, may be the two most familiar with the course, as the commentators said they live up the road and have gone down for pre-practice rounds.  More local knowledge when it comes to more intense or random contouring is always a good thing.  Local knowledge cuts down effects of randomness until randomness becomes the familiar, it seems to me.

Wild Bill, I would hope we'd do OK on that course if we moved up to the right tees, even if it is the ladies...  ::) ;) ;D
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Andy Troeger

Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #23 on: March 02, 2009, 08:03:44 AM »
http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/article/0,28136,1882469,00.html

See the middle of the page for comments on the greens from a couple of writers with quotes/references to thoughts from Tiger and Ogilvy.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Jack Nickldoak
« Reply #24 on: March 02, 2009, 08:30:40 AM »
Pete and Alice Dye always said that pros like flatter contours because they play the course once a year and need to learn them quickly, while average golfers who play a course often like rolling greens because in essence, they want to take a lifetime to figure the contours out, if at all.  I hope this isn't a case where Tour Pros desires (which are valid for them only) dictate design to an even greater degree when they won't show up at most courses.

Design for the guys who pay the bills, not the guys who get paid to play.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back