[Ian Andrew]

Bob Vasilak wrote a recent piece for Golf Inc. titled “Golf’s Most Influential Architects”

The piece can be read here:
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/cypress/golfinc_2011spring/index.php?startid=34#/34

In it he listed the 15 Most Influential architects in this order:

1.   Pete Dye
2.   Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw
3.   Tom Doak
4.   Brian Curley and Lee Schmidt
5.   Jack Nicklaus
6.   Robert Trent Jones Jr.
7.   Ron Fream
8.   Kyle Phillips
9.   Tom Fazio
10.   Greg Norman
11.   Rees Jones
12.   Gil Hanse
13.   Steve Smyers
14.   Richard Mandell
15.   Charles Blair MacDonald

I was curious to see what other people felt about the list.

[Ben Sims]

Ian,

Obviously the intent of the article was to highlight practicing/modern architects.  But then, why include CB Macdonald as a token to the old at #15?  Shouldn't MacKenzie and Ross have just as much clout as classic period architects?  Is CB Mac more relevant now because the template boom happened?

I'm being critical for no good reason, yes.  But the reverence to one classic era architect as influential above others is a slight if the article's intent was to educate about golf architects, in my opinion.  

Another shot to that list is if you're going to include Rees Jones and Greg Norman, then you must find a way to differentiate their influence above firms like Arthur Hills, Jim Engh, and Dr. Hurdzan and Mr. Fry.  What makes Jones and Norman so much more influential than other successful modern architects.  Or take it another way, how do you differentiate firms like Kyle Phillips and David Kidd for the purposes of this article?  

[Chip Gaskins]

No Old Tom Morris, Tillinghast, Ross, Mackenzie, Raynor, etc???

[Dan King]

It looks like the pool of candidates was well-known alive architects who design courses in the eastern portion of the U.S. and CB MacDonald. What's the point?

Ian, did you see you got a mention as No. 16?

Cheers,
Dan King

The trick for the developer, as devised through his architect, is to build something that is photogenically stunning, however impractical, extravagant or absurd. Never mind the golfer, that most gullible of all citizens.
  --Peter Thompson

[Kyle Henderson]

Ben,

I'm guessing CBM was included because of the recently-opened Old Mac course, tongue-in-cheek style.

[Ben Sims]

Ben,

I'm guessing CBM was included because of the recently-opened Old Mac course, tongue-in-cheek style.

Muscles,

I gather you're right, it just seemed all too easy.  I would think that MacKenzie, Ross, and Tilly have just as much influence on modern architecture as CB Mac, Old Macdonald notwithstanding. 

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Hard to believe this list.
It would be very insightful to be privy to what parameters (if any) that the voters were given. That is if there were voters or is the article just one persons' opinion.

Ian will need to buy a larger hat. LOL

[Tom_Doak]

How could there really be 15 influential modern architects when there are less than 15 courses being built in the USA right now?

P.S. to Ian:  Thanks for the compliment [I think]!

[Andy Stamm]

The premise of this list seems muddled. It's called the "Most Influential" but then says that some of the people making the list are virtually unknown and are included because they are making valuable contributions to the game. But those two things are hardly the same and the latter description doesn't have much to do with influence. So I guess it's a list of the editors' "Most Noteworthy" or something similar. Anyway, it's hard to evaluate the list when I'm not sure of its premise.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Who reads Golf Inc?

[Randy Thompson]

There is a lot that could be said but what stuck out was Fazio so far down as nine and some of the others thart come in a head of him but it´s one person opinion. The other thing i found funny in the article was when he was talking about the Nicklaus group and how he is looked as or the Architect associated with, "money in the bank.. for developers"! There have been lots and lots of his projects that have gone bankrupt but in general i agree this is the case in the USA. In reality they are the design firm for devlopers that fear or lack marketing skills.

[Ian Andrew]

Thanks for the compliment [I think]!

Tom,

It was definately meant as a compliment.

[Ian Andrew]

Ian, did you see you got a mention as No. 16?

Dan,

It's because my Mom had a vote

[Ian Andrew]

I'll have to ask - Dye WAS clearly a huge influence in his prime - but is he still as a big an influence now to new architects?

I think Coore for example carries far more weight now.

[Randy Thompson]

I'll have to ask - Dye WAS clearly a huge influence in his prime - but is he still as a big an influence now to new architects?

I think Coore for example carries far more weight now.

Ian,
I think it depends where you draw the time line, if your considering the most influential in the last five to say ten years, than your probably right but if I wrote the article or was a one man voting machine, I would have given a tie between Coore and Doak, really hard to justify why one should be put ahead of the other. However, if that time line was drawn to consider the last twenty to thirty years, than I think Dye is properly placed in the number one position especially when you consider he had some direct or indirect influence on both TD and BC.

[Niall C]

On the basis that this list is for the most influential, and not necessarily the best, I would be interested to hear what kind of influence each of these architects has had. For instance, what influence has Pete Dye or Fazio had outwith America ? I'm aware that they have worked outside the US but what impact have their designs or ideas had ?

BTW, I'm posing those questions as I really don't know the answers and not because I'm looking to get into any kind of argument. Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.

Niall

[Steve Kline]

Good points Niall.

Since all the rage is minimalism/naturalism or whatevever you want to call it, it seems that Coore would have to be #1 and Doak #2. In my limited knowledge it seems they have shifted the entire industry. I feel that what Pinehurst just did is a direct of result of this movement and the iconic start of it was Sandhills - even if that was't the true start.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Congratulations to those who made this list. But, I have to say, influential is a very strong word.

Of the 15 architects on the list, maybe 5 have influenced me in some way.

Tom Doak and Bill Coore were influenced through working with and learning from Mr. Dye, but they've both signficnatly expanded on that influence in their own work. Like Mr. Dye before them, Tom and Bill are mavericks not imitators, which is more influential to me than a trendy bunker style for example. 

[Bill Brightly]

Influence is a word that cuts both ways...Influenced to follow, say Mackenzie to Doak, or NOT to follow, to do something very different...

[Tim Nugent]

All I could think of was, HUH???  If someone just posted that list of names and asked "what do they all have in common?"  would "the 15 most influential architects" pop into your mind?  Ya, I thought not.

[paul cowley]

I agree Tim...I was going to post something but couldn't get past the "huh" stage!

[Mark Bourgeois]

Was expecting to see such a list start like more like this:
1. Robertson
2. OTM
3. RTJ
4. Mackenzie
5. Braid
6. Macdonald

Are we talking influence on design or influence on business? One could argue the above-listed influenced both (to different degrees).

[Tom_Doak]

I just noticed that while Pete Dye has been given due credit as mentor to myself and to Bill Coore, nobody mentioned that he was also the mentor to Lee Schmidt and Brian Curley!  And, for that matter, he worked with both Nicklaus and Norman at the beginning of their careers.  That would be my definition of "influential".

[Mark Bourgeois]

That's a legitimate and objectively measurable definition of influence, but it seems to leave out something along the lines of design influence; "coaching trees" and "design schools" seem to imply both apprenticeship (learning the fundamentals of the craft) as well as some sort of philosophy.

Personally, I like the "Velvet Underground" definition: only 800 people bought their records, but everyone who did went out and started a band.

[Tom_Doak]

That's a legitimate and objectively measurable definition of influence, but it seems to leave out something along the lines of design influence; "coaching trees" and "design schools" seem to imply both apprenticeship (learning the fundamentals of the craft) as well as some sort of philosophy.

Personally, I like the "Velvet Underground" definition: only 800 people bought their records, but everyone who did went out and started a band.

Mark:

Not sure I understand the difference you are making; my point was that many people started their own bands as a result of Mr. Dye.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()