[John Kavanaugh]

It depends what you are calling golf course architecture. I suspect half of the 64 golf corse architects know more about golf course architecture than Jack Nicklaus, golf course architecture is the whole thing from pen to finish and all the encompasses getting there. Jack's knowledge of understanding of construction techniques, grasses, plants, percolation rates of rootzone materials, planning procedure and redtapeystuff is not going to be as high as many 'one man bands'. Jack has an orchestra behind him, he can rely on his team of course, equally JN is no dumbo. If you talk about the pure holes and the sharp end design of how individual holes might play then its down to opinion if you like what he does or do not. I do not think that bit is the rocket science though, anyone can draw holes and if you have a scaled rule place the bunkers in sites to test certain carries that offer better lines for the next. The real skills are making the IT WORK IN THE GROUND.

I do not believe I ever said that Nicklaus is the greatest architect, only that he may be the greatest expert on architecture.

[Adam Clayman]

Before responding, I'd have to know what he learned from Tom Doak

Patrick, Other than what he's admitting to having learned, if you go and play some of his recent works, you can see what they are trying to emulate, versus his older more stereotypical Jack.

A more rumpled canvas is how I would generalize it, but, it's more than that. I did use the word try, because as of my last playing of one his more recent, the team still has not yet put "it" all together yet.

[Bruce Katona]

With my previous employer I had the opportunity to interact and work with JN staff on a project in FLA.  The staff and I had similar training and backgrounds. They went off to work in GC design and me in construction and real estate development and land planning.

It was very interesting to learn how the JN team prioritized items.  With most projects currently, real estate and housing were part of the process.  Road crossings to access different parts of the course were to be avoided at all costs working with JN - revise the land plan to avoid golf course road crossings.

At the site where we worked JN had done the existing course design.  It was a high end FLA layout with housing on the edges, cart paths installed as this is what the client wanted and expected.  What stood out to me was the time spent to minimize visual disturbance of the cart path on the course and the wonderful landscape design sequences installed from green to the next tee.  

Those who study design will understand the "transition from space to space" ie. green to tee in this instance.  JN's team modulated the space between green and the next tee better than I've seen.  

[George Pazin]

Danica knows more about building a race track than I could learn in a book.

Interesting perspective. Do you think she'd get the details right the first time? How much to incline curves? How tight to make corners?

Does the fact that most of the top ten courses were built by non-champion golfers illustrate anything?

You asked if I thought she would do a better job than me, I said yes.

The fact that non-champion critics award non-champion architects illustrates nothing.

Apologies for trying to flesh out your thoughts, John, didn't realize discussion was limited to one question and one answer.

Interesting distinction in your post to Adrian, gotta think a bit more about that.

-----

Jeff, ego is an impediment to much more than just golf course design.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Adam,

I am sure we all want to hear about your "last laying" of his team!  This is a family site.....

George, didn't mean to say it wasn't....

Okay, who has the cajones to start a similarly titled thread about either Doak or CC?

[Michael Dugger]

Here is my problem with Jack.  

Arguably, nobody has had more opportunities than he.  His portfolio is huge, hundreds of courses.

Yet where is the top 10 course?  A Magnum Opus that will stand the test of 100 years.

His best work (Sebonack), again, arguably, was a co-design.

I'm sorry but Muirfield Village is not spoken of in the same vein as Cypress Point, Merion and NGLA.

Where are the heavy hitters?  He's had more opportunities than most and it's not like it's been due to working with dull properties.

[John Kavanaugh]

Danica knows more about building a race track than I could learn in a book.

Interesting perspective. Do you think she'd get the details right the first time? How much to incline curves? How tight to make corners?

Does the fact that most of the top ten courses were built by non-champion golfers illustrate anything?

You asked if I thought she would do a better job than me, I said yes.

The fact that non-champion critics award non-champion architects illustrates nothing.

Apologies for trying to flesh out your thoughts, John, didn't realize discussion was limited to one question and one answer.

Interesting distinction in your post to Adrian, gotta think a bit more about that.

-----

Jeff, ego is an impediment to much more than just golf course design.

George,

If Danica and I were given a blank slate to design a racetrack and not allowed to do any research or hire consultants I still believe she would do a better job at keeping participants alive.  I would probably design a longer lasting surface, or maybe not.  Maybe she would have such a poor mix design that a pot hole would form and poor Dale Jr. would meet his daddy on turn 3 just for effect.  Is this what you wanted to know?  Am I the only person in the world that sees through your line of shit and tires of your to nice to kiss attitude?  Or am I all wet and you honestly believe that some doodle nerd understands the cause and effect of land forms on a golf ball better than Bubba Watson, Hogan or Nicklaus?

Go get some sun and hit a Goddamned ball for Pete's sake.

[Jim Eder]

What are the specifics of his designs that people don't like? I think David Kelly mentioned the difficulty of them. But are his green designs lacking, are his placement of bunkers, his use of water, his tendency to favor a specific shot, etc?  I tend to enjoy most Nicklaus courses (I am also still in need of more education on GCA).  Are JN courses in the same league as the classics or a C&C or a Doak?  Not in my opinion but I do think he is above average for sure.

[George Pazin]

Am I the only person in the world that sees through your line of shit and tires of your to nice to kiss attitude?  Or am I all wet and you honestly believe that some doodle nerd understands the cause and effect of land forms on a golf ball better than Bubba Watson, Hogan or Nicklaus?

Go get some sun and hit a Goddamned ball for Pete's sake.

  I hope you're the only person who sees it, as it does not exist. Why do you start potentially interesting topics if you aren't interested in discussing them? Perhaps that's a line of shit even you can't see through...

I have no problem believing some doodle nerd understands the cause and effect better than your heroes, it just depends on who that doodle nerd is. It sure isn't me or you.

Appropriate time for the sun comment, we've had our first couple days of sun in weeks here. Spent them with my son, sorry to disappoint.

[Garland Bayley]

George,

If Danica and I were given a blank slate to design a racetrack and not allowed to do any research or hire consultants I still believe she would do a better job at keeping participants alive.  I would probably design a longer lasting surface, or maybe not.  Maybe she would have such a poor mix design that a pot hole would form and poor Dale Jr. would meet his daddy on turn 3 just for effect.  Is this what you wanted to know?  Am I the only person in the world that sees through your line of shit and tires of your to nice to kiss attitude?  Or am I all wet and you honestly believe that some doodle nerd understands the cause and effect of land forms on a golf ball better than Bubba Watson, Hogan or Nicklaus?

Go get some sun and hit a Goddamned ball for Pete's sake.

Now John, behave yourself. Don't want to have to hit the report to moderator button.

Being able to achieve certain effects from the contact between a golf club and a golf ball makes no determination of the understanding of the effects of land forms on a golf ball. In fact, as Jeff post indicates, a primary result of having the great ability of these guys is that they avoid land forms.

[John Kavanaugh]

Nicklaus has won and/or played well on more types of courses than anyone who ever lived.  To say he did this over his career without having the ball bounce and roll about is lunacy. 

George,

What question have you asked me that I avoided?

[Garland Bayley]

Nicklaus has won and/or played well on more types of courses than anyone who ever lived.  To say he did this over his career without having the ball bounce and roll about is lunacy. 
...

And what do you call making up things that were not written by others?

[John Kavanaugh]

Being able to achieve certain effects from the contact between a golf club and a golf ball makes no determination of the understanding of the effects of land forms on a golf ball. In fact, as Jeff post indicates, a primary result of having the great ability of these guys is that they avoid land forms.

Your words Trollicious.

[Garland Bayley]

Being able to achieve certain effects from the contact between a golf club and a golf ball makes no determination of the understanding of the effects of land forms on a golf ball. In fact, as Jeff post indicates, a primary result of having the great ability of these guys is that they avoid land forms.

Your words Trollicious.

Pertinence of this post?

[Peter Pallotta]

Interesting thread, but its premise is flawed. At the level of professional architects, it isn't about knowledge (i.e. something that can be taught), it is about taste and temperament (in-born qualities) and intentions (part of a personal heirarchy of values).  There is nothing anyone can meaningful 'teach' anyone else when it comes to taste, temperament and intentions; though I grant that many of us around here try to do exactly that more often than not.

Peter

[John Kavanaugh]

I take it as you saying that Jack is so skilled at ball striking that he avoids land forms which somehow makes him less of an expert on architecture than a poorer golfer.  It is my contention that a player who either uses or avoids landforms to gain an advantage on an opponent understands their use and purpose better than the hit and hope crowd.

[Kirk Gill]

John, I'll say this - there's nothing I could teach JN about golf course architecture if I were to sit him down and try and tell him what I know. The idea of that is ludicrous.

But at the same time, I can acknowledge the possibility that I or some other layman on this site might, in conversation with the man, produce some nugget of insight that would cause Jack Nicklaus to think about some aspect of GCA in a way that he'd not previously considered. But I've never met him, and don't know how open he might be to that. But I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Garland Bayley]

I take it as you saying that Jack is so skilled at ball striking that he avoids land forms which somehow makes him less of an expert on architecture than a poorer golfer.  It is my contention that a player who either uses or avoids landforms to gain an advantage on an opponent understands their use and purpose better than the hit and hope crowd.

John,

Please work on your reading comprehension.

You never answered George's questions about violin concerto composition.

Like Jack did in golf, in music Paganini read and played the greatest violin concertos greater than anyone. However, the violin concerto he wrote falls far short in everyone's opinion of the concertos written by the masters such as Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms. Why is that? Since, these people were not accomplished violin players?

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,

I have no opinion on anything concerning the violin.  If anything I have always found women violin players sexy and male fiddlers awkward.

[Kirk Gill]

I like my male fiddlers on the roof. Here is an exception:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjkUJ9d6dDQ


Garland, I think you also missed something that John said. He didn't say that Jack was the best architect, just that he know the most about architecture. In a way, your Paganini example makes a similar point. Who knew more about violin concertos than Paganini? But did it translate to the creation of great concertos? By your account, apparently not. Knowing the most and doing the best don't necessarily go together. I've seen virtuosos of the electric guitar play extended, long-winded guitar solos that bored the living crap out of me, but I'm awed by the knowlege of guitar playing it took to actually play them. I just don't want to actually have to LISTEN to them. On that count, Jack probably does better than a lot of experts. Lots of people seem to like a lot of his courses. Not everyone, mind you, and perhaps not the cognescenti, but overall it might be said that JN is a better gca than Paganini was a compser of violin concertos? Perhaps?

[Garland Bayley]

Kirk,

I am not ignoring his saying Jack is an "expert". I am disagreeing with his assumption that being a great player makes you an expert. If the hacker plays as often as Jack, and visits far more of the courses he plays, then John's logic would make the hacker the greater expert on experience alone.

The experimental physicist should also be a greater expert on this bounce and roll stuff and ball flight than Jack also.

My point is that being a great ball striker does not make you great at anything else, like John is trying to maintain.

Being a soils expert could give you an advantage over Jack on bounce and roll expertise.

Being an aeronautical engineer could give you and advantage over Jack on ball flight.

I went with Paganini, because of how technologically simple writing music is (pen and paper) over golf architecture.
Because, Jack's ball striking is more directly analogous to Paganini's fiddling.
Paganini is NOT more expert on concerto architecture than Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms.

[John Kavanaugh]

Kirk,

I am not ignoring his saying Jack is an "expert". I am disagreeing with his assumption that being a great player makes you an expert. If the hacker plays as often as Jack, and visits far more of the courses he plays, then John's logic would make the hacker the greater expert on experience alone.

The experimental physicist should also be a greater expert on this bounce and roll stuff and ball flight than Jack also.

My point is that being a great ball striker does not make you great at anything else, like John is trying to maintain.

Being a soils expert could give you an advantage over Jack on bounce and roll expertise.

Being an aeronautical engineer could give you and advantage over Jack on ball flight.

I went with Paganini, because of how technologically simple writing music is (pen and paper) over golf architecture.
Because, Jack's ball striking is more directly analogous to Paganini's fiddling.
Paganini is NOT more expert on concerto architecture than Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms.

Garland,

Jack is just one of millions of great ball strikers who have played the game.  He is however the finest golfer to ever turn his ball striking into victories against fields of like ball striking talent.  I am saying he found all those victories through his understanding of the architecture presented before him on each and every different playing field.  I do not think he just went willy nilly hitting and hoping and stumbled into the greatest career of all time.  What is architecture if it is not what distinguishes between winners and losers.

[SL_Solow]

Barney;  Your premise appears to be that a superior understanding of course management equates to a superior ability to design a golf course.  Assuming equal ball striking ability, a superior understanding of how to play a course will likely result in better results.  But the ability to remain patient and carry out a "game plan" is also a factor.  I suggest that it was Jack's strength of will that separated him along with superior skill even more than some uncanny ability to understand the architecture.

Moreover, figuring out the strategy on an existing course, particularly as it relates to an individual's particular abilities, is a different skill set from taking an undeveloped site and creating a new, interesting and challenging course for a wide spectrum of players.  That does not suggest that Nicklaus lacks that ability, my exposure to his work leaves me with mixed opinions and I haven't played enough of them to have formulated an overall opinion of his work.  But the idea that one cannot do great work or be a great critic if one is not a great player is belied by the evidence.  Exhibit #1 is MacKenzie an acknowledged hack he created some of the great golf courses in the world.  On the opposite side of the ledger, there are many top professionals who have dabbled in architecture without any notable success.

I suspect there is little or nothing I can teach Niclaus about GCA unless he wants to know how someone of my limited skill and experience views courses.  But I can analyze his work and present informed(?) opinion and commentary which can be evaluated on its own merit.

[George Pazin]

George,

What question have you asked me that I avoided?

I don't recall saying you avoided anything. On the contrary, I find your responses to be most illuminating, though perhaps not in the manner intended.

[John Kavanaugh]

MacKenzie was hardly a hack. This according to Wiki (sorry but it was an easy find) suggests that he could break 80 while in his 60's.

As a player, MacKenzie was a self described "good putter, but a mediocre ball striker" for most of his life. It was not until after his move to California, when he was already in his 60s, that MacKenzie had what he described as his "golfing epiphany". This was an improvement in his ball striking which enabled him to often score in the high 70s to low 80s for 18 holes. He described this in one of his books as "in the 70s after 60".

I have a feeling that the guy knew how to win a bet.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()