[Anthony Gray]

  Template holes are not plagerism. They are simply templates.

  Anthony

[Kevin Lynch]

Bill,

As a self-admitted, compulsive mediator/consensus builder, I suspect the more troubling part of your comment to Dick was the following:

"Only 251 posts, so I'll give you a break as a new guy. Here is what you'll come to understand if you make the effort to learn."

There's simply no other way to read that other than pure condescension (not "frankness").

Beyond that sentence, everything else you wrote about your passion for templates is great and opens the door for frank discussion.

Unfortunately, the "quoted" section above only serves to stifle open discussion and, as Dick suggests, often causes potential contributors to leave altogether.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Bill - I think you over reacted to  Dick's posts. I am not student of words but I did not read plagerize as strongly as you do, however strictly I expect your right.

[James Boon]

James - I can only really say how I think. I pretty much can remember everything I have ever played or seen, I would like to think that the things I have forgotten were not worth remembering, funny how I can remember quite minute details about Pebble Beach from one play whilst I remember very little from say Burnham Beeches (also a 1 play) and BB was quite nice btw. I think things like the 6th green at Hunstanton, perhaps the 7th hole at Hunstanton are lodged in my memory bank and if a piece of land comes up that way then yes I may use 'bits' of those holes. I cant say I am in to totally copying although the thought of replicating a TOC with GPS on a flat dull site has some crazed appeal to me. A par 3 course with replica holes is another possible. I like the principles of the 16th green at North Berwick and the idea of replicating the idea rather than the actual. I know when I talk to Ben Stephens he talks about things being like other holes, when I talk to my staff when we are constructing I might show pictures of bits. I also like the idea of taking a green from another course (perhaps those lovely Painswick pics) and using that green as is but playing to it from another angle, ie say the surface of the 7th at Painswick but played backwards.....sometimes you can have fun reversing pics. So I do think that the way I look at other golf holes would be how you deal with buildings.

Adrian,

Thanks for the response. Interesting that you mention Ben referring to holes he is designing or sketching being like other holes, as it was him doing this that i was thinking of when I queried it with you.

I really like the idea of taking an element of a holes, but approaching it from a different angle, literally or figuratively. For instance, imagine if a green like the 11th at TOC was approached from the rear instead? Interesting stuff!

Cheers,

James

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Dick,

I understood all parts of your post(s). I'll explain mine.

Plagerize is SUCH a strong word. When you start your post with that word, you are begging for a response such as mine. Plagerize means to steal, to take one's ideas as your own. If you profit from plagerism, you are subject to paying monetary damages to the party from whom you plagerized. If you want to use one word to dismiss a professional  in ANY field as a fraud, you would apply plagerism to his name.

It is fine to state that you dislike the use of template features, or that you would never emply them if you were building a course. That is your opinion and your right. There are plenty of people on this site who knock Raynor and others out of the Macdonald school.

But you went over the top and implied that Macdonald stole ideas and claimed them as his own, that Raynor stole ideas and claimed them as his own, that Banks stole ideas and claimed them as his own, that Doak stole ideas and claimed them as his own, that Lester George stole ideas and and claimed them as his own, etc. etc,. As one who tries to learn as much as I can about all architects and all styles, I'm just not going to allow that kind of near-slander to go unchallenged.  Sorry if I hurt your feelings, but this site is dedicated to an open and frank discussion.

I think you are way over the top, plagerizing is one thing, using ideas or cues from template holes is another.
As stated in my original post. Be careful who you accuse of slander or near slander. Seriously.

[Carl Rogers]

there are relatively few truly truly original ideas ....
themes... variations .... combinations ... re-combinations
as TD has said here on the site a golf course is a combination of 18 holes over a property in context .... that has to be original .... but is it any good?

[David Harshbarger]

Having recently played Yale there are a bunch of holes there I would look at.

10 - Carries, but I would make it the hill top strategically advantageous, ie a little closer.
14 - Knoll, I love the idea of using land features to propel the ball around, rewarding the low blunder over the high flier.
18 - Home, the split fairway is awesome, but I think one that was really split, where you committed off the tee to one or the other, would be very cool.

Dave

[Bill Brightly]

Bill - I think you over reacted to  Dick's posts. I am not student of words but I did not read plagerize as strongly as you do, however strictly I expect your right.

Adrian,

It is pretty hard to misinterpret the word palgerism... It means to steal or take one's ideas as your own. At the very least, it is a slam of any architect who employs templates fatures, or am I totally missing something?

One of the common fallacies I read on CGA is that architects who use template features "copy holes." In almost all cases, they copy  a feature and employ it in the design of a hole. For example, Macdonald liked the way the Redan at North Berwick played, so he employed the playing characteristics of the green complex in different ways at different courses, never failing to give credit to the original. At National he built a downhill par 3 with the green running right-to-left and a very deep "redan bunker." At Piping Rock he built it with an uphill shot. At Sleepy Hollow he build another downhill hole, but reversed the direction of the kick. I have no doubt he built each hole because that is what the ground dictated. So when I see posters repeat the "copying holes" fallacy, I always correct them.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Bill - I see where you are coming from but I think its more a case of internet typing does not always come out the same as face to face stuff. I have wars on here with the same few and its usually a play on words.
Personally I dont really like direct copies and even though I am a relatively young architect stuff I have done gets copied...its just a case of grin and bear it and treat it as the highest compliment. We live in a vile world of litigation and gramical hazards, sometimes its better to offer a handshake especially on this forum which should be 1500 smiley peoples.

[Bill Brightly]

Adrian,

Since my golfing experience is limited to the US (and about 20 courses in Australia and Ireland) I have never played any of your courses, but I would like to. It is nice to learn that others have copied you, because it means you built something worthy of imitation!

I imagine that any architect, (real or pretend,) has to make a choice early on if they will employ template features or not. It is natural that most do not, and this is a good thing since it expands the variety of golfing experiences for golfers. So I respect your answer to the original post: none.

Personally, if I were designing a course I would look for one green site that is perfectly suited for a Redan. I'd do that partially because I love playing Redans, but more importantly, because I could have confidence that even if I built 17 other crappy holes, the Redan would probably be a good golf hole.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Bill - Its funny you mention The Redan because in my findings amongst normal golfers they are unliked. We dont have many in my area but there is one that I have never ever heard anyone speak fondly of and one other that is absolutely despised.

[archie_struthers]

  :DJ

When we built Twisted Dune templates didn't enter the equation. Rather holes that I liked influenced some of the design . Would love to try again but not at such a cost lol!  If anything , if you build your own I would really spend tremendous effort on the green design, and not be afraid to be daring .

[Bill Brightly]

Bill - Its funny you mention The Redan because in my findings amongst normal golfers they are unliked. We dont have many in my area but there is one that I have never ever heard anyone speak fondly of and one other that is absolutely despised.

Hmmm, maybe I would end up with 18 crappy holes...

[Ken Moum]

There would be more than 100 yards difference between the longest and shortest par threes. Something like 110 to 255 might be nice.

More than 200 yards between the longest and shortest par fours.  Lets say 245 to 460.

More than 150 yards difference between the longest and shortest par fives, which would necessarily violate the USGA recommendation for length of par fives.  Make them 440 to 595.

Note that all three categories overlap.

As a short hitter who plays at 6,000 yards whenever possible, I am sick to death of a courses that offer a procession of 150-yard par threes, 370-yard par fours and 500-yardpar fives.

K

[David Harshbarger]

As a short hitter who plays at 6,000 yards whenever possible, I am sick to death of a courses that offer a procession of 150-yard par threes, 370-yard par fours and 500-yardpar fives.

K

Ken, that's one reason I love my club.  The 9-hole course has two sets of tees, one for the front and one for the back nine.  There are no forward tees, member tees, or pro tees, just the tees.  On the par 3-'s, that means we play 125, 135, 170, 180, 190, and 210 through the course of a round.  So instead of a high capper like me being relegated to the 150 tees, all the time, now I play these long 3's, which, in fact, are a ton of fun.

[Norbert P]

 Tripp Davis, at the Tribute GC (outside Dallas, Texas) used the concept of the 4th hole of The Old Course of Moray to fine effect.  The most intriguing green there IMO. It's a simple complex that runs an angled green front left to back right with a knob at the 4 o'clock position.  So simple yet worthy of further examination.

  I'd also like to design something like the Long Hole from St. Andrews Old Course. (Ahem, Mr. Keiser, may I adjust #9 on Bandon Dunes for you?) 

 There's also a great green at The Woodlands outside Melbourne that is a worthy candidate for study.  I can't remember the hole # but it's shaped like the hood scoop from a 1964 Ford Thunderbolt.

[Garland Bayley]

Thanks for the lesson Bill, I will try to follow the rules of GCA from now on.
I know there are lots of posters that are no longer active on this site for this very reason.
A bunch of know it alls.....................
I will not be replying.......................

Does the site really want posters that are unwilling to stand up for their ideals? Who really cares if you can't get others to adopt your ideals? That's life! It's simple, get yourself heard. Over time you may or may not get some converts.

Certainly there are a bunch of know it alls on this site. But, where in life do you not encounter that?

[Garland Bayley]

I would not make an effort to use templates in a course I designed. However, I am sure some of the holes might be recognized as having "design patterns" if not templates in them. For example. A hole might have the design pattern of a Redan style green without being a Redan, because it is not a par 3. The generic design pattern there is a green that has two approach options, one being the ball bouncing in from one direction and turning towards the hole, the other being flying in from the other direction, turning the opposite direction in the air.

Of course, I am just an armchair architect that has participated in armchair contests on this site. My first full judged 18 was critiqued for having too many hill top greens. Turns out I was using the Knoll template without even knowing there was such a thing. I learned from that experience. But isn't that part of what this website is about? Learning and sharing experience and thought?

[Mark_Rowlinson]

I used to try this exercise when walking the dog over my uncle's small farm. He had 68 acres, latterly all of it meadowland. There were hedges, a few trees, several small ponds. Most of it was flattish but at the far end the land fell away to a meandering brook which marked the edge of that part of his property. I found what I thought would make an excellent short par 5 with a slightly elevated green tucked round behind a small pond, not dissimilar to the Road Hole with the Road Bunker being the pond. But once I'd put that hole in I couldn't route a further eight holes without endless crossing or boring parallel holes.

It's all irrelevant. The uncle (and dog) died some years ago, the farm was sold and the opportunity to have a go at designing a golf course did not present itself.

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Thanks for the lesson Bill, I will try to follow the rules of GCA from now on.
I know there are lots of posters that are no longer active on this site for this very reason.
A bunch of know it alls.....................
I will not be replying.......................

Does the site really want posters that are unwilling to stand up for their ideals? Who really cares if you can't get others to adopt your ideals? That's life! It's simple, get yourself heard. Over time you may or may not get some converts.

Certainly there are a bunch of know it alls on this site. But, where in life do you not encounter that?


Garland;
I was just wondering how much of this thread you read before shooting off your mouth as above.
I guess I can rest my case about a bunch of know it alls etc.
Have a nice day.

[Garland Bayley]

Thanks for the lesson Bill, I will try to follow the rules of GCA from now on.
I know there are lots of posters that are no longer active on this site for this very reason.
A bunch of know it alls.....................
I will not be replying.......................

Does the site really want posters that are unwilling to stand up for their ideals? Who really cares if you can't get others to adopt your ideals? That's life! It's simple, get yourself heard. Over time you may or may not get some converts.

Certainly there are a bunch of know it alls on this site. But, where in life do you not encounter that?

Garland;
I was just wondering how much of this thread you read before shooting off your mouth as above.
I guess I can rest my case about a bunch of know it alls etc.
Have a nice day.

Dick,

I read the whole thread before posting. And, you might as well get used to me "shooting off my mouth", because I'm not intending to go anywhere.
Here's another bit of shooting off my mouth. Why don't you learn to use the quote mechanism properly? Is that too little to ask? Simply post below any and all characters you find in the window for composing your response. I guess I must be a know it all, because here I am teaching you on my second response to you.

Now the question is, do you have the cajones to state your case politely and perhaps adamantly without all the derogatory name calling and personal slams?

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Mr. Bayley

You may not be going anywhere, but I am.

Another GCA participant gone.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Garland,
You really told him. Good work.

[jeffwarne]

As a short hitter who plays at 6,000 yards whenever possible, I am sick to death of a courses that offer a procession of 150-yard par threes, 370-yard par fours and 500-yardpar fives.

K

Ken, that's one reason I love my club.  The 9-hole course has two sets of tees, one for the front and one for the back nine.  There are no forward tees, member tees, or pro tees, just the tees.  On the par 3-'s, that means we play 125, 135, 170, 180, 190, and 210 through the course of a round.  So instead of a high capper like me being relegated to the 150 tees, all the time, now I play these long 3's, which, in fact, are a ton of fun.

just" the tees"....what a concept
I suspect I'd like that course

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()