Guess The 8 Finalists for the Olympic Design Job

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Tom

That is enlightening, thank you.

[Jason Walker]

Tom-

Us GCA enthusiasts can only hope someone like you or Gil Hanse wins.  However, I just can't see a scenario where a Jack, Lorena, Annika, Norman team doesn't win.  

I say that as a complete outsider with little to zero knowledge about how all this works.

And all that being said, I guess my original point is--does it even matter?  Most build-up to the Olympics regarding venues ultimately ends up being just that--build up.  Does a great golf course in Brazil need the Olympics to validate its greatness?  Perhaps for the same reasons I disagree with golf being an Olympic sport, doesn't golf already have its shrines?

From a business point of view--do you as a Golf Course Architect see value in being the winner (or is this a "job")?  If so, can you give any context as to that value?

[Michael George]

In my practice, I have learned that sometimes even the most political process can result in a completely non-political result.  For instance, if two or more parties are equally strong politically (ie. 2 lobbyists directed at a lawmaker or in this instance, Nicklaus, Norman, Player), they can divide the decision making authorities and every once in a while the non-political option can win the day as the decision making authorities look for a way out of the irreconcilable debate.

Good luck Tom.  I am sure you have presented a wonderful bid.

[Garland Bayley]

Good luck Tom. I'm pullin' fo' ye'.

[John Kavanaugh]

The only thing I remember from the last Olympics is the beauty of the architecture. Hey Tom, how old you gonna get before you quit being described as young?

[Mac Plumart]

Does a great golf course in Brazil need the Olympics to validate its greatness?

Most likely, yes.  At the very least, it won't hurt.  In my opinion, Seminole gets a very large boost in the ratings due the its lore and Hogan link.  Augusta with Jones, Mackenzie, and The Masters.  I could go on...but you get the point.  The story, the aura, the legend, the non-golf architecture stuff associated with a course go a long way to boosting a course's greatness ranking.

IMO.

[Jud_T]

The point is that while it may be a bit of a stretch based on the cynicism justifiably developed over many years, the best case scenario here could be very powerful and well beyond just another feather in Tom's cap.  That's what's really exciting about this thing.  If even a dent is made in terms of tournament course presentation, growing the game globally, maintenance practices, sustainability or pace of play (ok now that one is wishful thinking), this course and a strong Olympic golf movement may in fact be more influential than any dozen private clubs built on pure driven sand, I dare say potentially even more important than Bandon or Sand Hills to the game globally.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm shocked by the list of finalists.

If the decision was based on the respective bodies of work over the last decade is there any doubt who would be eliminated and who should be considered for the project ?

[Niall C]

Patrick

I would assume that they already had to "present" in some shape or form to get this far. In most lines of work, winning jobs is a skill in its own right, and while an impressive back catalogue might help a great deal its possibly not everything. Having said that, there doesn't seem to be any complete novices out there if you accept that Anneka is a front for experienced professionals.

Niall

[Patrick_Mucci]

Niall,

If you list the body of each architect's work over the last decade, and compare those bodies of work, you have to ask yourself HOW some of those 8 finalist were even eligible to make presentations.

I haven't followed the process, but would be more favorably inclined if Dye and Fazio replaced some of the finalist.

Can you list two exceptional courses that each of the 8 finalists have designed in the last decade ?

Three ?

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Tom, Good luck.

[Niall C]

Niall,

If you list the body of each architect's work over the last decade, and compare those bodies of work, you have to ask yourself HOW some of those 8 finalist were even eligible to make presentations.

I haven't followed the process, but would be more favorably inclined if Dye and Fazio replaced some of the finalist.

Can you list two exceptional courses that each of the 8 finalists have designed in the last decade ?

Three ?

Patrick

Frankly, I don't know their body of work at all well enough. I'd be struggling to say from personal experience of any living architect that two of their courses were exceptional, I simply haven't seen that many modern courses. However with regards to deciding what was exceptional and what was not, that would be in the eye of the beholder. You also have to take into consideration the sites they worked on. I know nothing about this Olympic site an don't know if it would be capable of producing an exceptional course in any case.

Niall

[RJ_Daley]

One has to ask themselves what aspects of a golf course do they really want or need for a one-time Olympic competition over two or so weeks.  And, the 60 person men's and women's field of competition selection format won't even give it much more competitive appeal than the Bankok Open for serious golf fans.  Surely, it won't have the quality of a major competitive field.

http://golf.about.com/od/tourmajorevents/f/olympicformatfield.htm

So, will the viewers be hard core golf fans, or just channel surfers watching the casual or random interest in how the Olympics are shaping up that year?  And, will watching the tournament at the Olympics draw spectators equally that want to enjoy or witness a "RIO" experience, not much different than going to a real Marti Gras, and those who want to see the best golfer from Thailand compete, compared to serious golf fans who are most inclined to watch an Open or US Open? 

The point being, that despite the site being seaside, it doesn't really appear to have anything extraordinary going for it in terms of naturally golf design greatness as a canvas, yet, will the emphasis be on the eye candy to draw viewers compelled to watch the event mainly for its glamorous  location?   Or, will  the golf nerds, compelled to see the architecture as it relates to a fairly mundane field of competitors make up the bulk of the audience?  Can the design of the course light a fire in the Brazilian golf scene, or will they revert back to golf as a fairly incidental to the upper class, low participation by the locals, scene?   

I'd have to imagine that the selection committee is looking mostly at who and how they can show off the glamor of Rio for two intense weeks of viewing, and they aren't really all that concerned about what course design can truly bring out the finest golfer in the world as an Olympian athlete.  I think if they could afford 10 waterfalls, and a jetset name(s) as the course designers, and that brings eyeballs to the broadcast or spectators to the venue, for the two weeks of the Oly's, that is about all their focus is on. 

Having spewed all that negative energy, I'd love to see the best archie get it and beat the challenge of doing a really great course within their budget realm, and a course that will have a lasting impact on the scene as launching more participation in the game in a low participation region of the world. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Niall,

I understand.

So, let's look at it in another light.

What courses, solely produced by Greg Norman, Sorenstam and Gary Player, would you say are outstanding, to the degree that you'd recommend them as "must plays" to friends traveling to nearby locations ?

[Joel_Stewart]

If you list the body of each architect's work over the last decade, and compare those bodies of work, you have to ask yourself HOW some of those 8 finalist were even eligible to make presentations.

I haven't followed the process, but would be more favorably inclined if Dye and Fazio replaced some of the finalist.

Can you list two exceptional courses that each of the 8 finalists have designed in the last decade ?

Three ?

You don't know who submitted applications.  It's like the lottery, you can't win unless you play.

I do think it's odd that Fazio isn't involved, and there must be an explanation.  It wouldn't surprise me with his ego, the money, time and travel it just wasn't worth it.

I suspect that C&C and Kyle Phillips have different reasons as well.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joel,

Dye, Fazio, Rees and C&C's absence is puzzling, if not for any reason other than the fact that future Olympics may need courses built and one would assume that you'd like to be on the list of approved vendors/bidders.

It's not like there's a tremendous amount of work on new courses today, or into the future.

In addition, being named, the "Olympic Designer" carries tremendous weight around the world when looking to be awarded new work.

[Niall C]

Patrick

I wasn't being modest when I said I hadn't played enough of their courses to judge. I've played one Doak, at least one Nicklaus although there could be more and a Thomson. The Doak (Renaissance) I thoroughly enjoyed and thought was great fun and a good test, the one Nicklaus I can remember playing was in Florida was completely bonkers for its impossible green complexes but good fun nonetheless in a holiday golf kind of way, and the original Dukes Course at St Andrews as laid out by Thomson. At the risk of being blackballed by the Aussie contingent I would say I really liked the old Dukes, especially when you consider the heavy clay soil and some of the gradients he had to contend with.

Not really enough scope to come up with a definitive view on who I think best suited.

Niall

[Mike Nuzzo]

Dye, Fazio, Rees and C&C's absence is puzzling, if not for any reason other than the fact that future Olympics may need courses built and one would assume that you'd like to be on the list of approved vendors/bidders.

Has Pete Dye ever had to win a project?  He never answered the phone, let alone jump through hoops to get one.  I'd be surprised if his family didn't submit in the first round.
How many courses have Fazio designed for this market - sustainable/practical - the fee is $300k too.
C&C - I think Tom mentioned why they may not have submitted - knowing if Tom and Gil were submitting would have probably helped.  Are proposals their strong suit?
Reese - I'd be surprised if they didn't submit.

Cheers

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Pete has told me stories of going against other archies, although he always claims to submit a price of "high bid + $1" so he can say that if he lost a project, it was purely because of low bid.  LOL.

Good luck to all on the project.  If certain architects didn't submit, it was probably because they didn't like the travels, the restrictions, or the general hoopla.  As one in the biz put it, much of the time "celebrity work" turns out to be "the best job I never got."  I could certainly see the Oly job falling in that category.

[Garland Bayley]

Patrick,

If I recall correctly, it has already been stated by an authorative source on this thread that Dye, and C&C did not choose to participate.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland,

I only have a few minutes and have to attend to a project, who was the authoritive source and what reply # was it ?

Thanks

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

I only have a few minutes and have to attend to a project, who was the authoritive source and what reply # was it ?

Thanks

What makes you think I have more time than you?

[Mike Nuzzo]

Jeff
Thanks for sharing, that is funny.
I think they are stories because they are notable, I'll guess there weren't that many.

If someone wanted Pete Dye to design a golf course, who else could they consider?

[Jeremy Rudock]

Tom,
     In the unfortunate event that your bid is not selected, is there any chance you'll post some of the details of your presentation here?

Thanks,
Jeremy

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,
     In the unfortunate event that your bid is not selected, is there any chance you'll post some of the details of your presentation here?

Thanks,
Jeremy

No.  Sorry.  It's strictly against the rules of the process, and I'd rather not get sued.

Whoever does get the job deserves not to have their design compared to the losing entries, and the last thing the Rio 2016 group wants is for people to second-guess their decision.  My guess is that you will never get to see any of the other proposals, anywhere.  It's sort of sad, but also perfectly understandable.