Courage in golf course architecture

[paul cowley]

Phillippe

After spending a day wandering the Diamante site...and being overwhelmed as the site was so scary/strong...and knowing that the popular wisdom in Cabo was that golf has never been built on the Pacific side because it's too windy...coupled with concerns that many parts of the site were not stable enough to grow grass on...and then having the owner ask if the site was qualified for golf and worthy of a major investment?...and pausing to answer "yes"...and his next question...."do you think a Top 100 ranked course could be built on it?...followed by a lengthy pause to again answer "yes"...and then his asking..."do you think you could build one here?...and then an even longer pause to again answer "yes".

I've never given multi million dollar investment advice to clients lightly, and after 7 years this day seems like yesterday...probably because the decision made me go out on a limb and trust my instincts....which makes pulling it of even sweeter.

Audacious...I don't know...but as a result there were about 5 new courses being planned for the Pacific side (before the slow down).

[Niall C]

What about Schmidt-Curley?

Stone Forest looks unique and took some courage/audacity to develop...as well as some of their other Chinesse courses.

Mac

Where does the true courage lie in this example ? Is it with the developer or with the architect. After all the architect had a unique landscape to work with and perhaps restrictions as to what he could do. It seems to me that the real risk lay with the developer who was going to be spending money on a product that was in some respects untried and untested.

I think real courage is where the architect deliberately chooses a certain (controversial ?) path rather than being forced down a route due to constraints.

Niall

[Peter Pallotta]

Paul - I thought that Philippe's use of the word "courage" was a little inappropriate/non-applicable in the gca context, and hadn't posted on this thread.  But your post captures something important -- the relationship between convictions and responsibility.  I'm am very glad it has worked out so well.

Best to you and yours for a peaceful and enriching new year.

Peter

[paul cowley]

Thanks Peter and wishing the same to you and yours!

You know, I'm beginning to think that the real courage will be shown by the profession of GCA and how it accepts the fact that most of the designers practicing a few years ago probably won't live or work long enough to see a recovery and continue to be able practice their trade.....and that the ASGCA will become more like a veterans group that gets together to discuss old times.

Dahm, and I was just getting the hang of it!  

[Ronald Montesano]

What's the story on Tom Weiskopf and quicksand in Ireland? How he walked the Loch Lomond course (Ran references it thus...

The story of  Tom Weiskopf almost perishing in quicksand at 6:00am in the marsh on the 14th hole summarizes the enthusiasm that he brought to this special undertaking.


that's either courage or stupidity.

[paul cowley]

What about Schmidt-Curley?

Stone Forest looks unique and took some courage/audacity to develop...as well as some of their other Chinesse courses.

Mac

Where does the true courage lie in this example ? Is it with the developer or with the architect. After all the architect had a unique landscape to work with and perhaps restrictions as to what he could do. It seems to me that the real risk lay with the developer who was going to be spending money on a product that was in some respects untried and untested.

I think real courage is where the architect deliberately chooses a certain (controversial ?) path rather than being forced down a route due to constraints.

Niall

Niall...I absolutely agree...the designer plays an important role, but one he wouldn't have without the vision of the developer and his willingness to risk his own capitol in the process. Ken Jowdy, the principle owner of Diamante, probably deserves more credit for the course than any of those involved, including me.

[Mac Plumart]

Niall...I think you bring up great points and are correct.

Paul...great post(s).

[Brett_Morrissy]

Courage,
For me this is measured along a line of 'potential to fail'.
And then, what does that failure mean to the person who is being courageous?

Take the architect/designer/artist - all should be taking risks, being courageous in their work, to challenge their creativity, and build/design/create something new that will provide enjoyment in one form or another for many years to come. If they are not taking risks, then their work is 'pedestrian'. 

Now add commercial reality, what is the brief, financial constraints, and land or materials available to work with, to build or create with. Then for the golf course architect,  add environmental constraints, government guidelines, etc.

Finally, the course founder, owner or developer, where I think lies real risk, for this person or group, failure would usually mean financial ruin, loss greater than just reputation alone, loss of associates, friends, peer's & shareholder's investments.

Take Michael's example of Bill Coore in China, his reputation would tell us that he is at the top of his field, takes his role extremely seriously, and will give his utmost to produce the very best he possibly can for his client and his clients guests and golfers. But, if this course is a failure, the risks Mr. Coore engaged, are they really courageous? As the price of failure is not life changing, but it may well be for the developer of the the course on Shanqin island.

So for me, the risks the current days GCA's are taking are those in their earliest projects, where if they do not/did not succeed, they may not have found a career afterward, so for those that did not play it too safe, that took some risks and they paid off in delivering an interesting and perhaps new golf experience, that was courage and victory. I believe that some early projects did not want to "risk" their project on the "rebel" young Tom Doak, the perception that he was too controversial.
 - if a developer is only exposing himself to a portion of his wealth or investment pool in building a new course on some far away place, then where is the risk?  This does not appear especially courageous.

Wouldn't it be great if those charged with delivering a new course for the Olympics, we're courageous in their choice of designer, and then courageous in their brief to the choice?

[Ulrich Mayring]

Not so sure whether a big name architect qualifies here, as he can afford to take any risks he wants and, in case of failure, return to his comfort zone. True courage is where people actually bet their career and perhaps life on something.

Ulrich