News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Yannick Pilon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« on: January 31, 2012, 09:48:46 AM »
I know you guys are familiar with the process, so parts of this might be redundant for some, but here's my take on it, from my blog (which mostly in french, so far....)
www.yannickpilongolf.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is in the following days that the Rio Olympic’s organizing committee will announce the team that will be in charge of designing the golf course which will be host of the Olympic golf competition for men and women in 2016, 112 years after the last presence of the sport in the games.

This project is probably the one that has generated the most interest from architects in many years, simply because of the prestige and visibility that this course will obtain during the games.  This will no doubt be a dream opportunity for a team to make its mark in the industry, and be talked about for a very long time.  But it will also be a very complex project that will be created under the eyes of the entire industry which will expect nothing less than a grand slam.  In other words, this course will be picked apart by hundreds of so-called architecture “experts”!

Many teams have submitted a bid to hopefully be chosen in a competition that started last fall. Now, eight teams remain in the hunt:
•   Jack Nicklaus et Annika Sorenstam
•   Tom Doak
•   Greg Normal et Lorena Ochoa
•   Martin Hawtree
•   Gill Hanse
•   Gary Player
•   Robert Trent Jones II et Mario Gonzalez
•   Peter Thompson and Ross Perrett
 
These teams will make a final presentation to a jury comprised of one representative from the city of Rio, one representative from the organizing committee, one representative from the company that will run the course once the games will be done, and finally, one representative from the International Golf Federation – an organization committed to promoting the sport worldwide.

As far as I am concerned, the choice of the architect will be crucial, even if the majority of viewers who will follow the golf events will have no clue who the architect of the course is, and what difference it makes.  The choice is crucial because of the prestige of the event, and the fact that this will be an occasion for this committee to send a message as to what constitutes a great golf course that represents not only the Olympic movement and all of its values, but also the roots of the game of golf (and no, I am not talking about money!).

I sincerely hope that their choice will not go towards one of golf’s emblematic figures still part of the process, such as Jack Nicklaus, Greg Norman or Gary Player.  These athletes and great personalities have certainly contributed to the popularity of the sport, and in that regard, they have all of my admiration and respect.  But their very lucrative association with a immense quantity of course designs has also contributed in making golf the sport that so many people today describe as expensive, elitist, and at the source of profitable home lots, without any regards to the modest and populist origins of the sport.  Can we blame them, and many others similar golf figures? Certainly not; they have only surfed on the wave.  Today, however, it seems evident that their model has to make place to a simpler, more accessible one, aimed towards developing the sport and all its benefits, particularly with an aging population in many markets.  It seems like the only logical way to help the sport develop again.

In that sense, my vote goes to either Tom Doak or Gill Hanse: two architects which, in my humble opinion, have solidly made their case in the past few years towards that goal.  It’s also not a surprise that is it most likely these two teams that have the smallest available financial resources to participate in this complex process which, I am afraid, will be more politic than based on good old common sense and the artistic and creative qualities of the finalists.

To be continued in a few days…. I am crossing my fingers.

YP
www.yannickpilongolf.com - Golf Course Architecture, Quebec, Canada

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2012, 11:29:20 AM »
Yannick,

I disagree on many points, but interesting reading!  I have little doubt that the selection process will focus on things other than what particpants here believe, and what you believe should happen, as written in your blog.

First, I am of the opinion that all those architects can send a good or the best message for the future of golf.  They will all do fine in that regard.  While JN in particular was at one time associated with perfect maintenance and rising standards, etc., in general, all the architects have a wide mix of courses, maintenance budgets, international experience, etc.  Not only that, but I suspect the client - i.e., the Olympic Games - probably personfies the ideals of sportsmanlike amateur ideals gone slick corporate more than any of the gca's being interviewed!  If the course doesn't come out the way you think it should, I would look there first, regardless of who is chosen as designer.

And frankly, the course is so unique - the first and maybe last ever designed specifically for the Olympics - that I believe it will have little influence on future designs.  As I mentioned yesterday, I think the critiques will far outweigh the atta boys for whoever gets it.

I have heard a few things but find them dubious, knowing how these decisions often come out waaaay different than expected - the finance guy asked TD to submit, Dawson likes Hawtree from his Open work, JN and Annika are frontrunners, etc.  I would add RTJ as the fourth if they cut the field in half again (either publicly or in private sessions)  That said, no one is better known as an international ambassador for golf than Player, and he could be stronger than any of us suspect.

Frankly, in many of these things, the decision is already made, or at least the committee is leaning one way or another.  Sometimes, they have a point system, and the finalists are currently ranked from 1-8 and the interview may be like a final course exam, perhaps counting half the total grade.  In other cases, it starts over fresh at the interview and the firm that wows them, doesn't step on their own sword, etc. gets the job.  

Despite public pronouncements of it "being a tough decision" if you ever sit on those selection committees, you know that one, and at most two, firms just blow them away with a presentation while the others sort of rehash their experience, qualifications, etc.  Someone will go in there with a design and vision that jives with the committees and win the job.

So, while all firms are emminently qualified, in the end, its not design skill, its salesmanship, that will land the project, which has been the case since the days of Old Tom Morris.  And, as a fellow architect, I root for the guy who presents the best vision for the course itself, which is what you are saying.  

For all the outside hoopla, it is still the design that will make the difference.  That said, we all hope that it doesn't come down to one guy understanding where to put the TV towers, bleachers, cables, etc. over where to put the bunkers.  Or, come down to a competion of "numbers" - X has designed 12 tournament courses, and Y has designed only 1, etc.

« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 11:31:02 AM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jaeger Kovich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2012, 11:42:28 AM »
Jeff - Your reply was by far the most accurate, intelligent and well thought out take on the Rio 2016 project I have read yet.

Thank you,

Jaeger

Ulrich Mayring

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2012, 03:42:49 PM »
Maybe it'll turn out a bit like American Idol. For the first installment people really think that the winner is somehow special and the event a once in a lifetime opportunity. So folks are scrambling head over heels to get the job. And then for the next Olympics it is done all over again with horror stories emerging about the first time winner having turned out as a one hit wonder and ended up in the gutter. So a few folks will be a bit more weary the second time around. And after a few more re-runs it'll be just like the Ryder Cup selection process: no legitimate course wants to host it anymore.

On the other hand, maybe it really is a singular event. Meaning that the next Olympics won't have golf at all - in which case I wonder how accommodating it would be to have done the course for a failed experiment.

Then again, it may be the glorious rebirth of golf and a spectacular milestone remembered for years to come. Them's gambling hands who takes it ...

Ulrich
« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 03:46:38 PM by Ulrich Mayring »
Golf Course Exposé (300+ courses reviewed), Golf CV (how I keep track of 'em)

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2012, 04:14:38 PM »
Ulrich,

I'm thinking this will be more of a one off because RIO is extenuating cirmcumstances in that there really was nowhere in the area that could host an international event like this.  Pretty much any other summer Olympic city you can think of has one.

For example, lets look at the last cities to host the summer Olympics:

2012 - London
2008 - Beijing
2004 - Athens
2000 - Sydney
1996 - Atlanta
1992 - Barcelona
1988 - Seoul
1984 - Los Angeles

I'm pretty sure all of those cities would have had a venue to use for the Olympic Games with the possible exception of Athens....not sure what they have.


Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #5 on: January 31, 2012, 04:19:05 PM »
Don't count out Desmond Muirhead. I do believe he plans on making a presentation if at all possible.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #6 on: January 31, 2012, 04:23:02 PM »
Ulrich,

I'm thinking this will be more of a one off because RIO is extenuating cirmcumstances in that there really was nowhere in the area that could host an international event like this.  Pretty much any other summer Olympic city you can think of has one.

For example, lets look at the last cities to host the summer Olympics:

2012 - London
2008 - Beijing
2004 - Athens
2000 - Sydney
1996 - Atlanta
1992 - Barcelona
1988 - Seoul
1984 - Los Angeles

I'm pretty sure all of those cities would have had a venue to use for the Olympic Games with the possible exception of Athens....not sure what they have.

Kalen, there is a slight chance in 2020 if the first of the six finalists is chosen : Baku (Azerbaijan), Doha (Qatar), Istanbul (Turkey), Madrid (Spain), Rome (Italy) and Tokyo (Japan). We won't know for more than a year and a half.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 04:41:45 PM by Pete_Pittock »

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2012, 04:32:08 PM »
True...

I've never even heard of Baku?  Where is that?

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2012, 04:45:19 PM »
west shore of the Caspian Sea

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2012, 05:08:06 PM »

First, I am of the opinion that all those architects can send a good or the best message for the future of golf.  They will all do fine in that regard.  

So, while all firms are emminently qualified

I strongly disagree
All of the firms are not qualified to the same level - not even close.
To date most of the firms on this list have not sent a good message for the future of golf.
Just because they say it now, doesn't mean they know how to perform.

You have several other items correct, but you also have several other items wrong, but that is for another day after the selection is made.  :)

cheers
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2012, 05:13:18 PM »
Mike,

You are right that further discussion should wait a few days to see who they select.

I also agree that some of those firms are more qualified than others, although we might disagree on the criteria.  I am not all that familiar with Hawtree or Thompson's/Ross Perret work, for example, and I doubt you are either. 

The mere fact that it is such an international field suggests the committee had some unique "givens and druthers" they were looking for, unless they just picked names out of a hat, or had each committee member pick two and interview all of them.

Upon reflection, interviewing more than five usually suggests that the latter may have happened, or that they aren't 100% sure what they are looking for and are still leaving it wide open.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #11 on: January 31, 2012, 05:34:03 PM »
With all those big names on the boards...

..hard to see how the "little" guys will have much of a chance. 

If it doesn't go to Nicklaus, Norman, or Player, I'd be pretty darn surprised.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #12 on: January 31, 2012, 05:43:51 PM »
Kalen,

Me too.  As per above, it seems to me that the "other guys" would have to blow the socks off the committee with their presence or presentation, but its hard to believe some of the big boys won't be very persuasive.

That said, I have heard Greg Norman is only sending an associate, so I would think he would be out for lack of passion for the project.  At least, IMHO, he should be!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Yannick Pilon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #13 on: January 31, 2012, 05:53:58 PM »
Jeff,

Would you care to elaborate on what you disagree with in my statement?  I generally agree with almost everything you said and I don't see how what you wrote is so far off my initial statement.

I know for sure that all of these firms could do a fine job. I just hope that a few of them will not get it because of what they represent in the grand scheme of things based on my own personal opinion, not on their capabilities as architects.

You are right, salesmanship will most likely win this thing, unless they have already made their choice!  But don't you think that guys like Jack and Greg have tons more resources to wow the committee?  To them this is pennies, while others in the process - including a large number of the firms which did not make the finals - are trying to make a living at this while generally offering a more cost effective and more environmentally sensitive approach to it all!

YP
www.yannickpilongolf.com - Golf Course Architecture, Quebec, Canada

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2012, 06:27:25 PM »
Yannick,

Basically, I think that outside of gca.com, where minimalism and some kind of "message" or style reigns supreme, most of the rest of the golf world, including the comittee won't see the groupthink vision of this site as all that desireable.   In the committees eyes, all are good firms, for reasons we don't know exactly.   IMHO, if Doak gets picked its because he has become as big a star as the others in the pro ranks, not for his design style.  As always, I could be wrong.

I think we both agree the traditional big boys have a natural advantage.  I am not its in their financial resources as much as them being perhaps safer, more comfortable picks for a committee.  The committee has several big structures and may feel more comfortable with a designer with a big corporate structure rather than a guy like Gil or TD who goes in saying he will build it on site, more or less.

So, I see factors like structure, ability to produce plans, design to make it look good on TV, having done tournament courses (lighting, spacing between greens and tees for crowds, cables, etc. etc.) international experience, fast track, etc, as the biggest selling points of firms who have done tournament courses from scratch.  Ability to get international projects built (on a tight schedule) is a must, not a plus.  I don't know TD's construction schedules on his NZ or GBI projects, but again, I see someone pairing up with a Wadsworth or LUI as co-partners having an advantage on a tight schedule job, too.

I see the winning firm pitching all the above hard, and answering any questions about their weaknesses as percieved by the committee (i.e., too expensive for perhaps JN, maybe not enough tournament courses for TD) frankly and well to the satisfaction of the committee.

But, who knows.  Maybe they will make an unconventional choice.  Certainly TD has reached that megastar status where maybe he can say he has done X amount of highly rated courses, etc.  Maybe his legendary routing skills will have him come up with something so unique they cannot pass it up.  Unique designs don't always sell, either.  Too risky.  I recall knowing I had lost a job when my routing contained parallel first and tenth holes, a la Inverness in Toledo.  One guy questioned the safety, and no matter how much I described the spacing, he was thinking of some course somewhere where he nearly got hit, and couldn't get over it.


In those kind of presentations, it isn't often design as much as passion.  Not many can really  see design, all can see passion.  Not sure who scores the biggest points there in terms of presenting their passion for design.  


It is very probable that at least one of the firms will be going along nicely in the presentation and then stumble on a boo boo.  Despite the best preparations, it could derail them.  Similarly, the firm that had done the best job of anticipating what they want to hear, and hitting those points one by one in their talk will likely score very highly. (The old Bewitched or Brady Bunch shows, where they pitch a completely different idea from what the client wants who then "sees the light" are actually pretty rare on big projects)

Overall, its a tough call on how to proceed when you go into that "biggest game of your life" presentation.  

Short version - I don't think any overriding goal of determining golf's future will be considered at all in this presentation.  Mostly, its about getting it done and done right for the "really big shoe" that is the first Oly golf games.  It might come down to the firm that best convinces them they won't have egg on their face when its all over, and if they do, they certainly couldn't have anticipated it with their selection.  While many here route for the underdogs, committees tend to go with the "sure thing."

As always, just MHO.

  
« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 06:34:02 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2012, 06:55:01 PM »
Statistically, the "global" golf community has already played their card...they have, with few deviations, been extremely anxious to engage big name players during the past decade. This does not mean that will happen this round, but I will be surprised if the temptation to go with a household name and player participant (or one in the same) is not the decision.

Mike N. makes a good point. But, I read the post again and cannot ever recall a time in golf when the designers were 100% in tune with what the game truly needed. This is a twofold problem: (1) What the game truly "needs" is not 100% pin-point-able, and (2) Design as an undertaking (no matter the design problem) is never aligned fully with a popular cause or direction — this is what keep designers hovering beyond the expected and passionate about design. An example is Mike Kaiser and Bandon...until the populous saw it, they had no idea to ask for it and demand it. Now, of course, it is an "obvious" solution and one we can say: "Now, see there, that is what the game needed..."

Jeff B. says that each of the finalists can deliver the right message (and effort), and I do believe this. They are all very smart in their own way.

One more thought: The decision, I suspect, will not be entirely about who can create the best solution...but also, who can deliver the best story to a worldwide audience. If I were on the selection panel (besides scaring the hell out of those of you here  :D ) I think one of my roles would be to imagine the many interviews and appearances of the designer ultimately charged with the assignment. Now, close your eyes and imagine __________ giving an interview by __________ and being seen on _____ cable channels across the free world and even parts of the non-free world.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 06:56:35 PM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2012, 07:26:16 PM »
One more thought: The decision, I suspect, will not be entirely about who can create the best solution...but also, who can deliver the best story to a worldwide audience. If I were on the selection panel (besides scaring the hell out of those of you here  :D ) I think one of my roles would be to imagine the many interviews and appearances of the designer ultimately charged with the assignment. Now, close your eyes and imagine __________ giving an interview by __________ and being seen on _____ cable channels across the free world and even parts of the non-free world.

Forrest:

I'm sure that you are right, that some on the committee imagine that the architect for the course will be the subject of a great deal of attention, and will put some weight on that in their selections.  But, I don't really think it will happen, do you?  They barely even interviewed Pete Dye on television during the original TPC at Sawgrass when everyone in the field was talking about the course.

I find it funny to hear you and Jeff arguing that what the committee should really want is a designer who can capitalize on his celebrity.  But, that's all the more reason for me to make a polished presentation tomorrow morning.

Chris Johnston

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2012, 07:40:35 PM »
One more thought: The decision, I suspect, will not be entirely about who can create the best solution...but also, who can deliver the best story to a worldwide audience. If I were on the selection panel (besides scaring the hell out of those of you here  :D ) I think one of my roles would be to imagine the many interviews and appearances of the designer ultimately charged with the assignment. Now, close your eyes and imagine __________ giving an interview by __________ and being seen on _____ cable channels across the free world and even parts of the non-free world.

Forrest:

I'm sure that you are right, that some on the committee imagine that the architect for the course will be the subject of a great deal of attention, and will put some weight on that in their selections.  But, I don't really think it will happen, do you?  They barely even interviewed Pete Dye on television during the original TPC at Sawgrass when everyone in the field was talking about the course.

I find it funny to hear you and Jeff arguing that what the committee should really want is a designer who can capitalize on his celebrity.  But, that's all the more reason for me to make a polished presentation tomorrow morning.

Good Luck, Tom!

Dick Kirkpatrick

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2012, 07:44:32 PM »
Tom

All the best with your presentation tomorrow.

I am hoping that they can see true talent instead of picking a better known name. Really.

I have faith in the wisdom of the committee.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2012, 07:47:51 PM »
I think Jeff B's comments ring the most true to me, especially as it pertains to the biggest names having a huge advantage.

To me its no different than Budweiser being the market bully of beer, even though I think its a crap product.
Or McDonalds being the king of burgers despite their food being barely edible.
Or WalMart the king of retail despite all their despicable business and labor practices.
Or insert <Massive Name Corporation> here.

I hope and would be thrilled to death to see a TD or Gil Hanse get it, but it just seems like such a steep hill to climb.

Lets break it down evaluator by evaulator

1)  City of RIO rep - This person will know zero about golf...this vote is a waste as it will likely be highly political.
2)  Organizer of the Games rep - Perhaps will know more than person 1...but once again I suspect this person will know little about courses and also be a very political vote.
3)  Course Operator Rep - This will likely be the most informed person, the one person I would seek out to make a good impression on.
4)  A rep from the IGF - You may as well just rubber stamp this vote now...no way he votes anything other than Jack!
« Last Edit: January 31, 2012, 08:00:02 PM by Kalen Braley »

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2012, 07:52:26 PM »
Tom...I don't think that is necessarily what the committee should want (or will want), but I do think it will enter their minds. As for the eventual interviews, I will hazard a guess that "yes", it will be a big story and a likely part of the coverage of the games.

I am thinking good thoughts your way — my best wishes for that stellar presentation!

---

(I hope you go before Desmond...  ;D  )
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2012, 04:31:51 AM »
Picking up a little on what Forrest was saying, the main reason I would like this job to go to either Hanse, Doak, Hawtree or Trent Jones is because if and when the publicity for the designer does come, it might remind some people that golf course architecture is a profession and not just something old pro's who can't compete anymore take up as an afterthought... But I'm sure that's a long way from the front of the minds of the selection committee...

Jay Flemma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2012, 05:17:32 AM »
Guys, don't underestimate Jones.  He may get picked. and if he does, my guess is he'll build a southern hemisphere version of Chambers Bay, which would be a darn good golf course.

My guess...just a guess...is they'll pick Jones or Hanse.
Mackenzie, MacRayBanks, Maxwell, Doak, Dye, Strantz. @JayGolfUSA, GNN Radio Host of Jay's Plays www.cybergolf.com/writerscorner

Yannick Pilon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2012, 06:22:52 AM »
Picking up a little on what Forrest was saying, the main reason I would like this job to go to either Hanse, Doak, Hawtree or Trent Jones is because if and when the publicity for the designer does come, it might remind some people that golf course architecture is a profession and not just something old pro's who can't compete anymore take up as an afterthought... But I'm sure that's a long way from the front of the minds of the selection committee...

I think you just summed up my thoughts, even if the comment sounds a bit harsh towards the big boys who have still proven over the years they can produce good work as well.

YP
www.yannickpilongolf.com - Golf Course Architecture, Quebec, Canada

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architecture and the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2012, 08:17:10 AM »
Yeah, I feel that way, too.  Always prefer that gca get its due recognition, and if JN gets it, I hope his guys at least get some credit for doing a lot of the work.  Actually, I hope the shapers and contractors get their fair share of pub out of it too! 

Basically, my feelings are let the best firm win.  There are literally "horses for courses" in the design field, and I hope the committee picks the right horse.

LOL. Last thing I figured was that TD would chime in the night before the big presentation on golf club atlas!  Sure hope we didn't distract his preparations and I especially hope (although I doubt there is any chance of it) that he started reading and messing with his presentation based on anything anyone else said here, me included.  He sure doesn't need our advice.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back