[Patrick_Mucci]

Ian,

I understand.

The thirst for knowledge is a great pursuit.

Crump probably is a bad example because he was a novice and sought the advice of the "experts" of his time.

But, the writings of the ODG's often reference other architects visiting their projects in progress.

Maybe the money has become so significant that the idea of "casual consulting" is a thing of the past.

[Tom_Doak]

The question is, would you consider a design change offered by an outsider ?

Of course.  There are lots of ideas in every course that weren't mine to start with.  Most of them are contributed by my associates; some by clients and friends.  

The idea of a very short par-3 at Barnbougle came from Tim Weiman saying years ago that he would love to see me build a hole that was a real "Little Devil" ... since we were in Tasmania, I thought that was a great place to build a hole named as such. And in fact, it was Mike Clayton who actually found that particular hole, turning the routing back into the wind to a green site that I'd originally considered going at from a different direction.

But, not many of my competitors have come out to visit on their own time, and volunteered a great idea for me to use on one of my courses.  If they do, my ego is not too big to take a good idea and run with it, despite what some may think.  I learned that from Mr. Dye long ago.

P.S.  Your view of how Crump and his friends worked together is a bit warped by what happened afterward.  George Thomas and A.W.Tillinghast were not seen in 1914-1918 as established architects; they were just there as golfing friends of George Crump with a bit of experience at design.  Harry Colt had different status, of course; that's why Crump paid for HIS input.

[Mike_Young]

Even Ian Andrew, who I consider a friend, spends more time with my associates at the Renaissance Cup than he does with me.  

Tom,
Be careful what you wish for. I'll follow you like a lost puppy at the next one.   Although that assumes you're short of players to fill out the matches.

He came South and had to bring a translator to breakfast....

Mike,

“Y’all think yur funy”

I'd be curious to know what some of our contributing architects have learned from other contemporary architects, not as mentors, such as Dye and Doak, but, as competitors.

Pat,

I’ve sought out just about every architect that has ever interested me which includes all your favourites. Some are phone conversations, others involve days spent together, and when I’m lucky it’s on a course where the designer can share important stories or ideas to increase my understanding of the “entire” project. For example Tom was kind enough to walk me through the earthworks required to accomplish Ballyneal while out there together.

I’ve visited a number of courses in construction from Sebonac through to Old Macdonald and Castle Stuart and walked with either the designer or key member of the design team. BTW I don’t make suggestions. But I certainly ask a lot of questions to learn as much as I can from them. I find designers very flattered to be visited and very generous with their time and information.

I also seek out restoration and renovation projects which fly under your radar. I share historical information when I can actually help. I love to spend time learning about the decision process, because much of that is very complicated and "grey." For example I visited Merion, Quaker Ridge and LACC mid-construction because I wanted to see the detailing.
  
I’ll never have enough answers and anything someone else can teach me is something else I can draw from. Some architects are very open with sharing their knowledge and others are not. I find the vast majority are open and the younger generation of current architects particularly so.

What none of you will ever fully understand is someone the most brilliant people on very specific aspects of golf design are not talked about here at all. I love the “favourites” too, but I think there are more subtle aspects that some others are really good at and I seek them too.  Golf architecture is far more than a routing, bunker placement and bunker style, but that’s the depth that any people stop at. If you want to learn it all, you need to seek out a lot of architects, builders, superintendents and even the occasional engineer if you really want to know what you’re doing.

The point I want to make to you pat is there are more out there like me than you would think. The problem is most of us work under the GCA radar and “all” architects are painted here by the careers of about twenty.  

Good post....dude

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

AWT had designed a number of good to great courses prior to and between 1914 and 1918.

Shawnee 1908

San Francisco 1915
Shackamaxon 1917
Somerset Hills 1917

And six other lesser courses.

And Crump did incorporate HHA into # 7 so his opinion must have carried some weight, despite the pay scale.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

AWT had designed a number of good to great courses prior to and between 1914 and 1918.

Shawnee 1908

San Francisco 1915
Shackamaxon 1917
Somerset Hills 1917

And six other lesser courses.

And Crump did incorporate HHA into # 7 so his opinion must have carried some weight, despite the pay scale.

When did he suggest that idea to Crump -- 1914, when he had done ONE course -- or 1918, when Crump died?  The hole was finished by 1918, and it didn't get built overnight.

Also, though San Francisco Golf Club was founded in 1915, it's been established now that Tillie didn't visit until 1920.

[Jeff Blume]

Pat,

Interesting discussion.  I don't think that most modern day architects are opposed to having competitors visit their projects and offer opinions as long as it is done in the right spirit.  As Ian put it, the pursuit of knowledge and ideas can definitely come from the experience of others.  Having said that, there is an ethic involved in visiting a competitor's project while it is under design or construction.  Provided that the competing architect has been invited or has requested permission from the architect of record to tour the site, I see no problem with going to see another architect's work.  Showing up unannounced on a construction site and speaking with another architect's client is, in my opinion, ethically questionable.

ASGCA does strive to provide education to our members.  In fact, Ian and I serve on a committee that seeks to identify pertinent educational topics and arrange for speakers to support these efforts.  We also engage in panel discussions and forums to encourage discussion and debate amongst the members.  To my knowledge we do not visit active construction sites as a group, but do visit and play some of the finest golf courses ever created.  Usually after the round the real discussions and exchange of ideas occurs in the bar while enjoying an adult beverage (just like it has always been done, thus the 19th hole) .

For your reference, our last six meetings have been held at the following locations:

2012 Chattanooga, Tennessee
2011 Denver, Colorado
2010 Ponte Vedra, Florida
2009 Seattle, Washington
2008 Scotland
2007 Atlanta, Georgia

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

Appreciate the reply.

What were the courses under construction at each of those locations and who was the architect of record ?

[Jeff Blume]

Pat,

I don't know what courses were under construction in those cities at the time, but we did not visit any active construction sites as part of the meetings.  Some of the courses played include The Honors Course, Lookout Mountain and Chattanooga Country Club in Tennessee; Sahalee, Chambers Bay and the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain in Seattle; and East Lake, Atlanta Athletic Club, Peachtree and Hawks Ridge in Atlanta.  Our Denver meeting focused on public access golf so the courses there are not a famous (although I did arrange to play at Ballyneal and Cherry Hills).  I did not attend the Scotland meeting, nor did I go to Ponte Vedra since I have spent alot of time there anyway.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

My reply to you was partially to poke fun at Garland Bailey for his allegation that the meetings were held to review ongoing projects.

The jist of this thread had to do with architects informally consulting with one another during a project.

I cited Crump and that was probably a bad example since he was a novice.
But, there are other examples where contemporary architects visited works in progress, sometimes offering advice.

Partnerships were formed and partnerships broke up, but, it seemed as though the earlier architects were more entwined with the projects of others.

You don't see that to much today.

So, is an architect left to his own devices, his own creative talent, absent the imput of contemporaries ?

Or, do architects learn from their contemporaries, and if they learn, what do they learn ?

[Sam Morrow]

Garland didn't say anything about ongoing projects, did he?

[Mike_Young]

You don't see that to much today.

So, is an architect left to his own devices, his own creative talent, absent the imput of contemporaries ?

Or, do architects learn from their contemporaries, and if they learn, what do they learn ?

PM,
I think in this day and time many learn more from shapers that have worked for others than from other architects.  I have seen a good shaper change a mediocre architect and the guy really didn't even know it...

[Jeff Blume]

Pat,

I think that all architects learn through the influence of their mentors and also through what they see and experience.  I do know that many of us architects discuss our work with others, but that usually doesn't occur on an active jobsite.  In reality, most modern day architects do a great deal of interpretation of others concepts just like MacDonald did at National.  Although first hand knowledge may not be commonplace, I do believe that our Society meetings foster great opportunities for the exchange of ideas.  If nothing else it is incredibly entertaining to listen to Ian pontificate on design theory after he has had a few  .

Golden age architects may have visited each others projects more often, but  I doubt that they had annual get togethers to allow for the free flow of ideas regarding the profession of golf course architecture.  Although the Society is not perfect, I have found that many of its members are more than willing to discuss their individual design theories and offer advice to solve a given problem.

[Jeff Blume]

I forgot to mention that during our Seattle meeting some of us took a day trip to Vancouver to visit and play Capilano.  One of Stanley Thompson's finest creations, and without a doubt the world's greatest mens locker room.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland didn't say anything about ongoing projects, did he?

Sam,
Read reply # 6 and try to place it within the context of the jist of this thread

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff & Mike,

At what point does the creative process transcend the learning process ?

Phrased another way, to what degree is the creative process an acquired skill ?

[Sam Morrow]

Garland didn't say anything about ongoing projects, did he?

Sam,
Read reply # 6 and try to place it within the context of the jist of this thread

Says they play golf, doesn't say it's based around new courses or anything.

[Mike_Young]

Jeff & Mike,

At what point does the creative process transcend the learning process ?

Phrased another way, to what degree is the creative process an acquired skill ?

IMHO not much of the creative process is acquired...

[Jeff Blume]

Pat,

I tend to think that the creative process is mostly intuitive.  Most of us design professionals (not just golf course architects) learned a design process through education (either formal university training or through being an apprentice (or both)).  Creativity on the other hand is a talent most are born with, just like great authors or artists.  It is that creativity that separates the truly great works from the ordinary or mundane.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

I agree with others that the creative juices are inherited.  Now, maybe school refines that or provides a framework to work within, but really, I always knew within a week whether an intern was really a design type personality.

As to your suppositions in the OP, actually, and with all due respect, they are mostly BS and generalizations.  I say that any gca who wants keep learning from others can and does so.  ASGCA meetings are great, and we learn from the courses we play, seminars and discussion of those courses and issues, and mostly from hanging out with others who (as Jeff alludes) can get very philosophical after a few drinks in a loose atmosphere. 

Of course, it can happen other ways, too.  Archipalooza (the one I was invited to, anyway) was a similar atmosphere.

Over Thanksgiving, Rich Mandell was in town and we spent a few hours at lunch exchanging ideas on gca.  I have talked with Ian on the phone on several occaisions.  Frankly, I think we can learn a lot of ways. 

In reality, we have a few photos of the old guys doing other site visits, and from that you extrapolate that these guys did it all the time.  Well, I recall someone who knew about that famous Mac visit say that he only went there thinking they were offering him the job, not much different than what might happen today!

I do find it hard to host or be hosted on a job site, but I have done it. Like TD says, you fly in to work, you are on a limited schedule, and gasbagging about architecture with a peer doesn't seem like my best use of time......

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike and Jeff,

That brings me back to the "informal consulting" concept and it's benefit to the creative process on a given project.

HHA on # 7 at PV would seem to be Exhibit "A"

But what modern day architect would admit that the creative ideas of others might trump theirs ?

It's an interesting dilemma.

[Garland Bayley]

Jeff,

My reply to you was partially to poke fun at Garland Bailey for his allegation that the meetings were held to review ongoing projects.

...

Sorry Patrick,

But I made no such allegation. Back to grammar school for you and English comprehension.

Maybe you should ask Jeff if RTJ II, Bruce Charlton, or Jay Blasi were on hand to discuss Chambers Bay when they visited it.

[Tom_Doak]

Mike and Jeff,

That brings me back to the "informal consulting" concept and it's benefit to the creative process on a given project.

HHA on # 7 at PV would seem to be Exhibit "A"

But what modern day architect would admit that the creative ideas of others might trump theirs ?

It's an interesting dilemma.

Patrick:

If you examine how George Crump was different from today's architects, you'll have your answer.

It's not that he was a relative novice that's important.  It's also that he was THE CLIENT.  So, he didn't have to worry about another architect stealing the job from him.  And he didn't have to worry about whether asking for a second opinion would offend the architect he'd chosen. 

And he didn't have to worry about whether having someone else consult on the project was a violation of the ASGCA code. 

[Jeff Blume]

Garland,

Actually they were.  I remember Bobby getting up and discussing their creation of the "ribbon" tees and their reasoning behind it.  Like Mike Young stated in an earlier post, I have probably learned more about that course's creation from the contractor (Jon O'Donnell from Heritage Links) than from Bobby, Bruce or Jay.  Heritage has done a number of my projects, and I speak to Jon on a regular basis.

[Jeff_Brauer]

As to my many fond memories of either ASGCA meetings or maybe the GIS when architects tend to gather, I tend to remember tidbits like hearing Rees Jones say his course has narrow fw because the owner didn't have money for more than a double row irrigation system.  I felt great knowing the big boys have the same kind of owner problems I did!

On the other side of the coin, I was opinining on triple row irrigation one day, and Erik Larsen of Palmer overheard, adding that they went to four rows, so that the two inner rows could be run together for the fw, and two outer rows run together to water the rough less.  I guess its a way to hear what trendes and ideas are out there, and most guys are more than willing to share.

One time Pete Dye was discussing the grades he felt were pinnable, and used inches per feet.  A few of us started some math on pads to figure out (in our more traditional % of slope method) that he used 2.25% as max slope for cups.  In the same discussion Mike Hurdzan pointed out that his expriences was that you needed 1.5% minimum wherever there was ice (from Devil's Pulpit, which came in handy when I worked in MN.

When I did work in MN, I called Brian Silva and a few others who work in heavy rock for some technical advice and they gave it freely.

I can recall many other discussions where I learned how guys built bunkers, tees or greens, or what not.

Actually, we don't discuss "pure" design philosophy all that much.  I tend to think some guys design more or less by rote, and can't articulate theory well, even if they can execute it.  Actually TD is a marvel of written thinking among gca's.  Writing and designing is as different a skill as playing and designing.  And, as TD also alludes, its just hard to view work in progress without the filter of "I would have done it this way" or at the very least, "Why didn't you consider doing it another way?".  

The shapers and contractors don't like those lines of discussion preferring to build something just once for one architect, twice if they have to.  But, they are under contract to build to the architects plans and instructions, and there are probably some legal issues to moving stuff around because someone not under contract to do anything has what they consider a "great idea" to share.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat,

Actually, as this thread demonstrates, Tom has always been generous acknowledging that the idea of the "little devil" at Barnbougle came from a suggestion I made long before the hole was ever built. If I recall correctly, I think it was a discussion about five years before. Tom never had to say where the idea came from but he did.

Funny thing. My inspiration for recommending the idea came at least 15 more years before during an oil industry golf boondoggle at Whitemarsh Valley in Philadelphia. From the "Philadelphia school" to Tasmania. Who would have thought!

By the way, I took a note from your friend George Crump and retired from my brilliant golf architecture career. I decided it could only go downhill from where I started!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()