[Don Mahaffey]

Sven,
I know we need to wait to see the actual plan for the new Lido, but are you saying it will be like Old Mac with template inspired holes arranged by the architect to fit the land? Or do you believe the Lido at Streamsong will be a "copy" of the original Lido in that the routing, hole sequencing, and golf features will be built to be as close as possible to the original?

[DMoriarty]

Don, does it matter to your perspective either way?  I seem to recall you raising similar questions and concerns about Old Mac, also site unseen.

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven,
I know we need to wait to see the actual plan for the new Lido, but are you saying it will be like Old Mac with template inspired holes arranged by the architect to fit the land? Or do you believe the Lido at Streamsong will be a "copy" of the original Lido in that the routing, hole sequencing, and golf features will be built to be as close as possible to the original?

Don:

I don't know.  From what we've heard, it sounds like they want to stay as close as possible to the original, including finding a site that provides all of the key elements.  

If I had to guess (speculation alert), I'd think they'd do their best to add a bit more space between some of the holes, and perhaps make some changes to some of them to "resortify" and "modernize" it (assuming its going to be built at Streamsong).  One simple change is that the original only had three sets of tees.  Most resort courses these days have five.

George Bahto indicated he had an incredibly accurate plan of the course that would enable someone to reproduce the original down to the inch.  I think that statement is a bit of hyperbole, as not only do we know that the as built course was slightly different than the plans for it, but I can't imagine they have all of the elevations mapped out in such detail.  Maybe they do.  

When the course was claimed by the Navy, the super at the time went out and tried to record as much evidence of the design of the course as he could in order to facilitate a rebuild.  It wouldn't surprise me if those photos (and other materials, if any) resurfaced at some point and the team has them as a tool.  George indicated he had a good deal of contact with the family of the last owner, and if they photos were still around that would be as good a place as any for them to have been found.

I do know that they have been gathering materials and studying the original for quite some time in anticipation of this project.  And the guys who have been tapped to build it won't disappoint (from a confidence standpoint).  

The one question that lingers in my mind about the project is whether or not you try to emulate what CBM was doing with the course (at least what I think he was doing), that being creating a "championship" test of links golf in the United States.  I don't know if that is part of their goal, but it would be incredibly cool to see high level golf played on a modern day version of the original.

Sven

[BCrosby]

Sven -

I see no particular value in trying to reproduce the Lido's original hole sequencing. Similarly, chest-beating about the exactness of any hole to its Lido forebear seems to me a set up for endless, largely pointless, arguments. More to the point, I'm not sure why any architect worth his salt would want to take on something like that.

The OM model of a course "in the spirit of..." works well enough, no? 

Bob



 

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven -

I see no particular value in trying to reproduce the Lido's original hole sequencing. Similarly, chest-beating about the exactness of any hole to its Lido forebear seems to me a set up for endless, largely pointless, arguments. More to the point, I'm not sure why any architect worth his salt would want to take on something like that.

The OM model of a course "in the spirit of..." works well enough, no? 

Bob
 

Bob:

You're asking the wrong guy.  Its not my project.

Sven

[Tom_Doak]

Sven -

I see no particular value in trying to reproduce the Lido's original hole sequencing. Similarly, chest-beating about the exactness of any hole to its Lido forebear seems to me a set up for endless, largely pointless, arguments. More to the point, I'm not sure why any architect worth his salt would want to take on something like that.

The OM model of a course "in the spirit of..." works well enough, no? 
 

That was how Old Macdonald was born.  Mr. Keiser asked if we could rebuild the Lido on the Bandon site, and I said we couldn't, though we could take many of the templates and try to fit them to the ground -- as Macdonald did.

However I did not want to sell something as "the Lido" which really wasn't.  To do otherwise shows little respect for the golf course you're supposedly trying to honor.  If you're going to sell it as the Lido, don't you have to stick pretty close to the plan for the real thing?

P.S.  It's not my project either. 

[Sven Nilsen]

Tom:

If the Old Mac land had been ideal for a Lido rebuild, would you have signed on?

I understand that there is a lot more involved in why and when you take on projects.

Sven

[Peter Pallotta]

I was going to suggest one thing that can't be replicated is Lido's original length, either in total or hole-by-hole. But then it struck me that in fact this would be the best thing to replicate -- since what was back then a challenging championship test would be just perfect for today's technology-laden, 10 handicap retail golfer. They'd play from the back/championship tees, and what an ego-stroke that would be. They'd come off the course in droves with big smiles on their faces wondering why 'no one builds great courses like this anymore'.

Peter

[Mark Steffey]

Sven -

I see no particular value in trying to reproduce the Lido's original hole sequencing. Similarly, chest-beating about the exactness of any hole to its Lido forebear seems to me a set up for endless, largely pointless, arguments. More to the point, I'm not sure why any architect worth his salt would want to take on something like that.

The OM model of a course "in the spirit of..." works well enough, no? 

Bob

why would an architect be needed?  if a land owner has the plans, give them to a grader or three and you're all set (after all how did d ross build 100 courses a year when a train was the only mode of transportation?)

[BCrosby]

Sven -

I didn't mean to suggest those were your views. Just threading the thread.

Mark Steffy -

"...give them to a grader or three and you're all set". 

Sure, you could build the Black at Streamsong without the help of an architect. Things like that have been tried before.

To my knowledge such self help projects have turned out to be disasters, however detailed the old plans and photos used.  I can pretty much assure you that the owner putting millions of dollars into the new Streamsong course will appreciate that and will want the assistance of an architect from day one.

Bob

[Tom_Doak]

why would an architect be needed?  if a land owner has the plans, give them to a grader or three and you're all set (after all how did d ross build 100 courses a year when a train was the only mode of transportation?)

Nobody has plans down to the quarter-inch, unless they hired a surveyor in the digital age [which couldn't be the case for Lido].

There is always a lot of interpretation to be done for what's between the contour lines, and, for that matter, whether what is on the drawing is really what the architect MEANT.  In most cases, it's up to the architect and the people he has designated to sort out the details.  Whoever your "graders" are would have to make a bunch of judgment calls if there was no one to guide them.

[Don Mahaffey]

Don, does it matter to your perspective either way?  I seem to recall you raising similar questions and concerns about Old Mac, also site unseen.

David,
I did raise similar concerns about Old Mac, even sending a note to Tom expressing those concerns. Tom responded and let me know I didn't quite have it right. I enjoy OM and don't recognize some of the holes there as template holes. 7 & 17 come to mind, but concede that I am not the template expert you may be. But I also think it would have been interesting to see a Tom Doak inspired golf course.

I also concede that I may be wrong about Lido, which is why I asked the question.
I remain steadfast in my belief that copying the routing or sequencing of a course and building it in another place is something I will never endorse. If you do, good for you.
I think it is a bad idea.

[Tim_Weiman]

Don,

Good thread. I must admit the experience of playing the Tour 18 here in Houston a couple times was a turn off on the subject of replicas. Ok, the TPC island green was ok, but parts of it were stupid or really stupid. Why on earth did they try to replicate #14 at Pebble Beach?

I could go on.

But, where I struggle is whether the Lido is possibly an exception. Maybe it is such a unique case - in part because it is NLE - that if someone could replicate it at an appropriate site (certainly not the Old Macdonald site), it might not be such a terrible idea.

I don't know. I guess I would have to see the site and the plans and hear from an architect we could trust before making a decision.

For easier to say no to a St Andrews replica, IMO.

[DMoriarty]

Don,  

I've been a long time critic of the original Lido concept, and I imagine some of my critiques of the original will probably apply equally to this new project, but really it is impossible to say without knowing more about the details project.

As for your original question, though, copying originals is quite common in art and design and is sometimes one of the mechanisms for the original creators to profit from their creations.  That isn't to what you are referring I know, but it does raise some of the same questions of authenticity and artistic contribution.

How about a craftsman who builds fine wood furniture based on the designs of the Arts and Crafts era from 100 years ago, or from earlier periods.  Such a craftsman isn't really producing "original art" in the sense of Stickley or the original designer, but the reproduction could nonetheless produce high quality craftsmanship in a rendition of the original design, and provide the consumer an opportunity to experience great design from the early period as it was intend to be experienced.   Do you feel that such reproductions are also a bad idea?

Another thing to consider about the Lido project as opposed TOC, ANGC, or NGLA is that the Lido was supposed to be a design removed from the context and constraints of the environment.   In his words, CBM was playing "Creator," and on a grander scale than with NGLA and some of his other courses.  So in some ways we can isolate the "design" element of the Lido in a way that we cannot reasonably isolate the design element with other great courses.   In short it is all design with very little nature.  (This is the one of the bases for my critique of the original.)  

So one could argue, I guess, that Lido project is more amenable to copying than some other courses where Nature plays more of a crucial role.  It would in a sense be following a design that was intentionally removed from any particular context.  I don't think that I agree with this argument, but it is worth considering.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Don,

Good thread. I must admit the experience of playing the Tour 18 here in Houston a couple times was a turn off on the subject of replicas. Ok, the TPC island green was ok, but parts of it were stupid or really stupid. Why on earth did they try to replicate #14 at Pebble Beach?

Tim,

Part of the problem with a "Tour 18" course, or any course that extracts specific holes from a variety of courses, is the lack of continuity.

A replica of Lido would not suffer that inadequacy, as the continuity of the original was well received and the architect/s style is not disrupted by intelopers.

I could go on.

But, where I struggle is whether the Lido is possibly an exception. Maybe it is such a unique case - in part because it is NLE - that if someone could replicate it at an appropriate site (certainly not the Old Macdonald site), it might not be such a terrible idea.

I don't know. I guess I would have to see the site and the plans and hear from an architect we could trust before making a decision.

For easier to say no to a St Andrews replica, IMO.

I don't understand your thinking, nor do I understand Don's objection to recreating Lido at Streamsong.

A Lido at Streamsong wouldn't be an exact replica in terms of the setting and as Tom Doak alluded to, probably not down the inch in terms of hole design.

I don't think anyone is expecting that, and I know that few if any would be able to detect the difference.

No one on this site has played the original Lido, so what do they know of it's playing qualities ?

Yes, we know that the CBM/SR/CB templates are in abundance, but, so what, they're in abundance on dozens of courses, all of which are well received.

So, again I ask, what's the objection to recreating Lido ?

If Lido was viewed in the same light as NGLA, how can replicating it be a bad thing ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Don, does it matter to your perspective either way?  I seem to recall you raising similar questions and concerns about Old Mac, also site unseen.

David,
I did raise similar concerns about Old Mac, even sending a note to Tom expressing those concerns. Tom responded and let me know I didn't quite have it right. I enjoy OM and don't recognize some of the holes there as template holes. 7 & 17 come to mind, but concede that I am not the template expert you may be. But I also think it would have been interesting to see a Tom Doak inspired golf course.


You can, it's called Pacific Dunes.

I also concede that I may be wrong about Lido, which is why I asked the question.
I remain steadfast in my belief that copying the routing or sequencing of a course and building it in another place is something I will never endorse.

WHY ?

So many lament the loss of great courses, either built or designed, so why object to resurrecting a course designed by one of the giants in golf course architecture, a course recognized as a great course amongst all of it's peers.

But, then again, I endorsed the rebuilding of the WTC, only one story taller.

If you do, good for you.
I think it is a bad idea.

WHY, in your mind, is it a bad idea ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Don, does it matter to your perspective either way?  I seem to recall you raising similar questions and concerns about Old Mac, also site unseen.

David,
I did raise similar concerns about Old Mac, even sending a note to Tom expressing those concerns. Tom responded and let me know I didn't quite have it right. I enjoy OM and don't recognize some of the holes there as template holes. 7 & 17 come to mind, but concede that I am not the template expert you may be. But I also think it would have been interesting to see a Tom Doak inspired golf course.

I also concede that I may be wrong about Lido, which is why I asked the question.
I remain steadfast in my belief that copying the routing or sequencing of a course and building it in another place is something I will never endorse. If you do, good for you.
I think it is a bad idea.

Don,

Let me pose the question another way.

Suppose Lido had never been built, but, someone recently found the blueprints in the attic at NGLA.

Would you be against the course being built, according to the blueprints, at Streamsong ?

If so, WHY ?

[Don Mahaffey]

Pat,
IMO, no good golf course gets built exactly to plan. There is always field decisions because no matter how good anyone thinks they are at building a course in the office, it gets changed for the better in the field.

If someone had what they thought was a good plan, and hired an architect to adapt the plan to a certain piece of ground, then I'd be fine with that. If they do that, the first thing to change will be the plan to better fit the ground, and then while the course is getting built, it will be edited in the field.

What I am against is taking a course from another region, on different soils, in a different climate, with a different builder, construction superintendent, client, equipment....on and on, and claim they can rebuild the same course. That is disingenuous because no matter what the techno nerds may say, I'm calling BS on it being pulled off.

Are they trying to rebuild the Lido with the routing, holes sequencing, and golf features replicated as close as possible? Or will they take the plan, concede it was not drawn with central Florida in mind, and allow the architect to take those 18 hole concepts and arrange them to best fit the land?  If they do that, then I think the course will be better, but it will not be THE Lido.  Thus I'm curious what they have in mind.

[Mark Fedeli]

I've been following this and Sven's thread very closely, trying to understand the POV of those who are not thrilled with this idea. And while I understand each objection on an intellectual level, I'm truly struggling to see how they outweigh the potential benefits.

If we all woke up tomorrow, and suddenly there appeared a recreation of the Lido at Streamsong, as faithful as humanly possible to what we know of the original, and it also happened to be a terrific course in its own right, who could have a problem with that? Would those who don't currently endorse the idea not be curious to at least try it out? And if so, then isn't it worth it for Streamsong to give it a try and have it be just one of their offerings (considering they've expressed interest in producing up to 7 courses)? Surely their track record gives them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the overall quality of any course they add there, whether its the Lido or no.

Where I do see trouble is in claiming that it is THE Lido when, as Don just referenced, it will never be THE Lido. And I would not be surprised in the least if Streamsong covers all these eventualities by using some terminology similar to "inspired by". That said, conjuring my best Jean-Paul Sartre, THE Lido does not currently exist, so effectively it never existed. One may certainly find all this distasteful and not their preferred method of course creation, but any recreation of THE Lido is really the new, current, and only Lido.

From a customer standpoint, what's the worse that could happen, and what are the standards for success?

I would worry that the course may not live up to the marketing hype (which is sure to be along the lines of "Now you can play the mysterious course that was once the greatest in the world"). But that wouldn't taint the legacy of the original Lido or CBM and it wouldn't effect my personal enjoyment. At the least, GCA history buffs are provided with a public CBM-style course on the East Coast that is high-quality and can be played in the middle of winter. It's important to remember that, for those without easy access to any MacRaynors, that sounds pretty heavenly and far outweighs theoretical concerns.

[Joe Hancock]

Now that we're several pages in, I'm getting more confused as to whether we're talking architecturally about the reproduction of Lido project, or if we're talking about the business aspect of reproducing Lido. Is the general tenor of the discussion leaning in one of those directions? It seems more and more we question the financial wisdom of developers behind projects yet to be built. Not a big deal, but I know that's not an aspect of the Lido discussion I could possibly add to with any wisdom. Mosaic seems to be doing just fine with Streamsong so far.

Joe

[Jud_T]

This is all just so much mental masturbation:

1.  Financially this is a pimple on Mosaic's ass.

2.  They have apparently done a very good job thus far with the first 2 courses, there's little reason to believe that they'll jump the shark with the next 2, including potentially "The Lido".

3.  This is land that has been extensively mined over the past several decades in my understanding.  While I'm sure they'll be "working with the land" where it makes sense, it's hardly as if they're taking a perfect piece of pristine crumpled links land and flattening it with a bulldozer to recreate the Lido.

4.  Even the idea that they are taking something and rebuilding it perfectly as if they were spitting it out of a plastic mold from the past is silly.  There will inevitably be a number of decisions both large and small to be made along the way which will result in a product not exactly the same as the original, several of which have already been enumerated.  It is really here that we are projecting, which again is all so much of a wank job at this point in the proceedings.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

I agree with your observation of the Tour 18 concept, i.e., the lack of continuity. The other problem I have is that if you have played many of the real holes, it just doesn't work. The setting is so radically different. Just seems stupid.

Did have the opportunity to play the Donald Ross Memorial and didn't find it too bad. Much better than the Tour 18.

As for the Lido project, I am actually open minded about it. Don't think it would interest me if I was a practicing architect - I would rather do something original - but as a golf architecture junkie I'd probably enjoy seeing it if it was done well.

[JMEvensky]

Are they trying to rebuild the Lido with the routing, holes sequencing, and golf features replicated as close as possible? Or will they take the plan, concede it was not drawn with central Florida in mind, and allow the architect to take those 18 hole concepts and arrange them to best fit the land?  If they do that, then I think the course will be better, but it will not be THE Lido.  Thus I'm curious what they have in mind.

This is the part of the "replica" argument I don't understand either.

How many field interpretations does it take to go from replica to homage to riffs on a theme of CBM?

[Peter Pallotta]

Six.

[Don Mahaffey]

Joe Hancock,
I think most of the golfers here will welcome the course and they tend to measure good architecture by popularity. I'm not saying that is a negative, just factual in that if a lot of people like it and it is a commercial success, then it is good architecture. It seems that is how some look at developing the Lido.
Me, like always I'm a little off my rocker thinking about things that I can't change or even influence, but I think of the tremendous crop of new era designers who will never get an opportunity to show their stuff because they will never get the chance to BE popular. Whomever designs the new Lido will be second, maybe third, fiddle on the credits.

But I also think this. If they do build it, I hope they nail it. I don't think they will have the courage to do that, retail golfer mentality and all, because I think it was hard, severe, and manly. By God, if they are going to call it Lido I sure hope they don't produce some watered down course meant to be "retail golfer" friendly because that isn't the original.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()