"Great" Architecture is Unnecessary

[Don Mahaffey]

I don’t know about the premise on this thread as I think it sometimes takes great architecture to create a 5 or 6 on a 2 or 3 site.  Great architecture and great courses don’t always go hand in hand as the site has so much to do with being great. But, sometimes it takes a great architect to be brave enough to let the land be the star.

[jeffwarne]

 Should make for some interesting golf trips. Bada bing bada boom, Comfort Inn and the local muni.

done that at Shennecossett many a time
[size=78%]Goat Hill coming ang going[/size]
good times

[Tom_Doak]

For that matter, sites matter to great architecture.  One reason Torrey Pines or Sand Pines are not liked is the sites are 10 and the designs really don't even get to 9 or 8 on the scale.


So, it is certainly situational, but like Mike says good is more a requirement to enjoyment than great.  As architects, I wonder if the old saying of "Don't let perfect be an impediment to good" applies?

Jeff:


I'm sorry but that last quote makes me want to cry after Pres. Obama used it to justify his compromises on so many issues of importance (starting with health care).  Perfectionism is a vice, but I believe we should strive for excellence instead of settling for the crap that others deign to give us.


One reason I'm a minimalist is that in the context of the above, it helps to have some natural limits on what one can design.  I strive for greatness but accept the limitations of the site, so the focus is on creativity rather than budget and earthmoving power.


And therefore site selection matters a ton.  The funny thing is that neither of your examples was a good site, in my opinion!  Sandpines was too open, while Torrey Pines had too many restrictions about going close to the cliff edges.  Most people look at the beautiful surroundings and assume that the golf had more potential, but I don't know if I could have done much better with either of them ... though I would have argued like hell about the restrictions with La Jolla, instead of just giving up on it.

[Mike Sweeney]

"Perfectionism is a vice, but I believe we should strive for excellence."

Great quote/thought Tom. I may "borrow it" for a different paradigm.

[Carl Rogers]

Don' t all of the Trump Courses proclaim greatness by their Owner, where if not trying to so hard to be great, a pretty good course could had for 1/10th the price?

[Jeff Schley]

Sitting around trying to make the perfect decision is not realistic in many professions.  It is a series of best decisions made in succession that strive for improvement that matters.  Paralysis by analysis is something the military for example is cognizant of, you have to make the best decision right now as the situation is most likely dynamic and as new information comes in you never get out of the analysis.  It is incremental decision making advocated most in dynamic environments, perhaps in the art world, or novelist you have the luxury of time, but I can't think of many jobs where you do.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,


While I agree with you in concept here, I would think Golf Course design to be one of the few where you can take your time.  From Inception to Final Product it takes years to get a course in the ground, so its seems there would be tons of time for analysis in this profession.


I recall a few posts about how C&C will walk a site sometimes for weeks before coming up with a routing....

[Sean_A]

I don't know why the idea of perfect crept into the discussion.  There is an immense gulf between great and perfect.

Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

I don't know why the idea of perfect crept into the discussion.  The is an immense gulf between great and perfect.

Ciao

Indeed there is a well known book titled "Golf is not a Game of Perfect"

[Jeff Schley]

Jeff,


While I agree with you in concept here, I would think Golf Course design to be one of the few where you can take your time.  From Inception to Final Product it takes years to get a course in the ground, so its seems there would be tons of time for analysis in this profession.


I recall a few posts about how C&C will walk a site sometimes for weeks before coming up with a routing....

Is that why it takes these guys so long......

I don't know who originally said it, but "you can't rush greatness."

[Tom_Doak]

I don't know who originally said it, but "you can't rush greatness."

No, but you can certainly over-think it!!  Routings necessarily take time to work out but great art (shaping wise) is an "in the moment" thing.  Polishing if up for too long can ruin it.

[Rich Goodale]

Getting back to the initial post, my belief is that the "experience" is far more important than the "architecture."  A game of golf is (hopefully) only 4 hours of one's life, and if it is a "great" course and not near your abode it is probably the only time you will play the course.  What do you do for the rest of the day?  Well...if you are there with fellow players, are they fun people to play with and fun people to hang out with the apres golf?  Is the venue pleasant and blessed with "eye candy," and are the locals friendly and joyful?  All these things have nothing to do with "greatness" but they matter.  For example...


....I played Royal County Down for the first time in 1979, with an old HS friend and in a downpour and with a need to get to the airport shortly after the game.  Even though the club was not at all welcoming, and we were playing on the 2nd anniversary of the death of Bobby Sands (which made the avant golf in a local hotel very interesting....), it was a good learning experience and I will always rate RCD as one of the 25-30 3*** courses in the world.  That being said, I have not felt the compulsion to visit Newcastle or play the course in the last 39 years...


Context matters,

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom Doak,


Well, I wasn't thinking politics when I wrote that, but was thinking of other art forms. Just as someone wonders how we got from great to perfect (Guess I am to blame....) going from overly perfectionistic to not striving for excellence is also a bounce back too far from great to good.


In fact, looking back at my 20 year old designs, always seeing some changes I would make now, but many (mostly the munis) all tend, trend and blend towards the median, usually a result of market and maintenance forces.


 I wonder if onlookers wonder just how much effort went into trying to make the course very good, if not great.  And how much time, low maintenance budgets, minor design changes in the name of maintenance or satisfying a green chairman's ego, etc. take away from the greatness left opening day.  Of course, in other ways, it should get better, with maturing trees, turf, etc.


But, there are a lot of ways to look at the basic assumption of the thread.  The "pure" architecture questions might revolve around degrees of strategy and/or degrees of allowable mix.  Does the golfer have to hit the far edge of a fairway to have an opening, or do you soften that to the correct side, third or even half the fairway in the name of accommodating everyone?


For that matter, say you design that fairway as you see fit (let's assume tee shot right to edge of fw) what percentage of golfers even notice?  For many, presumably most mid handicappers, they miss the point of some additions we might all treasure here, but might appreciate the purty flowers, etc..

[Charles Lund]

The Rich Goodale anecdote, with the emphasis on context, captures my sentiments about some experiences with courses where architectural greatness was the basis for traveling to the course.
[/size][/color]
[/size]I've played over 160 different courses outside of North America.  The travel experience over ten years began with the lower barriers to the best of the best outside of North America.  The experiences with a variety of quality courses and the best of the best have helped me understand playing characteristics of what people call the best of the best.[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Over time, I have opted to return to specific areas many times, mostly based on areas having a concentrations of courses that would be ranked 4 to 6 on the Doak Scale.  My latest trip to Australia was number 13 and my next trip to Ireland will be number 12.  I have played two rounds at Royal County Down, two at Royal Portrush, and a single trip to the Southwest.[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Much of my decision making has related to quality time in areas with welcoming people and a great golf culture, where there is less regimentation, flexible options for scheduling, and fewer barriers to play.[/color]

[/size]Charles Lund[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Quote[/color][/size]

"I played Royal County Down for the first time in 1979, with an old HS friend and in a downpour and with a need to get to the airport shortly after the game.  Even though the club was not at all welcoming, and we were playing on the 2nd anniversary of the death of Bobby Sands (which made the avant golf in a local hotel very interesting....), it was a good learning experience and I will always rate RCD as one of the 25-30 3*** courses in the world.  That being said, I have not felt the compulsion to visit Newcastle or play the course in the last 39 years...[/color][/size]Context matters,"[/color]