Did Canada produce the greatest force in golf arch history?

[T_MacWood]

And I'm not talking about CB Macdonald (he was born in Canada?). Is Stanley Thompson the greatest influence in the history of GA? Other than MacKenzie, was their an architect that produced more superior designs? Thompson also unleashed his protege RTJ on the golf world....we all know the impact he made. Another protege, Cornish, in collaboration with Whitten, produced perhaps the most influencial book on contemporary design--The Golf Course. You can trace today's appreciation for classic GA and probably this site back to that book.

[Jeff_Mingay]

You might be right, Tom. Your theory on Thompson's wide range of influenence is interesting.

During his heyday, in 1930s, it's no secret that Mackenzie and Tillinghast, in particular, were great admirers of Thompson's work and design philosophy. In fact, I recently read an article by Geoff Shackelford -- an article on Tillinghast for GOLF that appear in the Bethpage Open preview -- that stated Tillinghast was writing a lot about Thompson during the 30s. Those articles must be interesting. I haven't seen them.

And, I'd put Thompson's 'top 5' up against most other golf architect's 'top 5', confident The Toronto Terror would prevail. There are only a few portfolios that might compare to Capilano, Banff, Jasper, St. George's and Highlands Links. Throw Westmount into the mix, as a tie-break, and Thompson is still in a good position to come out on top.

[Tom_Doak]

I think in twenty years' time, people will look back and decide the greatest force was Pete Dye.  He changed the direction of architecture, he mentored a lot of young men who are changing it again today, and he influenced the design styles of nearly every practicing architect of his day.  He even got Jack Nicklaus started in the business!

Undoubtedly Thompson is underrated for his contribution ... but it's hard to say he had that much influence, since just when his practice would have had influence, the business shuttered up for twenty years.  To say as much, you would have to give most of the credit for Robert Trent Jones's success to Stanley Thompson ... and I think that's a stretch.

For me the top three (in alphabetical order) would be Colt, Dye, and MacKenzie.

[Jeff_Mingay]

I agree with Tom Doak re: Thompson's supposed influence on Trent Jones.

I think Thompson had more influence on Trent Jones from a sales/marketing perspective then he did on the actual design side of the business. Geoff Cornish, who was around both of them quite a bit, confirmed this for me, too.

[henrye]

I think that one thing Thompson had going for him was the incredible properties he was given to work with.  Banff is a masterpiece, but in great part because of the property.

Colt and MacKenzie have influenced golf throughout the world.  Old Tom Morris clearly had the greatest influence - 18 holes, ending where you start.

Has Pete Dye truly been a strong influence outside the borders of America?

[TEPaul]

"Other than MacKenzie, was their an architect that produced more superior designs?"

Maybe Pete Dye was the biggest influence amongst architects due to his constant mentoring and his young architects clearinghouse company but did Pete Dye produce 'more superior designs' than Thompson as Tom MacWood asked?

I, for one, have no real idea.

[T_MacWood]

It might be argued that Dye has had a more positive influence, however Thompson influence as caried out by RTJ is without comparison--negative or positive depending on your point of view. Isn't the modern golf course firm a reflection of RTJ. Also the alteration to championship venues is carried on to this day.

As far as the influece being RTJ and not Thompson, there is some truth to that, but would there be a RTJ without Thompson? The same with Cornish. And the interest in golf architecture, the interest in the golden age and the interest in preserving and restoring these courses IMO can be traced back to C&W.

henry
Old Tom brought golf course back to their starting point? I didn't know that...please explain.

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

While I would like to agree with JM, I think Mackenzie's five would beat Thompson, but have to believe he wouldn't be far behind.

Thompson's top five certainly would stack up well for me against Dye's top five. I have not been to Casa de Campo, but even with it in, can't imagine it would take it over the top.

Disagree with Henry though regarding sites Thompson had to work with. While Cap, BS, JP and CBH all have dramatic surroundings, they were tough properties. St. George's land was the only great piece he had of the five.
Cap faced rain and terrain
Banff, poor soil, not a great deal of contour.
Jasper, poor soil again, but this site had more interest.
CBH, worst soil of the group and dealing with rock. The place is spectacular, but anybody that says they would have found that routing would have to be lying.

Therefore, that only heightens Thompson in my book. He certainly did not have the dunes and ocean Mackenzie had at CP. Nor a true sand site like Royal Melbourne.

Tom M,
To your last point, I agree. Because RTJ did not follow Thompson's design philosophy is not an indicator of the influence.

The direct influence Thompson had on RTJ is far greater than any Mackenzie had. Today, the architecture lineage in Canada still largely traces to Thompson, can the same be said of many of the Golden Age architects?

[Robert Thompson]

Gentlemen: I wonder if the reality of Thompson's legacy is marred by the fact that a lot of American critics, raters, players and architects have not played many of his courses.

Thompson's courses are spread out all over Canada -- with the best (Highlands Links in Cape Breton, NS and Capilano in Vancouver, with Banff and Jasper in the middle) make it difficult to see all of his best work. Add to that fact that several of his interesting courses (like Cataraqui and St. Thomas) are almost unheard of in the U.S.

Is Thompson the most influential? I think that would be a tough point to argue. Is he the most underrated of North America's significant golf architects? I think that would be an easier point to make.

And wait and see the terrific bunker reno that Ian Andrew is doing at St. George's  -- Thompson's best. Maybe that'll open some eyes and turn some heads....

Robert

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Rob,
I disagree that Thompson's body of work is difficult to see. Surely that has been the mentality that has kept people from doing it.

Cape Breton is the most remote and both Noel and Ran commented on it being fairly easy to get to.

Surely anyone serious about architecture today would have to seek Thompson out.

[Tom_Doak]

From my chats with Robert Trent Jones ten and twenty years ago, he used Stan Thompson's example of running a business as a reminder of what not to do!  Jones was always afraid he wouldn't get paid, because Thompson could spend the entire check for services rendered the night he got it.

Trent Jones' business plan was exactly the same as Donald Ross's, if you simply substitute the airplane for the train.  And since Jones knew Ross, too, it's not hard to guess how he sorted it out.

Tom M, I guarantee you that with or without Thompson, Robert Trent Jones would have made his mark.

P.S. to the Canadians:  If Thompson's influence in Canada was so good, where are all the other great courses his proteges built?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Cornish's talks of Jones and Thompson were not from a "business plan" standpoint, but from a greater sense of flair in sales. Perhaps Jones drew upon the Ross model, but Ross never made a point to travel the world the same way Jones did. That would seem more the Thompson model.

Secondly RTJ's business model of having numerous people under him - Cabell Robinson, Rees, RTJ Jr., Ruelwich - seems more the Thompson model than the Ross.

As for the dearth of Canadian courses that came from Thompson's influence, the era following wasn't exactly the glory period - 1945-60. Also, whether the talents/vision were ever shared by his proteges is a matter of little debate.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom Doak's right. Most contemporary Canadian architects cite Thompson as a direct influence, so where are the comparable golf courses? Not a single course built in Canada in the post-World War II era has been compared to the world's best. It's quite shocking, actually. Some pretty good properties have been utilized for golf in recent years.

And I agree, Tom. I don't think RTJ used Thompson's business model. He was a poor businessman, I understand, with an appetite for excess, and living for the moment. This fact has been qualified. But Mr. Cornish says RTJ most definitely learned a lot about selling, and salesmanship from Thompson. Cornish calls Thompson the best salesman the business of golf course design has ever seen.

Tom MacWood:

Another interesting point about a modern golf architecture firm being a reflection of RTJ.

But, you can probably take it a step farther back. Stanley Thompson & Associates was providing site planning, landscape architecture, and agronomic consulting services back in the 1930s/40s. I understand he was the first golf course architect to branch out into those other allied fields, employing 'associates' to handle much of the work he really didn't want to do personally.

[henrye]

Ben.  You are no doubt correct when you point out the difficult conditions that Thompson had to work with on some of his great courses, but for me, the natural surroundings, views, topography, rivers, creeks, mature trees, etc. are clearly a huge component of the overall experience on those courses.  Difficult soil, yes, but the natural sites are spectacular for golf.  Without these sites, I wonder if Thompson would be as revered in Canada as he seems to be today.

Jeff.  I think there have been some exceptional golf courses built in Canada in recent years.  To be fair, even Thompson's most revered works are well down any list of the world's greats.  And while this may be justified, I do think that these courses get discounted somewhat because they are less well known and in Canada.

Tom.  As a Canadian, I make no assertion that Thompson had any major influence on global GCA, rather I agree with you that he likely did not.   Your comment, however, about Pete Dye being the greatest force on the influence on GCA in 20 years time makes me wonder if we are likely to see that influence outside the U.S., or if we have, where?

[T_MacWood]

Tom D
I’m not so sure RTJ would have succeeded without Thompson…at least to the degree he did. RTJ couldn’t have picked a worse time to get into design and he wasn’t exactly located in an architectural hotbed -- Upstate NY.

He was fortunate to hook up with the one guy who was designing anything of significance at the time (the late 20’s and 30’s) – Thompson . The prestige and publicity Thompson received for courses like York, Digby Pines, Green Gables, Westmount, Capilano and Cape Breton was parlayed by Jones into some modest projects in the states, but more importantly into an opportunity to write about golf architecture for the lone remaining magazine at the time (Thompson & Jones were about the only firm advertising). Because of his time with Thompson, RTJ was well established before WWII and perfectly positioned to fill the void after the war.

I don’t think you can measure Thompson’s influence by the greatness of his proteges. Its debatable how good RTJ was an architect or if his influence was positive, but it really can’t be argued that he dominated the face of architecture. As an architect I’m not certain on Cornish either, but he and Whitten’s book has had a major impact.

Henrye
That’s like saying “I wonder what influence MacKenzie would have had without a spectacular site like Cypress Point.” There have been a number of courses built in spectacular settings, and sadly far too many misses. How many Banff, Jasper or Capilanos have been built in the Canadian Rockies in the last sixty years?
 
You say Thompson had no influence on architecture, but Old Tom clearly had the greatest influence. My impression of Old Tom is placing 18 stakes on an afternoon—like Tom Dunn, he produced average to poor designs that were all redone after he was gone. Am I wrong? Whats the story with the 18 holes ending where they start?

[Tom_Doak]

Henrye:  So far Pete's influence overseas has been limited to:

Perry Dye's work in Japan, Singapore, Thailand, Korea, Taiwan, etc.;
Shunsuke Kato's work in Japan (an architect who cites Pete as a major influence);
T. K. Sato's limited work in Japan (he apprenticed with Perry);
Lee Schmidt's work in China and the Far East;
Russell Talley's work in Europe;
Bill Coore's work in France and Indonesia;
Rod Whitman's work in Canada;
and my work in Australia and New Zealand.

Wow!  There's more than I thought!

[Tony Ristola]

Add Rod Whitman's work in Germany, a fine golf course which goes largely unnoticed...Schloss Langenstein.  

Take a number of the courses on the Continental Euro 100 posted here a couple weeks ago and his effort there is better than most German courses on the list.

[ian]

Tom, As much as this pains me, Stanley is not even close to the greatest influence on golf architecture; and to Tom Doak I say Pete Dye isn't either. I do agree that Dye's influence is much larger (again this pains me to say it- I may loose my citizenship).

My offering would be Allan Robertson, the superintendent and first "architect" to the old course. He made a lot of major changes that changed the course largely to what we admire now. The old course is and always will be the starting point for all of golf architecture. If it is not Allan, then it is god and the Old Course that he created.

Stanley forgive me.

[T_MacWood]

Ian
What impact did Alan Robertson have on golf architecture?

[ian]

Do we not all study his holes or versions of the holes he had a handle on. Are not many of Tom Morris's and Tom Simpson's based on the strategies and ideas found on the Old Course. was not Mackenzie's chief influence the Old Course. Does Golf Architecture come back to the Old Course. I don't have my books at home to look up all the changes Robertson made (so please correct me if I am wrong) but did he not combine the 22 holes to 18 and create holes such as 17. Is he not the first brick in the foundation?

I could be wrong, usually am, but it strikes me that it all starts with the Old Course.

[TEPaul]

"He was fortunate to hook up with the one guy who was designing anything of significance at the time (the late 20’s and 30’s) – Thompson."

Tom MacW;

Come on now--if that's not a skewing and misreading of golf architectural history I just can't imagine what is.

Aren't you sort of forgetting about a bunch of courses of some terrific architects that were coming on stream at that time such as ANGC, Shinnecock, Pinehurst #2 (perfecting), Pebble Beach (redesigned), Cypress Point, Seminole, Bethpage Black, Perry Maxwell's work et al that not only were world beater designs but are all still up in and around the top ten in the world today?

Thompson didn't exactly fill a void in talent following WW2 because some of those old guys had lost their touch. Basically by that time (after WW2) almost all of them were dead!

[T_MacWood]

TE
I should have said after the Depression. No one produced more high profile designs in N. America after the Depression (Oct 1929).

[TEPaul]

If someone asked me what I thought was the greatest force (or influence) in the history of golf architecture I think I'd say that somewhat loose conglomeration of architects that emerged from the English heathlands!

I'd say the so-called "heathland" architecture of that group was the greatest influence and I'd bookend that influence beginnng with Willie Park's creation of Sunningdale in 1901 and end it with final work of Alister MacKenzie in the early 1930s.

In that time those that can loosely be categorized as the Heathland architects (Park, Colt, Abercromby, Fowler, Alison, Taylor, Mackenzie) took the incipient art of architecture out of the linksland and built the first of true quality man-made golf architecture elsewhere. They were the first to do so---build true and natural quality architecture elsewhere--and for that alone their influence (force) has to be considered immense in the history of GCA!

They also went world-wide, the first to really do so. They were also the first to build courses that were man-made that best emulated nature in many ways, basically in its look and in its "lines". The pinnacle of this was reached by Mackenzie and ended with his ideas of truly naturalizing golf architecture with his unusual ideas on the application of camouflage (a still misunderstood architectural application that really was "naturalism" in its most complete golf architectural form). The evolution of man-made architectural "strategy" in golf and architecture also emerged with them vs the highly penal unnatural architecture that was simultaneous with their vastly different products.

The irony is I don't think that most see or understand, even today, all that they evolved and accomplished in golf architecture in little over three decades.

If a renaissance is now on us or coming soon I think the time will soon come when the extent of the influence of the so-called "Heathland" architects will be better understood and appreciated. When one looks back accurately over the entire sweep and evolution of man-created golf architecture I think those "Heathland" architects should be seen as the most significant influence of all.

[TEPaul]

Tom:

Oct, 1929 was the stock market crash that ended the "Roaring Twenties" and brought the depression on that lasted into the early 1940s and WW2.

[T_MacWood]

What about Horace Hutchinson? He was a major influence on those Heathland men and a major influence on the early American architects.

Who designed more siginificant courses than Thompson during that period?