Most Overrated Architects

[wsmorrison]

Thanks, Joel.  I did hesitate putting the post on here and expect to get an earful (or eyeful ) but today's tour of CC York really has me thinking!  Again, I have a small sampling to deal with, but I can't get over my sense that he is overrated as he is rated so very highly by most.

[cary lichtenstein]

The  only architect that I have consistently been mistified by the amount of work he gets is Arthur Hills.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Eckstein - with that response we may have to change the post title to "most over-rated poster!"

[Kyle Harris]

Whoa... This one could get heavy in a hurry.
Don't knock the Irish.

Wayne,

Schuylkill CC may change your opinion on Ross's seemingly one-dimensional routings. The land for such a small property is used quite effectively. Jeffersonville, to me, does as well. While I haven't played many of his more well regarded designs (i.e. Aronimink, Plainfield, etc.) it seems his lesser-known work tends to shy away from any tendencies.

I did feel that Lulu fell into a pattern on the back nine a bit, but there is some variety on the front in terms of approach shots and elevation.

[Mike Hendren]

I am surprised by the suggestion of Ross.  He could do less with less and leave a very good golf course behind.  He (or his associates, or some farmer, as Mike Young likes to claim)did it hundreds of times.  

Purely speculation, but at this point, his batting average could very well be better than that of Coore & Crenshaw as well as Doak, just to name couple.  Let them design and build 300 more golf courses each and we'll see how valid the comparison is.

I believe he remains the most UNDERrated golf course architect of all time.  Then again, it's a big world out there and I've only seen a small corner of it.  

Mike  

[Kyle Harris]

Mike,

I'll play devil's advocate here.

Would you consider the distribution of Ross courses in terms of architectural quality to be positively skewed, negatively skewed or on a normal distribution.

Ross did design a lot, and there are a bunch of gems. But is this a function of throwing a lot of sh*t against the wall and seeing what stuck?

[Mike Hendren]

Kyle,

A very good and legitimate question.  I wish I was qualified to answer - paging Dr. Klein?

Some time ago I posed the challenge to the treehouse to name "bad" or "poor" golf courses designed (actually or ostensibly) by Donald J. Ross.  The reponses were surprisingly few - perhaps twenty or so.  Out of 400 that's a stinker rate of 5%.  

On the other end of the spectrum Ross is credited with 21 of the top 100 classic golf courses on Golfweek's list (a "great" rate of 5%) including 13 of the top 50 (1 out of 4).  

I'll speculate that it's the remaining 90% of Ross' portfolio that supports his reputation.

Just in Tennessee alone, the routing of Belle Meade is fantastic, though little of his work remains.  Cherokee is a smart routing on an improbable hillside.  Richland was good enough to host the 1980 women's open, then ploughed under for a subdivision.  Memphis CC remains a genuine gem.  To my knowledge it's never been discussed on this site.  Everyone knows about Holston Hills.  All this in golf-poor Tennessee.  

A few other gems that come to mind are Athens CC and French Lick Springs' Hill Course.  I'm guessing there are many, many more out there.  

I vote for highly positively skewed.  Something like this:

                                               xxxx
                             xxxxxxxxxxxxx      xx
                  xxxxxxxx                           xx
           xxxxx                                        xx
       xxx                                                  xxxx
xxxxx                                                            xxxxxxx

 
Mike

[Bill Gayne]

This thread is a course rating thread in disguise without any ratings or rating system to measure against. Seriously, if you're going to rank/rate architects don't you have to rank/rate the courses and cross tabulate the course ratings to the architect ratings? I'm not sure if determining underrated or overrated architects is of any more value than doing the same with courses except that it makes for a lot of internet chatter.

Anyway, if one was to create a rating scale similar to the Doak scale what would it be and where would these architects being discussed fall out?

Maybe a ten being Alister Mackenzie. A golf architect that all serious golfers and golf architect students should seek out a large cross section of his courses. That would see many different types of courses and features. A great learning experience and one would also enjoy the time spent.

Maybe a zero being a one course architect that laid out something very rudimentary that was not educational or fun.


 

[cary lichtenstein]

The problem with critizing someone like Ross is he did so many courses without ever seeing the land, or seeing it once.

Without the benefit of air travel, and being in such geat demand, and probably desires of as much income as possible, he attached his name to courses that he had only an occansional influendce.

[Kyle Harris]

Cary,

I feel that only furthers the tag "overrated."

Overrated implies that the course gets more hype or note than it is actually worth, and if a course only gets notoriety because it has the Donald Ross name attached to it, and that further clouds judgment of architectural quality, then you have an overrated golf course.

[wsmorrison]

Bill,

I hope this doesn't have to be about ranking an architect with the basis of his course rankings.  The three points I made aren't based upon rankings.  I think it fair to say that Ross's method of operation was often as a topo router...he did so in a systematic way.  There are, of course, exceptions and Kyle does speak highly of Schuykill CC and the lack of the high-low-high tendency there.  I've seen it a lot and like I said, maybe it is just because of poor sampling technique.  At CC York it was a pattern that left a lot of interesting sites on the property out of the routing and the course variety and interest suffered.

How about the majority of Ross's courses standing the test of time?  Do they as well as some other architects?  Of course some do, but how does his overall portfolio of work stand the test of time?  It seems to me that some of his courses needed redesign pretty soon after they were built.  Sampling error on my part?  Maybe.  It just so happens that 7 out of Flynn's 20 redesigns were Ross courses less than 10 years after they were built.  Most of the clubs don't realize they were significantly remodeled by another architect.  Throw in the Ross greens at Pinehurst #2 being far different than those so beloved today and it leaves something to consider.

Eckstein,

I know a number of people that don't hold Flynn's body of work in the same regard as Tillinghast, Thomas, Mackenzie and others.  I would hope you would add some support to your statement and let us know why you feel that is true.  How many Flynn courses have you studied/played and which courses do you attribute to Flynn?  Do you think NLE courses should be considered?

"His courses are a little stale and pedestrian compared to the big names of MacKenzie, Thompson, Colt, Tillinghast and Ross. A second level architect in the same league as Emmet, Stiles and Gordon."

Shinnecock Hills
TCC, Brookline
Merion
Kittansett
Huntingdon Valley
Philadelphia Country
Rolling Green
Lancaster
Lehigh
Cherry Hills
Cascades
Indian Creek
*Boca Raton North
*Boca Raton South
*Mill Road Farm
Manufacturers
Atlantic City CC
*Opa Locka
Pocantico Hills

* NLE

Are these stale and pedestrian designs?  If so, I think our definitions are a lot different!  I really do question your understanding of what Flynn did or your ability to evaluate his work.  

[wsmorrison]

Cary,

Be that as it may, his chosen method of operation by design would result in less than quality efforts.  It can be explained but the results should not be ignored (I'm not at all suggesting you are).

Mike,

I really do see your point and think I am at a disadvantage to speak of the big picture of Ross's work.  Your opinion is valid and worthwhile.  All I can say is that I don't see him the same way from my experiences and I think that's OK that we differ.  I respect everyone's opinion.  It's a big world and there's room in it for both of our tastes.

I hope Eckstein expounds on his.  I'd really like to hear his point of view.  

[Kyle Harris]

Eckstein,

Schuylkill CC
Jeffersonville GC
Lulu CC
Seaview Bay (Bunkering)
Lewistown CC (Heavily renovated by Ault and gang)
Torresdale/Frankford
Riverton

Not a large sample, I know, but all are among my list of favorites.

[wsmorrison]

Eckstein,

What do you think Flynn did at Merion and TCC?  Isn't it possible he did a lot more than you think you know?  Very few do and we look forward to presenting comprehensive archival materials that will convince you and other skeptics.  I hope you'll buy the book next year...you're in for a lot of surprises.

As for Pine Valley, he did a lot agronomically to rescue the course from total turf loss.  His construction work will be determined if possible and the limited design work (bunkers in the slopes below 2 and 18 green?) if we can.

NGLA and Macdonald were an inspiration to Wilson and through him to Flynn.  I don't think Flynn was ever in California.

Please do not ignore my questions.  What Flynn courses are you familiar with and why are they stale and pedestrian?

[Zack Kelly]

I would have to agree with Guest Ben Delow, Tom Fazio has to be the most overrated, his designs and redesigns are just diappointing in my opinion, the land and budgets that he is given he should have so many courses that are breathtaking, but the majority are not.
And the comment about Ross, WOW, they knocked my socks off who has more top ranked courses to their credit than Ross and the technolgy he had as opposed to today's guys.  
Just my 2 cents worth.

[Joel_Stewart]

Perhaps this thread should have been overrated "living and dead" architects.

Wayne:  Eckstein is out of his league with this, don't expect a thoughtful response.

[wsmorrison]

Joel,

I know I went out on a limb.  I think Ross is a great architect.  Can't he be overrated and still great?  He's just not that great if you know what I mean  

As for Eckstein, maybe he's related to Ross.  Or maybe to JB McGovern who Flynn couldn't stand  

I wouldn't mind hearing his views as long as he presents some supporting evidence.  It takes all kinds to fill the big world theory.  I just expect some substance to his statement.  He didn't answer my question about his Flynn experience yet he asked Kyle his Ross experience.  I guess he doesn't mind the question, just the direction of it.

[PThomas]

Wayne ...be ready for middle-of-the-night phone calls from the Donald Ross Society....

[wsmorrison]

Paul,

Oops, I'm taking the phone off the hook!  Now where's that danged delete button?

[Bill Gayne]

Bill,

I hope this doesn't have to be about ranking an architect with the basis of his course rankings.  The three points I made aren't based upon rankings.  I think it fair to say that Ross's method of operation was often as a topo router...he did so in a systematic way.  There are, of course, exceptions and Kyle does speak highly of Schuykill CC and the lack of the high-low-high tendency there.  I've seen it a lot and like I said, maybe it is just because of poor sampling technique.  At CC York it was a pattern that left a lot of interesting sites on the property out of the routing and the course variety and interest suffered.

How about the majority of Ross's courses standing the test of time?  Do they as well as some other architects?  Of course some do, but how does his overall portfolio of work stand the test of time?  It seems to me that some of his courses needed redesign pretty soon after they were built.  Sampling error on my part?  Maybe.  It just so happens that 7 out of Flynn's 20 redesigns were Ross courses less than 10 years after they were built.  Most of the clubs don't realize they were significantly remodeled by another architect.  Throw in the Ross greens at Pinehurst #2 being far different than those so beloved today and it leaves something to consider.

Wayne, I found your comments on Ross well thought out and on the mark based on my limited experience. I think a good example of your point close to me is the former Hampton Golf Club which is now part of the Woodlands Course. A city owned course. Ross did the original work in 1930 and interstate road construction altered the course and Tom Clark revised portions of the course in the early 1970s. The course isn't much now and from looking at the newspaper clippings of the early 1930s it was thought of as the third course in the community behind James River Country Club's new course opened in 1932 and Yorktown Country Club. Going through the list of his courses on the Donald Ross Society website shows how prolific he was but for every Pinehurst #2 or Seminole there were a lot of Hampton Golf Clubs.

As for my comments on ranking and rating, the title of the thread is "overrated" and to me that means there is some sort of quantification rather than general comments. As I said on my original post I'm not sure if ratings and rankings serve any purpose but to create internet chatter.

[redanman]

I have always admired Flynn and Ross for their ability to make enjoyable courses for all levels of golfers without forgetting women, children and the casual golfer.  It is hard to praise one and damn the other, so I have to tell Wayne to go and see some more Ross.  

Given Eckstein's role around this place, his comments do not surprize me.  He contributes very little that is not intended to demean.  Flynn was far from flashy, but never pedestrian, there is a difference.  

Flynn still remains under-rated and under appreciated no matter how much I kid Wayne about Flynn's presence on every planetoid in our solar system.  

Ross and Flynn are as similar and as different as can be simultaneously, but each built courses that can generally be played by all and enjoyed.  They  generally have in common great difficulty in losing golf balls, a good thing!

I would say that as a group "over-rated architects tend to be modern architects who quite coincidentally are over-priced as well".  All of them have done some fine work and make us wish that all of their courses were as good as their best - thus their over ratedness.  

No need to name names.

[John_Cullum]

Taking a shot at Ross was a bold maneuver. It has some merit, as I suspect he did more mediocre courses than the others with whom he keeps company. But I say his better work keeps him out of the overrated category.

I am thinking Rees Jones is THE most overrated. I have seen nothing very good out of Jones, and Ocean Forest is among the most overrated courses. Unlike Tom Fazio, who has some pretty good work out there.

How about this-a preferred citizen of this group builds a much heralded course at the base of a canyon and then it gets washed out after a heavy rain. How overrated is that?

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Even Michael Jordan had a bad night once in a while!

This Ross discussion smacks of the search for perfection.  The old architects worked with rudimentary equipment and mules!  

For the Classic architects wouldn't a better measure be the number of surviving courses?  The statisticians need to get to work onthat one!

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Flynn..Ross...wow very bold comments and my hat goes off to those willing to express those opinions...I do not agree but hell that's what we are all about on this site.

Personally..Mr Nicklaus stands out as being rather overated, I would say Gary Player, but I do not know anybody who rates his work highly in the first place, so he cannot be overated

I think the cookie cutter courses of multiple architects from the seventies can be brought into question, as can some of Fazio's work, although the more of his courses I play the more I see that I like..such as last weekend at Dancing Rabbit in Mississippi..a very good golf course, with maybe a couple of holes excepted...

[Kyle Harris]

Even Michael Jordan had a bad night once in a while!

This Ross discussion smacks of the search for perfection.  The old architects worked with rudimentary equipment and mules!  

For the Classic architects wouldn't a better measure be the number of surviving courses?  The statisticians need to get to work onthat one!

I am not in the Ross is overrated camp, but I think you may have missed Wayne's criticism - which was mainly centered around the routing of the golf course. Not much to do with mules and hand plows in routing a golf course.