Synecdoche - why does "Bill Coore" stand for "Coore and Crenshaw"?

[Michael Moore]

Fairly often on this board the part is used to designate the whole. I have gently tried to raise this issue a couple of time in the past.

Surely Bill Coore spends more time on site.

Surely Ben Creshaw is deeply involved in the designs.

Why does Coore and Crenshaw get collapsed into Bill Coore?

[ForkaB]

My reading of the runes of those who know tells me that Coore is the brains of the outfit and Crenshaw is the front man.  We all love "Gentle Ben" but I doubt if any of us would want to spend good money to have him design a golf course all by himself.

BTW--I don't think we are talking "synecdoche" here. This situation is more from the encyclopedia of tragedy than of rhetoric.

[Mike_Sweeney]

For those like me who do not do The NY Times's crossword puzzle:

syn·ec·do·che    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (s-nkd-k)
n.
A figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole (as hand for sailor), the whole for a part (as the law for police officer), the specific for the general (as cutthroat for assassin), the general for the specific (as thief for pickpocket), or the material for the thing made from it (as steel for sword).



To answer the question, from all second hand reports I have heard, they are true partners - both agreements and disagreements. I am sure at the beginning it was nice to have a 2 time Masters Champion on the letterhead, but here in this little myopic GCA world, I don't think of Crenshaw that way.

I think the real question is why have they not added some of their "regulars" to the letterhead ? Probably similar to my little 2 person partnership that I have with my partner, they don't want to run a firm, they want to build golf courses.

[JakaB]

If that is true why does one of the only courses Coore ever did by himself get a 2 in Doaks book...Kings Crossing..

[Tom_Doak]

Rich,

I've known them both since 1981, and I will disagree with your reading of the runes.

The main difference between them is that Bill is a full-time golf architect, whereas Ben has a wife and three teenagers, and is still trying to play golf competitively and pursue other business interests on top of their design business.  Ben has a lot less time to devote to golf architecture.  

I'm pretty sure that if they were working on their own, each of them would be able to produce courses 90% as good as the ones they do together.  It always makes me wonder why they don't build more than they do ... except at hectic times here in the office, when I think they are geniuses.

If I couldn't design courses myself, I would as soon give my money to Ben to design one for me as give it to anyone who participates on this board ... with no offense to the other architects who participate here.  Ben is an architect, too.

[Tom_Doak]

John K:  You posted simultaneously with me, so I didn't answer your question ... I only saw King's Crossing in the dirt, and Bill is probably still a bit peeved that I rated it as I did.  But it was just an awful piece of land ... dead flat, very heavy clay, no vegetation, just telephone poles on the horizon.  [Very much like The Rawls Course, but with worse soil.]

He was just happy to have any assignment back then, and it's probably one reason they're so choosy now.

[DTaylor18]

Mr. Moore, please see the quote below.  It sums it all up succinctly.

[Tyler Kearns]

Perhaps Ben's dissapointing performance on the Senior Tour over the last three years (3 top 10's) is evidence that he is spending a lot of time focusing on other projects, namely golf architecture. This would be similar to the lackluster year Graham Marsh had during the construction of Sutton Bay.

TK

[TEPaul]

"My reading of the runes of those who know tells me that Coore is the brains of the outfit and Crenshaw is the front man.  We all love "Gentle Ben" but I doubt if any of us would want to spend good money to have him design a golf course all by himself."

Rich:

As usual you've done a piss-poor job of "reading". If even you could spend half a day in the field with those two you'd come to know that's not true at all!

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Quite obviously some of you don't know the paticulars of Austin Golf Club.

Seventy years from now, HISTORY will tell our great grandchildren just how GREAT Coore AND Crenshaw really were. They will be looked upon with a small handful of others as the best in their field.

[ForkaB]

Mea maxima culpa!

OK, then......can anybody else answer Michael Moore's question, which is why (outside of the latter parts of this thread), Coore seems to be perceived as the senior partner in C&C, at least in terms of GCA (and on GCA.com)?

PS--Tom Doak, does this mean that it would not be in my best interests to apply for your internship?

[JakaB]

Mea maxima culpa!

OK, then......can anybody else answer Michael Moore's question, which is why (outside of the latter parts of this thread), Coore seems to be perceived as the senior partner in C&C, at least in terms of GCA (and on GCA.com)?

Rich,

Basically it is easier for the wanna be architect to associate with the talent of a guy like Bill Coore than Crenshaw.   We will never know what we might do with a piece of land in our hands but most of us have proven what we can't do with a club....If you are going to be someone you are not at least try to get some shoes that fit..

[ForkaB]

So, Barney....

....you seem to imply that Crenshaw has relatively little talent, GCA-wise, as MM implied, and TEP, the Emperor and Tom D have striven to deny.

Why?

[JakaB]

Rich,

That is so wrong...I am surprised you read it that way.   It is my opinion that it is easier for the common man to relate to Coore than Crenshaw...and that is why they try to elevate Coore so as to elevate themselves..

[Michael Moore]

. . .
you seem to imply that Crenshaw has relatively little talent, GCA-wise, as MM implied . . .

Rich -

Where do you come up with this stuff?

This is a question about attribution and perception, not about what I think about Ben Crenshaw.

Please read more carefully.

[JakaB]

I have always known that as Doak and C&C become more mainstream this board would find ways to tear them down....With Coore and Crenshaw it is really quite simple...call Crenshaw a front man and just another PGA pro who got all the breaks because of his contacts....you can love Coore and pity Crenshaw and still be the smart critic you are.  Now with Doak it gets more complicated.....plus Doak is a friend of the site very much unlike Rees, Fazio or Nicklaus....The stories of Doak saving Sebonack from the likes of Nicklaus and his people are already legendary....the question will be in the end...will Doak save Doak from himself...

[ForkaB]

Michael

I do read carefullly and try to write carefully.  I used the word "implied" because (to me) you seemed to damn "gentle" BC with faint praise when you said that he "got involved in the designs."  Of course he did.  But, what value did he add?  On this site, when you talk about the value added (GCA wise)from the C&C partnership, all you hear about is Coore.  Which brings us back to your original question, no?

[rgkeller]

the question will be in the end...will Doak save Doak from himself...

One suspects such an endeavor will fall to TEPaul.

[TEPaul]

"One suspects such an endeavor will fall to TEPaul."

Almost clever rg---with a very large accent on almost!  

You guys should hear the story about how Coore and Crenshaw got together in the first place. It says a lot about the way they are and the pretty unique way they've always worked together.

[Joe Hancock]

It boils down to the concept of partnering. If partner "A" brings 90% of the talent to the table, and partner "B" brings the last 10% that elevates partner "A"'s work to greatness, don't you agree that it is now a true partnership?

I know that if I ever got the chance to partner with true talent, I would relish my role as the partner who contributes that last 10% to bring the whole package to a level of greatness. After all, it is that last 10% that seperates the chaff from the wheat, IMO.

Joe

[TEPaul]

Joe:

Bill Coore probably spends nine more time on site than Crenshaw does but that doesn't mean Coore has nine times more talent than Crenshaw does.  

There's a very fine cover story in LINKS magazine about Coore and Crenshaw. One can't miss in the article the fact that they and their crew bring a very unique approach and philosophy to golf architecture today and also how they do that and a few good photos in that article show the evidence. It'd be pretty hard to miss.

[Joe Hancock]

Tom,

I don't know Bill or Ben, and therefore made my comments in a general sense. I think any partnership that adds up to a wonderful team doesn't need percentages or headlines to make either partner feel justified in their contribution towards the partnership.

Joe

[JakaB]

Why is there a need on this site to downplay the role of Crenshaw....how would you think Morrish/Crenshaw or Nuzzo/Crenshaw would have worked out...I'm guessing just as well.      

[Mark Brown]

John,

Having the good fortune to spend a lot of time with Ben and Bill on sites as they worked makes me believe that Crenshaw and Morrish would not be as good as Crenshaw & Coore. They have a very special relationship -- both busines and personal, and that applies to all of Crenshaw's business partners. They are nearly all longtime friends that he knows and trusts. Coore may be the best golf course router in the business, but Ben is involved in the whole design process. To put it simply, two class acts make an even better class team.

For example, Crenshaw goes out of his way to know and talk to the whole staff at Augusta during the Masters, including the cooks, the maintenance people etc, etc. I happen to know because I walked down the back of the clubhouse with Ben and watched him call them by name and say hey to all of them. To me he's in a class of his own among Tour players. He (and Bill) are the most humble people I've met anywhere.

I've been undeservably blessed to know them both.

[JWL]

Mr. Kavanaugh
I would be most interested in hearing more about the stories that are quickly becoming legendary about Sebonack that you referred to in your post.   Would you are anyone else care to elaborate.   That should be very interesting.