Most overrated big name architect is ???

[teejaywhy]

[quote name='tbowles411' timestamp='1361559473' post='6480945']
[quote name='stage1350' timestamp='1360211657' post='6378275']
Dye. He's a closet sadist.
[/quote]
+1 Sadistic basterd

You should never [b][i]lose a ball in the fairway[/i][/b] just because you put it on the "wrong side."

[/quote]

I'd be interested to hear of an example.

[bandonman91]

Tom Weiskof. Worked at a Tom course and he just doesnt get it. Plus got to play a couple of his exclusive courses Yellowstone Club and Spanish Peaks. Incredible pieces of land but he ruined them. way too many shortish par 4s for a good player that are too long for the average player. Par 3s tend to be the same length. Just boring. Always has too many short par 4s. Doak and Crenshaw are the only 1s that do the short par 4 thing now. Good guy though. Loves to fish and can still get it done on the course

[vtnerf]

Nicklaus.
Have a few locally, including a signature course, that I just can't like. Too much visual noise. Too much give to the bombers. (I'm not short either...)
He's got 7,600 yards at sea level. That's just insane!! His works just don't do it for me, and I don't even think playing them repeated would allow me to warm up to them.

[cxx]

I don't think you can rate the architect without looking at the time that the course was designed. During the 90's everyone wanted the hardest course possible, so fairway moguls, cloverleaf greens and all sorts of tricky stuff was the norm. It really was a bad time for golf course design. That and the maintenance costs for these courses went through the roof. I was glad when they went back to more traditional playable designs.

Fazio was after this time and he benefited from that, but his courses share some similar features, primarily that you can see what you're going to get. The hazards are not hidden, and you can plot your way around from the tee.

[Lodestone]

Many people who hate Donald Ross don't appreciate the context in which he worked.

False fronts, for example, were placed as the golfer's friend. When DR was designing, equipment would not allow for super high shots. So the false front was there to accept a shot, and take the steam of of it, so it would hold the green.

also, the predominant grass was Rye, and in North Carolina (Pinehurst #2) the greens were made of compacted sand. Ross's penchant for extreme contours makes more sense when you are putting on slow surfaces.

I play DR course as my home course, and now it has bent greens, and sometimes the Super like to put pins in impossible places and roll and cut the greens way faster than the greens were designed for. I see scratch golfers putt OFF the greens, take 4 and 5 putts...and I hear people b**** about Donald Ross like it's his fault that in 1934 he didn't see this coming.

[bblakeman]

Nicklaus, he puts bunkers in the middle of greens. thats not golf

[italianstallion]

To comment on the Dye bit: I've played one of his courses, Sawgrass. With such a limited sample size I can't make a comment for or against. I will say that you need to plot your way around that golf course, you cannot try and overpower it. There's some holes with alot of room off the tee, most holes however require you to not only hit the fairway but hit it in the right spot. Same thing with the approaches: tiny greens, and if you miss them in the wrong spot getting up and down can be virtually impossible. That course requires so much course management, I've never seen anything like it. And yes it can be really frustrating.

I enjoyed the few Fazio courses I've played, especially World Woods Pine Barrens. Is it a Top 100 course? I don't think so, but its pretty darn good in my opinion, especially for Florida. Punishes the bad shots, rewards the good shots. Its worth the hour trip and I look forward to playing it. Strantz was a master of his craft, I enjoy his courses almost as much as classic Tillinghast designs. I've only played a few Ross courses, but there was a guy who knew how to build a fair golf course. I've never felt cheated or betrayed on a Ross track.

Which brings me to my conclusion: anything by Jones is a snooze-fest. Lots of mounds, big greens, water hazards, condos, $150 price tags. No thanks.

[bblakeman]

agreed nicklaus

[bblakeman]

he puts bunkers in the middle of greens, seriously?

[teejaywhy]

[quote name='bblakeman' timestamp='1364100568' post='6676479']
he puts bunkers in the middle of greens, seriously?
[/quote]

Examples, please.

[isaacbm]

Tough to have a bigger name in golf than Nicklaus. The trouble with his courses is that his style caters to the excess that was predominate in the 80's and early 90's. Most of his courses are a maintenance nightmare. You need a crew of 5 guys just to keep the bunkers and faces of the bunkers in shape. It's not just that he favors a high fade for every shot, it's that the courses don't look natural. You stand on a lot of tee boxes and there's some sort of strange feature out there that just looks out of place.

If a course is struggling financially or if there's ever a water shortage, Nicklaus courses are always the first to look like crap. Which basically means that they are designed in a way that goes against nature and the weather patterns of the area.

[HoffTTM]

[quote name='bblakeman' timestamp='1364100149' post='6676425']
Nicklaus, he puts bunkers in the middle of greens. thats not golf
[/quote]

ask Riviera Country Club whether that is "Golf"

[ClarkGrswld4]

Arthur Hills' tracks are boring IMO

[adamjstl]

Tom Fazio. Now I have only played a few Fazio tracks, but the two biggest names, World Woods (Pine Barrens) and Branson Creek, were not everything I expected. At the time, World Woods was the #26 public course in the country. We finished the round, all enjoyed the course, and all agreed that was an outrageous ranking. Branson Creek was consistently in the top 100 public up until 2-3 years ago. I played it in 2011 and was again underwhelmed.

 

Don't get me wrong, while both very nice courses, World Woods especially, I have to think that the Fazio stamp was more responsible for those ratings than the courses themselves.

 

The most over-rated in my book is Jack.

 

His courses generally are variations on the same design:

 

1. Wide fairways that generally favor a fade.

 

2. (On his more playable courses) Narrow greens surrounded by lots of trouble. Again, favoring a high fade.

 

3. (On his more --unprintable---courses) Greens that have lots of unnatural swales and other contours, that can leave you still struggling to make par even after hitting your approach to the center of the green.

 

3. Stonewolf in Fairview Heights, Illinois. The par-4 3rd is 323 yards from the tips, and features the most outrageous, unnatural green ever built. As a 2 handicap, I have one par on this hole in over a dozen tries. Yikes.

[adamjstl]

Tough to have a bigger name in golf than Nicklaus. The trouble with his courses is that his style caters to the excess that was predominate in the 80's and early 90's. Most of his courses are a maintenance nightmare. You need a crew of 5 guys just to keep the bunkers and faces of the bunkers in shape. It's not just that he favors a high fade for every shot, it's that the courses don't look natural. You stand on a lot of tee boxes and there's some sort of strange feature out there that just looks out of place.

 

If a course is struggling financially or if there's ever a water shortage, Nicklaus courses are always the first to look like crap. Which basically means that they are designed in a way that goes against nature and the weather patterns of the area.

 

I agree completely with your entire statement.

[adamjstl]

Fazio's courses are typically best played down the middle of the fairway. As has been stated a few times already, everything is out in front of you from the tee. He is a master of creating beautiful, playable courses. The downside of that, to many of us at least, is that his courses tend to have a "sameness" to them. He certainly isn't a bad designer, perhaps just forgettable.

[HighSpeedScene]

Art Hills. With a bullet

[jewofgolf]

Tom Fazio. Now I have only played a few Fazio tracks, but the two biggest names, World Woods (Pine Barrens) and Branson Creek, were not everything I expected. At the time, World Woods was the #26 public course in the country. We finished the round, all enjoyed the course, and all agreed that was an outrageous ranking. Branson Creek was consistently in the top 100 public up until 2-3 years ago. I played it in 2011 and was again underwhelmed.

 

Don't get me wrong, while both very nice courses, World Woods especially, I have to think that the Fazio stamp was more responsible for those ratings than the courses themselves.

 

The most over-rated in my book is Jack.

 

His courses generally are variations on the same design:

 

1. Wide fairways that generally favor a fade.

 

2. (On his more playable courses) Narrow greens surrounded by lots of trouble. Again, favoring a high fade.

 

3. (On his more --unprintable---courses) Greens that have lots of unnatural swales and other contours, that can leave you still struggling to make par even after hitting your approach to the center of the green.

 

3. Stonewolf in Fairview Heights, Illinois. The par-4 3rd is 323 yards from the tips, and features the most outrageous, unnatural green ever built. As a 2 handicap, I have one par on this hole in over a dozen tries. Yikes.

 

All the hate on Nicklaus and Stonewolf.

 

Hole 3 there is simple. Hit a driver up the left side and leave a wide open pitch of 30 - 40 yards. If downwind, drive it into the greenside bunker or swale and get up and down. Hit an iron off the tee and leave a wedge.

 

Hit courses are 2nd shot and short game courses. I love them. Yes you have to focus on good iron shots and getting up and down/making putts.

 

When he designs tight holes, they are shorter...so hit less than driver.

 

I think the greens being crazy is my favorite design aspect. Give me buried elephants all day!

[Matt J]

All of them?

 

When you have a new wave of minimalism in design you may be previously guilty of excess.

[az2au]

Seems that Normans work is hated, didn't he offer to redo medalist for free and they told him to kick rocks?

 

His one design in Arizona was completely plowed under and redone before the club ever opened!!

He's the only one that ever played a round there as well. Kinda cool if you think about it that way. It became Mirabel instead which is a typical Fazio design that is almost indistinguishable from Estancia in a lot of ways (course, not setting). Fazio's best work in AZ is Whisper Rock Upper IMO.

 

As to the original post, this conversation begins and ends with Dye to me. With others such as Rees Jones I can see people thinking of them but the sheer volume of over-manufactured crap that Dye has put into the world brings him to the top. People using Harbour Town or Sawgrass to talk about how great Dye is tells me that we don't want the same thing in golf courses at all. Those two courses are, well, I have no desire to ever play either again. If you want to defend Dye then use Long Cove or PDGC instead. There is good work among all of those railroad ties and mounds if you look hard enough. 17 at Sawgrass is pretty much the pinnacle of terrible IMO. And, yes, before you ask, I have played there 8 times (business, not a choice, tough life, I know) and on 7 of those 8 I made par or birdie. The other time I took an 8 after hitting two balls in the water. Score is irrelevant.

 

Other holes I think that are just plain bad on TPC Sawgrass: 1, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, and 15. I'm not sure I care for any particular hole on Harbour Town. I guess 18 is fine but there's nothing but mediocrity and clunkers the rest of the way. 9 and 16 stand out as being particularly bad IMO.

[Thunder Dan]

Rees Jones, barf

[mp14dawg]

I can say that I haven't met a too many golf courses I didn't like, with the exception of a local course that starts par 3 (island green, no driving range) par 5 par 3. Log jam, no way around it. The only Dye experience I have is the courses at Kohler, and with the benefit of either a caddy or yardage book I think they are excellent and very fair. If you put a gun to my head I think I would tell you that Black Wolf Run was my favorite. I also had the best weather and played the best that day... Someone could certainly have an opinion on how they were created but the courses are beautiful and if played from the correct set of tees very fair. You do have to really trust your lines off the tee and you will have some that do seem off but it seems like that is part of what a Dye course is. It seemed to me that there for the most part was always fair landing area.

 

Your post is just over three years old but I had to reply because as soon as I read island green with no driving range I thought "Tanna Farms" lol. I used to live in that neighborhood. The original sister course is Mill Creek and from a design perspective its just as awful as Tanna. Oh and they do in fact have a driving range for Tanna, it's just that its about a mile away at Mill Creek's clubhouse lol.

[EKELLY]

There is only so much you can with land, dirt, and sod. Oh, and 18 little plastic cups. There are numerous factors in design, including drainage. As a guy that has worked for a company that has roughed in a few courses in the southeast for Dye and Coore, there is more to the building courses than most think!!.....

[naws-golfer]

RTJ and Rees jones. Never played a course of theirs that was memorable, or exceptional. Usuall holes are a bit too long and the greens are unimaginative.

 

Dyes courses being so popular may have skewed people's opinions. The honors course is another example of his genius.

 

I like my courses to be easy/straightforward off the tee and more challenging around the greens.

 

I wasn't a fan of stream song the resort, but the courses are great, using every club in the bag as well as hitting uphill/downhill all of the shots.

 

 

[toddnt]

Tom Fazio...... Overrated and overpriced!

 

Love me some Dye, you know what you're going to get when you step out of the car... Teeth kicked in!

[DoubleorQuits]

Tom Doak

 

150 yard wide fairways and big undulating slow a** greens are not strategy. Yawn

[EKELLY]

Augusta is nothing more than several million in landscaping, but people crap themselves when they see it. The course isn't really anything that you can't find in several states in the northeast or the Michigan area.......It's not all THAT!!........The greens are another story......UNREAL!!......

[BKKALLDAY]

There are some Robert Trent Jones courses in New York that are pretty lackluster. Though for each of these misses, he's produced gems, so I couldn't call him "overrated"

[Matt J]

Augusta is nothing more than several million in landscaping, but people crap themselves when they see it. The course isn't really anything that you can't find in several states in the northeast or the Michigan area.......It's not all THAT!!........The greens are another story......UNREAL!!......

 

You're absolutely right, ANGC is nothing that 30 or 40 million dollars couldn't buy. If that's what you meant by several then I agree. If you meant 3 or 4 million that wouldn't get you a year of maintenance. As far as installation, I guess it would depend on what you started with, let's not forget the place was a nursery before it was a golf course. Transplanting one mature tree is pretty expensive and not a guarantee as I recall.

[WiscoGolfAddict]

Arthur Hills' tracks are boring IMO

 

 

Washington County in Hartford, Wisconsin is a great track with affordable rates. He also designed a local muni that [depending on time of the year] has some pretty decent greens and is a good value, Wanaki. Chicago Highlands is a great [albeit incredibly challenging] course, too.

 

Washington County: