Most overrated big name architect is ???

[Roadking2003]

Richie; My evaluation of a golf course has nothing to do with age and who designed it. I'm not that versed in course design, so I just ask a few questions;

 

1. was it fun to play?

2. was it challenging?

3. was it beautiful (ocean, trees, etc)?

4. what was the condition?

5 was there a variety of holes?

6. did you need to think a little or just get up and whack the ball?

 

A good comparison is East Lake vs. Cabo del Sol. East Lake is boring and IMHO only highly rated due to the Bobby Jones connection and it was designed by Donald Ross. I played it and it doesn't make my top 100. On the other hand, Cabo del Sol is spectacular. It shines in all of the six areas listed above.

[FairwayFred]

Does anyone here actually realize how little the designer "really" does? Yes, he plots out the holes, of course. Beyond that it's all drainage and elevations. Hey, let's put a bunker here, and take out those trees. Getting water to run from high to low..........Cutting dirt here, pasting it there.........Grassy mounds on a golf course? Don't let ANYONE tell you different than THIS: They are there because the builder didn't want to pay to haul off the extra dirt!!.....LOL.....Here's the thing , Pebble and Augusta are Icon's because they've been on TV for 50 years. Pebble has 5 good holes and a bunch of fillers. Augusta isn't a GREAT course, I've been there. Azalea's don't make a golf course, just like Monterey doesn't make Pebble...........When I played Pine Valley the first time, after growing up on the Black Course, my first thought was, "this is it?".......No big deal..........Only the #1 course in the country , forever......Opinions are like #%@#$%^&**, we all have them......

 

What courses DO you like?

[pierso2]

I'm gonna say Nicklaus and whoever designed my park district course. Probably some civil engineer...

[dhc1]

I agree that Doak is over-rated. He is great at convincing owners of can't-miss properties that they need huge fairways so that the two sides present a different shot into the green: not hard to do when they're 50 yards apart.

 

He's like the typical Golf Club Atlas poster who reveres "strategy" even though he's a bogey golfer who doesn't have the game for it.

 

His lack of respect for other designers is appalling.

 

Same thing with shackleford.

[TheDailyDuffer]

I agree that Doak is over-rated. He is great at convincing owners of can't-miss properties that they need huge fairways so that the two sides present a different shot into the green: not hard to do when they're 50 yards apart.

 

He's like the typical Golf Club Atlas poster who reveres "strategy" even though he's a bogey golfer who doesn't have the game for it.

 

His lack of respect for other designers is appalling.

 

Same thing with shackleford.

 

Alister Mackenzie was a 13 handicap who built wide fairways and large undulating greens on can't miss properties some of which include Cypress Point, Crystal downs, Lahinch, Royal Melbourne, and this quaint little spot in Georgia called Augusta National. Also check out that Seth Raynor guy, he was a terrible golfer...

 

Also shackelford isn't a designer....

[Guia]

To think Pete Dye is over rated you must be smoking something.

[HighSpeedScene]

I agree that Doak is over-rated. He is great at convincing owners of can't-miss properties that they need huge fairways so that the two sides present a different shot into the green: not hard to do when they're 50 yards apart.

 

He's like the typical Golf Club Atlas poster who reveres "strategy" even though he's a bogey golfer who doesn't have the game for it.

 

His lack of respect for other designers is appalling.

 

Same thing with shackleford.

 

Alister Mackenzie was a 13 handicap who built wide fairways and large undulating greens on can't miss properties some of which include Cypress Point, Crystal downs, Lahinch, Royal Melbourne, and this quaint little spot in Georgia called Augusta National. Also check out that Seth Raynor guy, he was a terrible golfer...

 

Also shackelford isn't a designer....

 

If he has design credit for a course, is he not a designer?

 

http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/golf-into-the-rustic

[RichieHunt]

Richie; My evaluation of a golf course has nothing to do with age and who designed it. I'm not that versed in course design, so I just ask a few questions;

 

1. was it fun to play?

2. was it challenging?

3. was it beautiful (ocean, trees, etc)?

4. what was the condition?

5 was there a variety of holes?

6. did you need to think a little or just get up and whack the ball?

 

A good comparison is East Lake vs. Cabo del Sol. East Lake is boring and IMHO only highly rated due to the Bobby Jones connection and it was designed by Donald Ross. I played it and it doesn't make my top 100. On the other hand, Cabo del Sol is spectacular. It shines in all of the six areas listed above.

 

Fun to play is the biggest factor for me. For instance, I really like playing a lot of Arnold Palmer designs because they are fun to play. Like Eagle Watch in Woodstock, GA. Probably wouldn't make the top-50 courses on any list in Georgia, but I would rather play that than play Echelon, East Lake, and Chateau Elan. I would rather play Victoria Hills in DeLand than play most higher priced courses and private clubs in the Orlando area.

 

The thing with Ross is he designed a gazillion different courses. He's not going to roll 6's every time. But, his percentage of excellent clubs is way up there and they flat-out beat most of the designers we've seen in the past 30-years. Sure, there are people out there that rate courses based on their history, but I find for the most part the Ross', Tillinghast's and McKenzie's were just far superior overall.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

[RichieHunt]

To think Pete Dye is over rated you must be smoking something.

 

I don't think so at all.

 

I've played numerous Dye courses and I would say at least half of them I didn't enjoy in the least bit. Nobody likes blind tee shots where you can hardly see the fairway and there's trouble both left and right that is pretty narrow (and you can't see the trouble either). Or the numerous courses where he creates some very pedestrian holes where it looks like he ran out of room just so he can create some 'signature holes' which may be pretty, but are not very practical. Or the large influence he has had on other architects which has only slowed down pace of play and made courses that are not sustainable financially.

 

He's hit some big ones like Sawgrass, Kiawah and Harbour Town. But there are just as many others that were garbage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

[ratspros]

I love how people criticize the Fazio's, Nicklaus' etc for oversized greens that are tough if your on the wrong quadrant but praise the Doaks, crenshaws's etc for large greens because they bring in strategy and creativity.

 

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

[ratspros]

Underrated would be Ron Garl

 

Yup.

 

$ for $, he'd be my pick.

 

I would also add Arnold Palmer to the list as underrated. Because he's so popular as a golfer and a person, I feel that many hardcore golfers don't take his courses as seriously and I think he usually designs fabulous and fun golf courses. Eagle Watch in Woodstock, GA is one of my favorites.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

Garl did my home course. I think there are 1 or 2 holes that weren't executed all that great but other than that really good.

 

Blow up the Point nine and start fresh there. The other two nines are great.

[duffer987]

 

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

 

Interesting. Can you provide some examples of this criticism?

[knock it close]

Underrated would be Ron Garl

 

Yup.

 

$ for $, he'd be my pick.

 

I would also add Arnold Palmer to the list as underrated. Because he's so popular as a golfer and a person, I feel that many hardcore golfers don't take his courses as seriously and I think he usually designs fabulous and fun golf courses. Eagle Watch in Woodstock, GA is one of my favorites.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

Garl did my home course. I think there are 1 or 2 holes that weren't executed all that great but other than that really good.

 

Blow up the Point nine and start fresh there. The other two nines are great.

Yea lol, oh and re route the creek on Heritage 1

[QMany]

Most overrated: Crenshaw. He ruined Pinehurst #2. I also think the old timers (Ross, MacKenzie, Maxwell,Tillinghast, etc) as a group are way overrated. Many people who rate courses give extra credit for the old timers. A good example is Prairie Dunes. It's a really good course and generally rated in the top 50. I can list 20 Nicklaus courses I like better.

 

My favorite architect is Nicklaus. I've played 31 of his courses and love almost all of them. The "Nicklaus designs courses for a fade" statement is a myth.

You have played 20 courses better than PD, let alone 20 Nicklaus courses? I am very interested in this list.

[ratspros]

 

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

 

Interesting. Can you provide some examples of this criticism?

.

 

You've never been to golfclubatlas.com obviously. I don't have to paste links now to specific threads (can do tonight if you like) but over there not only do the Doak fan boys dislike Fazio's lack of strategy but they coined the term anti-strategy architecture to be affiliated with Fazio.

[duffer987]

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

 

Interesting. Can you provide some examples of this criticism?

.

 

You've never been to golfclubatlas.com obviously. I don't have to paste links now to specific threads (can do tonight if you like) but over there not only do the Doak fan boys dislike Fazio's lack of strategy but they coined the term anti-strategy architecture to be affiliated with Fazio.

 

I read their course reviews, but a fairly cursory look at their forums struck me as internet golf's Pseud's Corner, so I've not been back. Now you've piqued my interest!

[herdman]

Jack Nicklaus. Just don't care for a lot of his designs.

[Matt J]

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

 

Interesting. Can you provide some examples of this criticism?

.

 

You've never been to golfclubatlas.com obviously. I don't have to paste links now to specific threads (can do tonight if you like) but over there not only do the Doak fan boys dislike Fazio's lack of strategy but they coined the term anti-strategy architecture to be affiliated with Fazio.

 

I read their course reviews, but a fairly cursory look at their forums struck me as internet golf's Pseud's Corner, so I've not been back. Now you've piqued my interest!

 

The site is owned by Tom Doak. To find a chorus of his followers there is not that shocking, although I have read posts by many GCA's there on many interesting topics.

 

Strategy is as strategy does.

[Matt70]

Greg Norman. Bunkers in the middle of fairways!

[FairwayFred]

Same thing with fairways. Fazio builds a wide one and it takes away from strategy because you can hit it anywhere. Doak builds a wide one and oh my the angles and options you can play are amazing.

 

Interesting. Can you provide some examples of this criticism?

.

 

You've never been to golfclubatlas.com obviously. I don't have to paste links now to specific threads (can do tonight if you like) but over there not only do the Doak fan boys dislike Fazio's lack of strategy but they coined the term anti-strategy architecture to be affiliated with Fazio.

 

I read their course reviews, but a fairly cursory look at their forums struck me as internet golf's Pseud's Corner, so I've not been back. Now you've piqued my interest!

 

The site is owned by Tom Doak. To find a chorus of his followers there is not that shocking, although I have read posts by many GCA's there on many interesting topics.

 

Strategy is as strategy does.

 

Just an FYI, Golf Club Atlas is not owned by Tom Doak. It is owned by a gentleman named Ran who lives in Pinehurst. That site has some of the best course reviews and pics you will ever find.

[Matt J]

Thanks.

 

I think they were plugging his book when I first started reading it so I jumped to that conclusion. They feature a lot of his articles too. Perhaps Ran is just a fan.

 

I agree it's a great site.

[FairwayFred]

Thanks.

 

I think they were plugging his book when I first started reading it so I jumped to that conclusion. They feature a lot of his articles too. Perhaps Ran is just a fan.

 

I agree it's a great site.

 

Ran is friendly with Doak. He was one of 3 co-authors on Doak's new confidential guide. I do find it very interesting that Doak posts as much as he does over there. Seems like he would have other things to do with his time.

 

[TheDailyDuffer]

Greg Norman. Bunkers in the middle of fairways!

 

While I'm not exactly a fan of the Norman design team, I find "bunkers in the middle if fairways" to be a fairly weak criticism. Centerline or cross bunkers can add variety and make the course more strategic. If you find you've hit a "perfect shot" and you're now in a bunker in the middle of the fairway, it wasn't actually a perfect shot. The center of the fairway isn't nor shouldn't always be the best place to play from.

 

Pull up any top 100 world list and I'll point out to you all the ones that have bunkers in the middle of fairways

[knock it close]

Greg Norman. Bunkers in the middle of fairways!

 

While I'm not exactly a fan of the Norman design team, I find "bunkers in the middle if fairways" to be a fairly weak criticism. Centerline or cross bunkers can add variety and make the course more strategic. If you find you've hit a "perfect shot" and you're now in a bunker in the middle of the fairway, it wasn't actually a perfect shot. The center of the fairway isn't nor shouldn't always be the best place to play from.

 

Pull up any top 100 world list and I'll point out to you all the ones that have bunkers in the middle of fairways

Yea I agree, Matt70 don't go play the Old course

[dtm6582]

I do find it very interesting that Doak posts as much as he does over there. Seems like he would have other things to do with his time.

 

Like all of us posting here? :)

[dhc1]

It's not that tom doak doesn't make great courses: I like his tracks a lot. However, the level of adulation he gets from certain quarters (GCA) is over the top and thus, he is over-rated IMO. Perhaps what gnaws at me most is that his open disdain for Tom Fazio and other architects is disrespectful and filled with sanctimony. Conversely, fazio and his team have taken the high road in biting their tongues.

 

Mr. Doak's specialty appears to be courses in remote areas with remarkable views and limited space constraints. He would not be an architect I would consider for a course near a crowded metropolitan area with geography constraints.

 

I am intrigued by the reversible course at forest dunes and the renovation (which is totally different from design work IMO) at Medinah.

 

[TheDailyDuffer]

It's not that tom doak doesn't make great courses: I like his tracks a lot. However, the level of adulation he gets from certain quarters (GCA) is over the top and thus, he is over-rated IMO. Perhaps what gnaws at me most is that his open disdain for Tom Fazio and other architects is disrespectful and filled with sanctimony. Conversely, fazio and his team have taken the high road in biting their tongues.

 

Mr. Doak's specialty appears to be courses in remote areas with remarkable views and limited space constraints. He would not be an architect I would consider for a course near a crowded metropolitan area with geography constraints.

 

I am intrigued by the reversible course at forest dunes and the renovation (which is totally different from design work IMO) at Medinah.

 

I'm not prepared to call an architect overrated for what he may of said about another architect. While you can certainly dislike Tom Doak the person for who he is and how he talks, criticizing him as an Architect for something that has nothing to do with the quality of his courses isn't fair. Picasso was a Jerk, and Tarantino is a weirdo, but that doesn't change the fact that they were/are respective geniuses in their art form.

 

Doak's specialty is not building courses in remote areas with remarkable views, but rather building great golf courses on great pieces of land with minimal earth moving. It takes infinitely more talent to route a golf course though the existing landscape while moving as little dirt as possible, then it does coming onto a site and just deciding where a the hole is going to be and bulldoze the land. The Fazio team are experts at earthmoving and creating golf holes, despite what landforms are already in place.

 

Im not entirely sure what you mean by "geography constraints", but to imply that Doak couldn't build a great golf course on a site in a metropolitan area is just silly. As previously stated, its infiniately more difficult to tightly route a golf course on pre-existing land, then it does to create it. While I'm sure that Doak would have no problem building a golf course on a flat site with a great deal of earthmoving (because he has already done so) its not really his thing. If you're looking to build a golf course on flat ground with houses on both sides that will cross a road every two holes you should probably give Jack Nicklaus a call. The reason why Doak gets these sites in remote areas with great views, is because the developer wants to build a course that highlights the terrain already in existence, not build new terrain. Take a look at pacific dunes, its an amazing course thats tightly routed on a fairly small plot of land, built with very little earth moving and for a minuscule budget (when compared to a typical Nicklaus, Jones, or Fazio project). If you had a small piece of land in a large metropolitan area that was suitable for golf I'm sure Doak would give you a quality course. Unfortunately these types of projects are far and few between these days.

 

Truth be told Fazio doesn't give a s**t what anyone says about him. Although several of Doak's criticisms are accurate, Doak actually really likes the top tier Fazio courses.

 

Yes Doak gets a lot of praise on GCA. There certainly are a good bit of kiss a**es, and those afraid to say something negative about his courses. However, you have to take note of the fact that there probably aren't even 100 regular posters on that site, and even still GCA members represent less than .0000001 of the golfing community.

[dhc1]

It's not that tom doak doesn't make great courses: I like his tracks a lot. However, the level of adulation he gets from certain quarters (GCA) is over the top and thus, he is over-rated IMO. Perhaps what gnaws at me most is that his open disdain for Tom Fazio and other architects is disrespectful and filled with sanctimony. Conversely, fazio and his team have taken the high road in biting their tongues.

 

Mr. Doak's specialty appears to be courses in remote areas with remarkable views and limited space constraints. He would not be an architect I would consider for a course near a crowded metropolitan area with geography constraints.

 

I am intrigued by the reversible course at forest dunes and the renovation (which is totally different from design work IMO) at Medinah.

 

I'm not prepared to call an architect overrated for what he may of said about another architect. While you can certainly dislike Tom Doak the person for who he is and how he talks, criticizing him as an Architect for something that has nothing to do with the quality of his courses isn't fair. Picasso was a Jerk, and Tarantino is a weirdo, but that doesn't change the fact that they were/are respective geniuses in their art form.

 

Doak's specialty is not building courses in remote areas with remarkable views, but rather building great golf courses on great pieces of land with minimal earth moving. It takes infinitely more talent to route a golf course though the existing landscape while moving as little dirt as possible, then it does coming onto a site and just deciding where a the hole is going to be and bulldoze the land. The Fazio team are experts at earthmoving and creating golf holes, despite what landforms are already in place.

 

Im not entirely sure what you mean by "geography constraints", but to imply that Doak couldn't build a great golf course on a site in a metropolitan area is just silly. As previously stated, its infiniately more difficult to tightly route a golf course on pre-existing land, then it does to create it. While I'm sure that Doak would have no problem building a golf course on a flat site with a great deal of earthmoving (because he has already done so) its not really his thing. If you're looking to build a golf course on flat ground with houses on both sides that will cross a road every two holes you should probably give Jack Nicklaus a call. The reason why Doak gets these sites in remote areas with great views, is because the developer wants to build a course that highlights the terrain already in existence, not build new terrain. Take a look at pacific dunes, its an amazing course thats tightly routed on a fairly small plot of land, built with very little earth moving and for a minuscule budget (when compared to a typical Nicklaus, Jones, or Fazio project). If you had a small piece of land in a large metropolitan area that was suitable for golf I'm sure Doak would give you a quality course. Unfortunately these types of projects are far and few between these days.

 

Truth be told Fazio doesn't give a s**t what anyone says about him. Although several of Doak's criticisms are accurate, Doak actually really likes the top tier Fazio courses.

 

Yes Doak gets a lot of praise on GCA. There certainly are a good bit of kiss a**es, and those afraid to say something negative about his courses. However, you have to take note of the fact that there probably aren't even 100 regular posters on that site, and even still GCA members represent less than .0000001 of the golfing community.

 

Fair enough. I think he's over-rated as many times when his name comes up (usually with bogey golfers), the adulation is over the top. One can think someone is a very good architect but still think he's way over-rated. YMMV.

[ethanshapiro]

Pete Dye is far from overrated. Play the Ocean Course in Kiawah and you'll understand. DYEabolical if i do say so myself

[Guia]

Roadking2003: You have played 31 of the Nicklaus' courses? Wow, I have been playing 50 years and doubt that I have played 5 of Nicklaus' courses. I think you greatly exaggerate.

 

As a side note I was curious as to how many courses Nicklaus (his company) has designed. I think he is one of the most busy designers ever, there has to be easily over 300 world wide. Wow.