[Tim_Weiman]

Golfclubatlas has reached a critical mass. It is surely the most widely followed golf architecture related site on the Internet. It has a core of lay people – golf architecture junkies – passionate about bringing the “consumer’s” point of view. It has some superb course reviews and interviews. It is widely followed by people in the golf industry, more so than some care to admit. It thrives in part because once the bug for golf architecture gets in your blood, it isn’t likely to go away, but also because GCA is the one place where honest, critical feedback flows freely, if not always fairly. Finally, the discussion usually remains fairly civil, at least by the standards of Internet discussion groups.

Still, it is not without room for growth or improvement. We remain far too American centric. Participation by folks in Australia is steadily increasing, but European participation remains disappointing especially when you consider the wealth of great golf architecture in that part of the world. Yet an even more fundamental gap remains the relatively limited participation by people in the golf industry: developers, golf architects, design associates and shapers, contractors, maintenance personnel, green chairman, etc.

We recognize folks in the business are in a completely different position than lay people. They have a personal stake in projects and simply can’t always speak openly or freely. We offer the protection of anonymity, but that doesn’t seem to encourage that much industry participation. There are even concerns that anonymity, far from encouraging industry participation, may actually discourage it.

In sum, we have arrived at a point where we are long on candid criticism – a Tommy Naccarato will stand up and criticize work by prominent architects at prominent clubs (Fazio/Merion) – but short on the kind of special insight only people closely associated with courses/projects can bring.

Overcoming this problem won’t be easy. Observers such as Tom Paul and Pat Mucci believe it will take a private page with more stringent rules on conduct, a change that doesn’t seem on the horizon.

Anyway, what would industry folks be able to contribute, whether is be from anonymous posts or from people willing to sign their name? Here are just a few things that come to mind – things that I feel would enrich our discussion:

Site feasibility issues
Pre-construction property characteristics
Project vision, for new builds, renovations or restorations
Architect selection, process, candidates, why the winner was selected
Design associates, project managers
Guidelines/instructions given to architect
Permitting issues – challenges and compromises
Key routing issues
Hole design, strategy, hazard placement
Construction issues, key challenges, earth moved
Contractor selection – who made short list, who was selected & why
Key maintenance issues, e.g., green speed, water, rough maintenance, budget
Budget – high level, if not especially detailed

I’m curious what else people might like to see and if you have any thoughts on how we could encourage more industry folks to participate here.

P.S. Just so I don’t slight anyone, let me thank those people in the industry that do freely contribute. I’m sure it is appreciated.

[Mike Hendren]

It ain't broke.

[Tim_Weiman]

Mike Hendren:

I'm curious.

Would you not find greater industry input on the issues I listed interesting? Are those subjects boring? Are we getting you all the industry input you would like?

Acknowledging that we have come a long way, what's the harm in striving to go even further?

[CHrisB]

Tim,

Tangential to your main question, I wonder if we could get more foreign (esp. European) participation if the discussion was more on-topic and less "Americanized"--we talk a lot on here about American politics, American sports (lately baseball and college football), etc., and I wonder if the perception by those in other countries is that this is largely an "American" site.

That being said, I enjoy those discussions because they are fun and help me get to know the participants a little better, certainly faster than if we stuck just to architecture. So I'm not saying anything should be changed, but if the goal was to make this a truly global DG, then that might be something worth looking at. The number of off-topic posts by foreign participants seems to be quite low.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Mike, I would love more industry participation. I believe we are lucky to have as much unbiased industry feedback as we get now. It is becoming a more compretitive industry and therefore agendas become more the rule than the exception. I hope we can continue to attract the quality people we have now and grow from there with generally unbiased commentary. It really is not broke. I do wish we could attract more commentary from the UK and Europe too. I love when the Aussie courses come up, especially with pictures, for I have not been there yet.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Chris, are you a Texas Owl or an Owl living in a tree far far away.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I'll be glad to contribute more on those topics, however, I don't know how much more interesting people would find it.

[Bob_Huntley]

The differences in the American, compared to the British golf scene was ably presented some thirty odd years ago by Dan Jenkins. He wrote an article which appeared in Golf Digest entitled "Do Shower Slippers make a Difference." It was an hilarious send off on some of the quirks in the British social system. A comment on the half of a towel and tepid shower water, together with the idea that club dues might approach a decent bottle of wine was, at the time, spot on.

[John_Conley]

Tim:

You had a thread about anonymous posts and someone offered about a half-dozen examples of good threads started by people with screen monikers.  I initially thought good point, but then I realized none of the people in question had a true need to stop short of revealing their identity.

I think we all use the site for different reasons and appointing an arbiter of appropriateness is a bit heavy-handed.  Ran's broad range of allowable topics seems to be adequate and he is doing a good job of kicking out the riff-raff.

[Tim_Weiman]

Shivas:

There may be some technology differences. I agree on the text messaging thing and also believe Europeans got into the cell phone thing in a bigger way than we did here - at least that was my impression working in London and Paris. Not sure on the computer thing, though certain areas may have been behind the States in offering attractive access plans.

Based on private feedback from folks overseas, I do agree with ChrisB that there may also be a cultural issue. Sports here in the States are different than in Europe. I know when I'm in Europe I feel a little out of place when television reporting covers European sports. So, if Europeans feel the same way here, it wouldn't surprise me.

As for discussion of politics, Robert Kagan offers an interesting perspective in "Of Paradise and Power, America and Europe in the New World Order". Kagan starts out with a bang:

"It is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world, or even that they occupy the same world.......on major strategic and international questions today Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus. They agree on little and understand each other less and less....when it comes to setting national priorities, determining challenges, and fashioning and implementing foreigh and defense policies, the United States and Europe have parted ways".

I cite Kagan in part because his essay has received so much attention among policy making elites on both sides of the Atlantic, but also because he so clearly and forcefully lays out the cultural differences between European and Americans today. In this context, I agree with Chris that our frequent discussion of American political issues may be a turn off for Europeans. As someone quilty of engaging in these discussions from time to time, I think we may want to cool it a bit if our purpose here is to focus on golf architect matters and broaden participation.

But, that's the international issue. I really hope we can also encourage more industry folks to come on here as well

[A_Clay_Man]

Tim- My first reaction was similar to "if it ain't broke". But continuing your read I feel the forum is here.  Industry insiders who want to learn about other areas within their industry from perspectives not necesarily "the party line"  is hopefully the optimal use of this site. Their participation isn't necessary in the discussion if they choose to "just watch" as long as they learn from "watching" and apply what they've learned into their respective fields.

Dilatante status has it's upside by not being forced to be Politically Correct, truth often wins out.

As for expanding to other golfing regions of the globe I think that will take time. Yesterday, I was paired with a gentleman from England , just he and I. By the second hole I lifted my sweatshirt to reveal one of George's gca T-shirts (the collector item one with the misspelling). After spending four hours together it was obvious to me that this man was "one of us, one of us" and was keen on checking out the site when he returns home in a fortnight. He's a member at a private club and seemed passionate about his golf and it's fields. He proclaimed his golfing claim to fame was being called "a bandit" by Christie O'connor Sr. almost 20 years ago in a competition sponsored by Ford pairing England V. Nor Ire, wales and Scot.

[Ran Morissett]

Tim Weiman
You are the world's most boring man and are excluded from this DG forthwith.
Cheers

[ian]

Tim,

I'm sorta with Jeff on this. I have a large collection of historical documents and photos that I share when I have time. It still makes its way off the first page in less than a week. Martha Burk and other non-architecture topics hang on for a month. The threads that last are often not about architecture.

What you want is what I want, but its not what a majority of the people on the site want. I kinda agree with the idea of the site is very good as is. I may wish for more architecture, but I also may be very disappointed in the results of that wish coming true.

Things I would like to see more of.....
Tommy's bunker discussion threads
Any Turner post (I'm hooked)
The course routing contests by Jeremy and Tommy

Ideas......

A question and answer thread by Bahto, Brauer, Doak, and the other interesting golf industry people. One agrees, we post questions and they agree to watch the site daily and answer questions

Encourage profile threads on some of the people. I would like to see what Kelly Blake Moran has done because I have not been fortunate enough to meet him. I would like to know what Schaupeter, Chris Brands , Eckinrode and the other "quieter" posters are doing in the coming year.

Just some thoughts........bet you can tell the kids are in bed early tonight!

[Tim_Weiman]

Ian,

Thanks for your comments. A couple points in response:

I don't know what the majority view is, but clearly there have been some people very resistant to the idea of trying to dig deeper into golf architecture matters. One person was so hostile to the idea that he pretended to be Ran in an apparent attempt to shut down the conversation.

What puzzles me is that golf architecture only becomes more interesting when you get exposed to some of the issues I listed. At least, that is my view.

But, maybe the medium is wrong. Maybe an open Internet forum with people having very different levels of exposure to golf architecture issues just isn't the right format. It's hard to disagree with Jeff Brauer when we have people who almost take pride in not reading classics works in the field.

In my initial post, I tried to carefully acknowledge the positive things the site has achieved. But, obviously, there is fear that something would be lost if we made efforts to broaden participation and to attract more industry/international contributors. It is beyond me how people interested in golf architecture would find that "boring".

Thanks again.

[Mike_Young]

Tim,
I think most in the industry are extremely careful of such sites and have much to lose and nothing to gain by commenting.
While I find it enjoyable and at times educational, it has too much down side to attract comments from the industry.
Just a few years ago, you would see all types of PR by architecture firms saying what and where they were working.  Today, you lay low so that no one knows where you are working.  Architects adhere to the wishes of their client and work in his confidence.  Nothing to gain discussing work on the web.  Just my opinion.

[Tim_Weiman]

Mike,

Your points are well taken. Architects may get all they need from lurking - consumer feedback. So, of course, attracting greater participation from them is never going to be easy.

Honestly, I've been pushing this issue mostly to benefit lay people for whom golf architecture is a hobby. We could benefit enormously, but you have to have the appetite. Apparently quite a few people really don't.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Tim,
I just don't think many in the industry have much to gain by participating here. Take supts. for instance. I've been corrected on things like mowing square tees vs. oblong shaped by someone who I'll bet has never mowed a tee in his life. I've mowed more then I care to think about, but my experience meant little when compared to someone who posts often here who had a "little knowledge". I recently posted an article on green speed management that would have enlightened many who think it's simple to get greens to roll a certain speed. Two folks responded, you and another supt. from Mich. Yet, if a frequent poster writes about green speed, he's sure to get 20 responses from "experts" willing to debate the reasons for differing speeds. That may be a poor example,  but if your a design associate who is trying to give his clients what they want, why would you come here and debate that if it goes against the obvious grain that we see here. I enjoy this site and find it very informative and interesting much of the time. But, it can also be very cliquish and has an obvious bias towards certain architects and certain styles of golf courses. If your not one of those architects and/or build courses that you know are not well received here, why would you participate?

[Norbert P]

HAPPY HALLOWEEN !!!

http://www.hothouse.force9.co.uk/elvira.jpg

[Tim_Weiman]

Don,

I thought the Crystal Downs article was excellent. It demonstrated the professionalism of your industry colleague. It pertained to a subject of interest to golfers - green speeds. Lastly, it pertained to a classic course where concerns have been raised recently about green contours exceeding what works with modern agronomy.

But, I guess people find all that stuff “boring”. This is a golf architecture discussion group, after all!

I’m not sure how to address the “favored architects” thing other than to encourage people to write more on what they like about architects who aren’t favored here.

Why would those not favored participate? Maybe they shouldn’t. But, I can’t figure out why the lay people here aren’t interested in how to encourage them to do so.

[noonan]

This site could use some maintenance forums and some miscellanous forums to grow the site.

Ran could charge for advertising.....here is a bowling site that is thw equivalent for golf maintenance and management.

http://www.bowltech.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi

JK

[Norbert P]

This site could use some maintenance forums and some miscellanous forums to grow the site.

Here's a site that happily says "NO!" to a free forum on maintenance...  

http://forums5.gcsaa.org/webboard/wbpx.dll/~GCSAAForums

  What's the use of the exchange of ideas when only a select group can use it?

Noonan, I think your idea is a good one.  At least, perhaps a "Technical" Icon could be developed for topics specific to the profession.

[Forrest Richardson]

Making Golf Club Atlas more interesting would be like spending time trying to make gin more interesting. It's a far better use of one's time in my view to simply enjoy the delights of what is already here to enjoy.

Tim...wouldn't this be akin to remodeling a classic?

[Chris Kane]

Forrest,
From what I can remember of GCA's glory days (1999-2000), what's needed is restoration of a classic!

[Tim_Weiman]

Forrest:

Like most lay people, my "inside" knowledge of golf course projects is limited - probably to less than ten venues. Honestly, some of this "inside knowledge" couldn't be disclosed here. But, it does shed light on both the creative process of designing/building a golf course and all the various aspects of a project. I find that stuff makes things far more interesting - not even a close comparison to simply going out and playing a course.

That's why I push this issue, even though I recognize the problems attracting more industry input to this site.

[Forrest Richardson]

Tim,

I like your ideas. I suspect you have more insight and ability than either you disclose or realize. Let it out!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()