WEBVTT - Golf Architecture Mailbag: Manufacturing, Mitigating Technology, & More

0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:02.800
<v Speaker 1>I miss a green, for example, I'm already upset. When

0:00:02.800 --> 0:00:04.920
<v Speaker 1>I find my ball in the bunker, I'm really upset.

0:00:05.000 --> 0:00:07.200
<v Speaker 1>And when I find my ball in a fried egg.

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:11.080
<v Speaker 2>Friday Egg, the dreaded Frida Egg, Friday, fridag Egg, fridagg

0:00:11.160 --> 0:00:13.239
<v Speaker 2>bride Egg Lie, I'm about ready to run off of

0:00:13.280 --> 0:00:13.640
<v Speaker 2>the hump.

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:41.960
<v Speaker 1>Welcome back to another edition of the Friday Egg Golf Podcast.

0:00:42.440 --> 0:00:46.000
<v Speaker 1>I am your host, Andy Johnson. Today I'm joined by

0:00:46.600 --> 0:00:50.159
<v Speaker 1>a friend of the program, a former big part of

0:00:50.200 --> 0:00:53.360
<v Speaker 1>the program, former co host of this podcast, Garrett Morrison.

0:00:53.760 --> 0:00:56.680
<v Speaker 2>Hello, Garrett, Hello, how's it going Andy.

0:00:56.920 --> 0:00:59.240
<v Speaker 1>It's going great. It's going great. We're going to talk

0:00:59.400 --> 0:01:04.240
<v Speaker 1>golf arct texture today. Always exciting, always fun to open

0:01:04.319 --> 0:01:08.039
<v Speaker 1>up the mail bag and and kick around some big

0:01:08.080 --> 0:01:12.360
<v Speaker 1>topics in golf. So we each picked four questions to

0:01:12.880 --> 0:01:15.840
<v Speaker 1>bat around, so we should have a a pretty full

0:01:16.120 --> 0:01:18.720
<v Speaker 1>I feel like we always have, like a big aspiration.

0:01:18.760 --> 0:01:20.720
<v Speaker 1>We're gonna get through a lot. I figured if we

0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:23.600
<v Speaker 1>just picked four each that it would probably fill up,

0:01:23.920 --> 0:01:25.320
<v Speaker 1>fill up the pod.

0:01:25.560 --> 0:01:28.200
<v Speaker 2>Aim small, miss small exactly exactly.

0:01:29.480 --> 0:01:32.920
<v Speaker 1>And before we get to the mail bag pod big

0:01:33.280 --> 0:01:36.920
<v Speaker 1>big news in the Friday Pro Shop, it's black Friday

0:01:37.000 --> 0:01:40.080
<v Speaker 1>It's that time of the year. It's time to save,

0:01:40.160 --> 0:01:44.480
<v Speaker 1>it's time to shop. That's the way this works, you know,

0:01:44.840 --> 0:01:48.040
<v Speaker 1>load up on your holiday gear. The Friday pro Shop

0:01:48.160 --> 0:01:51.680
<v Speaker 1>has a Black Friday Sale. The code is b F Sale,

0:01:52.160 --> 0:01:56.800
<v Speaker 1>which gets you twenty percent off everything. As as a reminder,

0:01:57.000 --> 0:02:00.600
<v Speaker 1>Friday Golf Club members, you guys get a little bit

0:02:00.600 --> 0:02:05.800
<v Speaker 1>more so if you use your normal code. It's very

0:02:05.840 --> 0:02:09.280
<v Speaker 1>secretive for those that aren't members, but you know, if

0:02:09.320 --> 0:02:11.480
<v Speaker 1>you use your normal fried Egg member code, you get

0:02:11.520 --> 0:02:14.160
<v Speaker 1>twenty five percent off this week. The only things that

0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:18.960
<v Speaker 1>aren't included in the sale at Proshop dot thefridagg dot

0:02:19.000 --> 0:02:23.040
<v Speaker 1>com are our book, our new coffee table book that

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:27.320
<v Speaker 1>is going to ship pretty soon, and golf bags. So

0:02:27.320 --> 0:02:29.960
<v Speaker 1>those are the only two things that are excluded. Do

0:02:30.000 --> 0:02:33.840
<v Speaker 1>you have a favorite pick, Garrett from the pro Shop.

0:02:35.120 --> 0:02:38.600
<v Speaker 2>I mean, there are so many, and plus I might

0:02:38.680 --> 0:02:40.840
<v Speaker 2>not be totally up to date on what we actually

0:02:40.880 --> 0:02:45.000
<v Speaker 2>have in the Pro Shop in all honesty, because it

0:02:45.160 --> 0:02:49.160
<v Speaker 2>changes pretty quickly. Items sell out pretty quickly, and we

0:02:49.280 --> 0:02:53.080
<v Speaker 2>have a great crew led by Meg Atkins and Abby

0:02:53.120 --> 0:02:57.640
<v Speaker 2>Libenthal that keep things really fresh in there. But I

0:02:58.080 --> 0:03:04.880
<v Speaker 2>recently in a newsletter recommend getting a humble koozie. A

0:03:05.000 --> 0:03:09.800
<v Speaker 2>not interested in fighting kuzzi, which I think could be

0:03:09.919 --> 0:03:12.519
<v Speaker 2>very useful for some people because if you're using a kuzi,

0:03:12.560 --> 0:03:15.120
<v Speaker 2>you're probably drinking a beer. And if you're drinking a beer,

0:03:15.160 --> 0:03:17.280
<v Speaker 2>you might be in an environment where people might want

0:03:17.320 --> 0:03:20.040
<v Speaker 2>to fight, you know, because they're getting a little lubricated,

0:03:20.600 --> 0:03:22.880
<v Speaker 2>and you're just telling people with this kouzzy. I'm not

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:25.480
<v Speaker 2>interested in participating in that, and I think it could

0:03:25.840 --> 0:03:27.880
<v Speaker 2>could help people evade certain situations.

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:30.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I could save you, could really get you out

0:03:30.160 --> 0:03:34.000
<v Speaker 1>of a jam. I like that. I got a couple

0:03:34.000 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>of recks. I love the bet dratty they got that.

0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:38.760
<v Speaker 1>We got a bunch of andy hoodies check that out,

0:03:40.320 --> 0:03:42.800
<v Speaker 1>and a bunch of other dratty stuff. But then I'm

0:03:42.840 --> 0:03:46.160
<v Speaker 1>a huge fan of this Friday Golf American needle hat.

0:03:46.520 --> 0:03:49.200
<v Speaker 1>It's just got Friday Golf in block text on it.

0:03:49.560 --> 0:03:52.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm just a big fan of it. So that that's

0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:58.640
<v Speaker 1>my wreck, and really earnest reck. It's not on sale,

0:03:58.680 --> 0:04:02.120
<v Speaker 1>you can't save money. I think the book's gonna be awesome.

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:07.040
<v Speaker 1>I'd recommend the book. Check out the book. Garrett put

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:11.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of time and energy into that book and

0:04:11.680 --> 0:04:13.840
<v Speaker 1>it is. Uh. I think it's gonna be a beautiful

0:04:14.640 --> 0:04:18.120
<v Speaker 1>book to have and to read through. The pictures are

0:04:18.680 --> 0:04:22.880
<v Speaker 1>are spectacular, the writing's great, and I think it I

0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:26.440
<v Speaker 1>think it looks really good. So I would I would

0:04:26.440 --> 0:04:27.240
<v Speaker 1>recommend the book.

0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:31.080
<v Speaker 2>The book's so cool. I mean, yeah, I was. I

0:04:31.160 --> 0:04:33.719
<v Speaker 2>was charged with editing a lot of the words that

0:04:33.760 --> 0:04:36.400
<v Speaker 2>are in the book. But the design of it is

0:04:36.440 --> 0:04:39.080
<v Speaker 2>so cool. And the photography that we have in there,

0:04:39.080 --> 0:04:44.120
<v Speaker 2>mostly taken by Andy obviously you Andy, Cameron Hurdis and

0:04:44.120 --> 0:04:47.120
<v Speaker 2>Matt Ruschius, is beautiful and I think the way it's

0:04:47.120 --> 0:04:49.599
<v Speaker 2>displayed in the book is going to be really fun.

0:04:49.800 --> 0:04:52.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Did you do you have any photos that's snuck in?

0:04:53.520 --> 0:04:56.240
<v Speaker 2>I think I must have. You know, I photographed like

0:04:56.240 --> 0:04:59.480
<v Speaker 2>like Victoria Golf Club in Australia is in there, and

0:04:59.560 --> 0:05:03.760
<v Speaker 2>I was the one who photographed that one, and so people,

0:05:03.920 --> 0:05:06.680
<v Speaker 2>well people might be people might notice a decline in

0:05:06.720 --> 0:05:10.640
<v Speaker 2>the quality. I would assume, like it's definitely not my specialty,

0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:15.599
<v Speaker 2>but you know, pretty much everything looks good in golden

0:05:15.640 --> 0:05:17.400
<v Speaker 2>hour light. So as long as you get good light

0:05:18.000 --> 0:05:20.880
<v Speaker 2>that that sort of compensates for a lot of sins.

0:05:21.200 --> 0:05:24.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so check all that out. Pro shop dot Thefrida

0:05:24.640 --> 0:05:29.320
<v Speaker 1>egg dot Com. It's BF Friday, and while we're at it,

0:05:30.240 --> 0:05:35.120
<v Speaker 1>I know it's not summer anymore. But Maui Nui, our

0:05:35.120 --> 0:05:39.560
<v Speaker 1>friends at Maui Nui have an always summer sausage and

0:05:39.560 --> 0:05:43.400
<v Speaker 1>it's the cleanest, most nutrient dense lunch meat on the planet.

0:05:43.800 --> 0:05:48.160
<v Speaker 1>And it's crafted from one wild harvested access deer from

0:05:48.200 --> 0:05:54.360
<v Speaker 1>Maui uh seasoned with Hawaiian red sea salt and pink peppercorn.

0:05:55.160 --> 0:05:59.800
<v Speaker 1>So this tastes great, it fuels performance, does good for

0:05:59.839 --> 0:06:04.280
<v Speaker 1>the planet. And listen, it's not you know, it's not

0:06:04.360 --> 0:06:08.360
<v Speaker 1>always summer, but you can always eat summer sausage. It's

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:12.479
<v Speaker 1>not a deli beat. It's a completely new way to

0:06:12.600 --> 0:06:14.719
<v Speaker 1>have a sandwich. I had one of these recently. It

0:06:14.760 --> 0:06:18.320
<v Speaker 1>was delicious. I recommend it honestly, like I didn't know

0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:21.159
<v Speaker 1>what I was I was getting into, and it was

0:06:21.200 --> 0:06:25.320
<v Speaker 1>a delightful sandwich beat, a lot healthier than your typical

0:06:25.520 --> 0:06:29.719
<v Speaker 1>sandwich meats, you know those those deli meats, and like

0:06:30.160 --> 0:06:36.800
<v Speaker 1>high in protein and it's super clean nutrition, unlike your

0:06:36.839 --> 0:06:40.120
<v Speaker 1>typical deli beat. So if you're interested in in uh,

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:44.520
<v Speaker 1>Mali Nui's always summer sausage. You can go to Maui

0:06:44.640 --> 0:06:48.840
<v Speaker 1>Nui Venison. That's m a u I n Ui Venison

0:06:49.040 --> 0:06:52.159
<v Speaker 1>v E n I s O n dot com slash egg.

0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:55.800
<v Speaker 1>And when you're asked about how you heard about Maui Nui,

0:06:56.080 --> 0:06:59.360
<v Speaker 1>make sure to mention this podcast because it helps support

0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:03.440
<v Speaker 1>the show. So go get your always summer sausage even

0:07:03.480 --> 0:07:09.160
<v Speaker 1>though it's the winner. I'll revolutionize your lunchtime sandwiches at

0:07:09.200 --> 0:07:12.600
<v Speaker 1>Maui Nui Venison dot com slash egg. All right, big

0:07:12.600 --> 0:07:15.280
<v Speaker 1>thanks to Maui Nui for the support this year. Garrett.

0:07:15.600 --> 0:07:21.080
<v Speaker 1>Let's get into the golf architecture discussion. Since you're the

0:07:21.120 --> 0:07:25.080
<v Speaker 1>guest here, let's give you the first question. I get

0:07:25.760 --> 0:07:26.760
<v Speaker 1>my influencer, Mike.

0:07:27.800 --> 0:07:30.960
<v Speaker 2>Oh my goodness. Okay, where do I start? Well, there

0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 2>were a lot of great questions. We each chose four,

0:07:34.320 --> 0:07:37.600
<v Speaker 2>so we chose a total of eight, and so there

0:07:37.600 --> 0:07:39.320
<v Speaker 2>are many we're not going to get to, but that

0:07:39.560 --> 0:07:42.600
<v Speaker 2>always happens anyway, so we just did it by design

0:07:42.720 --> 0:07:45.239
<v Speaker 2>this time. The first one I'd like to talk about

0:07:45.320 --> 0:07:49.480
<v Speaker 2>is from Brian Decker on Frida Egg Golf Club. So

0:07:49.560 --> 0:07:52.000
<v Speaker 2>we put out a call for questions within our new

0:07:52.600 --> 0:07:55.640
<v Speaker 2>community forum and Frida Egg Golf Club, which has been

0:07:56.040 --> 0:07:58.400
<v Speaker 2>a lot of fun so far. Whatever you may think

0:07:58.440 --> 0:08:00.440
<v Speaker 2>of message boards on the internet, this one one is

0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:02.600
<v Speaker 2>is I feel like so far it's one of the

0:08:02.600 --> 0:08:06.360
<v Speaker 2>good ones. But in any case, Brian asks on FUGC,

0:08:07.560 --> 0:08:12.600
<v Speaker 2>the privately owned ultra premium national membership club model seems

0:08:12.640 --> 0:08:16.080
<v Speaker 2>to be the most common source of quality architecture over

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:19.760
<v Speaker 2>the past few years, beyond the obvious examples like the park.

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:23.720
<v Speaker 2>What are some other forms of developer slash ownership models

0:08:24.040 --> 0:08:27.440
<v Speaker 2>that you've seen that have produced good golf and might

0:08:27.480 --> 0:08:29.080
<v Speaker 2>be scalable elsewhere.

0:08:31.800 --> 0:08:34.079
<v Speaker 1>I don't think there's been a lot of diversity in

0:08:34.120 --> 0:08:38.080
<v Speaker 1>the in the type of types of models. I think

0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:42.040
<v Speaker 1>one that jumps to mind is the public private partnership

0:08:42.240 --> 0:08:44.120
<v Speaker 1>for for public golf.

0:08:44.480 --> 0:08:44.880
<v Speaker 2>This is the.

0:08:44.880 --> 0:08:52.120
<v Speaker 1>Answer where you know a a private group ideally that

0:08:52.240 --> 0:08:56.400
<v Speaker 1>has the you know, aligned intentions with a with a

0:08:56.600 --> 0:09:00.480
<v Speaker 1>municipality or a county. You know one the would jump

0:09:00.480 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 1>to mind as Rustic Canyon. This is an example of this,

0:09:05.120 --> 0:09:08.160
<v Speaker 1>and don't you know, I don't know the exact intricacies

0:09:08.160 --> 0:09:11.240
<v Speaker 1>of it, but it's a lease and you know, one

0:09:11.240 --> 0:09:14.760
<v Speaker 1>of the big parts of the lease is a is

0:09:14.840 --> 0:09:18.720
<v Speaker 1>keeping the golf affordable. And what you get there is

0:09:18.840 --> 0:09:23.480
<v Speaker 1>you get a ownership group of the lease that is

0:09:23.520 --> 0:09:26.280
<v Speaker 1>aligned and you know, maybe it's not an ownership group,

0:09:26.320 --> 0:09:31.640
<v Speaker 1>it's a leaseee that's aligned with the municipality or county

0:09:32.760 --> 0:09:36.360
<v Speaker 1>where it is, Hey, we want to provide an asset

0:09:36.440 --> 0:09:39.560
<v Speaker 1>for the community, and we're going to give you the

0:09:39.640 --> 0:09:44.280
<v Speaker 1>key here is that give them a long lease that's

0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:47.720
<v Speaker 1>very manageable. A lot of times you see these and

0:09:47.760 --> 0:09:51.319
<v Speaker 1>it's a dollar, you know, a year, you know, some structure,

0:09:51.360 --> 0:09:55.480
<v Speaker 1>different ways there could be profit sharing, but anyways, it

0:09:55.640 --> 0:09:59.400
<v Speaker 1>sets up a situation because the problem with so many

0:09:59.480 --> 0:10:03.720
<v Speaker 1>of these you know, municipalities or public golf courses when

0:10:03.720 --> 0:10:08.240
<v Speaker 1>they go to a you know, a lease model is

0:10:08.280 --> 0:10:12.880
<v Speaker 1>if you give somebody a five year lease, there's no

0:10:13.120 --> 0:10:18.439
<v Speaker 1>time to put capital improvements, significant capital improvements in place

0:10:18.960 --> 0:10:23.160
<v Speaker 1>and recoup the money. You need to have a long

0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:28.480
<v Speaker 1>term lease. And this is where fifty seventy one hundred

0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:32.400
<v Speaker 1>years is really beneficial because then all of a sudden,

0:10:32.440 --> 0:10:35.160
<v Speaker 1>if you want to do a major project, let's just say,

0:10:35.880 --> 0:10:38.440
<v Speaker 1>you need to do the irrigation it is it is

0:10:38.559 --> 0:10:41.920
<v Speaker 1>worn out, and you also want to you know, redo

0:10:41.960 --> 0:10:45.400
<v Speaker 1>the bunkers, and some greens and make some big changes

0:10:45.440 --> 0:10:48.439
<v Speaker 1>with the golf course. Okay, if I put eight to

0:10:48.480 --> 0:10:52.079
<v Speaker 1>ten million dollars into the golf course, I now have

0:10:52.160 --> 0:10:59.120
<v Speaker 1>the opportunity to recapture that that revenue over ten fifteen years.

0:10:59.520 --> 0:11:02.280
<v Speaker 1>What the issue is when these at leases are short

0:11:02.640 --> 0:11:04.480
<v Speaker 1>is you have no incentive to do that because you're

0:11:04.480 --> 0:11:08.680
<v Speaker 1>just going to lose money and the person leasing the

0:11:08.720 --> 0:11:12.400
<v Speaker 1>property could change who they listen to, you know. So

0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:15.800
<v Speaker 1>I think that's that's probably the model that's worked the best.

0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:20.680
<v Speaker 1>I think there's room for other models, we just haven't

0:11:20.720 --> 0:11:23.439
<v Speaker 1>really seen it yet. I think the model I'm kind

0:11:23.440 --> 0:11:30.680
<v Speaker 1>of most interested in is the idea of extremely low

0:11:30.720 --> 0:11:31.760
<v Speaker 1>amenity golf.

0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:37.200
<v Speaker 2>That's new. Yeah, mom and pop golf. I'd love to

0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:40.240
<v Speaker 2>see how mom and pop golf might work in the

0:11:40.240 --> 0:11:44.280
<v Speaker 2>current environment. Mike Young at the Fields outside of Atlanta

0:11:44.840 --> 0:11:48.000
<v Speaker 2>is a big advocate of people trying this. It's not

0:11:48.200 --> 0:11:52.400
<v Speaker 2>a big profit business, but you can make a profit

0:11:52.960 --> 0:11:56.920
<v Speaker 2>if you save costs and if you operate at a

0:11:57.480 --> 0:12:01.559
<v Speaker 2>very you know, efficient according to a very efficient philosophy,

0:12:02.200 --> 0:12:08.560
<v Speaker 2>and you might be presenting course conditions that aren't luxurious,

0:12:09.160 --> 0:12:12.800
<v Speaker 2>but they're serving a certain segment of the market. You're

0:12:12.840 --> 0:12:17.200
<v Speaker 2>providing affordable golf for people, and you're not relying on

0:12:17.280 --> 0:12:20.720
<v Speaker 2>the backing of a municipality to do it. So I

0:12:20.720 --> 0:12:23.680
<v Speaker 2>would like to see more people try mom and pop

0:12:23.720 --> 0:12:25.080
<v Speaker 2>golf because there are a lot of people out there

0:12:25.080 --> 0:12:27.599
<v Speaker 2>who love golf who really would like to own a

0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:29.880
<v Speaker 2>golf course and run a golf course, but are scared

0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:32.679
<v Speaker 2>to do it because you know, they think that they

0:12:32.760 --> 0:12:35.720
<v Speaker 2>might lose all their money, and that's a legitimate worry.

0:12:36.160 --> 0:12:39.120
<v Speaker 2>But you just have to be smart and efficient, and

0:12:39.200 --> 0:12:42.640
<v Speaker 2>I think you can do it. There have been, there

0:12:42.640 --> 0:12:44.920
<v Speaker 2>are a number of examples out there of people who

0:12:44.960 --> 0:12:48.680
<v Speaker 2>are doing it, and you know, they're relatively rare, and

0:12:48.720 --> 0:12:50.760
<v Speaker 2>not all of them are the greatest courses in the world.

0:12:51.320 --> 0:12:54.880
<v Speaker 2>But I wish people weren't as scared as they seem

0:12:54.960 --> 0:12:56.480
<v Speaker 2>to be to pursue this.

0:12:57.120 --> 0:12:59.480
<v Speaker 1>Well. I think some of it is such a follow

0:12:59.559 --> 0:13:05.760
<v Speaker 1>the leader type situation, and I think, like I think

0:13:05.800 --> 0:13:08.920
<v Speaker 1>also where people get wrapped up is they feel like

0:13:09.679 --> 0:13:12.200
<v Speaker 1>if they own a golf course, they have to have

0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:18.680
<v Speaker 1>the most luxurious, most talked about golf course, and often

0:13:19.160 --> 0:13:27.280
<v Speaker 1>what gets propped up in golf is exclusivity, opulence and

0:13:28.240 --> 0:13:32.960
<v Speaker 1>over the top features not necessarily even the golf course.

0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:35.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm not talking about the golf course features. I'm talking

0:13:35.400 --> 0:13:44.040
<v Speaker 1>about the comfort stations, the clubhouses, the amenities, and sometimes

0:13:44.280 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 1>what gets lost. Is one of the things I talked

0:13:49.520 --> 0:13:52.520
<v Speaker 1>about this with KVV a little bit, is there's a

0:13:52.600 --> 0:13:58.840
<v Speaker 1>startling lack of development across the different markets in golf.

0:14:00.760 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 1>All the development right now is at the high end. Yeah,

0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:08.760
<v Speaker 1>and I'm curious to see if people could make different

0:14:08.800 --> 0:14:16.000
<v Speaker 1>models work. And I understand the construction industry and materials

0:14:16.080 --> 0:14:19.520
<v Speaker 1>industry has made some of that difficult.

0:14:20.360 --> 0:14:24.440
<v Speaker 2>There's also a startling lack of development in high population places,

0:14:24.920 --> 0:14:28.440
<v Speaker 2>but and that's another issue having to do with land

0:14:28.480 --> 0:14:32.720
<v Speaker 2>costs and a number of understandable factors. So a couple

0:14:32.720 --> 0:14:38.280
<v Speaker 2>of thoughts on models. Quick thoughts. One, you mentioned the

0:14:38.400 --> 0:14:42.400
<v Speaker 2>lease agreements that many municipalities have for their golf courses.

0:14:42.760 --> 0:14:47.280
<v Speaker 2>Those are pretty common. But the lease ees that I'm

0:14:47.320 --> 0:14:49.440
<v Speaker 2>most interested in, or that I tend to be the

0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:53.440
<v Speaker 2>most interested in, are not the big companies that do

0:14:53.920 --> 0:14:57.240
<v Speaker 2>that have a lot of these management contracts. There are

0:14:57.360 --> 0:15:00.760
<v Speaker 2>efficiencies within those companies, and some of thempanies are better

0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:04.120
<v Speaker 2>than others, but that's kind of the usual thing. Is

0:15:04.120 --> 0:15:06.760
<v Speaker 2>that a municipality is going to give the lease to

0:15:07.080 --> 0:15:09.760
<v Speaker 2>a company that has a lot of other accounts and

0:15:09.800 --> 0:15:13.640
<v Speaker 2>a track record, and that can work out fine, just

0:15:13.720 --> 0:15:16.840
<v Speaker 2>depending on the specific people who are there. Sometimes it's

0:15:16.880 --> 0:15:19.520
<v Speaker 2>not so great. Sometimes there's not a lot of heart

0:15:19.560 --> 0:15:24.600
<v Speaker 2>and soul put into those projects. But I tend to

0:15:24.720 --> 0:15:29.160
<v Speaker 2>like the leases that are taken by individuals or very

0:15:29.200 --> 0:15:32.560
<v Speaker 2>small businesses that want to make something of their golf

0:15:32.600 --> 0:15:36.240
<v Speaker 2>courses invest in their golf courses. Those ones can have

0:15:36.800 --> 0:15:42.960
<v Speaker 2>really really good results. Public private partnership you mentioned this,

0:15:43.200 --> 0:15:46.320
<v Speaker 2>There are a lot of different versions of this. There

0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:51.000
<v Speaker 2>are groups in cities like Nashville that are fundraising and

0:15:51.520 --> 0:15:57.120
<v Speaker 2>pulling off pretty ambitious renovation projects at municipal courses because

0:15:57.160 --> 0:16:01.440
<v Speaker 2>they've gathered together a bunch of golf enthusiasts who have

0:16:01.560 --> 0:16:05.840
<v Speaker 2>some money and they've decided to support their municipal courses.

0:16:06.480 --> 0:16:11.240
<v Speaker 2>And that is definitely something that we saw at the

0:16:11.280 --> 0:16:16.360
<v Speaker 2>park and something that we're occasionally seeing popping up in

0:16:16.480 --> 0:16:19.760
<v Speaker 2>various cities across the country, but I wish it were

0:16:20.280 --> 0:16:22.840
<v Speaker 2>a little more common. And then the final one I

0:16:22.880 --> 0:16:26.800
<v Speaker 2>want to mention is the possibility of a community oriented,

0:16:27.800 --> 0:16:33.080
<v Speaker 2>very low cost private club I wish there were more

0:16:33.080 --> 0:16:37.640
<v Speaker 2>of those. I think those are that's a feasible model,

0:16:37.960 --> 0:16:40.120
<v Speaker 2>probably not as hard to work out as the mom

0:16:40.160 --> 0:16:44.080
<v Speaker 2>and pop course. But if we had a greater supply

0:16:44.840 --> 0:16:49.240
<v Speaker 2>of affordable private clubs, a lot of the pressures on

0:16:50.160 --> 0:16:54.920
<v Speaker 2>public golf and a lot of the movement toward really

0:16:55.000 --> 0:16:59.040
<v Speaker 2>high end private golf wouldn't be as worrisome.

0:17:00.280 --> 0:17:02.480
<v Speaker 1>I think you hit the nail on the head a

0:17:02.480 --> 0:17:05.560
<v Speaker 1>little bit with that one. One of the reasons we

0:17:05.600 --> 0:17:10.080
<v Speaker 1>don't have that as much anymore is that the demand

0:17:10.200 --> 0:17:14.600
<v Speaker 1>for private golf is so high in metropolitan areas that

0:17:15.160 --> 0:17:20.400
<v Speaker 1>what were the affordable options have gotten more expensive since COVID.

0:17:20.720 --> 0:17:25.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, everybody's everybody has really high initiation fees right now.

0:17:25.600 --> 0:17:30.280
<v Speaker 1>A fascinating study would be, it would require somebody with

0:17:30.520 --> 0:17:35.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, a little bit of intel in relationships in

0:17:35.119 --> 0:17:41.680
<v Speaker 1>a city, would be to compare the costs of membership

0:17:42.840 --> 0:17:48.359
<v Speaker 1>between dues and initiation of clubs in a major city

0:17:48.520 --> 0:17:51.440
<v Speaker 1>like New York or Chicago or LA. If you could

0:17:51.480 --> 0:17:56.080
<v Speaker 1>get a full list of a good list of clubs,

0:17:56.680 --> 0:18:01.040
<v Speaker 1>compare pre COVID post code and what they are, I

0:18:01.040 --> 0:18:06.040
<v Speaker 1>think it would be shocking how how much the price

0:18:06.080 --> 0:18:11.280
<v Speaker 1>has gone up for clubs that are that used to

0:18:11.359 --> 0:18:19.080
<v Speaker 1>be considered very affordable. Yeah, and it's really just a

0:18:19.160 --> 0:18:19.960
<v Speaker 1>demand thing, I.

0:18:19.960 --> 0:18:22.040
<v Speaker 2>Mean huge in the twenty twenties. This has been a

0:18:22.080 --> 0:18:23.200
<v Speaker 2>recent change.

0:18:24.320 --> 0:18:30.040
<v Speaker 1>This is just economics at work. Yeah, it's not anybody's fault.

0:18:30.080 --> 0:18:32.520
<v Speaker 1>And what they've done is they've improved their club with

0:18:32.600 --> 0:18:37.000
<v Speaker 1>the Capitol and they're more amenities than ever. But I

0:18:37.040 --> 0:18:42.399
<v Speaker 1>think one of the things that's happened in golf is

0:18:42.440 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 1>it's really I wrote about a course that I was

0:18:46.359 --> 0:18:50.120
<v Speaker 1>a member of in I was probably a member from

0:18:50.720 --> 0:18:55.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't know twenty thirteen or twenty fourteen through twenty sixteen,

0:18:55.800 --> 0:19:01.640
<v Speaker 1>twenty seventeen, probably twenty seventeen Calumet Country Club, which closed

0:19:03.359 --> 0:19:07.480
<v Speaker 1>this this past week. And you know, there's I found

0:19:07.480 --> 0:19:09.520
<v Speaker 1>out after I wrote the piece that there was a

0:19:09.560 --> 0:19:13.280
<v Speaker 1>lot there's a lot more going on potentially with it.

0:19:13.400 --> 0:19:18.280
<v Speaker 1>You know that maybe a story to come. But but

0:19:18.400 --> 0:19:22.800
<v Speaker 1>one of the things I think about is I was

0:19:22.840 --> 0:19:29.000
<v Speaker 1>in my late twenties and a great woman, Lorraine Skodro,

0:19:29.600 --> 0:19:34.320
<v Speaker 1>who runs tournaments for the CDGA, the Chicago District Golf Association,

0:19:34.440 --> 0:19:36.480
<v Speaker 1>that I played in a lot of those. She runs

0:19:36.760 --> 0:19:39.439
<v Speaker 1>ran ternaments for him. And she said, Andy, you know,

0:19:39.480 --> 0:19:42.080
<v Speaker 1>you're costing your money. You live in the city, You're

0:19:42.080 --> 0:19:45.199
<v Speaker 1>costing yourself money every year that you don't join Caliumet.

0:19:45.320 --> 0:19:46.720
<v Speaker 1>And I was like, what do you mean. She's like,

0:19:46.720 --> 0:19:49.240
<v Speaker 1>you play all this golf, Like why wouldn't you join there?

0:19:49.280 --> 0:19:52.040
<v Speaker 1>The deal's great. So I went down and I looked

0:19:52.040 --> 0:19:54.320
<v Speaker 1>at it, and at the time, you know, and this

0:19:54.480 --> 0:19:57.760
<v Speaker 1>was probably a harpinger for why they had financial problems

0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:00.240
<v Speaker 1>and that we were in financial crisis. It was one

0:20:00.320 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 1>hundred and fifty dollars a month for me to join.

0:20:03.400 --> 0:20:07.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and this was, I mean, okay, twenty thirteen, still

0:20:07.600 --> 0:20:11.879
<v Speaker 2>in the blast zone of the Great Recession, and still

0:20:12.000 --> 0:20:15.679
<v Speaker 2>at a low point for golf, right, and so this

0:20:15.960 --> 0:20:20.800
<v Speaker 2>was probably the best time in the past, I don't know,

0:20:21.119 --> 0:20:24.040
<v Speaker 2>one hundred years to try to join a private golf

0:20:24.040 --> 0:20:25.359
<v Speaker 2>club in terms of finances.

0:20:25.640 --> 0:20:29.320
<v Speaker 1>So I and they had a referral program which knocked it.

0:20:29.440 --> 0:20:31.520
<v Speaker 1>I knocked it down. I was paying one hundred bucks

0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:33.520
<v Speaker 1>a month and I had I think one hundred dollars

0:20:33.520 --> 0:20:37.280
<v Speaker 1>food minimum a month. And it was an amazing deal.

0:20:37.400 --> 0:20:42.560
<v Speaker 1>I I was. I played so much golf, I got

0:20:42.640 --> 0:20:45.240
<v Speaker 1>so many of my friends to join, and it was

0:20:45.280 --> 0:20:47.719
<v Speaker 1>a great place. And I don't think like I'm not

0:20:47.760 --> 0:20:50.520
<v Speaker 1>saying that's the model. I want to be clear. I

0:20:50.640 --> 0:20:54.439
<v Speaker 1>know that that's not a real model for golf. But

0:20:54.680 --> 0:20:59.280
<v Speaker 1>I think about today, where do you know, you talk

0:20:59.320 --> 0:21:01.240
<v Speaker 1>about what's going on in the world and the way

0:21:01.280 --> 0:21:05.000
<v Speaker 1>the costs have gone up, where does it we've seen

0:21:05.040 --> 0:21:08.920
<v Speaker 1>all this growth, Where does the twenty eight year old

0:21:08.960 --> 0:21:14.160
<v Speaker 1>young professional play golf, who is you know, working their

0:21:14.200 --> 0:21:19.320
<v Speaker 1>ass off to just house themselves at this point if

0:21:19.320 --> 0:21:20.480
<v Speaker 1>they live in a major city.

0:21:21.600 --> 0:21:24.840
<v Speaker 2>Where where does the regular forty year old dad play golf?

0:21:25.640 --> 0:21:27.920
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if there are even those places right now,

0:21:28.320 --> 0:21:31.800
<v Speaker 2>like middle class, middle aged people.

0:21:32.400 --> 0:21:34.879
<v Speaker 1>And it's a great it's a great situation. The game

0:21:34.960 --> 0:21:39.919
<v Speaker 1>has has grown so much in terms of participation, but

0:21:41.240 --> 0:21:45.160
<v Speaker 1>you've done some stuff with it with the NGNGF. It's

0:21:46.240 --> 0:21:48.760
<v Speaker 1>I think we're in such a similar position to the

0:21:48.840 --> 0:21:51.760
<v Speaker 1>nineties when they recommended, was it the nineties they recommended

0:21:51.800 --> 0:21:54.040
<v Speaker 1>a new golf course need to be built every day?

0:21:54.359 --> 0:21:54.600
<v Speaker 2>Was that?

0:21:55.320 --> 0:21:57.920
<v Speaker 1>I know that you have you have this in your

0:21:58.000 --> 0:22:00.000
<v Speaker 1>vault of oh right.

0:22:00.160 --> 0:22:02.720
<v Speaker 2>I bring it up from time to time with my

0:22:02.960 --> 0:22:05.320
<v Speaker 2>friends over there at the ENNGF. I think that they

0:22:06.560 --> 0:22:12.320
<v Speaker 2>learned a lesson from that prediction slash recommendation, and are

0:22:12.320 --> 0:22:15.840
<v Speaker 2>more cautious now in their kind of prognostications about where

0:22:15.880 --> 0:22:16.760
<v Speaker 2>the industry is going.

0:22:17.520 --> 0:22:23.359
<v Speaker 1>But golf has this huge supply issue at every level,

0:22:24.840 --> 0:22:30.280
<v Speaker 1>and there's no I don't foresee any way of fixing it.

0:22:30.359 --> 0:22:33.639
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, aside from increasing the supply, which has proven to

0:22:33.720 --> 0:22:37.920
<v Speaker 2>be I guess too expensive. Land costs are the big

0:22:37.960 --> 0:22:41.200
<v Speaker 2>factor there. Yeah. Where I would just like to see

0:22:41.560 --> 0:22:48.240
<v Speaker 2>some work done is on economy of construction and economy

0:22:48.400 --> 0:22:52.399
<v Speaker 2>of maintenance. I'm not sure that really that many people

0:22:52.520 --> 0:22:54.879
<v Speaker 2>are thinking about those things. People just sort of seem

0:22:54.920 --> 0:22:59.240
<v Speaker 2>to accept that right now. Golf courses cost a certain

0:22:59.240 --> 0:23:03.159
<v Speaker 2>amount to build, build, and maintain, but a lot of

0:23:03.160 --> 0:23:06.720
<v Speaker 2>what people think of as needs of construction and maintenance

0:23:07.119 --> 0:23:11.280
<v Speaker 2>are actually once And I would like to see a

0:23:11.400 --> 0:23:17.520
<v Speaker 2>perspective shift among golfers about what constitutes good conditioning. And

0:23:17.720 --> 0:23:21.240
<v Speaker 2>I would like to see a perspective shift among developers

0:23:21.760 --> 0:23:25.359
<v Speaker 2>about how much these projects actually cost, because I don't

0:23:25.359 --> 0:23:29.000
<v Speaker 2>think that they need to cost as much as they do.

0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:31.879
<v Speaker 2>So that's at least one area I'd like us to

0:23:31.920 --> 0:23:35.560
<v Speaker 2>work on. But I recognize it's a tough situation. Nobody

0:23:35.560 --> 0:23:38.359
<v Speaker 2>can afford to build an affordable golf course anymore, and

0:23:38.400 --> 0:23:41.960
<v Speaker 2>it's a real problem. But the current economic conditions that

0:23:42.000 --> 0:23:45.800
<v Speaker 2>we have right now won't last forever. Things will shift

0:23:45.880 --> 0:23:48.600
<v Speaker 2>and the golf industry will shift with it.

0:23:50.320 --> 0:23:56.000
<v Speaker 1>And if the economic conditions shift, it'll be interesting to

0:23:56.040 --> 0:23:59.560
<v Speaker 1>see if golfs demand issue shifts.

0:23:59.760 --> 0:24:03.359
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, let's hope that the shift isn't disastrous. But of course,

0:24:03.400 --> 0:24:07.399
<v Speaker 2>the trend in economic shifts over the past number of

0:24:07.480 --> 0:24:10.080
<v Speaker 2>years has been you know, they've been a little more

0:24:10.080 --> 0:24:11.760
<v Speaker 2>severe than you would want.

0:24:12.480 --> 0:24:16.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, all right, let's get to the next question.

0:24:16.240 --> 0:24:19.240
<v Speaker 2>We just finally Yeah, right, we're gonna even fall short.

0:24:19.320 --> 0:24:21.680
<v Speaker 2>We've gotta, we've gotta, we've got to knock these knock

0:24:21.720 --> 0:24:24.640
<v Speaker 2>these out here, all right.

0:24:25.600 --> 0:24:28.919
<v Speaker 1>This is a question about how we rate courses. In

0:24:28.960 --> 0:24:33.679
<v Speaker 1>case anybody doesn't know, we rate courses in Friday Golf Club.

0:24:34.240 --> 0:24:37.199
<v Speaker 1>If you join, you can get access to I think

0:24:37.240 --> 0:24:40.720
<v Speaker 1>we're probably at like one hundred and fifty reviews at

0:24:40.720 --> 0:24:44.200
<v Speaker 1>this point. With ratings. We do a zero, one, two

0:24:44.359 --> 0:24:49.840
<v Speaker 1>three egg system. It's very similar to a Michelin Star system.

0:24:50.119 --> 0:24:53.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I saw I saw on the app known as

0:24:53.520 --> 0:24:56.720
<v Speaker 2>X recently that this would be a great idea for

0:24:56.800 --> 0:24:59.600
<v Speaker 2>how to rate golf courses and somebody should do it.

0:25:00.200 --> 0:25:03.560
<v Speaker 2>And I think it was our friend and colleague, Brendan

0:25:03.600 --> 0:25:06.040
<v Speaker 2>Porath who put his hand up and said, actually we

0:25:06.119 --> 0:25:06.359
<v Speaker 2>do that.

0:25:06.800 --> 0:25:15.919
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. So a question from Mike, I'm I'm is it?

0:25:15.960 --> 0:25:17.960
<v Speaker 2>I'm okay, I apologies.

0:25:20.119 --> 0:25:24.120
<v Speaker 1>I was told by the whole family at an event. Okay.

0:25:24.280 --> 0:25:26.240
<v Speaker 2>I haven't met him in person. He's a he's a

0:25:26.280 --> 0:25:28.840
<v Speaker 2>big contributor to Friday Golf Club and a very it

0:25:28.840 --> 0:25:29.960
<v Speaker 2>seems like a very nice.

0:25:29.760 --> 0:25:32.960
<v Speaker 1>Guy, great player, great player, whole family great players of

0:25:33.040 --> 0:25:33.600
<v Speaker 1>their own right.

0:25:33.640 --> 0:25:36.960
<v Speaker 2>His brother is a coach, right is that his brother

0:25:37.560 --> 0:25:38.760
<v Speaker 2>at the University of Iowa.

0:25:39.040 --> 0:25:43.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Yeah, played played on a bunch of developmental tour

0:25:43.160 --> 0:25:46.560
<v Speaker 1>like the Latin America for a while. They all, they

0:25:46.600 --> 0:25:51.040
<v Speaker 1>all can get her around father, father and sons. How

0:25:51.040 --> 0:25:54.520
<v Speaker 1>do you, guys, egg? I guess you know that I

0:25:54.560 --> 0:25:55.399
<v Speaker 1>would say, rate.

0:25:55.560 --> 0:25:58.200
<v Speaker 2>How do you how do you? Yeah? Yeah?

0:25:58.320 --> 0:26:01.760
<v Speaker 1>Nine versus eighteen? And a follow on question from Ben

0:26:01.840 --> 0:26:05.600
<v Speaker 1>Dennison is how to evaluate nine hole courses that later

0:26:06.240 --> 0:26:09.119
<v Speaker 1>a different architect comes in to make up eighteen holes.

0:26:09.160 --> 0:26:13.760
<v Speaker 1>This is the happen stance place, Yeah, especially on the

0:26:13.800 --> 0:26:16.919
<v Speaker 1>East coast and in the in the Midwest because a

0:26:16.920 --> 0:26:21.080
<v Speaker 1>lot of farm towns have only needed nine holes and

0:26:21.119 --> 0:26:23.440
<v Speaker 1>the reality is they only ever needed nine holes.

0:26:23.520 --> 0:26:26.360
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean any place where golf was developed before

0:26:27.359 --> 0:26:31.760
<v Speaker 2>say the nineteen seventies, even this is a pretty common situation.

0:26:32.440 --> 0:26:35.800
<v Speaker 1>So it's how should we how should we think about

0:26:36.000 --> 0:26:39.440
<v Speaker 1>ranking and evaluating these courses when maybe these courses would

0:26:39.440 --> 0:26:42.840
<v Speaker 1>be better off staying nine holes? And what is your

0:26:42.840 --> 0:26:47.760
<v Speaker 1>favorite nine hole turned eighteen hole later course in the country.

0:26:48.320 --> 0:26:50.359
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so kind of three separate questions there, how.

0:26:50.240 --> 0:26:52.199
<v Speaker 1>Do you let's just start with how do we how

0:26:52.200 --> 0:26:53.480
<v Speaker 1>do we raise nine hole.

0:26:53.400 --> 0:26:56.639
<v Speaker 2>Versus eighteen Yeah, I mean we can I can you know,

0:26:56.720 --> 0:27:00.359
<v Speaker 2>knock out these questions pretty well. It's uh, it is

0:27:00.400 --> 0:27:03.400
<v Speaker 2>a tough issue when you rate a nine hole course

0:27:03.440 --> 0:27:05.919
<v Speaker 2>and you're trying to figure out, Okay, if this is

0:27:05.960 --> 0:27:08.560
<v Speaker 2>America's best nine hole course, does it have to be

0:27:09.400 --> 0:27:12.800
<v Speaker 2>three eggs? And we recently actually asked that question with

0:27:12.880 --> 0:27:17.200
<v Speaker 2>a with a course profile and rating that our colleague

0:27:17.200 --> 0:27:20.840
<v Speaker 2>Matt Rushis did on Culver Academies, the golf course at

0:27:20.840 --> 0:27:24.800
<v Speaker 2>Culver Academies that it's an excellent Langford and Moreau course

0:27:24.800 --> 0:27:29.239
<v Speaker 2>that has been beautifully restored, gradually restored, uh, you know,

0:27:29.440 --> 0:27:31.879
<v Speaker 2>owing in large parts of the efforts of the of

0:27:31.960 --> 0:27:38.200
<v Speaker 2>the superintendent there over Bobby Bobby Bobby Bobby, Bobby Weed

0:27:38.280 --> 0:27:40.760
<v Speaker 2>and recently Brian Schneider has made some suggestions there. So

0:27:40.960 --> 0:27:42.719
<v Speaker 2>credit to credit to everybody involved.

0:27:42.720 --> 0:27:47.280
<v Speaker 1>But Michael is the superintendent who's done an incredible job.

0:27:47.680 --> 0:27:53.399
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so the the you know, Matt gave uh Culver

0:27:53.600 --> 0:27:56.800
<v Speaker 2>one of the most aggressive ratings that I think we've

0:27:57.119 --> 0:27:59.960
<v Speaker 2>we've ever given. He gave Culver three eggs, and he

0:28:00.080 --> 0:28:02.760
<v Speaker 2>made an argument as to why it deserved it, and

0:28:02.840 --> 0:28:06.760
<v Speaker 2>I support that argument one hundred percent. I would say

0:28:07.160 --> 0:28:10.280
<v Speaker 2>I try to rate courses according to what they're trying

0:28:10.359 --> 0:28:13.960
<v Speaker 2>to do. If the course is trying to be a

0:28:14.000 --> 0:28:17.879
<v Speaker 2>great nine hole course, then I'll rate it according to

0:28:18.000 --> 0:28:21.200
<v Speaker 2>how well it is a great nine hole course. So yes,

0:28:21.280 --> 0:28:24.479
<v Speaker 2>I absolutely think that nine hole courses can get a

0:28:24.560 --> 0:28:27.680
<v Speaker 2>top rating. I also think that short courses can get

0:28:27.720 --> 0:28:32.280
<v Speaker 2>a top rating. And I actually gave three eggs to

0:28:32.760 --> 0:28:36.919
<v Speaker 2>the short course at sand Valley, the Sandbox, because I

0:28:36.960 --> 0:28:40.240
<v Speaker 2>think that that's the best par three course I've ever played.

0:28:40.280 --> 0:28:43.240
<v Speaker 2>I think it's an incredible work of architecture. The Green

0:28:43.280 --> 0:28:46.120
<v Speaker 2>shaping there is so good it kind of blows my

0:28:46.240 --> 0:28:50.320
<v Speaker 2>mind how good that golf course is. But a lot

0:28:50.320 --> 0:28:55.440
<v Speaker 2>of people would hesitate, I think to give a short

0:28:55.440 --> 0:28:58.200
<v Speaker 2>course a top rating because it doesn't contain par fours

0:28:58.200 --> 0:29:00.520
<v Speaker 2>and par fives, and maybe to a lot of people

0:29:00.560 --> 0:29:03.360
<v Speaker 2>it's not a completely satisfying version of.

0:29:03.280 --> 0:29:04.600
<v Speaker 1>Golf shot values?

0:29:05.120 --> 0:29:07.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, correct, how do you determine how do you talk

0:29:07.840 --> 0:29:12.320
<v Speaker 2>about strategy, strategic design, or shot values or protection of

0:29:12.440 --> 0:29:17.400
<v Speaker 2>par our favorite criterion. I'm just kidding about that obviously,

0:29:18.520 --> 0:29:22.840
<v Speaker 2>how do you rate a short course? And again, my

0:29:22.960 --> 0:29:25.360
<v Speaker 2>philosophy is, and I don't always like stick to this

0:29:25.360 --> 0:29:27.560
<v Speaker 2>one hundred percent, but I think my basic philosophy is

0:29:28.120 --> 0:29:30.040
<v Speaker 2>rate a course according to what it's trying to do,

0:29:30.320 --> 0:29:34.520
<v Speaker 2>and that extends to affordable courses versus high end private courses.

0:29:35.120 --> 0:29:38.520
<v Speaker 2>If the course is trying to be a great forty

0:29:38.600 --> 0:29:41.920
<v Speaker 2>dollars eighteen hole golf course, then I think that you

0:29:42.040 --> 0:29:45.800
<v Speaker 2>have to approach it from a slightly different perspective than

0:29:45.880 --> 0:29:49.840
<v Speaker 2>you would approach a course with a you know that's

0:29:49.880 --> 0:29:54.280
<v Speaker 2>trying to be the world's greatest high end private course.

0:29:54.240 --> 0:30:01.200
<v Speaker 1>Right, Yeah, I think I think determining their I identity

0:30:01.360 --> 0:30:05.760
<v Speaker 1>is such an important piece of evaluating a golf course.

0:30:06.240 --> 0:30:09.080
<v Speaker 1>And I don't want to be pretentious about evaluating golf

0:30:09.120 --> 0:30:13.600
<v Speaker 1>courses to a certain extent. How I think about my

0:30:13.960 --> 0:30:17.360
<v Speaker 1>what I rate golf courses. A lot of it is

0:30:17.440 --> 0:30:19.440
<v Speaker 1>like do I you know, and I don't want this

0:30:19.520 --> 0:30:22.360
<v Speaker 1>to sound too simplistic. I think about all the you know,

0:30:22.760 --> 0:30:26.640
<v Speaker 1>various things that go into a golf course, like the routing,

0:30:26.760 --> 0:30:30.680
<v Speaker 1>the bunkering, the greens, the turf, the you know, all

0:30:30.720 --> 0:30:33.760
<v Speaker 1>of that. But really when it comes to putting a

0:30:33.800 --> 0:30:37.160
<v Speaker 1>score on paper, I think about how much do I

0:30:37.200 --> 0:30:40.680
<v Speaker 1>think about going back there and dying to go back

0:30:40.720 --> 0:30:46.360
<v Speaker 1>and play it? And you know, for me, courses that

0:30:46.440 --> 0:30:51.000
<v Speaker 1>I just dream about going back and playing. And this

0:30:51.480 --> 0:30:55.160
<v Speaker 1>extends to places like you know, Diamond Springs, which is

0:30:55.440 --> 0:30:58.320
<v Speaker 1>I believe they've they've gone from thirty five to maybe

0:30:58.360 --> 0:31:02.640
<v Speaker 1>like fifty dollars now, but I dream about playing there.

0:31:02.920 --> 0:31:05.400
<v Speaker 1>You know. I don't want to give to too much away,

0:31:05.440 --> 0:31:07.960
<v Speaker 1>but I was going through the event calendar with Will

0:31:08.600 --> 0:31:11.720
<v Speaker 1>we have an event there this year and I said,

0:31:12.000 --> 0:31:14.720
<v Speaker 1>I saw it on the calendar and I said, ooh, Will,

0:31:15.440 --> 0:31:17.400
<v Speaker 1>I think I got to go to that Diamond Springs thing.

0:31:17.440 --> 0:31:20.240
<v Speaker 1>And he goes well, stirring at the US Open, I go,

0:31:20.800 --> 0:31:21.840
<v Speaker 1>I won't be there.

0:31:21.760 --> 0:31:24.320
<v Speaker 2>And you've already been to Michigan a million times, but

0:31:24.400 --> 0:31:26.400
<v Speaker 2>you still want to go to Diamond Springs.

0:31:26.640 --> 0:31:31.280
<v Speaker 1>So for me, now we could get really uh I

0:31:31.320 --> 0:31:36.280
<v Speaker 1>think the right the right word would be pedantic, right, yeah,

0:31:36.400 --> 0:31:41.400
<v Speaker 1>on the different you know aspects that go into it.

0:31:41.440 --> 0:31:43.880
<v Speaker 1>But at the end of the day, if I'm jumping

0:31:44.400 --> 0:31:49.200
<v Speaker 1>at the opportunity to go play somewhere, to me, that

0:31:49.200 --> 0:31:52.400
<v Speaker 1>that is a core part of it, whether it's nine holes,

0:31:52.440 --> 0:31:55.959
<v Speaker 1>six holes, twelve holes. And I think Culver is a

0:31:56.000 --> 0:32:00.880
<v Speaker 1>great example of that. Anytime I am within you know, really,

0:32:00.920 --> 0:32:03.840
<v Speaker 1>anytime I'm in Chicago and I'm thinking about going to

0:32:03.880 --> 0:32:08.720
<v Speaker 1>play golf, Culver rattles around in my brain and it's

0:32:08.760 --> 0:32:11.840
<v Speaker 1>three hours away. Anytime I'm in Chicago, I'm like, uh,

0:32:12.920 --> 0:32:16.360
<v Speaker 1>I could go to Culver, And to me, if it's

0:32:16.400 --> 0:32:19.160
<v Speaker 1>three hours away and I'm going to just drive down there,

0:32:19.600 --> 0:32:22.520
<v Speaker 1>it's got a very high appeal in the in the rating.

0:32:22.600 --> 0:32:28.360
<v Speaker 1>So for me, holes don't matter whatsoever. Type of golf

0:32:28.520 --> 0:32:31.360
<v Speaker 1>I don't think necessarily matters. On like, I'm not going

0:32:31.440 --> 0:32:33.800
<v Speaker 1>to dock a course because it's a short course. On

0:32:33.840 --> 0:32:36.920
<v Speaker 1>the egg scale. I'm going to rate it, you know,

0:32:37.160 --> 0:32:40.240
<v Speaker 1>against other and I think it makes it a little

0:32:40.240 --> 0:32:42.520
<v Speaker 1>bit cleaner when you do it that way, because if

0:32:42.520 --> 0:32:46.400
<v Speaker 1>you're thinking about rating restaurants, you wouldn't be like, well,

0:32:47.040 --> 0:32:51.400
<v Speaker 1>I like Italian food more than more than Ramen. So

0:32:51.400 --> 0:32:53.920
<v Speaker 1>so all the places are tough.

0:32:54.080 --> 0:32:59.400
<v Speaker 2>Sorry Japan, you know, like.

0:32:58.640 --> 0:33:03.120
<v Speaker 1>Like an, I think these different forms of golf, and likewise,

0:33:03.160 --> 0:33:07.200
<v Speaker 1>like what you brought up, you have championship courses like Shinnacock,

0:33:08.160 --> 0:33:12.360
<v Speaker 1>and you have really fun golf courses that are private

0:33:12.840 --> 0:33:16.280
<v Speaker 1>and well maintained, like Cape Arundle and Shinnacock. How do

0:33:16.320 --> 0:33:19.240
<v Speaker 1>you rate those? They are two they have two completely

0:33:19.320 --> 0:33:20.880
<v Speaker 1>different objectives.

0:33:21.000 --> 0:33:23.360
<v Speaker 2>It's apples and oranges. And that's part of why we

0:33:23.600 --> 0:33:28.440
<v Speaker 2>don't really love ranking courses one, two, three, four, five, six, right,

0:33:28.760 --> 0:33:33.320
<v Speaker 2>because that really forces you to say, Okay, you know

0:33:33.400 --> 0:33:36.360
<v Speaker 2>what's better Cape Arundle or Shinnacock, Like, how do I

0:33:36.480 --> 0:33:39.720
<v Speaker 2>come to that decision? Putting courses in buckets allows for

0:33:39.800 --> 0:33:44.560
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more flexibility about how we're assessing courses,

0:33:44.600 --> 0:33:49.760
<v Speaker 2>and we like to change our mode of assessment depending

0:33:49.840 --> 0:33:51.600
<v Speaker 2>on what the course is trying to do.

0:33:52.400 --> 0:33:56.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I've seen like all these like very intricate scoring systems,

0:33:56.520 --> 0:34:02.360
<v Speaker 1>but you have to rank out of ten a million times.

0:34:02.200 --> 0:34:04.720
<v Speaker 2>No offense to anyone who does this. I know people

0:34:04.800 --> 0:34:07.000
<v Speaker 2>who do this, and it looks like it's just a hobby.

0:34:07.000 --> 0:34:09.960
<v Speaker 2>It's just fun. I could not be less interested in

0:34:10.000 --> 0:34:14.680
<v Speaker 2>doing something like that, Like trying to mathematically work out

0:34:14.719 --> 0:34:17.600
<v Speaker 2>the perfect rating system for a golf course. I just

0:34:17.640 --> 0:34:21.719
<v Speaker 2>don't think. That's just not how I go about assessing

0:34:21.719 --> 0:34:22.319
<v Speaker 2>a golf course.

0:34:22.480 --> 0:34:26.839
<v Speaker 1>I also think like it becomes very formulaic, and there

0:34:26.840 --> 0:34:31.440
<v Speaker 1>are certain things that certain some golf courses have that's

0:34:31.600 --> 0:34:37.200
<v Speaker 1>just this like special sauce to them. A good example

0:34:37.239 --> 0:34:41.319
<v Speaker 1>of a course that I'm particularly enthralled with is Brambles

0:34:42.040 --> 0:34:48.839
<v Speaker 1>in California. It's been a very long growing period, and

0:34:49.920 --> 0:34:53.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, at different points I was kind of like,

0:34:53.880 --> 0:34:55.799
<v Speaker 1>in my head, I don't know if it's ever going

0:34:55.880 --> 0:34:58.640
<v Speaker 1>to get to where what they're telling me it's going

0:34:58.719 --> 0:35:01.879
<v Speaker 1>to get to with the turf and I play. We played.

0:35:01.880 --> 0:35:04.399
<v Speaker 1>We had an event up there a couple weeks ago

0:35:04.640 --> 0:35:08.919
<v Speaker 1>and we played and the turf was just so incredible

0:35:09.800 --> 0:35:12.719
<v Speaker 1>that I am. I'm just enthralled by it. But if

0:35:12.760 --> 0:35:16.200
<v Speaker 1>you looked at it from like a site standpoint and

0:35:16.360 --> 0:35:20.560
<v Speaker 1>a hole by hole. Maybe it doesn't like it's not

0:35:20.719 --> 0:35:25.200
<v Speaker 1>going to just wow people off the page, But for me,

0:35:27.640 --> 0:35:29.759
<v Speaker 1>as they keep getting it more and more dialed in,

0:35:30.120 --> 0:35:31.920
<v Speaker 1>the next thing they have to get it done is

0:35:31.960 --> 0:35:35.759
<v Speaker 1>the native It's just going up and up and up,

0:35:36.000 --> 0:35:40.520
<v Speaker 1>because there's just that it has an intangible quality between

0:35:40.640 --> 0:35:46.279
<v Speaker 1>the place, the turf, the architecture, the setting that all

0:35:46.360 --> 0:35:49.720
<v Speaker 1>melds together that if I grated it out on point

0:35:49.760 --> 0:35:53.359
<v Speaker 1>by point, I would find a lot of distractions. And

0:35:53.719 --> 0:35:57.840
<v Speaker 1>by doing that you get so specific that you almost

0:35:58.000 --> 0:36:01.840
<v Speaker 1>lose the plot. And I think like this might be

0:36:01.960 --> 0:36:06.000
<v Speaker 1>similar and I, I, you know, to if you're evaluating

0:36:08.080 --> 0:36:12.400
<v Speaker 1>a prospect for a for a for the NFL or

0:36:12.400 --> 0:36:18.719
<v Speaker 1>for the you know, NBA, and you get so I

0:36:18.760 --> 0:36:22.080
<v Speaker 1>would think like grading out really in depth is kind

0:36:22.080 --> 0:36:27.680
<v Speaker 1>of kind of similar to being enamored with measurables but

0:36:27.920 --> 0:36:34.400
<v Speaker 1>just ignoring on field production. And for me, how I

0:36:34.640 --> 0:36:39.640
<v Speaker 1>feel about the course and oftentimes one of the best

0:36:39.640 --> 0:36:41.920
<v Speaker 1>things to me is is do I just want to

0:36:42.040 --> 0:36:44.920
<v Speaker 1>just keep going and playing golf? And am I sad

0:36:45.000 --> 0:36:50.319
<v Speaker 1>if I can't just go play more? And that's kind

0:36:50.320 --> 0:36:54.680
<v Speaker 1>of like watching somebody being like, yeah, they're they're just

0:36:54.760 --> 0:36:57.080
<v Speaker 1>great at this. And to me, a great golf course

0:36:58.480 --> 0:37:03.160
<v Speaker 1>is you kind of know and I there are all

0:37:03.200 --> 0:37:05.719
<v Speaker 1>these things that go into it, and you could talk

0:37:05.760 --> 0:37:08.600
<v Speaker 1>in depth about the greens and the variety of the greens,

0:37:08.640 --> 0:37:12.200
<v Speaker 1>the routing, but there is just that intangible nature to

0:37:12.600 --> 0:37:16.040
<v Speaker 1>great golf courses that maybe if you broke it down

0:37:16.120 --> 0:37:19.759
<v Speaker 1>you could nitpick on things, but they just have a

0:37:19.800 --> 0:37:20.520
<v Speaker 1>special sauce.

0:37:21.200 --> 0:37:23.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, this is supposed to be about golf course appreciation,

0:37:24.160 --> 0:37:27.160
<v Speaker 2>and when you get too deep into rating golf courses,

0:37:27.760 --> 0:37:30.440
<v Speaker 2>you might lose sight of the fact that it's supposed

0:37:30.480 --> 0:37:33.279
<v Speaker 2>to be about golf course appreciation. But to get to

0:37:33.320 --> 0:37:37.439
<v Speaker 2>the other aspects of the question here, which we're asked

0:37:37.440 --> 0:37:38.720
<v Speaker 2>by Ben Dennison.

0:37:38.520 --> 0:37:39.440
<v Speaker 1>He's a great question.

0:37:39.760 --> 0:37:42.799
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's a really good, really cool question. Yeah, how

0:37:42.800 --> 0:37:44.880
<v Speaker 2>do you evaluate a nine hole course that later became

0:37:44.920 --> 0:37:48.680
<v Speaker 2>eighteen holes? And I will say my belief is that

0:37:49.280 --> 0:37:53.400
<v Speaker 2>I evaluate the course that exists now regardless of what

0:37:53.560 --> 0:37:57.319
<v Speaker 2>its history would be. But I also acknowledge that, yes,

0:37:58.560 --> 0:38:02.000
<v Speaker 2>a course can become word sometimes when it's expanded to

0:38:02.080 --> 0:38:05.880
<v Speaker 2>eighteen holes if those eighteen holes are not as good

0:38:06.000 --> 0:38:09.480
<v Speaker 2>as the original nine, even though all nine of the

0:38:09.520 --> 0:38:13.120
<v Speaker 2>original holes might still be there, still be intact. The

0:38:13.160 --> 0:38:19.000
<v Speaker 2>course as a whole can decline, in my estimation if

0:38:19.080 --> 0:38:22.120
<v Speaker 2>it now consists of eighteen holes, nine of which are

0:38:22.160 --> 0:38:24.680
<v Speaker 2>not nearly as good as the other nine. And this

0:38:24.800 --> 0:38:26.319
<v Speaker 2>is the case that a lot of courses. The one

0:38:26.320 --> 0:38:29.120
<v Speaker 2>that always comes to mind for me is I haven't

0:38:29.120 --> 0:38:31.600
<v Speaker 2>been to, but I've heard a great deal about Thindara

0:38:32.200 --> 0:38:34.160
<v Speaker 2>in New York. I think that's how you pronounce it,

0:38:35.800 --> 0:38:41.360
<v Speaker 2>you know, great original Donald Ross nine hole course along

0:38:41.480 --> 0:38:44.800
<v Speaker 2>with an additional nine that was built in the fifties

0:38:44.880 --> 0:38:50.360
<v Speaker 2>or sixties that just has a completely different architectural philosophy

0:38:50.400 --> 0:38:53.680
<v Speaker 2>behind it on a completely different kind of piece of land,

0:38:54.239 --> 0:38:57.080
<v Speaker 2>and just as the opposite and in many ways and

0:38:57.160 --> 0:38:59.439
<v Speaker 2>is really not very good, has not stood the test

0:38:59.480 --> 0:39:02.719
<v Speaker 2>of time. Well, well, that original nine holes is still

0:39:02.719 --> 0:39:04.960
<v Speaker 2>there and it's terrific and it's a great reason to

0:39:05.080 --> 0:39:08.799
<v Speaker 2>go play the course. But I would probably rate that

0:39:08.880 --> 0:39:11.960
<v Speaker 2>original nine hole course higher than I would ever rate

0:39:12.000 --> 0:39:16.400
<v Speaker 2>the full eighteen because again, you know, I'm rating the

0:39:16.719 --> 0:39:20.359
<v Speaker 2>course that is in the ground. My favorite course that

0:39:20.400 --> 0:39:23.120
<v Speaker 2>has gone through this kind of transformation would maybe be

0:39:23.160 --> 0:39:26.400
<v Speaker 2>an obvious one, and that's Prairie Did's where the original

0:39:26.520 --> 0:39:29.920
<v Speaker 2>nine by Perry Maxwell there is a masterpiece, maybe the

0:39:29.920 --> 0:39:33.879
<v Speaker 2>greatest nine hole course ever built. The additional nine by

0:39:34.000 --> 0:39:37.880
<v Speaker 2>his son, Press Maxwell, built in the nineteen fifties, is

0:39:38.080 --> 0:39:42.040
<v Speaker 2>missing a little something of the magic of those original

0:39:42.120 --> 0:39:45.239
<v Speaker 2>nine holes by Perry Maxwell. But really are pretty good.

0:39:45.880 --> 0:39:49.319
<v Speaker 2>Really really, Press did a In fact, he did a

0:39:49.320 --> 0:39:53.840
<v Speaker 2>great job considering the context in which the time period

0:39:53.840 --> 0:39:55.560
<v Speaker 2>in which he was doing all this, he did a

0:39:55.600 --> 0:39:58.680
<v Speaker 2>great job of matching the new holes to the old holes,

0:39:58.800 --> 0:40:01.920
<v Speaker 2>to the point where you know, ninety nine point nine

0:40:01.960 --> 0:40:04.160
<v Speaker 2>percent of people playing the golf course would not be

0:40:04.200 --> 0:40:07.920
<v Speaker 2>able to tell that one portion of this course was

0:40:08.000 --> 0:40:12.440
<v Speaker 2>built twenty or so years after the initial portion of

0:40:12.520 --> 0:40:14.920
<v Speaker 2>the course. And so I think Paridians is an example

0:40:15.480 --> 0:40:17.880
<v Speaker 2>of a course that went through the nine to eighteen

0:40:18.000 --> 0:40:20.000
<v Speaker 2>transition and came out.

0:40:19.960 --> 0:40:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Very nice, definitely the best example. And I sat and listened.

0:40:26.080 --> 0:40:28.799
<v Speaker 1>I had a friend who who wanted to make the

0:40:28.920 --> 0:40:31.439
<v Speaker 1>argument that the Press nine was better than the Perry nine.

0:40:31.480 --> 0:40:32.319
<v Speaker 1>And I sat and listen.

0:40:32.440 --> 0:40:34.400
<v Speaker 2>A lot of people do make that argument. Yeah, and

0:40:34.520 --> 0:40:36.960
<v Speaker 2>I don't agree with it, but I get it, okay

0:40:36.960 --> 0:40:37.799
<v Speaker 2>where that comes from.

0:40:37.920 --> 0:40:40.279
<v Speaker 1>I don't think it's like insane. There are a lot

0:40:40.280 --> 0:40:43.839
<v Speaker 1>of people tell me a lot of insane things. I

0:40:43.880 --> 0:40:47.200
<v Speaker 1>actually might think it's a little insane, but I listened, and.

0:40:48.440 --> 0:40:51.120
<v Speaker 2>I only think it's I only kind of disregard it.

0:40:51.960 --> 0:40:55.719
<v Speaker 2>I don't disregard it. I only disagree with it confidently

0:40:55.960 --> 0:40:59.240
<v Speaker 2>because the I think that original nine is such a

0:40:59.280 --> 0:40:59.839
<v Speaker 2>master work.

0:41:00.360 --> 0:41:07.640
<v Speaker 1>The I think what sucks about this is oftentimes I

0:41:07.680 --> 0:41:12.560
<v Speaker 1>think like less golf is better just in general, the

0:41:12.680 --> 0:41:19.040
<v Speaker 1>less you build, the better the result. Now I get,

0:41:19.360 --> 0:41:25.000
<v Speaker 1>so I get the point of you want more utility

0:41:25.120 --> 0:41:29.600
<v Speaker 1>eighteen holes in the standard, but just in general, I

0:41:29.640 --> 0:41:33.479
<v Speaker 1>think more facilities, specifically public facilities would be better. Office

0:41:33.560 --> 0:41:40.000
<v Speaker 1>nine hole facilities and eighteen whole facilities. And the case

0:41:40.320 --> 0:41:44.400
<v Speaker 1>of this is basically through the Midwest, all these there's

0:41:44.480 --> 0:41:47.920
<v Speaker 1>so many great public golf courses that were built by

0:41:48.000 --> 0:41:51.719
<v Speaker 1>Lafe for Moureau that were turned into eighteen holes that

0:41:52.360 --> 0:41:57.760
<v Speaker 1>the new nine is an utter disaster, in different varying

0:41:57.880 --> 0:42:01.280
<v Speaker 1>levels of disaster, to be clear, but one that jumps

0:42:01.280 --> 0:42:03.720
<v Speaker 1>to mind. There's a there's a plate place in northwest

0:42:03.760 --> 0:42:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Indiana called Legacy Hills that used to be Laport country Club,

0:42:07.600 --> 0:42:09.600
<v Speaker 1>the Front nine, and and it's not in great shape.

0:42:09.600 --> 0:42:15.640
<v Speaker 1>The front nine is pure lang for Moreau. It's it's

0:42:15.640 --> 0:42:21.120
<v Speaker 1>not well taken care of, but it's amazing the landforms everything. Uh,

0:42:21.280 --> 0:42:24.960
<v Speaker 1>it's amazing. The back nine just don't even bother. Just

0:42:25.000 --> 0:42:27.200
<v Speaker 1>pay the ten dollars to play the front nine. I

0:42:27.280 --> 0:42:32.480
<v Speaker 1>think it's fifteen, like don't even go, don't even go

0:42:32.560 --> 0:42:37.319
<v Speaker 1>across the road, park, don't go go Coke. But then

0:42:37.600 --> 0:42:41.280
<v Speaker 1>you have like other ones Marquette, people go to Gray Walls,

0:42:43.400 --> 0:42:47.319
<v Speaker 1>don't skip Marquette, which is the sister course to Gray

0:42:47.320 --> 0:42:52.120
<v Speaker 1>Walls in Marquette, Michigan. Uh, it's leg for Moreau nine.

0:42:52.280 --> 0:42:54.640
<v Speaker 1>And I think it was Uh, I can't remember the guys.

0:42:54.760 --> 0:42:57.279
<v Speaker 1>I think it was David gill Is the is the

0:42:57.760 --> 0:43:01.800
<v Speaker 1>other architect he did He actually did West Bend, another

0:43:01.880 --> 0:43:04.040
<v Speaker 1>length from Morose other nine as well.

0:43:04.680 --> 0:43:08.280
<v Speaker 2>Yes he did. Yeah, he was. He was a specialist, Yes,

0:43:08.400 --> 0:43:09.839
<v Speaker 2>in this very particular art.

0:43:10.280 --> 0:43:13.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. And then another one. Another example of this is

0:43:13.360 --> 0:43:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Harrison Hills, which had an additional Tim Lyddy design. Tim

0:43:18.640 --> 0:43:21.400
<v Speaker 1>Lady's holes are i would say, on the offensive scale,

0:43:21.680 --> 0:43:25.839
<v Speaker 1>a little bit lower than say Legacy Hills. But he

0:43:26.280 --> 0:43:28.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, he messed around with some of the some

0:43:28.800 --> 0:43:31.240
<v Speaker 1>of the length of Moreau holes, which is a shame

0:43:31.560 --> 0:43:34.120
<v Speaker 1>he tried to match the style it. You know that.

0:43:35.200 --> 0:43:37.200
<v Speaker 1>I think you could go both ways on that one

0:43:37.360 --> 0:43:40.400
<v Speaker 1>as to whether the golf course is better, you know,

0:43:40.520 --> 0:43:43.880
<v Speaker 1>but I think nine hole, as you see with Culver,

0:43:44.120 --> 0:43:47.160
<v Speaker 1>I think Culver is unequivocally the best nine hole golf

0:43:47.160 --> 0:43:51.680
<v Speaker 1>course that I've seen. Now, I haven't seen Whitonsville. Unfortunately,

0:43:51.800 --> 0:43:55.120
<v Speaker 1>Cameron has seen Whitonsville on our staff, but he hasn't

0:43:55.160 --> 0:43:59.279
<v Speaker 1>seen Culver, so we we can't get the definitive. But

0:44:00.280 --> 0:44:04.160
<v Speaker 1>for me is the unequivocal champ when it comes to

0:44:04.320 --> 0:44:11.719
<v Speaker 1>nine hole courses in America. And Harrison Hill's Marquette in

0:44:11.800 --> 0:44:16.719
<v Speaker 1>West Bend would all be able to challenge if they

0:44:16.719 --> 0:44:20.880
<v Speaker 1>were just nine holes. And you think about it, is like, yeah,

0:44:21.000 --> 0:44:23.319
<v Speaker 1>the best nine hole golf course in America is a nice,

0:44:23.560 --> 0:44:24.080
<v Speaker 1>nice ring.

0:44:24.680 --> 0:44:27.399
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And if you're a nine hole course, then go

0:44:27.480 --> 0:44:31.000
<v Speaker 2>after that crown as opposed to wanting to be something else.

0:44:31.320 --> 0:44:33.120
<v Speaker 2>You know, something just occurred to me. I can't believe

0:44:33.120 --> 0:44:37.160
<v Speaker 2>I didn't bring this up initially, but Pacific Grove is

0:44:37.200 --> 0:44:39.160
<v Speaker 2>a great example of a course that evolved in the

0:44:39.200 --> 0:44:43.520
<v Speaker 2>opposite direction where the initial nine holes was fine. But

0:44:43.600 --> 0:44:46.080
<v Speaker 2>kind of hasn't aged well because of tree plantings and

0:44:46.200 --> 0:44:49.320
<v Speaker 2>neighborhoods springing up around it and all that kind of stuff.

0:44:49.680 --> 0:44:52.759
<v Speaker 2>But then the second nine in the Dunes, designed by

0:44:52.840 --> 0:44:58.880
<v Speaker 2>Jack Neville in nineteen sixty, is spectacular and has become

0:44:59.280 --> 0:45:03.000
<v Speaker 2>the clearly superior nine and one that people will often

0:45:03.080 --> 0:45:06.640
<v Speaker 2>play by itself and not even go across the road.

0:45:07.239 --> 0:45:10.520
<v Speaker 1>Neville's an interesting character in golf architecture.

0:45:11.360 --> 0:45:13.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think he just he just lived his life

0:45:13.680 --> 0:45:18.920
<v Speaker 2>in the Monterey area, routed Bubble Beach, and then in

0:45:19.000 --> 0:45:22.239
<v Speaker 2>nineteen sixty got hired by the municipality of Pacific Grove

0:45:22.320 --> 0:45:25.640
<v Speaker 2>and did another really good routing he did.

0:45:25.719 --> 0:45:29.480
<v Speaker 1>He built Glenn Eagles too, and around that time he

0:45:29.640 --> 0:45:32.759
<v Speaker 1>worked for the city for a number of years. I

0:45:32.800 --> 0:45:36.000
<v Speaker 1>think what happened was the depression hit and he got

0:45:36.040 --> 0:45:40.799
<v Speaker 1>this city job. He was, I think the superintendent of

0:45:40.920 --> 0:45:46.879
<v Speaker 1>their golf courses, and then after he retired from that,

0:45:47.719 --> 0:45:50.880
<v Speaker 1>he got back into building golf courses. I didn't know

0:45:50.920 --> 0:45:56.960
<v Speaker 1>that that was Tom Shay, the great proprietor of a

0:45:57.160 --> 0:46:00.680
<v Speaker 1>lease holder of Glenn Eagles, told me to that story.

0:46:01.360 --> 0:46:03.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, that would be interesting to know more about My

0:46:03.200 --> 0:46:05.719
<v Speaker 2>impression of Jack Neville until this point was just that

0:46:05.760 --> 0:46:08.600
<v Speaker 2>he was kind of like a gentleman amateur and just

0:46:08.680 --> 0:46:10.359
<v Speaker 2>kind of was in the golf world.

0:46:12.680 --> 0:46:24.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's how I think the story. All right, let's

0:46:24.200 --> 0:46:27.080
<v Speaker 1>take a quick break. Let's talk about our friends over

0:46:27.120 --> 0:46:30.360
<v Speaker 1>at groove It. You know, everybody's looking for great gifts.

0:46:30.800 --> 0:46:33.480
<v Speaker 1>One of the things I find myself always looking for

0:46:33.600 --> 0:46:36.839
<v Speaker 1>great stocking stuffer. Let me tell you I got great

0:46:36.840 --> 0:46:40.080
<v Speaker 1>stocking for stuffer for you. Head over to groove it

0:46:40.160 --> 0:46:44.640
<v Speaker 1>brush dot com. That's groove it g r oo ve

0:46:45.520 --> 0:46:48.879
<v Speaker 1>it brush dot com and use the promo code fried

0:46:48.920 --> 0:46:52.040
<v Speaker 1>Egg for fifteen percent off any purchase. You might be

0:46:52.120 --> 0:46:54.960
<v Speaker 1>wondering what is a groove It brush. They are the

0:46:55.120 --> 0:46:59.080
<v Speaker 1>top rated golf brushes in on the market. They're veteran

0:46:59.120 --> 0:47:03.600
<v Speaker 1>owned and operated and listen, clean grooves mean better golf shots.

0:47:03.920 --> 0:47:05.880
<v Speaker 1>So this is the way you're gonna play better golf

0:47:05.960 --> 0:47:09.000
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty six is with the groove It brush.

0:47:09.120 --> 0:47:11.759
<v Speaker 1>The perfect one for the stocking stuff for mini g

0:47:12.360 --> 0:47:15.080
<v Speaker 1>It's a smaller brush, doesn't use the water, that's gonna

0:47:15.120 --> 0:47:18.399
<v Speaker 1>slide right into a stocking. It's the brush you see

0:47:18.600 --> 0:47:21.719
<v Speaker 1>lots of tour players using. You know, you just look

0:47:21.719 --> 0:47:24.640
<v Speaker 1>at their belts. They got it attached to that. All

0:47:24.680 --> 0:47:28.120
<v Speaker 1>of their products use the heavy duty diyel on bristles

0:47:28.160 --> 0:47:32.279
<v Speaker 1>that clean clubs without damaging them. These are awesome. Buy

0:47:32.280 --> 0:47:36.279
<v Speaker 1>it at groovetbrush dot com or your favorite golf retailer

0:47:36.600 --> 0:47:38.800
<v Speaker 1>and they're in thousands of walmarts. So this is super

0:47:38.880 --> 0:47:41.040
<v Speaker 1>easy to get. You can get it all over the place.

0:47:41.640 --> 0:47:44.000
<v Speaker 1>Only way to get fifteen percent with fried egg is

0:47:44.000 --> 0:47:47.239
<v Speaker 1>at groovetbrush dot com. Thanks to groove it. And let's

0:47:47.280 --> 0:47:48.120
<v Speaker 1>get back to Garrett.

0:47:56.080 --> 0:47:59.880
<v Speaker 2>All right, do we want another question, Yeah, let's go.

0:48:00.360 --> 0:48:04.920
<v Speaker 2>Question from Randy Sierra from FUGC. He says, there's plenty

0:48:04.920 --> 0:48:08.600
<v Speaker 2>written about naturalism and the blending of manufactured features into

0:48:08.640 --> 0:48:15.040
<v Speaker 2>the natural landscape. What makes visually manufactured architecture great and

0:48:15.239 --> 0:48:19.920
<v Speaker 2>what are some examples? Okay, so he's basically this question

0:48:20.040 --> 0:48:27.440
<v Speaker 2>kind of challenges the common the conventional wisdom that beautiful

0:48:27.440 --> 0:48:31.320
<v Speaker 2>golf features are the ones that are natural or indistinguishable

0:48:31.320 --> 0:48:34.600
<v Speaker 2>from nature. But we all know that that's not the

0:48:34.760 --> 0:48:39.160
<v Speaker 2>end of the discussion, because there are manufactured looking courses

0:48:39.200 --> 0:48:41.600
<v Speaker 2>that we all like. So what is it that makes

0:48:41.640 --> 0:48:46.399
<v Speaker 2>a good manufactured looking course stand out from one that

0:48:47.480 --> 0:48:49.200
<v Speaker 2>from one that is offensive looking.

0:48:50.200 --> 0:48:53.359
<v Speaker 1>Oh, there's a lot of varying degrees of manufactured. I'd

0:48:53.360 --> 0:48:57.120
<v Speaker 1>also I'm mixed up Jack Neville and Jack Fleming. Fleming.

0:48:57.200 --> 0:49:00.319
<v Speaker 2>Oh okay, well that makes more sense to me now, yeah, yeah,

0:49:00.320 --> 0:49:03.840
<v Speaker 2>Fleming is the guy. Fleming did some work. Yeah, he

0:49:03.920 --> 0:49:06.120
<v Speaker 2>added the nine to or he added some holes to

0:49:06.160 --> 0:49:08.840
<v Speaker 2>Sharp Park. He did a few other things. He was

0:49:08.840 --> 0:49:10.560
<v Speaker 2>an associate for various architects, and.

0:49:10.719 --> 0:49:14.920
<v Speaker 1>He met Alistair mackenzie at an Irish pub. Yes, and

0:49:14.960 --> 0:49:17.880
<v Speaker 1>that's how he got into the architecture world. But I

0:49:18.080 --> 0:49:20.600
<v Speaker 1>just mixed that up. He built Glen Glenn Eagles I

0:49:20.640 --> 0:49:21.560
<v Speaker 1>got from Jackson.

0:49:23.280 --> 0:49:25.400
<v Speaker 2>Jack Fleming didn't have anything to do with Pacific growth,

0:49:25.440 --> 0:49:26.759
<v Speaker 2>but he did have a lot to do with a

0:49:26.760 --> 0:49:27.960
<v Speaker 2>lot of other courses in the area.

0:49:29.480 --> 0:49:37.319
<v Speaker 1>The uh so different scales of of manufactured something that

0:49:37.400 --> 0:49:41.480
<v Speaker 1>I found interesting spending time with h with the architects

0:49:41.520 --> 0:49:46.400
<v Speaker 1>of Tim Jackson and David Cohn who I went to

0:49:46.440 --> 0:49:53.160
<v Speaker 1>Scottsdale National with. That is an extraordinary manufactured golf course.

0:49:54.200 --> 0:49:58.160
<v Speaker 1>I think that's actually probably one of the more underrated

0:49:58.480 --> 0:50:04.840
<v Speaker 1>or under you know, talked about really great uh modern designs,

0:50:05.800 --> 0:50:09.400
<v Speaker 1>and it's I understand why it's because nobody sees it.

0:50:11.960 --> 0:50:15.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, let's did you mention that it's who it's owned by, Yeah.

0:50:15.960 --> 0:50:18.839
<v Speaker 1>Bob Parsons. It's a very high cost to get hit.

0:50:19.200 --> 0:50:19.719
<v Speaker 1>I don't think the.

0:50:21.400 --> 0:50:26.600
<v Speaker 2>Guy just in case people in them, you know, But the.

0:50:26.520 --> 0:50:28.800
<v Speaker 1>Guy did a great job letting these guys build it.

0:50:30.000 --> 0:50:36.399
<v Speaker 2>Those guys did an amazing job. It really is Bob did.

0:50:36.480 --> 0:50:38.480
<v Speaker 2>Bob is an awesome owner because you just let those

0:50:38.520 --> 0:50:39.919
<v Speaker 2>guys do their thing.

0:50:40.400 --> 0:50:42.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but I mean they said they had a big budget,

0:50:42.760 --> 0:50:45.520
<v Speaker 1>and obviously this goes into it. But something they told

0:50:45.520 --> 0:50:48.920
<v Speaker 1>me about manufacturing golf because if you went out there,

0:50:49.160 --> 0:50:52.960
<v Speaker 1>you never believe that it was just all built. But

0:50:53.120 --> 0:50:56.040
<v Speaker 1>it was effectively a plot of land. We have a

0:50:56.080 --> 0:50:58.840
<v Speaker 1>YouTube video all about this if you're more interested in

0:50:58.880 --> 0:51:02.200
<v Speaker 1>looking at this. But it was a plot of land

0:51:02.200 --> 0:51:07.560
<v Speaker 1>that was like flat graded for houses, and they moved

0:51:07.640 --> 0:51:12.920
<v Speaker 1>heaven and high earth to create a really cool place

0:51:12.960 --> 0:51:17.840
<v Speaker 1>to play golf. And I'm I'm not I don't have

0:51:17.920 --> 0:51:23.440
<v Speaker 1>the exact number, but they made roughly a this is

0:51:23.520 --> 0:51:27.440
<v Speaker 1>just rough numbers off of memory, a sixty foot tall,

0:51:29.000 --> 0:51:37.280
<v Speaker 1>six hundred yard mountain. And what I was like that

0:51:37.280 --> 0:51:39.640
<v Speaker 1>that had to be here and They're like, it wasn't

0:51:40.640 --> 0:51:43.880
<v Speaker 1>And I was like what, And they're like, the key

0:51:44.360 --> 0:51:49.160
<v Speaker 1>to manufacturing something is to make it so big that

0:51:49.280 --> 0:51:51.000
<v Speaker 1>you could never believe it's fake.

0:51:52.160 --> 0:51:54.239
<v Speaker 2>And in that kind of a Fasio principle, this is

0:51:54.239 --> 0:51:55.480
<v Speaker 2>what they learned from Fasio.

0:51:56.320 --> 0:51:59.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but I don't think Fasio went ever went that big,

0:51:59.560 --> 0:52:00.360
<v Speaker 1>but they.

0:52:00.239 --> 0:52:03.919
<v Speaker 2>Created this maybe a couple of more modern places. But yes,

0:52:03.920 --> 0:52:05.960
<v Speaker 2>you're right, and I don't think he ever did a

0:52:06.719 --> 0:52:09.319
<v Speaker 2>even as far as I've seen, quite as well as

0:52:09.440 --> 0:52:11.080
<v Speaker 2>as Jackson con did it there.

0:52:11.680 --> 0:52:15.480
<v Speaker 1>It's so outlandish that it works that it feels like

0:52:15.600 --> 0:52:21.560
<v Speaker 1>you're playing in a natural setting. So I think that's

0:52:21.800 --> 0:52:26.040
<v Speaker 1>one end of it. But then there's a more natural,

0:52:27.200 --> 0:52:30.600
<v Speaker 1>less earth moving, but creating artificiality. And I think a

0:52:30.640 --> 0:52:33.799
<v Speaker 1>lot of the greatest golf courses in the world are

0:52:33.840 --> 0:52:40.240
<v Speaker 1>actually very artificial golf courses. Every seth Rayner golf course

0:52:40.320 --> 0:52:45.480
<v Speaker 1>is extremely artificial. It's artfully done, but you know the

0:52:46.040 --> 0:52:49.239
<v Speaker 1>shapes and such are are artificial.

0:52:49.800 --> 0:52:53.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean there there are. Every golf architect since

0:52:53.040 --> 0:52:57.799
<v Speaker 2>the Golden Age basically has manufactured features. Some put an

0:52:57.840 --> 0:53:01.600
<v Speaker 2>effort into blending those features in and making you think

0:53:02.000 --> 0:53:06.439
<v Speaker 2>that they were there previously. Others don't make as much

0:53:06.440 --> 0:53:08.560
<v Speaker 2>of that effort and are willing to let some of

0:53:08.640 --> 0:53:13.280
<v Speaker 2>their work stand out and show from the natural terrain.

0:53:13.680 --> 0:53:17.279
<v Speaker 2>And I think both methods can yield good results. For me,

0:53:17.560 --> 0:53:25.120
<v Speaker 2>the difference comes with the taste and the skill with

0:53:25.239 --> 0:53:30.279
<v Speaker 2>which manufactured features are generated. And this doesn't necessarily mean

0:53:30.360 --> 0:53:33.400
<v Speaker 2>the skill of making them look natural, but just the

0:53:33.440 --> 0:53:36.960
<v Speaker 2>skill of making them look interesting. Right, So, if we're

0:53:36.960 --> 0:53:40.920
<v Speaker 2>talking about overtly manufactured features, features that are not trying

0:53:41.440 --> 0:53:45.880
<v Speaker 2>to fool you into thinking their natural, then I really

0:53:45.960 --> 0:53:49.320
<v Speaker 2>like looking at the work of Walter Travis McDonald and

0:53:49.400 --> 0:53:53.640
<v Speaker 2>Rayner Langford and Moreau Pete die and then from the

0:53:53.680 --> 0:53:57.359
<v Speaker 2>current era, Brian Schneider and Jackson Kahn. I think all

0:53:57.440 --> 0:54:01.319
<v Speaker 2>of those architects do an interesting job of making overtly

0:54:01.400 --> 0:54:06.600
<v Speaker 2>manufactured features that don't feel just lame. And I think

0:54:06.640 --> 0:54:13.080
<v Speaker 2>they do that by introducing some unexpectedness, some surprise into

0:54:13.120 --> 0:54:16.279
<v Speaker 2>the shaping of these features. They are interesting to look

0:54:16.320 --> 0:54:20.240
<v Speaker 2>at in and of themselves because they're not just trying

0:54:20.280 --> 0:54:23.960
<v Speaker 2>to be pretty, they're trying to be interesting. They have

0:54:24.040 --> 0:54:26.480
<v Speaker 2>something about them that is maybe a little weird, maybe

0:54:26.520 --> 0:54:29.880
<v Speaker 2>a little off, maybe even like a little ugly, right,

0:54:29.960 --> 0:54:34.479
<v Speaker 2>They're a combination of ugly and beautiful in an interesting way.

0:54:35.160 --> 0:54:40.120
<v Speaker 2>And so I think that that is what separates those

0:54:40.239 --> 0:54:46.359
<v Speaker 2>architects I mentioned, and what separates their work from from

0:54:46.400 --> 0:54:49.520
<v Speaker 2>the work of like your you know, your your your

0:54:49.560 --> 0:54:53.160
<v Speaker 2>Jack Nicholas's, or your Rye Jones's, or even your Tom Fazio's,

0:54:53.360 --> 0:54:56.520
<v Speaker 2>because I don't think that you know, when Tom Fazio

0:54:56.600 --> 0:54:59.879
<v Speaker 2>is such a skillful architect and his firm does such

0:55:00.280 --> 0:55:03.160
<v Speaker 2>enormously expert work. He is one of the best at

0:55:03.160 --> 0:55:07.040
<v Speaker 2>the industry at tying everything in and making everything feel

0:55:07.120 --> 0:55:12.400
<v Speaker 2>coherent aesthetically. But to me, it looks like Tom Fazio

0:55:12.560 --> 0:55:15.759
<v Speaker 2>is just trying to make everything look pretty and look right,

0:55:16.719 --> 0:55:19.600
<v Speaker 2>and that ends up being a little bit boring after

0:55:19.640 --> 0:55:22.719
<v Speaker 2>a while. That's just just my personal reaction to it.

0:55:22.920 --> 0:55:25.480
<v Speaker 2>So I prefer architects who are a little have have

0:55:25.600 --> 0:55:30.120
<v Speaker 2>something about the the esthetics that is that is just

0:55:30.320 --> 0:55:33.080
<v Speaker 2>slightly off kilter, and and that's to me what makes

0:55:33.080 --> 0:55:33.640
<v Speaker 2>it interesting.

0:55:33.840 --> 0:55:35.640
<v Speaker 1>I think, I think you hit the nail on the head.

0:55:35.719 --> 0:55:41.960
<v Speaker 1>It's an irregular irregularity when when something looks like it's

0:55:42.040 --> 0:55:44.320
<v Speaker 1>just copy and pasted over and over again.

0:55:44.480 --> 0:55:46.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and this is a this is a Reese Jones problem,

0:55:46.920 --> 0:55:48.320
<v Speaker 2>which is a separate thing, right.

0:55:49.280 --> 0:55:52.360
<v Speaker 1>Well, yeah, a lot there are a lot of architects

0:55:52.440 --> 0:55:56.479
<v Speaker 1>that yeah, yeah, it's always always easy to swerve into

0:55:56.480 --> 0:55:56.919
<v Speaker 1>that lane.

0:55:56.960 --> 0:55:59.400
<v Speaker 2>But easy target easy.

0:56:00.320 --> 0:56:04.839
<v Speaker 1>It's when you get like the monotonous. It look that's

0:56:05.000 --> 0:56:10.160
<v Speaker 1>very similar one after another. I like, if you're going

0:56:10.200 --> 0:56:15.239
<v Speaker 1>to make stuff, make it all look different, and that's

0:56:15.280 --> 0:56:18.120
<v Speaker 1>going to be a better, better result. I will say

0:56:19.480 --> 0:56:24.000
<v Speaker 1>architecture has gone, like the trends of architecture has gone

0:56:24.080 --> 0:56:25.920
<v Speaker 1>to much more lay of the lay of the land,

0:56:26.040 --> 0:56:31.719
<v Speaker 1>even on more mundane sites. And I think a lot

0:56:31.760 --> 0:56:36.759
<v Speaker 1>of the monotonous comes from masquerading when you're trying to

0:56:37.239 --> 0:56:42.280
<v Speaker 1>artificially create a site. And what happens in that situation

0:56:42.880 --> 0:56:47.600
<v Speaker 1>is you hire a giant earth moving contractor and that's

0:56:47.640 --> 0:56:51.440
<v Speaker 1>where you get the monotony of the the mounds that

0:56:51.800 --> 0:56:55.080
<v Speaker 1>kind of just you know, flow, if that makes sense.

0:56:55.480 --> 0:56:59.480
<v Speaker 2>Mm hmm. Yeah. Well pretty much every modern every golf

0:56:59.520 --> 0:57:02.319
<v Speaker 2>course that's been built right now is being reshaped from

0:57:02.320 --> 0:57:06.439
<v Speaker 2>wall to wall, and some take that opportunity to do

0:57:06.680 --> 0:57:09.880
<v Speaker 2>something interesting and and others don't really know what to

0:57:09.960 --> 0:57:14.160
<v Speaker 2>do with that opportunity, and and so you end up

0:57:14.200 --> 0:57:16.920
<v Speaker 2>with a with a site that everybody can tell is

0:57:16.960 --> 0:57:20.280
<v Speaker 2>not because you can feel that it's not natural, but

0:57:20.280 --> 0:57:23.640
<v Speaker 2>but it's also not doing anything interesting with it, which

0:57:23.680 --> 0:57:26.640
<v Speaker 2>is can be a problem.

0:57:26.760 --> 0:57:28.360
<v Speaker 1>Here's a question for britch Headache.

0:57:28.840 --> 0:57:34.760
<v Speaker 2>I think Rich Henning, Yeah, r Henning Twitter.

0:57:35.120 --> 0:57:38.040
<v Speaker 1>When do you think the first AI golf course gets commissioned?

0:57:38.280 --> 0:57:41.800
<v Speaker 2>Oh? Boy? I mean, do you think it has already been?

0:57:41.920 --> 0:57:42.200
<v Speaker 2>I don't know.

0:57:42.920 --> 0:57:44.520
<v Speaker 1>I think it would be fun to talk about what

0:57:44.560 --> 0:57:45.880
<v Speaker 1>I could do and design.

0:57:46.320 --> 0:57:49.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, I'm I might be biased on this

0:57:49.520 --> 0:57:53.120
<v Speaker 2>because I really don't like a lot of the AI

0:57:53.240 --> 0:57:57.160
<v Speaker 2>shit that that we're seeing right now. I don't like

0:57:57.200 --> 0:58:00.560
<v Speaker 2>what a lot of AI focused companies are are doing

0:58:01.160 --> 0:58:05.360
<v Speaker 2>with the technology. But what could AI do in design?

0:58:06.360 --> 0:58:08.600
<v Speaker 2>What would I like it to do in design? I

0:58:08.640 --> 0:58:11.640
<v Speaker 2>think coming up with a variety of options for a

0:58:11.720 --> 0:58:14.520
<v Speaker 2>routing on a certain piece of land would be an

0:58:14.680 --> 0:58:18.320
<v Speaker 2>interesting use of an AI system. I would imagine that

0:58:18.360 --> 0:58:21.560
<v Speaker 2>it could give you. It could just like spit out

0:58:21.800 --> 0:58:25.880
<v Speaker 2>according to certain parameters, one hundred different routings of possible

0:58:25.960 --> 0:58:28.200
<v Speaker 2>routings of a golf course that would work, and that

0:58:28.280 --> 0:58:32.360
<v Speaker 2>might generate some creative ideas for the architect. I think

0:58:32.400 --> 0:58:38.880
<v Speaker 2>that AI could be used to look for opportunities for

0:58:38.960 --> 0:58:43.160
<v Speaker 2>efficiency and economy of construction. Those could be great gains

0:58:43.160 --> 0:58:46.360
<v Speaker 2>that you'd find possibly with AI. I mean, I don't know.

0:58:47.120 --> 0:58:51.000
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if like a drainage plan or irritation could

0:58:51.080 --> 0:58:52.200
<v Speaker 1>actually be AI.

0:58:52.880 --> 0:58:54.960
<v Speaker 2>Some of the more technical needs of a golf course

0:58:55.160 --> 0:58:58.320
<v Speaker 2>you would imagine could be done by a robot. I mean,

0:58:58.360 --> 0:59:02.120
<v Speaker 2>the funny thing about new AI stuff, especially the chatbots,

0:59:02.200 --> 0:59:05.080
<v Speaker 2>is that they're not very good at practical stuff, but

0:59:05.080 --> 0:59:08.600
<v Speaker 2>but really convincing it creative tasks, which is, you know,

0:59:08.720 --> 0:59:12.360
<v Speaker 2>kind of makes their application to golf architecture a little

0:59:12.360 --> 0:59:16.160
<v Speaker 2>bit difficult to fathom. I do know that AI has

0:59:16.280 --> 0:59:22.240
<v Speaker 2>already been helping architects with renderings, with responding to RFPs,

0:59:22.360 --> 0:59:26.320
<v Speaker 2>with presentations. I think that a responsible use of AI

0:59:26.440 --> 0:59:30.640
<v Speaker 2>to those ends could be good in the golf architecture industry.

0:59:30.680 --> 0:59:32.800
<v Speaker 2>But you know, if you're just using it to do

0:59:32.840 --> 0:59:35.080
<v Speaker 2>your homework, then then that's probably not good.

0:59:36.040 --> 0:59:36.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:59:36.880 --> 0:59:42.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, the temptation has to be has to be heavy.

0:59:42.760 --> 0:59:44.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I can see you can see a lot of

0:59:44.880 --> 0:59:50.800
<v Speaker 1>greens committees really going for AI generated uh wispy praise

0:59:50.840 --> 0:59:58.000
<v Speaker 1>of a golf course. Uh. I think this is going

0:59:58.080 --> 1:00:01.760
<v Speaker 1>to happen. It's going to have happen. I know, I'm

1:00:01.760 --> 1:00:03.960
<v Speaker 1>just going to be excited to be here to watch

1:00:04.000 --> 1:00:08.880
<v Speaker 1>the first few. Well, the reality with AI too is

1:00:08.920 --> 1:00:11.240
<v Speaker 1>it gets better and better the more you use it

1:00:11.560 --> 1:00:14.880
<v Speaker 1>and understand how to use it. But the issue is

1:00:14.920 --> 1:00:17.880
<v Speaker 1>there's going to be the first one's probably going to

1:00:17.920 --> 1:00:21.720
<v Speaker 1>be trash, and maybe the second one, may the third one.

1:00:22.440 --> 1:00:24.800
<v Speaker 1>And these things cost so much money that people just

1:00:24.840 --> 1:00:28.760
<v Speaker 1>stop trying to use it if it doesn't, if it

1:00:28.840 --> 1:00:33.320
<v Speaker 1>doesn't deliver really good results. But I do agree that AI,

1:00:33.680 --> 1:00:37.920
<v Speaker 1>it's like anything, can make an architect's job a lot

1:00:38.040 --> 1:00:40.120
<v Speaker 1>easier in some ways.

1:00:41.640 --> 1:00:47.200
<v Speaker 2>I would hope that it could be used to focus

1:00:48.080 --> 1:00:51.560
<v Speaker 2>architects on creative tasks in some way. Yeah, right, if

1:00:51.560 --> 1:00:55.080
<v Speaker 2>we if the great task of the use of AI

1:00:56.160 --> 1:00:59.919
<v Speaker 2>is to figure out what can belong to the AI

1:01:00.280 --> 1:01:04.280
<v Speaker 2>and what has to belong to humans than in golf architecture,

1:01:04.280 --> 1:01:06.160
<v Speaker 2>I would love to see if it's going to be used.

1:01:06.160 --> 1:01:10.440
<v Speaker 2>I would love to see architects figure out, Okay, what

1:01:10.640 --> 1:01:14.520
<v Speaker 2>portion of this job that I have can I clear

1:01:14.560 --> 1:01:17.640
<v Speaker 2>off my plate and give to this engine so that

1:01:17.720 --> 1:01:24.360
<v Speaker 2>I can be more creative, be more innovative in you know,

1:01:24.560 --> 1:01:29.280
<v Speaker 2>the other areas of my discipline. And I think if

1:01:29.280 --> 1:01:33.160
<v Speaker 2>it can do that, then great. But it's really hard

1:01:33.200 --> 1:01:37.160
<v Speaker 2>to figure out exactly where the AI should stop and

1:01:37.200 --> 1:01:39.680
<v Speaker 2>the human should start. Yeah, but that's why we.

1:01:39.640 --> 1:01:42.480
<v Speaker 1>Have to figure out, all right, what's the next?

1:01:43.120 --> 1:01:46.920
<v Speaker 2>Okay, what's next? We have got a good question from

1:01:47.000 --> 1:01:50.760
<v Speaker 2>Grey Carlton, who is a young up and coming shaper.

1:01:51.720 --> 1:01:54.120
<v Speaker 2>He says, lots of new builds on great Land these days.

1:01:54.360 --> 1:01:56.640
<v Speaker 2>What current architects would you choose to build a great

1:01:56.680 --> 1:01:58.960
<v Speaker 2>course on a dead flat site. I think we could

1:01:58.960 --> 1:02:02.360
<v Speaker 2>address thisretty quickly because we kind of have gotten into

1:02:02.360 --> 1:02:05.760
<v Speaker 2>some of related issues with a previous question. But what's

1:02:05.760 --> 1:02:06.800
<v Speaker 2>your what's your first thought there?

1:02:06.880 --> 1:02:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Eddie? Oh? And see this is just I hate this question.

1:02:11.360 --> 1:02:13.320
<v Speaker 1>This is my least favorite type of question.

1:02:15.920 --> 1:02:17.440
<v Speaker 2>Can we speak in generalities?

1:02:17.800 --> 1:02:18.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

1:02:18.200 --> 1:02:21.720
<v Speaker 2>Can we say that it doesn't have to be a maximalist.

1:02:21.640 --> 1:02:25.800
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't. I think that your favorite course that you

1:02:25.840 --> 1:02:29.680
<v Speaker 1>talk about on every podcast Talking Stick is Bill Koor

1:02:29.960 --> 1:02:31.240
<v Speaker 1>and Prenshaw's.

1:02:31.080 --> 1:02:34.439
<v Speaker 2>It's become I've become too predictable with the talking stick

1:02:34.520 --> 1:02:35.400
<v Speaker 2>talking point.

1:02:36.720 --> 1:02:39.800
<v Speaker 1>That that's a great and that's an example of really

1:02:39.880 --> 1:02:47.160
<v Speaker 1>minimalist architecture on a dead flat property. I think in general,

1:02:47.240 --> 1:02:53.280
<v Speaker 1>you got to have somebody that's really creative, depending up

1:02:53.320 --> 1:02:57.120
<v Speaker 1>where where the site is, depending on the climate. If

1:02:57.120 --> 1:03:00.640
<v Speaker 1>it's dead flat and it's sandy, I'd hire like anybody

1:03:02.400 --> 1:03:05.680
<v Speaker 1>because if it's super sandy, you could move stuff around

1:03:05.760 --> 1:03:13.160
<v Speaker 1>and create really uh interesting contours throughout. So you know,

1:03:13.200 --> 1:03:16.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to totally punt here, which is not not

1:03:16.560 --> 1:03:17.800
<v Speaker 1>a great answer.

1:03:18.120 --> 1:03:21.160
<v Speaker 2>I just you know, I want to see Mike DeFreeze

1:03:21.160 --> 1:03:22.680
<v Speaker 2>go to town on a dead flat site.

1:03:22.720 --> 1:03:25.480
<v Speaker 1>All right, there you go. I love I love that

1:03:25.520 --> 1:03:32.120
<v Speaker 1>you gave an answer. I'm punting. I'm being very political,

1:03:33.440 --> 1:03:35.360
<v Speaker 1>which is podcast.

1:03:34.960 --> 1:03:37.280
<v Speaker 2>The industry has gotten to you. Andy, I think I

1:03:37.320 --> 1:03:40.919
<v Speaker 2>think you just understandably resists the idea that you would

1:03:41.120 --> 1:03:44.160
<v Speaker 2>name one person and not name something else. But there

1:03:44.200 --> 1:03:48.040
<v Speaker 2>are many possible candidates who would do an interesting job

1:03:48.080 --> 1:03:50.360
<v Speaker 2>with the dead flat site, and frankly, I think, Okay.

1:03:50.760 --> 1:03:53.520
<v Speaker 2>The reason I took an interest in this question is

1:03:53.560 --> 1:03:57.080
<v Speaker 2>that a lot of the very best architects at this

1:03:57.120 --> 1:04:00.280
<v Speaker 2>point have spent a lot of time working on pretty

1:04:00.320 --> 1:04:04.480
<v Speaker 2>much nothing but really great sites or high potential sites,

1:04:04.560 --> 1:04:08.240
<v Speaker 2>at the very least not dead flat sites, and so

1:04:08.800 --> 1:04:13.560
<v Speaker 2>I think one interesting direction is to, you know, look

1:04:13.600 --> 1:04:16.040
<v Speaker 2>at some of these architects who have been blessed in

1:04:16.400 --> 1:04:19.400
<v Speaker 2>the land that they've gotten and try to see what

1:04:19.440 --> 1:04:22.120
<v Speaker 2>they would do now with a piece of land that

1:04:22.160 --> 1:04:22.800
<v Speaker 2>wasn't his west.

1:04:24.120 --> 1:04:29.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think you could go down the list of

1:04:29.160 --> 1:04:32.840
<v Speaker 1>heavy hitter golf architects. I think what you'd like to do,

1:04:33.960 --> 1:04:36.480
<v Speaker 1>what you'd like to have as a fan of architecture

1:04:36.640 --> 1:04:40.680
<v Speaker 1>over the period of time is a wide array of

1:04:42.520 --> 1:04:50.920
<v Speaker 1>varieties and sights. I really like seeing architecture on flat surfaces.

1:04:50.920 --> 1:04:55.960
<v Speaker 1>To me, as a fan of architecture, it's sometimes more

1:04:56.040 --> 1:05:00.920
<v Speaker 1>interesting than just the tremendous sight because the the land

1:05:01.240 --> 1:05:06.240
<v Speaker 1>and does the work. But as somebody going to see stuff,

1:05:06.320 --> 1:05:11.120
<v Speaker 1>I like to see flat golf courses to see the

1:05:11.280 --> 1:05:16.640
<v Speaker 1>clever solutions around what they did. Now. Am I saying

1:05:16.680 --> 1:05:19.600
<v Speaker 1>these are better golf courses than getting the best site

1:05:19.600 --> 1:05:24.360
<v Speaker 1>in the world. No, but it's it's it's fun and

1:05:24.560 --> 1:05:29.200
<v Speaker 1>amusing often to see all of the tricks pulled out.

1:05:29.400 --> 1:05:32.920
<v Speaker 1>That's to me what when you see the great architects

1:05:32.960 --> 1:05:37.560
<v Speaker 1>work on dead flat uh properties, what they're doing is

1:05:37.560 --> 1:05:40.680
<v Speaker 1>they're showing you all all of the things they've been

1:05:40.720 --> 1:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>thinking about for years.

1:05:42.320 --> 1:05:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, all the different Yeah.

1:05:45.800 --> 1:05:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and sometimes if I tried to build eighteen holes

1:05:50.280 --> 1:05:53.840
<v Speaker 1>of dead flat land, I'd run out of ideas, absolutely.

1:05:54.360 --> 1:05:56.200
<v Speaker 2>I mean, that's what Bill Cora was worried about it

1:05:56.320 --> 1:05:58.520
<v Speaker 2>at my favorite course, Talking Stick. And the reason I

1:05:58.640 --> 1:06:01.280
<v Speaker 2>talk about Talking Stick all the time is that, like,

1:06:01.640 --> 1:06:03.960
<v Speaker 2>I'm very interested in the question of how an architect

1:06:04.000 --> 1:06:07.320
<v Speaker 2>can be site specific on a bad site, on a

1:06:07.400 --> 1:06:10.960
<v Speaker 2>supposedly bad site, what can you come up with to

1:06:11.120 --> 1:06:16.200
<v Speaker 2>still be site specific when the site isn't giving you

1:06:16.720 --> 1:06:19.479
<v Speaker 2>that much that would usually be considered good for golf.

1:06:20.400 --> 1:06:23.480
<v Speaker 2>And you know, people right now are very concerned about

1:06:23.520 --> 1:06:26.000
<v Speaker 2>freshness in golf architecture or where it's going next, or

1:06:26.360 --> 1:06:30.120
<v Speaker 2>where new ideas are going to come from. We're maybe

1:06:30.200 --> 1:06:33.840
<v Speaker 2>not going to find new ideas on rolling Duneland right now.

1:06:34.080 --> 1:06:38.360
<v Speaker 2>And naturalist architecture applied to such Douneland. Those are great courses,

1:06:38.400 --> 1:06:41.000
<v Speaker 2>and I'd like to see as many of them built

1:06:41.000 --> 1:06:43.600
<v Speaker 2>as possible, honestly, because why not, Like they're they're all

1:06:44.000 --> 1:06:45.600
<v Speaker 2>it always turns out pretty nice.

1:06:45.520 --> 1:06:48.840
<v Speaker 1>You know, And they're all different because the landscapes and

1:06:48.920 --> 1:06:50.320
<v Speaker 1>they different.

1:06:50.440 --> 1:06:54.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, every site is specific in its way. But yeah,

1:06:54.040 --> 1:06:56.840
<v Speaker 2>if we're looking for something really different and really fresh,

1:06:57.800 --> 1:06:59.919
<v Speaker 2>I you know, I want to see a smart site

1:07:00.040 --> 1:07:04.920
<v Speaker 2>specific architect try to apply their site specific philosophy to

1:07:05.600 --> 1:07:07.520
<v Speaker 2>you know, a place that you wouldn't expect to yield

1:07:07.680 --> 1:07:12.000
<v Speaker 2>good golf, you know. And that doesn't mean like reconstructing

1:07:12.120 --> 1:07:15.720
<v Speaker 2>the play, like just denying what the what the side is?

1:07:15.840 --> 1:07:19.000
<v Speaker 2>It means looking for, Okay, what's interesting here and how

1:07:19.080 --> 1:07:21.840
<v Speaker 2>can we highlight it? And and to me, that's what

1:07:22.440 --> 1:07:24.640
<v Speaker 2>that's what's so interesting about talking stick is that corn

1:07:24.720 --> 1:07:28.640
<v Speaker 2>Crunch actually did that there? All right, next question?

1:07:30.240 --> 1:07:32.760
<v Speaker 1>All right, this is this is gonna be the last one.

1:07:33.680 --> 1:07:36.240
<v Speaker 1>We are going to get through four each, Yeah, set

1:07:36.280 --> 1:07:37.640
<v Speaker 1>out with our best intentions.

1:07:37.760 --> 1:07:40.640
<v Speaker 2>Apologies to the uh the ones left on the cutting

1:07:40.680 --> 1:07:43.320
<v Speaker 2>room floor. I mean, obviously I'm gonna as I usually do,

1:07:43.440 --> 1:07:46.680
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to get in the community forum and answer

1:07:46.760 --> 1:07:49.040
<v Speaker 2>a bunch of questions that we didn't get to, because

1:07:49.080 --> 1:07:49.800
<v Speaker 2>that's that's fun.

1:07:50.160 --> 1:07:54.600
<v Speaker 1>This is from Bob roll Tella on Twitter. Are there

1:07:54.640 --> 1:07:57.840
<v Speaker 1>any architectural features or approaches that could be considered as

1:07:57.920 --> 1:08:04.080
<v Speaker 1>a means of mitigating technolgical advances apart from sheer length? Surely,

1:08:04.240 --> 1:08:07.720
<v Speaker 1>with all the improved ability that comes along with new tech,

1:08:07.800 --> 1:08:10.720
<v Speaker 1>there might be innovations in golf course architecture to match.

1:08:12.120 --> 1:08:16.559
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, man, come on, golf course architects, keep up, keep up.

1:08:17.760 --> 1:08:20.439
<v Speaker 2>This is a pretty it's a good question. This is

1:08:20.479 --> 1:08:24.559
<v Speaker 2>a pretty common complaint made by Ron Witten. I'm seeing

1:08:24.840 --> 1:08:28.320
<v Speaker 2>within this question the seeds of a complaint that Ron

1:08:28.360 --> 1:08:31.840
<v Speaker 2>Witten often made in the pages of Golf Digest, where

1:08:31.880 --> 1:08:35.599
<v Speaker 2>he was the architecture editor, and that is that golf

1:08:35.720 --> 1:08:40.479
<v Speaker 2>architects have failed to innovate along with the biggest change

1:08:40.720 --> 1:08:44.120
<v Speaker 2>in the game of golf, which has been equipment technology

1:08:44.280 --> 1:08:47.560
<v Speaker 2>and distance gains, and that instead of that, according to

1:08:47.680 --> 1:08:51.840
<v Speaker 2>Ron Witten, they have just complained about it and said

1:08:51.840 --> 1:08:54.200
<v Speaker 2>the ball should be rolled back, we should roll back

1:08:54.240 --> 1:08:57.200
<v Speaker 2>the clock. And he believed that this was a backward

1:08:57.280 --> 1:09:00.240
<v Speaker 2>looking stance and not a forward looking stance, and he

1:09:00.320 --> 1:09:04.400
<v Speaker 2>adbhored it. And I get that argument.

1:09:05.520 --> 1:09:05.680
<v Speaker 1>You know.

1:09:06.040 --> 1:09:08.720
<v Speaker 2>The truth is, I'm not sure that there's anything new

1:09:09.040 --> 1:09:13.400
<v Speaker 2>under the sun in golf architecture when it comes to

1:09:14.240 --> 1:09:17.720
<v Speaker 2>combating distance gains. And I could be wrong about this,

1:09:18.040 --> 1:09:20.439
<v Speaker 2>since my job is to kind of react to golf

1:09:20.560 --> 1:09:24.680
<v Speaker 2>architecture as opposed to design new courses. But I think

1:09:24.760 --> 1:09:27.880
<v Speaker 2>that Pete Dye had a lot of good ideas about

1:09:27.880 --> 1:09:32.400
<v Speaker 2>how to mitigate distance gains in the seventies and eighties.

1:09:33.840 --> 1:09:38.160
<v Speaker 2>He was all about selective narrowness fair ways that kind

1:09:38.200 --> 1:09:42.000
<v Speaker 2>of changed in their dimensions as the hole went on.

1:09:42.560 --> 1:09:45.320
<v Speaker 2>He was all about tree lines, like lots of trees,

1:09:45.720 --> 1:09:50.639
<v Speaker 2>but paired with interesting angles and diagonals and shot shapes

1:09:50.960 --> 1:09:53.519
<v Speaker 2>and things like that, So trees kind of getting in

1:09:53.600 --> 1:09:55.880
<v Speaker 2>the way of what good players might want to do

1:09:56.240 --> 1:10:00.799
<v Speaker 2>and therefore limiting the amount that they could just wallop

1:10:00.840 --> 1:10:04.160
<v Speaker 2>away at the ball with their preferred shot shape. He

1:10:04.400 --> 1:10:09.000
<v Speaker 2>used water hazards to thwart pure bombing, right, So water

1:10:09.080 --> 1:10:12.599
<v Speaker 2>hazards would sometimes literally kind of cut off the landing zone.

1:10:12.640 --> 1:10:14.400
<v Speaker 2>And if you want to hit it three hundred and

1:10:14.400 --> 1:10:15.720
<v Speaker 2>twenty yards, you're going to be in the middle of

1:10:15.800 --> 1:10:19.080
<v Speaker 2>this pond. Fine, go for it, you know. And he

1:10:19.720 --> 1:10:23.240
<v Speaker 2>used classic strategic angles, but he just used them kind

1:10:23.240 --> 1:10:26.000
<v Speaker 2>of on a smaller and tighter scale.

1:10:26.400 --> 1:10:26.519
<v Speaker 1>Right.

1:10:27.080 --> 1:10:31.719
<v Speaker 2>That's TPC Sawgrass, that's Harbor Town. That was PGA West

1:10:31.800 --> 1:10:34.240
<v Speaker 2>in its early iterations. Right, that's what he was doing

1:10:34.800 --> 1:10:37.599
<v Speaker 2>with those courses that he was thinking about distance gains

1:10:37.640 --> 1:10:39.760
<v Speaker 2>and how golf architecture could be used to combat it.

1:10:40.240 --> 1:10:42.400
<v Speaker 2>That's how he did it. The problem with all of

1:10:42.439 --> 1:10:47.960
<v Speaker 2>that is that it made extraordinarily interesting professional courses, but

1:10:48.439 --> 1:10:52.080
<v Speaker 2>a lot of these innovations were not did were not

1:10:52.240 --> 1:10:56.720
<v Speaker 2>good models for other courses that wanted to appeal to

1:10:56.800 --> 1:11:00.280
<v Speaker 2>average golfers. Right, those models were great for t DPC

1:11:00.400 --> 1:11:04.000
<v Speaker 2>Sawgrass and Harbor Town and and PGA West, But once

1:11:04.040 --> 1:11:07.439
<v Speaker 2>you start replicating them, you are going to start getting

1:11:07.560 --> 1:11:11.320
<v Speaker 2>some frustration from average golfers, for whom a lot of

1:11:11.400 --> 1:11:14.479
<v Speaker 2>these factors, like the trees and the narrowness, and the

1:11:15.080 --> 1:11:18.280
<v Speaker 2>and the tight lines and the water hazards. You're going

1:11:18.360 --> 1:11:21.360
<v Speaker 2>to start getting understandable frustration from those golfers about those

1:11:21.439 --> 1:11:25.759
<v Speaker 2>kinds of features because those features tend to punish average

1:11:25.760 --> 1:11:29.000
<v Speaker 2>golfers a lot more than they punish expert golfers. So

1:11:30.080 --> 1:11:33.360
<v Speaker 2>I'm not sure how much there is that golf architecture

1:11:33.400 --> 1:11:36.280
<v Speaker 2>can do to stay ahead of the curve on distance gains.

1:11:37.120 --> 1:11:39.000
<v Speaker 2>And that's why I think there should be a rollback.

1:11:40.920 --> 1:11:47.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I was going to point out that the innovations

1:11:47.680 --> 1:11:50.880
<v Speaker 1>are going to hinder playability for all.

1:11:51.840 --> 1:11:55.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, So that's right. I think it's almost inevitably you know.

1:11:56.479 --> 1:12:00.880
<v Speaker 1>I think if you wanted to build a golf course

1:12:01.960 --> 1:12:08.120
<v Speaker 1>and you said to a designer, the only people that

1:12:08.200 --> 1:12:12.200
<v Speaker 1>are going to play this golf course are high level players,

1:12:13.200 --> 1:12:16.519
<v Speaker 1>I think it would look a lot different than what

1:12:17.680 --> 1:12:21.080
<v Speaker 1>everybody gets. Is like, I wanted to challenge the best,

1:12:21.479 --> 1:12:23.720
<v Speaker 1>but I want everybody to be able to have a

1:12:23.760 --> 1:12:27.920
<v Speaker 1>good time playing. This is effectively the charge that you

1:12:28.000 --> 1:12:34.000
<v Speaker 1>know most golf courses give. And if you removed everybody's

1:12:34.040 --> 1:12:38.880
<v Speaker 1>playing this, I think the golf you'd see, there's a

1:12:38.960 --> 1:12:41.800
<v Speaker 1>lot of innovation to be done, there'd be a lot

1:12:41.840 --> 1:12:46.960
<v Speaker 1>of crazy thoughts. It would look so much different than

1:12:48.200 --> 1:12:53.200
<v Speaker 1>what we consider great golf. I you know, Zach Blair,

1:12:53.840 --> 1:12:56.720
<v Speaker 1>a friend of mine who's I think, got a good

1:12:57.120 --> 1:13:01.320
<v Speaker 1>golf architecture brain. We talked about this and he's like,

1:13:01.479 --> 1:13:03.680
<v Speaker 1>I just put water everywhere.

1:13:04.040 --> 1:13:07.639
<v Speaker 2>Right, because that's the thing that is a strategic hazard

1:13:07.840 --> 1:13:09.760
<v Speaker 2>of meaning for these guys.

1:13:10.320 --> 1:13:13.760
<v Speaker 1>If you think about the way that golfers play in

1:13:13.800 --> 1:13:20.760
<v Speaker 1>the modern era, it's all risk averse strategy. What they're

1:13:20.840 --> 1:13:25.680
<v Speaker 1>doing is they are trying to mitigate all risk. So

1:13:25.800 --> 1:13:27.439
<v Speaker 1>if you wanted to put them in a blender, you

1:13:27.560 --> 1:13:32.400
<v Speaker 1>put risk everywhere, and you put them in situations where

1:13:32.479 --> 1:13:36.040
<v Speaker 1>they can't. They have no choice but to take on risk.

1:13:37.479 --> 1:13:42.920
<v Speaker 1>But that would be miserable, an absolutely miserable experience for

1:13:43.000 --> 1:13:46.439
<v Speaker 1>a fifteen handicap. It's why one of the things I

1:13:46.520 --> 1:13:49.240
<v Speaker 1>think would be interesting with the PGA Tour is if

1:13:49.320 --> 1:13:55.360
<v Speaker 1>they tried to build a modern day, built out championship

1:13:55.479 --> 1:14:00.160
<v Speaker 1>stadium golf course. I think that's an interesting idea for

1:14:00.280 --> 1:14:05.040
<v Speaker 1>them to ponder, and people that go play it just

1:14:05.240 --> 1:14:08.320
<v Speaker 1>understand this is you're going to shoot one hundred and

1:14:08.439 --> 1:14:11.760
<v Speaker 1>ten and you're not going to have a good time,

1:14:11.840 --> 1:14:15.360
<v Speaker 1>and people will line up to play it. But what

1:14:15.600 --> 1:14:20.200
<v Speaker 1>the charge to the architect? What every charge to every architect?

1:14:20.479 --> 1:14:23.360
<v Speaker 1>And this is people get frustrated with the Golden age

1:14:23.600 --> 1:14:28.080
<v Speaker 1>restorations and how they're not holding up to modern technology,

1:14:28.360 --> 1:14:33.920
<v Speaker 1>and let's just use US opens. It's like, well, you know,

1:14:34.360 --> 1:14:38.880
<v Speaker 1>this club is only hosting a US Open every ten

1:14:39.320 --> 1:14:43.080
<v Speaker 1>to twenty years. And the reason they did the restoration

1:14:43.840 --> 1:14:45.960
<v Speaker 1>was so that it's more enjoyable for their members to

1:14:46.040 --> 1:14:50.400
<v Speaker 1>play every day. If you wanted to make really hard

1:14:51.280 --> 1:14:57.040
<v Speaker 1>golf for pros, you could do that. It's totally feasible

1:14:57.160 --> 1:14:59.840
<v Speaker 1>to do. You just need a bunch of new golf

1:15:00.040 --> 1:15:03.120
<v Speaker 1>courses because I don't think most people want to play

1:15:04.080 --> 1:15:09.440
<v Speaker 1>what would be really challenging and hold up to modern technology.

1:15:11.360 --> 1:15:13.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't think everybody would want to play it all

1:15:13.160 --> 1:15:17.000
<v Speaker 1>the time. And that that's why a rollback makes sense,

1:15:17.080 --> 1:15:20.040
<v Speaker 1>because it would make a lot more more golf courses,

1:15:21.040 --> 1:15:24.200
<v Speaker 1>make a lot more sense for pro golf because a

1:15:24.280 --> 1:15:27.760
<v Speaker 1>great example, Pebble Beach has been just completely passed by

1:15:28.720 --> 1:15:31.639
<v Speaker 1>by technology. And this is what you know. We're gonna

1:15:31.640 --> 1:15:33.960
<v Speaker 1>see EUS open there every five years, and it's just

1:15:35.840 --> 1:15:42.759
<v Speaker 1>like they hit wedges on probably like ten holes, eleven holes.

1:15:44.360 --> 1:15:47.880
<v Speaker 2>Wedge the only defenses you know, the narrow fairway is

1:15:47.920 --> 1:15:50.719
<v Speaker 2>in the rough, which are which are sort of pathetic.

1:15:50.880 --> 1:15:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Think about it. Wedge on one, yeah, depending on when.

1:15:54.840 --> 1:15:55.599
<v Speaker 1>Wedge on three.

1:15:57.200 --> 1:16:02.000
<v Speaker 2>Maybe a wedge on two maybe no, No, not seriously,

1:16:02.560 --> 1:16:03.920
<v Speaker 2>I don't know that long of a hole and you

1:16:03.960 --> 1:16:05.080
<v Speaker 2>can just blast it down it.

1:16:05.720 --> 1:16:08.760
<v Speaker 1>I don't think. I still it's not a wedge.

1:16:08.880 --> 1:16:10.760
<v Speaker 2>It might be like an eight iron, nine iron maybe

1:16:10.800 --> 1:16:11.479
<v Speaker 2>in a couple of years.

1:16:12.280 --> 1:16:17.000
<v Speaker 1>Wedge on four, wedge on uh, you're sick. A wedge

1:16:17.040 --> 1:16:20.400
<v Speaker 1>on seven, not on eight, not on nine, nine on ten.

1:16:22.479 --> 1:16:24.920
<v Speaker 1>Then you got on the back and there's a wedge

1:16:25.000 --> 1:16:26.400
<v Speaker 1>on fifteen sixteen.

1:16:29.640 --> 1:16:31.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean also, I mean I think pros are

1:16:31.880 --> 1:16:35.639
<v Speaker 2>hitting on wedges on holes that that you'd be stunned

1:16:35.680 --> 1:16:37.439
<v Speaker 2>to see them. I mean, you know this, but that

1:16:37.760 --> 1:16:39.880
<v Speaker 2>we're all stunned to see them hitting wedges on So

1:16:40.439 --> 1:16:42.200
<v Speaker 2>it's not out of the question to me that a

1:16:42.280 --> 1:16:44.040
<v Speaker 2>pro would hit a wedge on nine at Pebble, or

1:16:44.200 --> 1:16:45.600
<v Speaker 2>hit a wedge on ten at Pebble, or hit a

1:16:45.640 --> 1:16:48.200
<v Speaker 2>wedge on thirteen at Pebble like they're they're doing these

1:16:48.280 --> 1:16:48.760
<v Speaker 2>things now.

1:16:48.880 --> 1:16:52.160
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, maybe this is why they should just play

1:16:52.200 --> 1:16:54.840
<v Speaker 1>simulator golf, right.

1:16:54.800 --> 1:16:58.080
<v Speaker 2>This should all be the Sofi Center. Yeah, they're great.

1:16:58.120 --> 1:17:01.040
<v Speaker 2>The great new uh, the great new course of the

1:17:01.120 --> 1:17:03.600
<v Speaker 2>game is the endless courses of so.

1:17:04.080 --> 1:17:06.400
<v Speaker 1>We get new golf falls this year for TGL.

1:17:07.080 --> 1:17:09.400
<v Speaker 2>I know, I know, I've I've been hearing some some

1:17:09.560 --> 1:17:13.040
<v Speaker 2>rumblings about the architects responsible, and I'm curious as to

1:17:13.560 --> 1:17:14.400
<v Speaker 2>what's gonna.

1:17:14.400 --> 1:17:18.360
<v Speaker 1>I know, Piece is back, m Well, of course he's back.

1:17:18.439 --> 1:17:22.840
<v Speaker 2>He was the star. He was the only he was

1:17:22.880 --> 1:17:25.040
<v Speaker 2>the only one who understood the assignment the last time.

1:17:25.120 --> 1:17:30.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, he was he was, all right, Garrett, everybody should

1:17:30.840 --> 1:17:34.360
<v Speaker 1>check out your Designing Golf Podcast. Always a pleasure to

1:17:34.600 --> 1:17:37.519
<v Speaker 1>break down these questions. Uh, I'll probably get in the

1:17:37.600 --> 1:17:41.320
<v Speaker 1>forum answer some bat some of these around too. There's

1:17:41.320 --> 1:17:42.880
<v Speaker 1>a forum now, we got a for it, we got

1:17:42.960 --> 1:17:44.879
<v Speaker 1>place of bad stuff around with everybody.

1:17:45.840 --> 1:17:47.640
<v Speaker 2>It's been really fun for me. I've I've written a

1:17:47.680 --> 1:17:49.479
<v Speaker 2>lot in the forum in the past couple of days

1:17:49.520 --> 1:17:52.280
<v Speaker 2>and I'm really enjoying it. It might actually make me

1:17:52.439 --> 1:17:53.120
<v Speaker 2>like writing again.

1:17:53.400 --> 1:17:58.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I'm trying to start to love writing again too.

1:17:58.320 --> 1:18:01.240
<v Speaker 2>I know it can be hard sometimes, yeah, listen, it

1:18:01.320 --> 1:18:03.160
<v Speaker 2>can be hard. But thank you for having me on

1:18:03.240 --> 1:18:03.599
<v Speaker 2>the pod.

1:18:03.520 --> 1:18:17.800
<v Speaker 1>And always great all right, big thanks for p J

1:18:18.000 --> 1:18:22.519
<v Speaker 1>Clark for editing producing this podcast. Go check out the

1:18:22.920 --> 1:18:26.920
<v Speaker 1>pro Shop, Proshop dot the Friday dot com, and and

1:18:27.680 --> 1:18:30.519
<v Speaker 1>check out our Black Friday deals. Big thanks for all

1:18:30.560 --> 1:18:33.800
<v Speaker 1>the support. I hope everybody has a happy and say Thanksgiving.