WEBVTT - Is It Time to Move Beyond Minimalism? 0:00:00.320 --> 0:00:02.800 One of the primary trends in golf architecture over the 0:00:02.840 --> 0:00:07.000 past couple of decades has been so called minimalism. In 0:00:07.080 --> 0:00:10.880 basic terms, minimalism means using as much of the natural 0:00:10.960 --> 0:00:14.160 landscape as possible in a golf course, and it means 0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:17.680 trying to create compelling golf while moving as little earth 0:00:17.720 --> 0:00:21.439 as you can. Recently, though, some architects have started to 0:00:21.480 --> 0:00:25.480 push back against this philosophy or just resist the categories 0:00:25.520 --> 0:00:30.440 of minimalism and maximalism altogether. Today, I'm talking to two 0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:34.840 such architects. Tim Jackson and David Khan are the principles 0:00:34.880 --> 0:00:38.200 of the firm Jackson Kahn Design. Some of Jackson Kahn's 0:00:38.320 --> 0:00:42.159 notable solo designs include the Other Course at Scottsdale National 0:00:42.520 --> 0:00:46.160 and the reimagined Dunes Course at Monterey Peninsula Country Club. 0:00:46.680 --> 0:00:50.000 Tim and David have an interesting perspective on recent and 0:00:50.040 --> 0:00:53.640 current trends in golf architecture, mainly because they're looking to 0:00:53.800 --> 0:00:58.320 move beyond them. I'm Garrett Morrison, and this is designing golf. 0:01:05.000 --> 0:01:09.040 So starting with you, Tim, what do you understand the 0:01:09.160 --> 0:01:14.080 term minimalism to mean as it's usually applied to golf architecture. 0:01:15.280 --> 0:01:19.919 You know, I think that minimalism in golf course architecture 0:01:21.080 --> 0:01:24.480 is used as a term that generally describes architects obviously 0:01:24.480 --> 0:01:26.960 who quote unquote work with the land, you know, don't 0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:30.080 move a lot of dirt. I think that, you know, 0:01:30.200 --> 0:01:34.600 maximalism is you know, somewhat a derogatory term. 0:01:35.200 --> 0:01:37.560 It does seem to be that way most of the time. Yeah, 0:01:37.600 --> 0:01:40.200 minimalism is the positive term and maximalism is. 0:01:40.200 --> 0:01:42.320 The negative, right And you know, and I think a 0:01:42.360 --> 0:01:45.360 lot of that's driven by, you know, to some extent, 0:01:45.400 --> 0:01:47.360 the you know, the golf that's been designed over the 0:01:47.440 --> 0:01:49.680 last twenty five or thirty years. And you know, if 0:01:49.680 --> 0:01:53.200 you have a great site, you know, anybody can be minimalist. 0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:55.840 You know, if you have a less than great site 0:01:55.880 --> 0:01:58.600 and you still have you know, expectations as far as 0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:03.240 great golf, there's less guys that can be quote unquote maximalists. 0:02:03.240 --> 0:02:05.760 I think and actually execute, you know, based upon those 0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:09.680 those definitions in terminology. But you know, we you know, 0:02:09.720 --> 0:02:13.240 we just we strive to to to maximize what we 0:02:13.280 --> 0:02:15.800 feel the potential is of any site, you know, regardless 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:16.680 from the starting condition. 0:02:17.880 --> 0:02:21.280 And David, from from your perspective when you hear about this, 0:02:21.280 --> 0:02:25.960 this kind of dichotomy between minimalism and maximalism. Is it 0:02:26.040 --> 0:02:29.000 something that you feel like you want to resist? Is it? 0:02:29.080 --> 0:02:31.760 Is it something that that makes you feel like maybe 0:02:31.760 --> 0:02:34.000 these aren't the most useful terms in the world. 0:02:35.000 --> 0:02:38.040 Yeah, I think it's counterproductive. Honestly, I think it's it's 0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:40.160 I know we're about to talk about it, so don't 0:02:40.160 --> 0:02:41.639 take this wrong way, But I really think it's a 0:02:43.360 --> 0:02:45.639 waste of time of a conversation, right, I mean, they're 0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:48.400 not they're not. They're not getting us any closer to 0:02:49.000 --> 0:02:52.079 really talking about the bones and the nuts of what 0:02:52.240 --> 0:02:56.840 is really, you know, considered great golf experiences. Right, it 0:02:56.840 --> 0:03:00.600 doesn't really matter in our opinion, if if the land 0:03:00.720 --> 0:03:03.240 was there and you just scratched it in or you 0:03:03.280 --> 0:03:05.000 had to create it from nothing because you started with 0:03:05.040 --> 0:03:07.880 a flat parking lot, what's that end result? Is it fun? 0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:10.920 Is it enjoyables or memorable? That's really what matters. And 0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:14.640 and both spectrums can get you there, both spectrums can 0:03:14.680 --> 0:03:17.680 make you fail also, right, I mean, ultimately it's on 0:03:17.760 --> 0:03:21.040 the it's on the shoulders of the architects to to 0:03:21.120 --> 0:03:25.160 make sure that it does result in something worthwhile and desirable. So, 0:03:26.200 --> 0:03:28.760 you know, I totally agree with Tim's definition. And and 0:03:28.840 --> 0:03:32.200 also it's you know, I think that there could sometimes 0:03:32.240 --> 0:03:36.720 be minimalism and maximalism design when you just talk about 0:03:37.520 --> 0:03:43.080 the actual golf features themselves or the lack thereof. And 0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:44.280 what I mean by that is kind of like the 0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:47.160 less is more mantra that you know, a lot of 0:03:47.240 --> 0:03:52.120 architecture professors preach, you know, just because you can doesn't 0:03:52.160 --> 0:03:55.240 mean you should kind of thing, and and that can 0:03:55.600 --> 0:03:57.920 that can also happen on a on a made for 0:03:58.000 --> 0:04:00.400 golf site, right, I mean a lot of time those 0:04:00.440 --> 0:04:05.880 are some of the most overly busy and bunkered experiences 0:04:05.960 --> 0:04:08.960 because while the land is is perfect for it, right, 0:04:09.000 --> 0:04:11.360 so you just have you feel like that need just 0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:14.320 just bunket bunker bunkers everywhere because it's a naturally sandy 0:04:14.320 --> 0:04:17.200 site with humps and hullocks and those are natural bunkers, right. 0:04:18.920 --> 0:04:21.840 And so you know, I could argue that that's maximalism 0:04:21.839 --> 0:04:24.839 in the a way it's it's just to me, it's 0:04:24.839 --> 0:04:29.559 just a it's just a circular conversation that really doesn't 0:04:29.560 --> 0:04:32.719 get us any any closer towards a you know, a 0:04:32.760 --> 0:04:35.560 better product at the end of the day. So I 0:04:35.600 --> 0:04:38.479 love debating and having the conversation. But I also don't 0:04:39.200 --> 0:04:42.320 you know, I don't feel like having that conversation moves 0:04:42.440 --> 0:04:45.560 us any closer to, you know, being better designers. 0:04:45.640 --> 0:04:48.040 So maybe they're not really terms that are on your 0:04:48.080 --> 0:04:50.760 mind when you're designing a golf course. They just kind 0:04:50.760 --> 0:04:53.479 of come maybe when you're talking about golf. 0:04:53.360 --> 0:04:56.320 Course are only when only when people bring it up 0:04:56.360 --> 0:04:59.040 to us quite honestly, yeah, right, I mean to us, 0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:01.640 we always look to me maximize the opportunity and potential 0:05:01.680 --> 0:05:04.600 of the site, whether it's scratching something in because it's 0:05:04.640 --> 0:05:07.840 already ideal for golf, or we've got to reinvent the 0:05:07.839 --> 0:05:11.039 wheel because there's nothing there to create something interesting from. 0:05:11.080 --> 0:05:17.320 So that's all we're focusing on, is really maximizing the 0:05:17.520 --> 0:05:20.760 experience and meeting the goals of the client. 0:05:22.680 --> 0:05:26.600 Well, part of this seems to be historical, I guess, 0:05:26.839 --> 0:05:33.120 and you both came up in the era when minimalism 0:05:33.320 --> 0:05:37.240 was becoming something that people discussed, and part of the 0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:42.320 original intention of talking about minimalism, as I understand it, 0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:45.440 is that it was opposed to a lot of what 0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:49.800 people thought was going on in golf architecture in the 0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:53.080 nineteen eighties. And nineties. There was a group of people 0:05:53.839 --> 0:05:56.640 in the mid nineties to late nineties or even a 0:05:56.640 --> 0:06:00.719 little bit before that, who were starting to say, let's 0:06:00.720 --> 0:06:05.120 pull back a little bit on building artificial features, and 0:06:05.160 --> 0:06:10.560 if we can avoid that artificiality, then let's do it. 0:06:11.440 --> 0:06:14.640 Let's make interesting golf, but let's build only as much 0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:19.480 as necessary to generate interesting golf. And I guess that 0:06:19.640 --> 0:06:24.479 stance had real meaning at a certain time. I wonder 0:06:24.520 --> 0:06:28.320 if that meaning has become diluted over time. Is this 0:06:28.320 --> 0:06:31.400 something tim that that you've noticed in during your time 0:06:31.480 --> 0:06:34.680 and in the profession, that that just kind of the 0:06:34.680 --> 0:06:38.720 the impact of that initial stance of minimalism has has 0:06:38.800 --> 0:06:39.880 decreased over time. 0:06:40.360 --> 0:06:42.440 You know, I think that the there's always areas in 0:06:42.480 --> 0:06:45.160 golf course architecture, and you can you know, starting back 0:06:45.200 --> 0:06:47.800 and you know, and mister McDonald brought over the template 0:06:47.800 --> 0:06:50.400 greens and you know, National Golf Links, and we were 0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:52.160 often running an American a little bit before that too. 0:06:52.240 --> 0:06:55.360 But that you know, there was a time and this 0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:57.560 is this is actually interesting conversation. I think there was 0:06:57.600 --> 0:06:59.760 a time when it was kind of one upsmanship. I 0:06:59.760 --> 0:07:04.279 think in golf course architecture and certainly many many courses 0:07:04.279 --> 0:07:07.720 that were designed and built in the nineteen eighties, you know, 0:07:07.920 --> 0:07:11.480 big earth moving projects, perhaps a lot of artificiality in 0:07:11.520 --> 0:07:13.800 the way that the courses were detailed and shaped. 0:07:14.960 --> 0:07:15.120 You know. 0:07:15.160 --> 0:07:18.440 I think that that that the return to a more 0:07:18.520 --> 0:07:22.600 naturalistic type or style of design, you know, starting maybe 0:07:22.760 --> 0:07:25.760 late eighties, early nineties, with guys reacting to what had 0:07:25.800 --> 0:07:28.000 been occurring and saying, hey, let's go a different direction. 0:07:29.440 --> 0:07:33.480 I think that's that's that's true. You know, again, the 0:07:33.840 --> 0:07:36.560 flow of of design a lot of times, I think 0:07:36.600 --> 0:07:40.000 follows trends, and you know, and again the big names 0:07:40.000 --> 0:07:42.920 in the industries, when they achieve a certain stature, a 0:07:42.960 --> 0:07:45.760 lot of times it's really interesting. It's almost like, you know, 0:07:45.840 --> 0:07:48.160 to some extent, the media tries to claw them back. 0:07:48.400 --> 0:07:49.600 You know, it's like, well they're at the top of 0:07:49.600 --> 0:07:51.480 the heap now, so let's let's break them down and 0:07:51.560 --> 0:07:53.880 let's you know, lift these others up. And I think 0:07:53.920 --> 0:07:57.120 the media has a role to play actually in both aspects. 0:07:57.160 --> 0:08:00.360 You know, when when Golf Digests came out with the 0:08:00.480 --> 0:08:03.200 America's one hundred Toughest Golf Courses in nineteen sixty six 0:08:03.280 --> 0:08:05.720 or wherever it was, George Pepper's list there were a 0:08:05.760 --> 0:08:07.120 lot of guys that wanted to be on that list, 0:08:07.160 --> 0:08:09.120 a lot of developers because it helped them sell real estate. 0:08:09.600 --> 0:08:11.560 And so as a result, some of the golf that 0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:13.480 was built in the seventies going into the nineteen eighties 0:08:13.560 --> 0:08:17.040 or these very difficult you know, overshaped you know, big 0:08:17.120 --> 0:08:20.360 contour type of features which created some very difficult golf, 0:08:20.360 --> 0:08:23.960 but it got them on the list, right. And now 0:08:24.120 --> 0:08:25.800 you know, the media kind of did you know, they 0:08:25.840 --> 0:08:28.880 rejected that because that's what was popular to a large. 0:08:28.640 --> 0:08:30.080 Extent, but he also created it. 0:08:34.080 --> 0:08:36.440 Yeah, and you know, so the quote unquote you know, 0:08:36.600 --> 0:08:39.840 return to minimalism and the architects. You know, I think 0:08:39.840 --> 0:08:42.079 there are architects who that that fits their style certainly. 0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:44.319 And and David and Iland we don't you know, to 0:08:44.360 --> 0:08:47.000 speak for Dave, but you know we don't we don't. 0:08:48.040 --> 0:08:51.040 We appreciate what they do. We enjoy what they do. 0:08:52.160 --> 0:08:53.880 You know, again, if we had a site that we 0:08:53.920 --> 0:08:56.000 could just scratch golf in, that we could find it 0:08:56.040 --> 0:08:58.240 as opposed to have to create it, we would love that. 0:08:58.880 --> 0:08:59.120 You know. 0:08:59.320 --> 0:09:02.280 We haven't necessarily been presented with a lot of opportunities 0:09:02.320 --> 0:09:05.400 along those lines. We've we've been given sites both our 0:09:05.440 --> 0:09:08.359 time with Tom Fazio and as Jackson con design. 0:09:08.120 --> 0:09:09.640 Where we've had to create the golf. 0:09:09.760 --> 0:09:11.680 You know, we've had to kind of create the environment 0:09:11.800 --> 0:09:14.360 to some extent and put the golf in it. And 0:09:14.400 --> 0:09:16.080 we were we were fortunate that we were taught how 0:09:16.120 --> 0:09:19.160 to do that and do it, you know, to I think, 0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:22.079 you know a degree and a level when it all 0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:25.240 goes back together that you know, you can't tell where 0:09:25.240 --> 0:09:27.480 we cut twenty feet or where we filled seventy feet 0:09:27.520 --> 0:09:29.960 because it all looks like it's been there. You know. 0:09:29.960 --> 0:09:32.320 One of the greatest compliments we ever got. Scott Steell 0:09:32.400 --> 0:09:35.640 National Ran morrisse Att, who's a great guy, said, you 0:09:35.679 --> 0:09:37.680 guys will never get the credit that you deserve because 0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:39.400 people will think this was one of the best sites 0:09:39.440 --> 0:09:41.720 for golf that you know, you've ever had the opportunity 0:09:41.720 --> 0:09:44.480 to design on. And so much of that golf course, 0:09:44.520 --> 0:09:47.520 so much of that property had to be created because 0:09:47.559 --> 0:09:49.280 it was so flat. It had been graded for lot 0:09:49.320 --> 0:09:52.280 pads prior to us being given in the land to 0:09:52.280 --> 0:09:55.920 build golf on. So you know, the owner had high expectations. 0:09:55.960 --> 0:09:57.520 We knew how to execute it, and he had the 0:09:57.559 --> 0:09:59.520 resources to make it happen, and he's very happy with 0:09:59.559 --> 0:09:59.920 the result. 0:10:01.360 --> 0:10:06.240 At Scottsdale National, you took an approach that Tom Fazio, 0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:09.240 whom you both worked for at times in your career, 0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:12.200 that Tom Fazio occasionally took to his sites, which is 0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:18.240 that he would create structures that were so big that 0:10:18.280 --> 0:10:22.280 people could hardly believe that they weren't real. And at 0:10:22.280 --> 0:10:25.440 Scottsdale National there was a little bit of that going on, 0:10:25.760 --> 0:10:28.400 as I understand it, where you had a site that 0:10:28.520 --> 0:10:32.439 wasn't giving you much, but you were able to move 0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:37.600 so much earth that the artificiality of the environment is 0:10:37.679 --> 0:10:41.840 not immediately obvious. David, does that resonate with you as 0:10:41.840 --> 0:10:43.440 a description of that project. 0:10:44.480 --> 0:10:49.319 Absolutely. It was pretty much the number one overarching goal 0:10:49.400 --> 0:10:51.200 of everything that we do. It had to fit into 0:10:51.200 --> 0:10:55.679 that believability and natural end result. So as much as 0:10:55.720 --> 0:10:58.439 people may knock us for moving a lot of dirt 0:10:58.480 --> 0:11:02.360 and being quote unquote maximums, we still have that same 0:11:02.600 --> 0:11:06.760 goal that the minimalists have and to make it feel natural. 0:11:07.280 --> 0:11:10.320 But when you're starting with lot pads or a parking lot, 0:11:10.840 --> 0:11:13.920 natural is not a great you know, it was already unnatural. 0:11:14.800 --> 0:11:16.840 So we had to bring that back and you know, 0:11:16.880 --> 0:11:19.760 there were eighty acres of that property that were void 0:11:19.840 --> 0:11:23.960 of anything, and the remaining of the remaining you know, 0:11:23.960 --> 0:11:27.640 one hundred two hundred acres was ravished by a fire 0:11:27.679 --> 0:11:32.520 in the mid nineties, so even the Sonoran desert was hurting. So, 0:11:33.200 --> 0:11:36.640 you know, early on we knew that ownership and us 0:11:36.880 --> 0:11:41.640 wanted this project to be essentially a Sonoran desert restoration project, 0:11:42.400 --> 0:11:44.960 but not simply by just planting the right plants, but 0:11:45.000 --> 0:11:48.720 by creating a terrain that made it feel like really 0:11:48.800 --> 0:11:52.120 something special and that it had always been there. So 0:11:52.400 --> 0:11:55.840 it takes a lot of effort and thought to craft 0:11:55.920 --> 0:11:59.120 something to that scale where the human eye can't perceive 0:11:59.760 --> 0:12:02.640 what you didn't didn't do, and it's tim set. I mean, 0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:06.400 it's it really is a great, a great compliment for 0:12:06.520 --> 0:12:09.880 us to to hear when people just honestly can't believe 0:12:11.000 --> 0:12:15.199 what we did there. You know, it was it was 0:12:15.240 --> 0:12:19.720 a really fun project, and uh, you know, it's just 0:12:19.880 --> 0:12:21.800 it's just a different it's just different. 0:12:22.040 --> 0:12:22.720 It's just different. 0:12:23.320 --> 0:12:27.920 But we are always after naturalistic end results in everything 0:12:27.920 --> 0:12:30.480 we do. We love natural golf, we love natural sites. 0:12:30.520 --> 0:12:32.760 We just you know, hopefully one day we'll get to 0:12:32.800 --> 0:12:34.480 work on a little bit more that are that we 0:12:34.520 --> 0:12:36.480 don't have to move the world to make it. But 0:12:37.840 --> 0:12:39.920 that's our stance is when you have to move the dirt, 0:12:40.520 --> 0:12:43.080 make sure you move it as nature would move it. 0:12:44.000 --> 0:12:45.320 And sometimes it's got to be big. 0:12:46.280 --> 0:12:48.080 Yeah, we should know too, you know, it's not it's 0:12:48.080 --> 0:12:49.880 not just us like we We get to work with 0:12:50.000 --> 0:12:52.559 great teams of people on these projects, especially these large 0:12:52.559 --> 0:12:56.360 scale projects like Scotstone National. Pinnacle Design, who is a 0:12:56.400 --> 0:12:59.800 golf course specific landscape architecture firm based out of Palm Desert, California, 0:12:59.840 --> 0:13:02.640 are just amazing at what they do in restoring landscapes, 0:13:02.679 --> 0:13:04.920 and they do it across a wide spectrum of environments. 0:13:05.640 --> 0:13:08.440 So they were absolutely a huge part of why Scottsdale 0:13:08.520 --> 0:13:09.400 National was successful. 0:13:09.440 --> 0:13:11.000 The shapers that we get to work with. 0:13:11.559 --> 0:13:13.160 Scott Hoffman, who's a good friend of ours, was a 0:13:13.240 --> 0:13:15.280 huge part of Scottsdale National, and there's done some really 0:13:15.320 --> 0:13:19.040 incredible stuff on his own now, you know, after Scottsdale, 0:13:19.080 --> 0:13:21.920 and so you know, that's part of the fun for 0:13:22.080 --> 0:13:24.000 us is that it's you know, we get to work 0:13:24.040 --> 0:13:27.640 with some really talented people who make it make it successful. 0:13:27.720 --> 0:13:30.600 Ultimately, Tim, I'm going to frame this question to you 0:13:31.760 --> 0:13:34.880 in maybe a slightly odd way, but I want to 0:13:34.920 --> 0:13:40.440 put Scottsdale National within a trio of courses that were 0:13:40.480 --> 0:13:44.560 built from a desert environment that wasn't offering much in 0:13:44.679 --> 0:13:48.880 terms of good golfing terrain. One example of that is 0:13:48.920 --> 0:13:51.960 Shadow Creek, of course, that you both are quite familiar with, 0:13:52.080 --> 0:13:55.920 I assume from your Fazzio days. Shadow Creek was an 0:13:56.080 --> 0:13:58.880 entirely constructed environment. If you look at what that site 0:13:58.960 --> 0:14:03.280 was before, it was basically a blank canvas, and mister 0:14:03.320 --> 0:14:08.920 Fasio built built something very different from that site than 0:14:08.960 --> 0:14:14.560 what was there initially. Another example might be talking stick Corn. 0:14:14.600 --> 0:14:20.520 Crenshaw had a similarly featureless environment, but instead of building 0:14:20.560 --> 0:14:24.520 something really big, they went sort of smaller in scale. 0:14:24.560 --> 0:14:27.440 They moved plenty of dirt out there, but they also 0:14:27.600 --> 0:14:31.480 used things like a boundary fence that was pre existing 0:14:31.480 --> 0:14:34.560 and they incorporated that into their holes. And when you 0:14:34.640 --> 0:14:38.000 go to that course, it feels like it kind of 0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:41.920 sits naturally in the Sonoran Desert. Even though there's more 0:14:42.000 --> 0:14:47.360 contour there than there was obviously initially, it still feels 0:14:47.400 --> 0:14:50.760 like it belongs to that Sonoran Desert environment in a 0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:53.160 way that the Shadow Creek doesn't shadow Creek is kind 0:14:53.160 --> 0:14:56.720 of like an oasis. It is completely separate from its environment. 0:14:57.400 --> 0:15:03.360 So between those two polls, or between those two approaches 0:15:03.480 --> 0:15:06.360 to to kind of a featureless site, where would you 0:15:06.400 --> 0:15:10.960 put Scottsdale National? How how does that project fit into 0:15:11.000 --> 0:15:13.560 that dichotomy that I that I just set up there. 0:15:13.800 --> 0:15:16.000 Yeah, I think spot scots still National and kind of 0:15:16.000 --> 0:15:17.080 splits the gap quite. 0:15:16.880 --> 0:15:18.840 Honestly, that's kind of what I thought. 0:15:18.920 --> 0:15:21.360 Yeah, Yeah, I don't know, you know, I don't know 0:15:21.400 --> 0:15:24.400 how much dirt mister Kort, mister Crunshaw actually moved on 0:15:24.520 --> 0:15:27.400 the what was the North Course, as I recall. 0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:29.400 At Yes, yeah, the North it was initially called the 0:15:29.440 --> 0:15:29.880 North Course. 0:15:29.960 --> 0:15:31.280 Yeah, so if you look at the peripheries of the 0:15:31.280 --> 0:15:33.000 golf holes, and you look at the tie in points 0:15:33.080 --> 0:15:34.800 right there, there's not a lot of up or down 0:15:34.800 --> 0:15:36.640 when you get to the edges, and and that kind 0:15:36.640 --> 0:15:38.800 of can be an indicator unless it was all revegetated, 0:15:38.800 --> 0:15:41.240 and you know how much dirt was or wasn't moved. 0:15:42.120 --> 0:15:44.520 And I played it, and I've enjoyed it, and I 0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:47.120 think it's a very interesting golf course, and and and 0:15:47.160 --> 0:15:50.080 I think it's great. You know, Shadow Creek is Las Vegas, 0:15:50.160 --> 0:15:52.680 and Steve Winn is Las Vegas, and you know, I 0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:55.720 think that directed a lot of what Shadow Creek became. 0:15:55.760 --> 0:15:58.200 And Tom actually gives design credit to Steve win. It's 0:15:58.240 --> 0:16:01.440 a Tom Fazzio and Steve wind Is. You know, the 0:16:01.480 --> 0:16:04.960 stories that came out of the development and construction of 0:16:05.000 --> 0:16:08.720 Shadow Creek, both public and private, being within the within 0:16:08.760 --> 0:16:13.120 the firm, are legendary. I mean, it really was groundbreaking. 0:16:13.440 --> 0:16:16.680 And you know, Tom never gave Steve a design fee 0:16:16.720 --> 0:16:18.720 when they started the project because Tom didn't know if 0:16:18.720 --> 0:16:22.840 he could execute truly what Steve Winn wanted. You know, 0:16:22.920 --> 0:16:25.440 they built the first four holes and then they used 0:16:25.480 --> 0:16:28.280 a hydro sater with different color mulch and they basically 0:16:28.280 --> 0:16:31.880 painted out fairways, roughs, creeks, greens, and then they put 0:16:31.880 --> 0:16:33.560 all the trees that were supposed to be on the 0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:36.760 plan in their boxes out on the golf holes and 0:16:36.840 --> 0:16:39.400 mister winsid I loved it. Just quadrupled the number of trees, right, 0:16:40.400 --> 0:16:43.200 and and so you know, when when they built it, 0:16:43.280 --> 0:16:47.040 and as successful as it was, I think a light 0:16:47.080 --> 0:16:49.640 bulb went off in Tom's head, where if you have 0:16:49.720 --> 0:16:52.600 an owner who has the resources and the desires, there's 0:16:52.640 --> 0:16:55.760 really not a bad site for golf. It just takes 0:16:55.800 --> 0:16:58.040 time and money. And I know that sounds trite, and 0:16:58.080 --> 0:16:59.520 I know a lot of people would push back on 0:16:59.560 --> 0:17:01.040 that and say, well, les's not what golf should be. 0:17:02.120 --> 0:17:04.159 You know. It's when we David and I. 0:17:04.240 --> 0:17:07.359 One of the first projects that we did was a 0:17:07.800 --> 0:17:11.280 was our only restoration project to date, and it was 0:17:11.640 --> 0:17:14.840 sunny Lands in Ranch Mirage, California, which Dick Wilson in 0:17:14.880 --> 0:17:18.200 nineteen sixty five designed a state course for Walter Annenberg. 0:17:18.400 --> 0:17:22.040 Yeah, interesting course, really interesting course in that area which 0:17:22.280 --> 0:17:24.120 has a lot of architecture that might be a little 0:17:24.160 --> 0:17:26.800 bit forgettable. But sonny Lands is pretty interesting. 0:17:26.800 --> 0:17:29.760 Okay, it's a fascinating property. I mean it's you know, 0:17:29.880 --> 0:17:32.239 the property may be more fascinating than the golf. But 0:17:32.280 --> 0:17:34.800 we were very faithful to try to do what the 0:17:34.840 --> 0:17:38.240 client wanted and restore Dick Wilson's design In one of 0:17:38.280 --> 0:17:41.520 the golf course architect critics, well known came out to 0:17:41.560 --> 0:17:45.120 walk with us and it was interesting. All he didn't 0:17:45.119 --> 0:17:47.320 really want to talk about sonny Lands, and he had 0:17:47.320 --> 0:17:49.880 put a list together of the top you know, call 0:17:49.920 --> 0:17:54.280 it ten twenty nine hole courses in America and had 0:17:54.280 --> 0:17:56.480 sunny Lands rated very highly and never stepped foot on 0:17:56.480 --> 0:17:58.800 property and admitted he had never stepped foot on property. 0:17:58.840 --> 0:18:00.320 And as he was walking, he's like, a maybe I 0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:02.119 got this rated a little bit higher than I should have. 0:18:02.840 --> 0:18:05.200 But all he wanted to talk about was how he 0:18:05.280 --> 0:18:09.080 had influenced Tom Fazio and how he designed golf right. 0:18:09.200 --> 0:18:11.200 And you know, did Tom read this article? Did Tom 0:18:11.280 --> 0:18:13.960 read that article? And we really burst his bubble to 0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:15.879 say that Tom didn't give a rip what you thought. 0:18:16.000 --> 0:18:16.640 He really didn't. 0:18:16.680 --> 0:18:18.919 All he cared about was the clients and if the 0:18:18.920 --> 0:18:20.959 client was happy at the end of the day, you know. 0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:23.320 And this kind of ties back into to Shadow Creek. 0:18:23.400 --> 0:18:23.800 Tom. 0:18:23.920 --> 0:18:27.440 Tom knew that Steve Whin wanted something completely over the top. 0:18:27.880 --> 0:18:30.439 He wanted something essentially that hadn't been done, you know, 0:18:30.520 --> 0:18:34.280 to that to that extent, I think to date when 0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:36.960 they built Shadow Creek, and a lot of people like 0:18:37.000 --> 0:18:38.680 to tear Shadow Creek down and say it's more of 0:18:38.680 --> 0:18:40.880 an engineering feet than it is really a great golf course. 0:18:40.920 --> 0:18:42.920 I've never stepped foot off a Shadow Creek after playing 0:18:42.920 --> 0:18:45.880 golf and been disappointed. And you know, David and ourfortunately 0:18:45.880 --> 0:18:47.359 we get to play a lot of great golf courses. 0:18:47.880 --> 0:18:50.600 You know, it's vastly different. Are there some things out 0:18:50.600 --> 0:18:52.640 there that we look at or like from a detail standpoint, 0:18:52.680 --> 0:18:54.280 you know that might be a little dated today, this 0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:57.119 that or the other. Sure, but you know, but to 0:18:57.440 --> 0:18:59.600 round back into your initial question, I saw a long 0:18:59.600 --> 0:19:03.679 way again there. You know, Scottsdale National, the impetus of it, 0:19:03.720 --> 0:19:05.640 as far as the earth moving comes from Shadow Creek. 0:19:06.280 --> 0:19:08.840 The environment that went back in comes from the Sonoran 0:19:08.880 --> 0:19:12.280 Desert more similar to talking Stick. So I do think 0:19:12.280 --> 0:19:14.040 it splits the gap, and I think it's kind of 0:19:14.040 --> 0:19:17.199 the mesh between those two different styles, you know, but 0:19:17.280 --> 0:19:20.720 applied specific to Scottsdale National. What mister Parsons desires were. 0:19:21.720 --> 0:19:25.880 That's really interesting. It's you sort of use the Shadow 0:19:25.880 --> 0:19:29.520 Creek method of earth moving, but then tied it back in, 0:19:29.880 --> 0:19:32.680 which takes a lot of a lot of effort and 0:19:33.359 --> 0:19:37.280 art and trying to make something that is massively artificial 0:19:37.720 --> 0:19:41.560 to seem like it like it flows back into into 0:19:41.600 --> 0:19:51.880 the landscape. This episode is brought to you by Club Champion. 0:19:52.119 --> 0:19:55.439 We're very excited to partner with Club Champion again in 0:19:55.520 --> 0:19:58.440 twenty twenty five, and if you're looking to improve your 0:19:58.480 --> 0:20:02.200 game this year, Champion has a lot for you. First 0:20:02.200 --> 0:20:05.119 of all, first and foremost, they have the most highly 0:20:05.160 --> 0:20:08.480 trained fitters in the world. They attend an in house 0:20:08.640 --> 0:20:14.160 university and they receive continued education from manufacturers to stay 0:20:14.240 --> 0:20:17.000 up to date on all the latest innovations in the 0:20:17.040 --> 0:20:20.520 world of golf equipment. These are career fitters who fit 0:20:20.680 --> 0:20:24.760 all day, every day. They have no distractions from accessories 0:20:24.880 --> 0:20:27.960 or lessons or anything else. They're just there to fit 0:20:28.080 --> 0:20:31.440 you to golf clubs. Every Club Champion store has sixty 0:20:31.440 --> 0:20:35.120 five brands, which equates to nearly seventy thousand different head 0:20:35.160 --> 0:20:38.199 and shaft combinations. This means that you'll be able to 0:20:38.240 --> 0:20:41.600 find equipment for every type of golfer and every type 0:20:41.600 --> 0:20:44.840 of swing. It doesn't matter if you're tall, short, if 0:20:44.840 --> 0:20:46.960 you have a fast swing, if you have a slow swing, 0:20:47.359 --> 0:20:50.679 if you're a junior, a senior, a beginner, or a pro. 0:20:51.240 --> 0:20:54.200 You will be able to find equipment at Club Champion 0:20:54.359 --> 0:20:56.320 that will bring the best out of your game. And 0:20:56.359 --> 0:20:58.959 that's what the fitters are there to do for you. 0:20:58.960 --> 0:21:02.159 You know, one of the biggest advancements in recent golf 0:21:02.640 --> 0:21:07.520 has been in fitting clubs. It hasn't necessarily been all technology. 0:21:07.880 --> 0:21:11.040 The fitting processes have gotten so much better, and I 0:21:11.040 --> 0:21:15.320 think amateurs can really benefit from that. Professionals are certainly 0:21:15.440 --> 0:21:19.280 going to that well every single day that they are 0:21:19.359 --> 0:21:22.760 professional golfers, but I think amateurs could generally take better 0:21:22.800 --> 0:21:26.439 advantage of it. So Club Champion is offering a great 0:21:26.560 --> 0:21:30.240 deal for designing golf listeners. You can get a free 0:21:30.720 --> 0:21:34.959 driver or iron fitting with a club purchase using the 0:21:35.040 --> 0:21:38.880 code fried Egg. That's one word fried Egg at Club 0:21:39.000 --> 0:21:43.080 champion dot com slash Frida Egg. All right, let's get 0:21:43.119 --> 0:21:52.640 back to the episode. So David, I want to get 0:21:52.680 --> 0:21:58.480 into some nitty gritty here shaping a bunker. I think 0:21:58.520 --> 0:22:02.000 that somebody who's really devoted to minimalism might say that 0:22:02.080 --> 0:22:05.439 the goal of shaping a bunker is to make it 0:22:05.480 --> 0:22:09.040 seem like it was pre existing in the site, or 0:22:09.119 --> 0:22:13.800 like it ties in to the surrounding landscape. When you 0:22:14.160 --> 0:22:17.000 shape a bunker, when you look at the the you know, 0:22:17.119 --> 0:22:19.840 finish work that you do on a bunker edge, or 0:22:20.320 --> 0:22:23.919 you know, whatever else goes into creating the esthetics of 0:22:23.960 --> 0:22:27.439 a bunker. Is your main intention to blend it in 0:22:27.520 --> 0:22:31.200 with the surrounding terrain or is there something else that 0:22:31.320 --> 0:22:35.520 also influences you in creating that final product. 0:22:36.480 --> 0:22:39.000 Yeah, I think there's more to it than just that, 0:22:39.200 --> 0:22:42.320 but absolutely that is one of the main goals is 0:22:42.359 --> 0:22:43.919 to make it sure, like, make it feel like it 0:22:43.960 --> 0:22:47.480 fits in and feels, you know, whatever we deem as 0:22:47.720 --> 0:22:51.360 natural to that site. You know. What we try hard 0:22:51.400 --> 0:22:52.720 not to do is just have a bunker that's just 0:22:52.840 --> 0:22:55.680 artificially popped up and ties down real quick and doesn't 0:22:55.720 --> 0:22:58.280 really relate to anything. So we always talk to the 0:22:58.320 --> 0:23:02.679 shapers about lines and flow and and it's super important 0:23:02.720 --> 0:23:08.160 and that goes from everything we're shaping bunkers included, especially 0:23:08.200 --> 0:23:10.359 like green side bunkers. If there's an eyebrow on it, 0:23:10.400 --> 0:23:12.879 making sure that eyebrow carries through into some feature on 0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:15.840 the green so it's bigger and and not just you know, 0:23:15.960 --> 0:23:17.760 just next to the green for next to the green sake. 0:23:17.840 --> 0:23:21.440 So obviously the math of where those bunkers go is 0:23:21.440 --> 0:23:23.640 is the first step, making sure it's it's where we 0:23:23.680 --> 0:23:26.639 want it, affecting the golfer the way we want it to. 0:23:27.200 --> 0:23:30.080 But after that, it is absolutely talking about how do 0:23:30.119 --> 0:23:32.280 we make this thing feel like it's always been here 0:23:32.280 --> 0:23:35.960 and it fits, you know, and it's it's It's not 0:23:36.040 --> 0:23:39.840 easy at times, sometimes it's it, it just falls into place, 0:23:40.720 --> 0:23:43.600 you know, a lot, a lot more clearly than others. 0:23:43.640 --> 0:23:47.600 But you know, there's also a challenge with multiple shapers 0:23:47.600 --> 0:23:50.760 on a project too, making sure that those those products 0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:54.120 are are coming out cohesively. And it feels like they all, 0:23:54.480 --> 0:23:56.480 you know, we're built by the same hands. A lot 0:23:56.480 --> 0:23:59.200 of times they're not, so that that's on us to 0:23:59.280 --> 0:24:01.640 make sure that, you know that those final products all 0:24:01.720 --> 0:24:07.639 kind of jive together. And yeah, so honestly everything we 0:24:07.720 --> 0:24:11.240 shape is with that naturalistic flow in mind. 0:24:12.400 --> 0:24:17.520 I've noticed this that the bunkering at your courses strikes 0:24:17.560 --> 0:24:23.600 me as being esthetically at least more similar to what 0:24:24.240 --> 0:24:28.840 Corn Crenshaw or Tom Doak might produce than what Tom 0:24:28.880 --> 0:24:31.800 Fazio was doing in the eighties and nineties, or what 0:24:31.880 --> 0:24:34.040 Jack Nicholas was doing in that same period, or what 0:24:34.080 --> 0:24:39.240 Tom Weiskoff was doing. There seemed to be some influences 0:24:39.359 --> 0:24:44.040 of the current trends in architecture on the way that 0:24:44.119 --> 0:24:47.960 your bunkers appear. Is that something tim that you've thought 0:24:48.000 --> 0:24:52.800 about consciously or is the process more organic than that, 0:24:52.840 --> 0:24:55.520 You're not necessarily thinking about stylistic influences. 0:24:56.000 --> 0:24:58.640 No, the process, I mean I hope it's more organic 0:24:58.680 --> 0:25:04.000 for us. You know, it's it's interesting people you know, 0:25:04.119 --> 0:25:07.720 define characteristics of designers and certainly bunkers can be part 0:25:07.720 --> 0:25:11.280 of that. And when we were with Tom, you know, Tom, 0:25:11.400 --> 0:25:14.440 Tom's a great guy. He gave us so much freedom 0:25:14.560 --> 0:25:18.680 once there was faith that we could execute a project 0:25:18.760 --> 0:25:22.040 and execute the goals of the project, and he allowed 0:25:22.080 --> 0:25:25.440 us to express what we saw from a design perspective. 0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:28.440 So you know, I know, you know, not to keep 0:25:28.480 --> 0:25:29.879 kind of coming back to Tom, but that's where we 0:25:29.920 --> 0:25:32.320 came from. If you look at the breath of Fassio 0:25:32.400 --> 0:25:35.320 courses and you look at them stylistically, I think they 0:25:35.320 --> 0:25:37.920 have the greatest amount of differentiation from any big name 0:25:37.960 --> 0:25:40.200 designer because he allowed the guys in the field the 0:25:40.240 --> 0:25:44.359 opportunity to do that. Conversely, you know there's architects who 0:25:44.400 --> 0:25:46.240 it's my way or the highway, big name guys that 0:25:46.359 --> 0:25:48.639 had a lot of projects going on and you know, 0:25:48.640 --> 0:25:52.000 thou shalt not deviate from the plan, right, And so 0:25:52.440 --> 0:25:55.960 you know, we we we like designing a lot of 0:25:56.080 --> 0:25:59.600 different bunker styles now and we've done you know, in 0:25:59.800 --> 0:26:03.720 in some of our current work, you know, the we've 0:26:03.760 --> 0:26:06.479 inherited some some Fazzio projects that we're now the consulting 0:26:06.560 --> 0:26:08.800 architects on and you know, the desert course at the 0:26:08.880 --> 0:26:13.560 Vintage Club in Indian Wells, California is diametrically opposed from 0:26:13.600 --> 0:26:17.480 a bunker style standpoint to Core Crenshaw and maybe some 0:26:17.520 --> 0:26:18.960 of the stuff that we're doing today and that was 0:26:19.000 --> 0:26:22.000 set before we got there. But you know, we have 0:26:22.320 --> 0:26:26.920 just as much fun taking the the that style of 0:26:27.000 --> 0:26:29.919 bunker and trying to either improve upon what's there or 0:26:30.000 --> 0:26:32.359 make it just as aesthetic as the type of bunkers 0:26:32.400 --> 0:26:35.680 that we have on other projects. You know, the bunkers 0:26:35.720 --> 0:26:37.840 when you stand on a tee, the bunkers are the 0:26:37.960 --> 0:26:40.879 contrasts that you see within that landscape many times or 0:26:40.880 --> 0:26:43.399 the most contrasts that you see. So the shape in 0:26:43.400 --> 0:26:47.440 the form that they take is very important. You know, 0:26:47.520 --> 0:26:50.120 your eye picks up every line. Dave's talking about lines. 0:26:50.160 --> 0:26:51.840 Your eye picks up every line when you're standing on 0:26:51.840 --> 0:26:53.960 the tee, whether you realize it or not. So we 0:26:54.000 --> 0:26:55.879 spend a lot of time on the bunkers, you know, 0:26:55.960 --> 0:26:58.720 regardless of what style we're trying to implement, and making 0:26:58.760 --> 0:27:01.399 sure that the flow oh is there that you know, 0:27:01.440 --> 0:27:04.240 strategically obviously we do the math, and that's that's super important. 0:27:05.240 --> 0:27:08.400 But you know, every golfer can appreciate beauty, not every 0:27:08.440 --> 0:27:12.120 golfer can appreciate strategy, and it's important to have both 0:27:12.119 --> 0:27:15.240 the form and the function. But yeah, you know, we 0:27:15.600 --> 0:27:18.000 spend a lot of time on bunker detail. Maybe too 0:27:18.080 --> 0:27:20.320 much time on bunker detail, I'm not sure, but it 0:27:20.359 --> 0:27:22.239 can add so much. You know, there's courses that are 0:27:22.280 --> 0:27:24.160 defined by the look and the style of their bunkering, 0:27:25.080 --> 0:27:27.880 and again, I think a big part of why that 0:27:28.080 --> 0:27:30.760 is is because of that contrast the shape and the movement. 0:27:31.240 --> 0:27:33.680 Get the math right from a strategy standpoint, but also 0:27:33.720 --> 0:27:34.879 make it as beautiful as it can be. 0:27:36.280 --> 0:27:40.119 There's something really interesting here that I'm not maybe I 0:27:40.160 --> 0:27:44.200 don't really have the vocabulary for, but I think there's 0:27:44.240 --> 0:27:50.600 something beyond just blending into the surrounding terrain and making 0:27:50.600 --> 0:27:55.920 it look natural that can make bunkers esthetically compelling. I'm 0:27:55.960 --> 0:28:00.320 thinking of Mike Strantz's bunkers. I'm thinking of Pete Dies bunkers. 0:28:01.640 --> 0:28:06.119 Sometimes those features not just bunkers, but also contours and 0:28:06.240 --> 0:28:09.880 green shapes and all sorts of golf features that those 0:28:10.000 --> 0:28:14.240 architects produced. They don't necessarily look natural, but they look cool. 0:28:14.960 --> 0:28:17.920 And that's and that's kind of the and that's that's 0:28:18.000 --> 0:28:21.159 such a sort of basic term, Oh wow, it looks cool. 0:28:21.680 --> 0:28:25.200 It's almost meaningless, it's not really that specific. But there's 0:28:25.240 --> 0:28:29.760 something about the work that those architects did that that 0:28:29.920 --> 0:28:34.200 goes beyond just feeling like it was already there. There's 0:28:34.240 --> 0:28:38.360 something kind of painterly about Mike Strants's bunkers, and there's 0:28:38.440 --> 0:28:43.880 there's something provocative and beyond naturalism about a lot of 0:28:43.880 --> 0:28:45.640 the stuff that Pete Died did in the field. And 0:28:45.760 --> 0:28:48.280 as you mentioned, Tim, you know, Mike Strands worked for 0:28:48.640 --> 0:28:51.800 Tom Fazio and the courses that he worked on have 0:28:52.280 --> 0:28:55.120 a kind of distinct flavor, just as the courses that 0:28:55.200 --> 0:28:59.600 you two worked on in Fasio's portfolio also have have 0:28:59.680 --> 0:29:01.880 something of your flavor in them, which which is really 0:29:01.960 --> 0:29:05.160 interesting to see. But David, when you think of Mike 0:29:05.240 --> 0:29:08.719 Strands's approach to building artificial features and Pete Dye's approach, 0:29:10.240 --> 0:29:12.600 is there is there something there that that goes just 0:29:12.680 --> 0:29:15.680 beyond we're trying to make it look like it's always 0:29:15.720 --> 0:29:19.360 been there, you know, beyond just blending it into the 0:29:19.440 --> 0:29:24.760 landscape that you aspire towards in your own work. 0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:28.160 Yes, yeah, and I know, you know, we try to 0:29:28.200 --> 0:29:30.120 push each other all the time on every project and 0:29:30.360 --> 0:29:33.160 sometimes it doesn't come to fruition based on you know, 0:29:33.160 --> 0:29:35.640 whatever the specifics of that project are, but we're always 0:29:35.720 --> 0:29:38.600 kind of looking for, you know, new ways to do 0:29:38.680 --> 0:29:42.440 things and new ways to not really shock people but 0:29:42.520 --> 0:29:45.160 catch their eye. Right, Like you said, going back here, 0:29:45.160 --> 0:29:49.000 it's cool comment. You know, I remember vividly numerous times 0:29:49.280 --> 0:29:54.280 at Auburn during landscape architecture program that the professors would say, essentially, 0:29:54.400 --> 0:29:57.440 don't ever do something because it's cool. That's not a reason. 0:29:58.160 --> 0:30:01.560 And now you know, fast forward twenty five years, Like 0:30:02.480 --> 0:30:06.320 I very much disagree. I think, you know, if you 0:30:06.360 --> 0:30:09.200 get all the other things right that lead up to that, 0:30:10.560 --> 0:30:13.200 doing it because it looks cool in our world at 0:30:13.280 --> 0:30:16.920 least is a damn good reason. Because at the end 0:30:16.920 --> 0:30:22.920 of the day, I mean, most everybody experience golf visually, right, 0:30:22.960 --> 0:30:24.640 and if you can stand on a tee and just 0:30:24.760 --> 0:30:27.760 be blown away by what you're looking at, to your point, 0:30:27.800 --> 0:30:31.720 whether it's artificial or real or you know, natural looking, 0:30:32.920 --> 0:30:35.600 it shouldn't matter. And I don't think it does matter, 0:30:35.960 --> 0:30:38.000 and especially you know, whatever weight you want to hold 0:30:38.000 --> 0:30:39.920 into the rankings. You know, I don't know this off 0:30:39.960 --> 0:30:41.440 the top of my head, but there's a lot of 0:30:41.520 --> 0:30:45.280 manufactured golf courses that are highly ranked and highly loved. 0:30:46.440 --> 0:30:50.040 You know, if Pete de fell into the naturalistic minimalist category, 0:30:50.080 --> 0:30:52.600 would never know Pete Die and same with Strants, And 0:30:52.680 --> 0:30:57.000 they're two of the best golf course architect artists to 0:30:57.080 --> 0:31:04.480 ever live, for sure, So I I admire them slightly 0:31:04.600 --> 0:31:07.680 more than you know, the others that that take the 0:31:07.720 --> 0:31:10.840 minimalistic approach, even though I absolutely love playing their courses. 0:31:10.880 --> 0:31:13.680 I mean, a lot of Core Crenshaw courses are my 0:31:13.760 --> 0:31:16.360 favorite I've ever played, so you know, nothing but respect. 0:31:16.440 --> 0:31:20.200 But in terms of kind of setting yourself apart as 0:31:20.240 --> 0:31:23.520 an artist, setting a client apart from what they possess 0:31:24.120 --> 0:31:29.440 by creating something that is just, you know, unmistakably only 0:31:29.520 --> 0:31:34.640 there is something really important I think to strive from, 0:31:34.680 --> 0:31:38.520 for for for all parties involved in a project. And 0:31:38.680 --> 0:31:42.080 I agree, I think that you know, while we love 0:31:42.120 --> 0:31:47.560 that natural look, it is absolutely okay to go bold 0:31:47.600 --> 0:31:54.000 and do something strikingly, strikingly not not natural, assuming it's 0:31:54.000 --> 0:31:56.800 still you know, it still has to fit right, it 0:31:56.880 --> 0:32:00.880 still has to feel right, and I can be executed 0:32:00.920 --> 0:32:04.600 in unlimited amount of ways honestly with with you know, 0:32:04.680 --> 0:32:05.840 the right creative brains. 0:32:06.880 --> 0:32:09.680 Well, picking up on that latter point, when you build 0:32:09.720 --> 0:32:14.680 something tim that is overtly artificial or that's not necessarily 0:32:14.800 --> 0:32:18.360 trying to blend or tie in in a in a 0:32:18.440 --> 0:32:22.960 low profile way, how do you avoid making it look 0:32:23.040 --> 0:32:25.440 cheesy or maybe more to the point, how do you 0:32:25.480 --> 0:32:30.320 communicate to your shapers how to make something look cool 0:32:30.920 --> 0:32:33.400 as opposed to silly. 0:32:34.760 --> 0:32:38.680 Great question, I'm not sure we have the answer, you. 0:32:38.640 --> 0:32:41.000 Know, it's got to just be I mean, yeah, I 0:32:41.000 --> 0:32:43.240 don't know if there is an answer to this question, 0:32:43.320 --> 0:32:45.800 but it's something I've thought about all the time because 0:32:45.840 --> 0:32:49.320 there there is a difference between Pete Dye and Mike 0:32:49.360 --> 0:32:56.040 Strant's artificiality and the artificiality that lesser architects achieved. Yeah, 0:32:56.080 --> 0:32:59.240 but there's something about their artistry that's that is cool 0:32:59.520 --> 0:33:02.160 and but that's hard to define, isn't it. 0:33:02.560 --> 0:33:03.840 I maybe not so. 0:33:04.000 --> 0:33:06.800 I we tend to fall into the strands category of 0:33:06.880 --> 0:33:09.400 trying I think more than the die category stylistically, when 0:33:09.400 --> 0:33:11.800 we do something bold as far as how we then 0:33:11.920 --> 0:33:15.720 try to, you know, somewhat naturalize what we've done. 0:33:15.920 --> 0:33:17.200 You know, Pete Die, I was. 0:33:17.240 --> 0:33:19.360 I went to Purdue and just cheer, dumb luck and 0:33:19.360 --> 0:33:21.959 timing got to be a part of the construction career 0:33:22.000 --> 0:33:23.400 on the camping course when I was there and Pete 0:33:23.440 --> 0:33:24.720 Die was building straits at the. 0:33:24.720 --> 0:33:26.280 Same time, and I didn't know that. 0:33:26.400 --> 0:33:27.880 Yeah, it got to you know, be out there in 0:33:27.920 --> 0:33:30.520 the field when And I don't think people really appreciate 0:33:30.520 --> 0:33:34.160 every Die design as Pete analysis, not just not just Pete, 0:33:34.920 --> 0:33:38.640 you know, and Pete is Pete is to me one 0:33:38.640 --> 0:33:41.760 of the best designers in use of angles that that 0:33:41.920 --> 0:33:45.760 in his courses, you know, strategically really force you to 0:33:45.760 --> 0:33:49.200 make decisions. And I think, you know, there's so and 0:33:49.240 --> 0:33:51.080 he never drew a plan. I mean, it all just 0:33:51.080 --> 0:33:52.800 came out of his head standing out there in the field, 0:33:52.880 --> 0:33:54.880 you know, and we would you know, work on golf holes, 0:33:55.120 --> 0:33:59.000 you know, six seven, eight, nine times, you know, reshaping, reworking, 0:33:59.080 --> 0:34:03.920 doing whatever. But the end result was worth it, you know. 0:34:03.960 --> 0:34:05.920 I had the good fortune recently to play you know, 0:34:05.960 --> 0:34:09.879 PJA West Stadium course and in nineteen eighty five, eighty six, 0:34:09.920 --> 0:34:13.719 I think when he did that in laking To California. 0:34:14.080 --> 0:34:16.040 It's there's so many things out there that are just 0:34:16.080 --> 0:34:18.800 still so astounding. I mean to stand on sixteen Fairway 0:34:18.800 --> 0:34:21.440 and look at San Andreas and no Pete was standing 0:34:21.480 --> 0:34:23.160 somewhere close to there and just said, you know what, 0:34:23.200 --> 0:34:25.520 I got an idea, you know, let's let's do this. 0:34:26.360 --> 0:34:29.080 He and Strance, I think both had no fear. And 0:34:29.160 --> 0:34:31.239 I think that's the commonality between the two is that 0:34:31.280 --> 0:34:34.640 they were not afraid to do very big, bold things. 0:34:35.160 --> 0:34:38.799 How they applied their art was completely different. And you know, 0:34:38.800 --> 0:34:40.560 i'd like to think that, you know, David and I 0:34:40.600 --> 0:34:44.640 are not afraid, but our art definitely follows more of 0:34:44.680 --> 0:34:46.920 the Mike Strands lineage and the Pete Ie lineage. 0:34:47.600 --> 0:34:52.280 And I think you mentioned something about when Pete was 0:34:52.280 --> 0:34:57.239 was working on the course and he reshaped a whole, 0:34:57.320 --> 0:34:58.960 you know, eight or nine times. I think that's part 0:34:58.960 --> 0:35:02.640 of the two. Not as an artist, your eye knows 0:35:02.719 --> 0:35:05.120 when it's right. You may not be able to express why, 0:35:05.160 --> 0:35:07.840 but you just know, like the lines aren't working, the 0:35:07.840 --> 0:35:11.800 scales not work, and the perspective isn't working. It is 0:35:11.920 --> 0:35:14.360 something is not right, and so you just you know 0:35:14.480 --> 0:35:17.440 well enough to either start over or move things around, 0:35:17.560 --> 0:35:20.480 or try this or try that. And I think that's 0:35:20.800 --> 0:35:25.120 you know, that coupled with the artistic eye, get you somewhere. 0:35:25.400 --> 0:35:27.480 Whether you're trying something bold or trying to fit it 0:35:27.480 --> 0:35:30.920 in natural, it's the same technique. So not being scared 0:35:30.960 --> 0:35:34.239 to try something and not being scared to erase it 0:35:34.320 --> 0:35:37.200 and try again, you know, it's got still national. We 0:35:37.239 --> 0:35:42.680 struggled the hardest on number seventeen Green. Other course, what 0:35:42.719 --> 0:35:45.640 we built was nothing what we had on paper, and 0:35:46.360 --> 0:35:51.320 it actually came it evolved from a big earthwork in 0:35:51.440 --> 0:35:55.120 balance that came late in the game. The earth or 0:35:55.160 --> 0:35:56.799 contractor came to us to say, we had one hundred 0:35:56.840 --> 0:35:59.440 thousand extra yards that you know from rock expansion as 0:35:59.440 --> 0:36:01.920 they were digging, and there was nowhere on plan to 0:36:01.960 --> 0:36:05.000 put it. And and so we found a place that 0:36:05.040 --> 0:36:08.839 happened to be behind one green and left of seventeen Green, 0:36:09.040 --> 0:36:13.200 just spatially, and you know, through a lot of trial 0:36:13.200 --> 0:36:15.640 and error, it ended up making both of those holds better. 0:36:15.680 --> 0:36:22.000 But we completely rebuilt the seventeenth Green complex five different times, 0:36:22.040 --> 0:36:26.280 five different concepts, until that final one was like this, 0:36:26.280 --> 0:36:30.600 this just feels right. And we had arguments, you know, 0:36:30.719 --> 0:36:33.040 of version one, two, three, and four as they were 0:36:33.160 --> 0:36:36.160 as they were shaped in the dirt and just one 0:36:36.200 --> 0:36:38.880 of us or two of us or three of us, 0:36:38.960 --> 0:36:41.160 you know, would either agree or disagree, and it's like, 0:36:41.160 --> 0:36:43.400 all right, if we're not all in consensus, then we 0:36:43.480 --> 0:36:45.440 got to rebuild, we got to do it again. So 0:36:46.320 --> 0:36:48.120 you know, that's that's a that's a huge part is 0:36:49.000 --> 0:36:52.600 knowing knowing when to stop and knowing when you need 0:36:52.600 --> 0:36:55.440 to keep pushing forward to find to find what's right. 0:36:56.520 --> 0:36:58.759 Yeah, that that does seem to be the difference than 0:36:59.120 --> 0:37:05.480 the handmade quality of really good looking golf features. It's 0:37:05.520 --> 0:37:09.000 hard to do that without having the architect to be 0:37:09.040 --> 0:37:13.960 heavily involved and without these revisions occurring. And you know, 0:37:14.000 --> 0:37:18.160 when people talk about why Pete Die's courses still look 0:37:18.280 --> 0:37:22.160 good they don't look dated, I think it's partly because 0:37:22.200 --> 0:37:26.319 they do still feel handmade and there's a specificity of 0:37:26.400 --> 0:37:31.680 vision there that is tough to produce if you're just 0:37:32.239 --> 0:37:37.080 having shapers come in or contractors come in and build 0:37:37.120 --> 0:37:40.759 something and you don't then go back and revise it. 0:37:41.280 --> 0:37:44.520 And so that extra personal touch seems to be really important, 0:37:44.840 --> 0:37:47.000 even if it's hard to define the point at which 0:37:47.360 --> 0:37:52.120 something begins to begins to look cool or to feel right. 0:37:52.239 --> 0:37:54.440 Feel right is the is the phrase that I that 0:37:54.480 --> 0:37:57.600 I hear you using quite a bit, Tim. I wonder, 0:37:58.040 --> 0:38:00.200 you know, when you look at Mike Strantz's courses and 0:38:00.239 --> 0:38:03.120 just for contacts for people who maybe don't know much 0:38:03.160 --> 0:38:08.360 about Mike Strants, Tobacco Road as a popular Mike Strants course. 0:38:08.680 --> 0:38:11.160 There are a lot of Mike Strands courses in North 0:38:11.200 --> 0:38:16.520 and South Carolina that remain very popular today. And unfortunately 0:38:17.120 --> 0:38:20.560 he died when he was too young and didn't end 0:38:20.640 --> 0:38:25.719 up perhaps having the massive influence on golf architecture. His 0:38:25.800 --> 0:38:29.960 influence is still very large, but you just wonder how 0:38:30.000 --> 0:38:32.879 much more could have been done if he had lived 0:38:33.239 --> 0:38:35.680 to a ripe old age. When you look at Mike 0:38:35.719 --> 0:38:40.640 Strantz's worked him, what inspires you about his stylistic approach 0:38:40.719 --> 0:38:42.440 or his his aesthetic approach. 0:38:43.239 --> 0:38:49.759 You know, specifically his ability to create beautiful looking golf 0:38:49.800 --> 0:38:51.920 holes and spaces and kind of in different ways to 0:38:52.520 --> 0:38:55.799 my first experience with Mike Strants. You know, David and 0:38:55.840 --> 0:38:58.480 I had the amazing good fortune to redesign the Dunes 0:38:58.560 --> 0:39:01.359 course at Mounty Peninsula Country Club. Yes, and you know 0:39:01.480 --> 0:39:06.040 when in the whole way that came about was extraordinarily organic. 0:39:06.080 --> 0:39:09.680 Just shere dumb luck and timing. But when we first 0:39:09.719 --> 0:39:12.040 experienced the Dunes course, which was I think a nineteen 0:39:12.080 --> 0:39:16.160 ninety five nineteen ninety six Reech Jones design for the club. 0:39:17.200 --> 0:39:20.320 We played the Dune's course and David and I walked 0:39:20.640 --> 0:39:24.600 or were driving back to the clubhouse and you passed 0:39:24.600 --> 0:39:26.640 the first tee on the short course, which Mike Strants 0:39:26.640 --> 0:39:28.879 had done I think in two thousand and three, and 0:39:29.200 --> 0:39:31.759 we was like full stop. Just we were just sitting 0:39:31.800 --> 0:39:35.680 there staring at the first hole and just the lines 0:39:35.719 --> 0:39:38.480 that he created, the movement that he created, the way 0:39:38.480 --> 0:39:40.680 the fair way moved with the bunkering, and the bunkering 0:39:41.280 --> 0:39:42.520 nestled into the spaces. 0:39:43.120 --> 0:39:45.640 It was, it's just it's gorgeous. It is. It is 0:39:45.640 --> 0:39:46.480 truly gorgeous. 0:39:46.520 --> 0:39:50.239 And and you know, so when we were, you know, 0:39:50.320 --> 0:39:52.960 again given the opportunity on the Dunes course, you know, 0:39:53.040 --> 0:39:55.400 they said they wanted something as good or better than 0:39:55.400 --> 0:39:57.400 the short course, and we were like, we don't know 0:39:57.400 --> 0:40:00.080 if we can do that, because it's it is so 0:40:00.239 --> 0:40:04.319 very very very good. And and and so you know, 0:40:05.520 --> 0:40:09.160 the restraint that that Mike utilized on the shore course 0:40:09.200 --> 0:40:11.960 and still created a tremendous amount of beauty you can't. 0:40:12.000 --> 0:40:14.160 You can't move a lot of dirt on the minor rapidan, 0:40:14.200 --> 0:40:16.200 soa one, it's there's a lot of rock. So it 0:40:16.200 --> 0:40:20.279 gets expensive into you know, coastal California. The agencies get 0:40:20.360 --> 0:40:22.640 very very nervous when they see, you know, anything that 0:40:22.680 --> 0:40:24.839 we would consider a small earthwork number kind of coming 0:40:24.880 --> 0:40:27.520 in front of him. And and so looking at what 0:40:27.600 --> 0:40:30.280 he did in in the Carolinas, and I've been fortunate 0:40:30.280 --> 0:40:31.799 to play a couple of his courses to Backer Road 0:40:31.840 --> 0:40:37.120 included the scale that he created, the movement that he created. 0:40:37.160 --> 0:40:39.040 There's no way that he could have done that at 0:40:39.160 --> 0:40:42.399 NPCC on the shore course. Yet he created just as 0:40:42.440 --> 0:40:45.319 beautiful and just as interesting a golf course, but enough 0:40:45.360 --> 0:40:47.600 in a in a far different fashion. And I think 0:40:47.640 --> 0:40:50.920 that's just true recognition of how amazing an artist that 0:40:50.960 --> 0:40:53.520 he was. He was an artist who happened to be 0:40:53.560 --> 0:40:56.480 a golf course architect, and and you know, he was 0:40:56.520 --> 0:40:59.440 able to apply his art in many different ways and 0:40:59.480 --> 0:41:02.160 still create tremendous amount of beauty and interesting golf. 0:41:03.280 --> 0:41:06.440 So I want to end with a topic that maybe 0:41:06.640 --> 0:41:10.200 is a little bit tired at this point, but maybe 0:41:10.200 --> 0:41:13.120 we can go somewhere new with it and that is 0:41:13.120 --> 0:41:17.840 the question of what's next in golf architecture. Often the 0:41:17.920 --> 0:41:21.440 kind of cliche answer to that right now would be 0:41:21.560 --> 0:41:26.560 that what's next is something after minimalism. People say, minimalism 0:41:26.600 --> 0:41:29.920 has been the primary trend in golf architecture for the 0:41:29.960 --> 0:41:32.600 past thirty years, and so clearly what must be next 0:41:32.719 --> 0:41:36.279 is some form of maximalism or some form of pushback 0:41:36.400 --> 0:41:40.440 against minimalism. So, David, when you think of the future 0:41:40.440 --> 0:41:43.799 of golf architecture, what do you think of. Is it 0:41:43.880 --> 0:41:48.800 something along these lines, absorbing different influences from the past 0:41:48.840 --> 0:41:51.840 to go in a different direction from minimalism or is 0:41:51.840 --> 0:41:53.880 that not a useful frame of reference for you? 0:41:55.160 --> 0:41:59.560 I don't know. I mean I think that eras of 0:41:59.680 --> 0:42:06.640 any art or architecture or fashion. You know, after a 0:42:06.640 --> 0:42:11.120 certain point, it just gets redundant, and people quite honestly 0:42:11.160 --> 0:42:12.960 just not get sick of it, but they're tired of it, like, 0:42:12.960 --> 0:42:15.440 all right, we get that that's great, but kind of 0:42:15.480 --> 0:42:19.040 need something fresh. It's hard to really obviously predict where 0:42:19.080 --> 0:42:22.080 that's going to go. I hope it goes down the 0:42:22.160 --> 0:42:25.600 road of just more variety of stuff and not and not. 0:42:25.880 --> 0:42:28.800 This is probably ignorant to say, because it probably won't happen, 0:42:28.840 --> 0:42:34.000 but I would hope that another trend doesn't just get 0:42:34.000 --> 0:42:36.120 started and we just hashed that out for the next 0:42:36.120 --> 0:42:37.920 two decades and now we're in the same boat, right. 0:42:37.920 --> 0:42:42.200 But history it probably going to prevail and that will happen. 0:42:43.280 --> 0:42:48.040 But you know, I think more more non traditional golf 0:42:48.239 --> 0:42:52.239 is definitely a wave that will be ridden for quite 0:42:52.239 --> 0:42:55.080 a while. And by that I mean any anything that's 0:42:55.120 --> 0:42:57.440 not a you know, quote unquote part seventy two to 0:42:57.480 --> 0:43:01.800 seventy two hundred yard championship course stylistically, that could be anything. 0:43:01.840 --> 0:43:04.480 But I think I think more non traditional golf properties 0:43:05.000 --> 0:43:10.680 are really cool, faster, shorter experiences or definitely a trend 0:43:10.800 --> 0:43:14.960 just with all of our attention spans and. 0:43:13.880 --> 0:43:14.480 And other. 0:43:15.840 --> 0:43:22.120 You know, just our time in life is getting chopped 0:43:22.200 --> 0:43:26.759 up more than it used to be decades ago. I 0:43:26.760 --> 0:43:31.839 think the artificial aspect, artificial turf aspect of golf could 0:43:31.880 --> 0:43:34.799 be somewhat of a trend in a way with with 0:43:35.719 --> 0:43:38.120 you know, given to the right teams of people, I 0:43:38.160 --> 0:43:40.719 think could be executed into some really really cool projects, 0:43:41.360 --> 0:43:44.600 one of which we're about to hopefully open up later 0:43:44.640 --> 0:43:49.840 this year. You know, it's I just I just hope 0:43:49.880 --> 0:43:54.880 that we as an industry maximize the variety of products 0:43:54.880 --> 0:43:57.360 that are being put out there, because too much of 0:43:57.360 --> 0:43:58.920 the same, even if it's a good thing, is just 0:43:58.960 --> 0:44:02.440 not It's not great for users. At the end of 0:44:02.480 --> 0:44:04.040 the day. We have a lot of golf out there, 0:44:04.120 --> 0:44:06.080 a lot of golf, and I think that's some of 0:44:06.120 --> 0:44:11.120 the knock that I personally put on the minimalistic approach, 0:44:11.160 --> 0:44:14.120 which I love. Like I said earlier, I absolutely love it. 0:44:14.160 --> 0:44:16.799 But it's like, Okay, we get that, we know that 0:44:17.160 --> 0:44:20.120 is great, we have enough of it. Let's let's try 0:44:20.160 --> 0:44:22.239 something else. Let's try to find that next thing that 0:44:22.640 --> 0:44:25.359 other people want to emulate, and then try to find 0:44:25.400 --> 0:44:30.040 something else. So, you know, I'm excited about the future. 0:44:30.080 --> 0:44:33.680 I'm excited about, you know, our future projects, and I'm 0:44:33.680 --> 0:44:35.520 excited to see what other architects do because I think 0:44:35.560 --> 0:44:38.200 the more the more varied stuff that comes out and 0:44:38.200 --> 0:44:40.799 has proven to be successful, I think owners out there 0:44:40.840 --> 0:44:44.680 will have more or will feel less risk in doing 0:44:44.719 --> 0:44:46.560 something that kind of bucks the trend. And I think 0:44:46.600 --> 0:44:49.600 that's kind of where where you know, the tipping points 0:44:49.600 --> 0:44:52.360 at right now, it seems like owners are getting a 0:44:52.400 --> 0:44:55.399 little bit more open to trying something different that may 0:44:55.800 --> 0:44:58.400 may not quote unquote kind of fit the mold. 0:44:59.080 --> 0:45:01.880 Tim anything to add to you know, I think that 0:45:01.960 --> 0:45:02.520 there are. 0:45:04.000 --> 0:45:08.040 Many different types and styles of golf course architecture that 0:45:08.080 --> 0:45:12.239 are ongoing even when a certain type of golf maybe predominates, 0:45:12.840 --> 0:45:14.560 and a lot of it is driven by what the 0:45:14.560 --> 0:45:17.000 media chooses to focus on and say, you know, and 0:45:17.040 --> 0:45:20.160 there's so many more options and outlets for golf media 0:45:20.320 --> 0:45:21.279 now than there ever have been. 0:45:21.400 --> 0:45:24.200 Right, but if if the media. 0:45:24.440 --> 0:45:26.640 You know, in certain aspects of the golf media, say hey, 0:45:26.680 --> 0:45:28.120 this is how golf should be designed, this is what 0:45:28.160 --> 0:45:30.719 we're going to focus on, that's what people perceive to 0:45:30.880 --> 0:45:33.680 be you know, that that trend or that style or 0:45:33.680 --> 0:45:36.160 that movement in golf. And I think there's always guys 0:45:36.200 --> 0:45:38.640 who are, you know, either working against that trend or 0:45:38.640 --> 0:45:40.759 doing something different, but they may not get the you know, 0:45:40.840 --> 0:45:43.840 the recognition or the you know, highlight of their work 0:45:44.600 --> 0:45:46.320 other than what the you know, the media gain. 0:45:46.239 --> 0:45:47.080 Chooses to focus on. 0:45:47.160 --> 0:45:48.839 And I think part of it comes down to that, 0:45:49.280 --> 0:45:52.120 you know, there's certain perceptions that you're more golf savvy 0:45:52.440 --> 0:45:55.840 if you believe minimalism is how golf should be designed 0:45:55.920 --> 0:45:58.720 versus any other way and you know, guys sitting around 0:45:58.760 --> 0:46:01.600 and trying to discern, you know, which template greenness is. 0:46:01.680 --> 0:46:03.680 Is it a you know, is it a double plateau? 0:46:03.719 --> 0:46:05.560 But you know which, what's the angle? And no, it's 0:46:05.560 --> 0:46:07.920 more of a burritz and and so there's and those 0:46:07.960 --> 0:46:10.600 are you know, great conversations, and people are interested in that. 0:46:10.640 --> 0:46:12.359 I don't I don't certainly take away from them wanting 0:46:12.400 --> 0:46:15.319 to have those conversations. But like Dave said, I just 0:46:15.360 --> 0:46:18.160 hope that, you know, you know, the variety in golf continues. 0:46:18.200 --> 0:46:20.600 The bigger the tent is, the more variety there will 0:46:20.600 --> 0:46:23.120 be and hopefully the more enjoyment for the end user. 0:46:23.120 --> 0:46:24.719 If we all had to play the same golf course 0:46:24.800 --> 0:46:26.440 day in and out, day in and out, time and 0:46:26.440 --> 0:46:29.319 time again, we get pretty sick of it, regardless of 0:46:29.360 --> 0:46:32.319 how good it is, I think ultimately, so I think 0:46:32.320 --> 0:46:33.160 that that's important. 0:46:33.840 --> 0:46:36.239 All right, Well, Tim and David, thank you so much 0:46:36.280 --> 0:46:39.680 for coming on the podcast. Really interesting discussion and hope 0:46:39.680 --> 0:46:41.080 to have you guys back on at some point in 0:46:41.080 --> 0:46:41.480 the future. 0:46:41.960 --> 0:46:42.600 Thank you, Grett. 0:46:42.640 --> 0:46:43.840 We'd love to Thanks Garrett. 0:46:49.640 --> 0:46:53.560 This episode of Designing Golf was produced by PJ Clark. 0:46:54.040 --> 0:46:56.920 Thank you PJ. Speaking of PJ, he's going to be 0:46:56.960 --> 0:46:59.080 back on designing golf pretty soon. We're going to do 0:46:59.200 --> 0:47:03.080 a golf golf Architecture one oh one episode coming up here, 0:47:03.160 --> 0:47:05.680 so it'll be good to have Pja back on talking 0:47:05.719 --> 0:47:09.000 about some one oh one concepts in golf course design. 0:47:09.560 --> 0:47:11.839 Something new that you should keep an eye on from 0:47:11.880 --> 0:47:14.960 Friday Golf is that we have a new website, the 0:47:15.040 --> 0:47:17.960 Frida Egg dot com. We relaunched our website about a 0:47:17.960 --> 0:47:20.920 week and a half ago and we're really proud of it. 0:47:20.719 --> 0:47:24.080 It looks great and I think that you can explore 0:47:24.200 --> 0:47:27.680 our content at a more robust level now, especially the 0:47:27.680 --> 0:47:32.200 golf architecture section of our website is much more navigable, 0:47:32.600 --> 0:47:34.640 So go check that out the Frida Egg dot com 0:47:34.680 --> 0:47:37.359 if you haven't already, And to get the most out 0:47:37.360 --> 0:47:40.480 of our website, you should join Friday Golf Club. Yes, 0:47:40.520 --> 0:47:43.640 we did rename it from CLUBTFE to fridagg Golf Club. 0:47:43.680 --> 0:47:45.680 We thought that would make a little bit more sense, 0:47:45.719 --> 0:47:48.520 and we use the relaunch of the website as an 0:47:48.520 --> 0:47:51.880 opportunity to do that. But Friday Golf Club is one 0:47:51.920 --> 0:47:54.080 hundred and twenty dollars a year and you get a 0:47:54.080 --> 0:47:58.240 lot with it, especially the wonderful community that we're building 0:47:58.640 --> 0:48:03.000 within that website as well as at events that we're 0:48:03.000 --> 0:48:05.640 holding and everything like that. I think that's the best 0:48:05.680 --> 0:48:07.879 part of it. You just get to meet people who 0:48:07.920 --> 0:48:11.640 are avid golfers, who are really into the game, into 0:48:11.640 --> 0:48:15.480 the architecture, into the competitive golf side. So that's a 0:48:15.480 --> 0:48:18.319 lot of fun. Check out Friday Golf Club. All right, 0:48:18.719 --> 0:48:20.959 thank you for listening, and we'll be back again soon 0:48:21.320 --> 0:48:28.040 with another episode.