Jack On Tiger: "It will take him seven or eight golf courses before he'll learn enough before he'll really be able to talk about it intelligently."
Considering the sheer volume of mediocrity produced by the Nicklaus design factory, Tiger Woods should be heartened by Jack Nicklaus's woefully condescending, ignorant and frankly embarrassing answer to Matty G's question:
Have you had the chance to talk design with Tiger?
No. I wouldn't think so. Tiger, at this point in time, wouldn't know anything about design.
Nothing at all, eh? Sorry, continue digging:
He knows how to play golf and he knows what a golf course looks like. But it was no different than when I was his age and starting out -- I wouldn't know anything about design. If he decides to get involved he'll learn. He's a smart kid and it depends on how much he wants to get involved.
Kid?
He won't know how to do it, but he'll learn. It will take him seven or eight golf courses before he'll learn enough before he'll really be able to talk about it intelligently.
And just maybe reach the point he too can produce his own Dismal River!
In the same interview Nicklaus lauds the "great job" done in renovating Augusta National. Which is why it's a miracle I did not tune out prior to Matty G's most probing question: "What's the best way to cook a trout?"
Monday, March 9, 2009 at 08:50 PM
Reader Comments (33)
serg.
I kinda like his courses but how can he say that Tiger doesn't know doodley when he admits that he "designs" courses that he almost never visits.
And it's good to know that there is no such thing as a bad client or a bad country.
while his professional accomplishments as a player speak for themselves, i don't think jack has 'become' bitter, self-involved and hyper-competitive; i think he was always that way, and just figured out a veneer that would allow him to compete with arnie for the love of the fans back in the day.
i also think tiger doesn't know anything about designing golf courses. how could he? i am not one of the self-designated design arbiters on here, but if you buy the idea that design is a rare and valuable skill in and of itself, then how can you not conclude that tiger is a brand/figurehead who doesn't know anything about design? or are we to conclude that he is a prodigy at everything he turns his hand to?
And he is wrong about Tiger's design knowledge, as much as it pains me to say it, we are probably going to see that Tiger is good at design the same way he is good at everything else. It also helps that if he feels he makes a mistake he will have the financial backing of his clients to correct it.
Jack admitted that he didn't do site visits early in his career, if you read what Tiger is doing, he is making many many site visits on his projects, and has apparently already made over 20 site visits to his Job in Mexico. So Tiger has already shown that he has it over Jack, just another area where Tiger will dominate Jack.......sorry old man.
Now Jack's opinion needs to be taken with a grain of fertilizer since Tiger has clearly taken business away from him and is commanding a fee far greater than Jack has or will ever be able to.
But he's right about Tiger's lack of design knowledge. Tiger might be able to articulate certain bunker and green styles he likes, but he doesn't seem to know much about agronomy, irrigation and grading, because I've never heard him talk intelligently or passionately about them in interviews.
Is my memory correct?
There are many more media outlets today than there were 35 years ago, and it's a bit tougher out there. But is Tiger taking more abuse than Jack did way back when, and is it justified? Asking...not implying anything, just asking...
ask ol' desmond if he "cheered" jack on at MV.
lets remember also, Old Tom, that site visits in your khakis don't necessarily mean you UNDERSTAND design. Its not something you pick up overnight, and once you decide you've learned everything there is to know about design, you're likely no longer relevant, because design (of nearly everything) is constantly changing, evolving and taking new forms, much like any other art form.
that is not to say Tiger WONT be good at it. I'm sure he will, and has surrounded himself with good people (Beau Weller, par example). Its just not going to happen right away - though, you, I and the general public may not notice it.
someone mentioned about Jack not having seen Bandon - he made a similar comment a few years ago about how he has no time to visit or see the work of his contemporaries - which essentially an admission that he has no interest in the advancement of the profession, rather, content to rest on his name. The Sebonack process was eye-opening, yet, he still doesn't feel the need to see Pacific, Ballyneal or Sand Hills (even when designing Dismal River...). shocking really. Lets hope Tiger isn't a carbon copy.
serg.
Young Man Birdie: I can see your point, but: Jack is not a professional golfer anymore, he is really just a business man. He is a business man who is jeolous of Tiger, and perhaps even feels a threat from him.
I'm in this business, and ultimately will lose business to Tiger and Jack and Fazio etc. etc. - the way it always has been and will be.....BUT, I can very confidently say IMHO: Tiger's first design efforts will eclipse Jack's, Arnie's, Ernie's, Faldo's, Monty's, Mark O'meara's, Norman's,..........first efforts at design.
There is an interesting article in "Sports Pro" Magazine for those who would like to get some insight into what Tiger is doing in design already. As someone who is in this business I would like nothing more than to simply dissmiss Tiger as a "kid" who knows nothing and as a non-factor in design, but I can already tell that is not the case. He has a very strong attention to detail, an incredible commitment to quality and a focus on the work that Jack simply didn't have for the first number of years of his design business. He also has a very strong person as his head of design who will work very closely with Tiger, so I think Jack may be surprised how much Tiger can already "talk" about design.
I think it's also interesting in that article that Jack says he would have no interest in going to see Bandon Dunes. Jack simply has no interest in seeing the other work that is being done, and has no respect for anyone other than himself. In truth, it's very sad.
Do you you think he has ever written a set of construction specs or bid documents?
I wonder if Jack could even talk "design" with others in the industry?
Let's hope he at least knows that water drains downhill and water sits flat!
This line, for instance, provides some balance:
"And if Tiger, if we wishes to be involved, he'll just learn and learn and learn. But now, good gracious, he has a lot of years to go play golf and so my guess is he's not going to do a lot right now. But we welcome him. I welcome him with open arms. Anytime you get the kind of fees he does it raises the bar for everybody else, so that's OK."
Why talk now?
Why not wait, see, and talk later?
Good or bad, it will be interesting to see the results of Woods' early efforts.
Since Nicklaus has not talked to Woods about course design, why comment on the subject?
Personally, I am surprised to hear any think an intelligent, accomplished golfer knows nothing about course design. I woud be very surprised if such a person knew much, if anything, about course construction. But in terms of initial course routing and hole layout, the player should have some valid ideas. Having heard many players discuss different sand textures and turf qualities (both on the greens and elsewhere) a good player may well have a handle on what the surface of the course should be. Woods now even seems to have a handle on what the surroundings of a hole should not be - housing! It has been banished from his Baha course.
It was done in 1977 and well before he had comleted seven of eight courses
To whit, he doesn't care a whit about how he's peceived, or about what others in the industry are doing. He's asked a question; he answers, without filters and without second-guessing himself.
If I were to translate it into regular-guy speak, JN was saying "It took me a long while to really understand golf course design, and I'm a pretty smart guy. So I think it'll take another pretty smart guy like Tiger a while longer before he can talk about the process and the goals involved with any genuine insight".
And he's probably right.
I've never played a JN course in my life, in part because I'm apparently not the class of people they want playing them. Would I want to play Walton Heath and Rustic Canyon and Ballyneal etc more? Yes. But gosh, when everyone is saying his work is medicore, I feel compelled to say "He's been the most successful businessman-architect of all time, and he's building the courses that he wants to build in exactly the way his clients want him too". With that, JN can hold his head up high.
Sure, JN's not curing cancer; but he's not causing it either. Once I realized that JN's (or any architect's fees) are not what's behind the rising costs of playing golf, it was time to lay off the constant criticism.
Peter
JN ought to be able to give us THE answer.
I liked to stuff about Jack's passion for fishing. All the other times he speaks he looks as board as a husband at Macy's.
Since your post is coming from Conde Nast headquarters, I'll take your remarks with a big grain of salt!
Geoff
PS - And that's bored, not board. I guess we know what job you don't do.
In theory, I love your blog and I'm honored to be the victim of your can-cutting wit. Being fairly new to this gig, it's taken me a few months to get some additional layers of skin, but they arrived at some point and they've been applied accordingly.
The Ambush videos, which can easily be perceived as lame, are fun for some. Especially the ones who get their annual buddies trips frozen in time by Golf Digest--a 15 minutes of fame situation, but when framed and/or put in family scrapbooks--can last forever.
Thank you for the links to some of the various stories I've done so far. Especially the most recent Q&A with Jack Nicklaus. The Tiger design comment has been rototilled by your readership into the cool, damp part of the soil. And although the trout cooking question is admittedly soft, it comes on the heels of what I thought was a revealing answer about how Jack was treated as a player in college--while the team practiced, Jack and his coach, Bob Keppler, fished, cooked fresh trout wrapped in bacon and drank a few beers.
I'd say, keep up the good "work," but I should mention...
The only thing that still bothers me, and is immune to any additional layers of skin I might grow in the coming months, is the fact that on some weeks we're colleagues. In the occasional issue of Golf World, I can't help but cringe when I see your byline. It's the team code of ethics that bothers me. I don't know enough about you to know if you've ever played team sports or worked in an office setting. It's one thing to be critical of a co-worker or teammate to their face, or even within the walls of the team unit, but I hate that you get to be critical of me and my colleagues one week, air your criticisms to your readership, and then "work" with us the next week.
I suppose it's like having brothers (I have two). I can call them names, but if you call them names, that's when there's trouble.
It's in my opinion that when you take work from the publications you criticize, that's when you undermine and ultimately ruin the credibility of your blog. But that's just me and credibility may be something you don't care about.
Maybe one day we'll go fishing, wrap some trout in bacon, drink a few beers and you can explain your perspective.
Matt
It is nice to be important.
It is more important to be nice.
You're way too sensitive. I don't think Geoff was criticizing you as much as Jack. For what it's worth, I liked your trout question.
YMB