I n its purest form, restoration takes the architect’s thoughts out of play; but sometimes it is not immune to an impure intent.

At some point in the 1980s, golf course architects and even some committees started talking “restoration”. Prior to this, the idea of putting another’s design back was relatively new. And why wouldn’t it be? In an era when golf course design was booming and architects had a seemingly endless supply of projects, why would you spend your time putting someone else’s work back, when you had your own legacy to leave?