News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:It's official
« Reply #50 on: April 04, 2004, 12:01:07 AM »
Tom: I'm very happy for you - congratulations. We'll all be waiting with baited breath.

You've earned your way - the hard way - which is often the best way.

Jack has been a hero to me. Being as "old" as I am, I followed him first at Winged Foot when he played the Open as an amateur (he had just one his first, I think) - he was playing in a group with Sam Snead and was outdriving him often.  I had gone to see Arnie and came home raving about this JN fella.

Tom, you've been a big help to me (a dry cleaner  :P) over the years and it will never be forgotten.

We know you will do well and I think this collaboration will be good for both of you and for golf as well!!

gb
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Big Pete

Re:It's official
« Reply #51 on: April 04, 2004, 06:34:12 AM »
Tom
What a fascinating project
I think I speak for everyone when I say I can't wait to see what you produce and how the collaboration goes . Best of luck

Sebonac

Re:It's official
« Reply #52 on: April 05, 2004, 12:04:08 PM »
Tom....All the best on the project...I have wondered Bayberry Land, and it definitely offers huge potential...as a life-long NGLA enthusiast, I do hope you consider not impinging on that site as you figure out the routing....I understand that all the right noises have been made on this subject, and I hope it carries through...

Sebonac

Re:It's official
« Reply #53 on: April 05, 2004, 12:04:52 PM »
I meant to say wandered....But I have also wondered about it...

TEPaul

Re:It's official
« Reply #54 on: April 05, 2004, 01:57:42 PM »
Sebonac said:

"I do hope you consider not impinging on that site (NGLA)as you figure out the routing..."

TomD:

As you well know, golf and golf architecture can be an intensely SUBJECTIVE issue and I think I just might diametrically OPPOSE what Sebonac just said there and ask you (or Jack, but I think you're probably the right one to ask on here) if you'd consider not just impinging on but actually cojoining AND MELDING together the fairways of #1, #2 AND #3 of NGLA with what you'll hopefully build at Bayberry along side them? Or how about #5, 8 and 9??

You know what they say my man---real fairway width is a hard thing to come by these days. The perfect opportunity for massive fairway width with comingled feartures producing even more incredible strategies is in the potential offing or offering here?

How cool would it be to hit shots on those cojoined stretches of fairway and features and ask your caddie;

"Am I on NGLA or Sebonac??"

The prospect is so cool I'm about to faint!

;)

« Last Edit: April 05, 2004, 02:00:57 PM by TEPaul »

Sebonac

Re:It's official
« Reply #55 on: April 07, 2004, 10:02:39 AM »
Well...for one thing...Bayberry (Sebonac) does not run along 8 and 9!!

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:It's official
« Reply #56 on: April 07, 2004, 12:04:22 PM »
Tom, cojoining fairways seems to open up several cans of worms, and while I haven't actually seen this whole Shinny, NGLA thing in person, I can't imagine that it is desirable to "meld" the two distinct courses.  I love big "field of play" fairways too.  But, not on different courses.  I would have to believe that just in legal issues alone, there would be too many negatives to the idea.  I understand ANGC is a short chip in distance from ACC in several areas of boundaries, yet because of hedges and such, one hardly notices one from the other course.  Memeber pride must have a great deal to do with it too, and I would agree with that sentiment personally.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:It's official
« Reply #57 on: April 07, 2004, 12:28:51 PM »
Fascinating!!!!  I would have loved to be a fly n the wall as the idea was hatched and then listened to the negotiations of this arrangement.  

Congratulations to all involved.  I can only think it will be great for golf!.

TEPaul

Re:It's official
« Reply #58 on: April 07, 2004, 12:57:03 PM »
RJ:

I was just kidding about melding together those fairways of NGLA and whatever might be near them at Sebonac.  

Sebonac;

Who does own that property to the right of #8 and #9? I did peak in along the right of #9 one time and spied a house or two in there.

Sebonac

Re:It's official
« Reply #59 on: April 13, 2004, 03:36:11 PM »
It is a seventies style develpoment that you access just past Bayberry, but on the left as you head down Sebonac road towards the highway....it actually had two bunkers framing the entrance...and is called something like Fairway Pines....

Patrick_Mucci

Re:It's official
« Reply #60 on: April 13, 2004, 06:34:37 PM »
Sebonac,

I believe the property immediately adjacent to the right side of the 8th tee at NGLA is Bayberry property.  And, it is very close to the 8th tee.

I also believe it extends across the road for a limited distance.
It was my understanding that that land on the other side of the road has been donated as one of the parcels to assist in the approval  process.

Also, why wouldn't Tom Doak want to create the best golf course possible ?

Why would he want to compromise his design, his routing because it might be extremely close to the holes and clubhouse at NGLA ?

Mike Pascucci hired him, not NGLA.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:It's official
« Reply #61 on: April 14, 2004, 08:27:45 AM »
Michael Pascucci has had several conversations with board members at The National, all very friendly, and he does not want to do anything seen as taking away from National.

However, National is lucky they have a friendly neighbor.  They left the door open to change because of their tree-clearing program which has been so widely praised here over the years.  Basically they have cleared nearly all the trees on their property right up to the boundary line.  If we wanted to do the same for Sebonack, it would change the perspective from National considerably, but how could they object?  They left themselves no buffer.  You can't just assume that the neighbors will keep their trees.

There won't be a negative impact, not only because we don't want to offend the neighbors but because we are strictly limited by the town as to how many acres we can clear on our side of the fence, and we need those all for golf.