Tom MacWood,
As usual, you're now offering your expert advice about a club, and specific issues that you know nothing about.
And, as usual, you're wrong.
You're arrogance is unbridled.
The genisis for the restoration of the 7th hole came from other members, not myself. But, once the idea was presented, its merits became obvious to all.
Other members, including myself were asked to look at the hole in the context of the restoration presented by the others and to comment on it. I thought the restoration would be great, and communicated same back to the party that made the request of me.
Research confirmed that the hole was as the member had suggested. There was no need to write a book or re-invent the wheel, it was blatantly obvious to everyone. And, the cost to implement the changes were minimal, as was the inconvenience to the membership.
Contrary to your false assertion, there was no strong arming, and the party who initiated the idea only sought to better the golf course, not gain attention, leave a legacy or gain credit as you have so arrogantly labeled their effort. ( I know, you thought it was me, and therefore directed those wise guy remarks at me, but, once again, you're wrong.)
Tom Doak is not infallible on matters of architecture.
For whatever his reasons, he made a mistake at # 7 and
# 17 bunker. I'm sure it's not his first and I'm sure it won't be his last, we all make them.
The saga of the 12th hole is well known to all, and I've yet to hear a valid reason not to restore the hole, and I don't want to rehash that issue again.
But, what I'm amazed at, is that you specifically asked for criticism of modern day architects, and when I offer some,
you get defensive, say it's invalid, claim it's for ridiculous ulterior motives etc.,etc.. and personally attack and besmirch my reputation. You are such a hypocrite. You got what you asked for, and didn't like it. STOP WHINING.
It's also amazing how sensitive you are with respect to any criticism of Doak's work, yet you foment and join in the feeding frenzy when there is any criticism of Rees or Fazio.
That you have the balls to say that I'm attempting to portrait Tom Doak in a bad light after all of the things you've said about Rees and Fazio is the height of hypocrisy and arrogance, something you seem rather adept at.
Personal attacks and sniping seem to be your specialty,
Perhaps you should abandon architecture and start a gossip column.