Love & Hate

[Patrick_Mucci]

David Tepper,

You never answered any of my questions.
Since I answer yours, could you answer mine ?

I don't think my experiences and observations are more valid than those of any other participant on this board, only yours.

Since when do you hold yourself out as the spokesman for this board ?  Do you think that the entire board agrees with you, and that I'm the lone dissenting view ?

Michael Moore,

You know the answer to the questions you pose.
And, they don't support your intented objective.

[David_Tepper]

Mr. Mucci-

When did I EVER hold myself out as spokesman for this board?
I have ONLY spoken relative to my personal experiences and observations, which relative to playing golf in GB&I appear to be far more extensive and numerous than yours.
 
However, so far on this thread, Brian G., Scott B., SPDB, Tom H., Matthew S., redanman, Lloyd C., Doug S., Rich G. Mike B. and Cary L. all seem to have voiced opinions similar to mine and have been also dismissed as "not getting it" by yourself.
Is that not correct?

I made, in good faith, what I thought was a constructive suggestion regarding how you might explain, with a little greater detail, the premises of your future posts. I genuinely think doing that might lead to more productive discussion and prevent future threads from turning into the joke that this one has become.

But, as usual, it appears the only opinion you care about here is your own.  

Fortunately, at this point, I do have more important things to do with my time. I am done.

DT    

[Michael Moore]

Pat -

I do not know the answers to the questions I posed to you, and I am genuinely curious to hear your responses. There seems to be legitimate confusion here as to what constitutes a home course.

[Tripp_Davis]

If a course has "penal" features, does that suggest the course should be labled penal?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tripp Davis,

That would probably depend on their number and the frequency of encoutering them.

David Tepper,

That is not correct.

[Lloyd_Cole]

Pat
You really need to put a little more thought into the wording of your opening gambits. 75% of this discussion has been semantics and mind reading. I think we all know what you meant, now. But life is too short for this. I don't think we should make assumpions about what we call a home course. I have no input or control over my little track, but that doesn't prevent me from bitching.

[TEPaul]

Five pages into this thread and I wonder if any of us can expect any logical answers at any point in our future---or are we going to spend the foreseeable future arguing over what the questions are?  

What this thread needs at this point is a moderator and of course that would be me. The first order of business shall be;

Pat, shut up and go to your room, or at the very least put on the dunce cap and go to the corner and sit in a chair facing the wall and be quiet!

Thank you! Now Michael Moore, it's your turn. Stand up and go to the head of the class and let it all hang out!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Lloyd Cole,

It would seem that some missed the core theme of this thread, the general difference in perspective of golfers from the U.S. who travel thousands of miles to Scotland to subject their golf games to a different type of golf and golf course.

I've always wondered about the double-standard that seemed to exist, where golfers relished the penal featues in Scotland, yet fought to soften the penal or dramatic features at their home course/club.

I've noticed the same syndrome with respect to some of the dramatic or penal features at Pine Valley, Garden City and NGLA and their home course/club.

Ask a high handicap to go to Pine Valley and they jump at the chance, despite knowing that the golfing rigors they face may be far beyond their abilities.  That same golfer, knowing he has a voice in the affairs of his home club will lobby, either in the name of fairness or in the guise of what best serves his game, to soften or eliminate the same features that he relished at PV,GCGC, NGLA and in Scotland.

It seems highly inconsistent.

Perhaps the difference is that the golfer knows he has no say in altering the golf course in Scotland, so he accepts what he finds, whereas, he knows he has influence at his home club and therefore, wants to alter the golf course to suit his particular golfing needs.

One only has to look at the hundreds of classic or golden age golf courses that have be altered and/or disfigured over the years to see the impact of the club member, whereas, it seems that the "classic" courses in Scotland haven't gone through the alteration and disfigurement process to the degree that their counterparts in the U.S. have.

There is a different perspective, or mindset, and to deny it, is foolish, or something that would qualify the poster for a scholarship to the TEPaul-Ray Charles school for understanding architecture

TEPaul,

What's a Dunluce Cup ?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
What's a Dunluce Cup?"

Pat:

That's a classic---hilarious!  
One never knows what wonderful things you can come up with by not being able to read properly. Now I understand the problem with these threads of yours. Other contributors are answering you very clearly but when what they write hits your brain it garbles!

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Interesting what you say about PVGC and the way many higher handicappers and others revel in getting beaten up by that course and its penal architecture. That is definitely the truth about PVGC and it's always been that way--from the very beginning to the astonishment of even George Crump (who frankly didn't even want poor players there).

Why is that though and why do those golfers feel that way about a PVGC and not that way about their home courses? Well, my club has a enormous amount of members who also belong to PVGC and over the years I've probably asked each and every one of them that question. All have said the same thing---that they do enjoy the rigors of playing a super hard course like PVGC but ONLY OCCASSIONALLY, and that they really do ALSO ENJOY playing a course the rest of the time where they aren't constantly behind the 8 ball as they can be at PVGC. They belong to both, they say, because they actually do enjoy and appreciate how different the two courses are! I might even call such a phenomenon the "Big World Theory" of golf and architecture in effect!  

You can call something like that LOVE and HATE, but those numerous golfers at my place who belong to both don't look at it that way. I suppose you can contend on here that they too are wrong and you're right about understanding what they really are thinking but that would be nothing more than another example of your on-going attempt to make some point and then defend it at all costs despite the realities to the contrary!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Which would you say is more penal, NGLA or Shinnecock Hills ?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I don't know, that's a good question if both of them were commensurately firm and fast. What would you say? The only real difference is NGLA isn't as long---doesn't have those long par 4s. It would though if they did nothing to the course and simply called #5, #7 and #18 par 4s and made the course (on a separate card) a par 70 like Shinnecock!    But you probably can't understand something like that because you'll never be as creative and as imaginative as I am!  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I knew you wouldn't understand the question.

I'm not talking about length.  We all know that Shinnecock is longer then NGLA.  Many think of Shinnecock, solely in the context of U.S. Open length from the back tees.  But try to make the quantum leap and view the question from the members tees.   Put on your Dunluce Cap and start thinking.

I think NGLA has more penal qualities that come into play.

What's your take ?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
I knew you wouldn't understand the question."

Pat:

Pretty much your stock answer to anything anyone says to you isn't it? I understand you're question and my answer is I really don't know. Can you understand THAT?

I do think, though, that there're probably a number of bunkers at NGLA that are probably more difficult to recover well from than at Shinnecock, but I haven't played Shinnecock very much--maybe only a half dozen times in the last forty years.

[Craig Sweet]

In my mind a trip to Scotland means I am playing golf on courses that exist in a "natural state" untouched by the hand of man. The hazzards, the "lay of the land", have not been manipulated into a phoney penal test. Whereas, the course I play here at home is contrived.

I know that in actuallity that is not truly the case, but I want to believe that.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

....The only real difference is NGLA isn't as long---doesn't have those long par 4s. .....

That's a unique analogy.

I've never heard anyone describe NGLA and Shinnecock Hills as being the same except that Shinnecock was longer.

Did you think of that yourself, or was it Ray Charles that told you that ?[/color]

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul;

That's a unique analogy.

I've never heard anyone describe NGLA and Shinnecock Hills as being the same except that Shinnecock was longer.

Did you think of that yourself, or was it Ray Charles that told you that?"

Pat:

That just shows how confused you can get inside of about ten posts and from one day to the next. I never said Shinnecock and NGLA were the same---I was only responding to this question of yours;

"TEPaul,
Which would you say is more penal, NGLA or Shinnecock Hills?”  

Doesn’t this thread have something to do with the question of “penal” or have you forgotten that too?  

It seems to me that almost every contributor on this website understands that you practically all you ever do is ask questions and when they give you answers practically all you ever do is respond with more questions. The only time you ever answer anyone with something other than another question is when you respond that they didn't understand your question!  

[Lloyd_Cole]

Pat
I don't disagree with your argument. I just don't think you worded the opening gambit very well. There was no mention of members tinkering with their home courses..
Back to the question, here's a thought -  Many seemingly sensible folk spend money to ride on rollercoasters every once in a while. Maybe there are not so many who like to do this week in, week out.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Lloyd Cole,

Your example is one of extremes, where the premise predisposes the intended answer.

I'd like to play any of these courses week in and week out. TOC, North Berwick, Troon, Prestwick, Turnberry, Western Gailes, Gullane.  Likewise Pine Valley and NGLA.

It's only the weather that troubles me, not the architecture.

[TEPaul]

"Lloyd Cole,
Your example is one of extremes, where the premise predisposes the intended answer."

Lloyd:

Do you believe that remark?? That just about tops all of them to date. Patrick either thinks he's campaigning to be the ambassador to the Court of St James in 1787 or he really has lost his mind!!