[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

Several times now you have referred to Pete Dye, Tom Doak and PGA West. Before you go on suggesting that nobody has ever said a word of criticism about this course, you might want to check out Tom's own comments on the subject. Tom doesn't exactly give the artificiality of the place a ringing endorsement.

I know Tom is grateful for the assistance Pete and Alice Dye gave him as a young person, particularly in the area of teaching construction techniques. But I haven't seen much evidence that Tom's own work looks "Dye" like in style. Atlantic City Country Club is an example where Tom worked to create movement on a flat pice of property without leaving the kind of artificial look one finds at PGA West or in the Sandpines pictures Tommy posted.

["   "]

Pat Mucci,

How is the quote "inapplicable"?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Yes, Pat, I don't know how I missed your retort on that one, but I too would like to know how that quote is inapplicable?

Pat, have you read MacKenzie's Golf Architecture?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Turner,

You brought up Yale and water hazards and ponds.
Atlantic has not ponds on the golf course so I have no idea of what you're talking about.  At Yale, the course could be routed and the holes built exactly as the architect desired, without outside interference.  At Atlantic, much of the property, including areas that could have made for good holes, was declared off limits.  And you want to compare those two projects.  How many holes on Yale are copies of holes from other courses ?  Ask yourself, if Rees did the same thing, would his copying of holes get the same pass as CBM/SR ?

What was Ross doing at Pinehurst, if not fixing it over a 26 year period ?  So Ross tinkers with the course and its fine tuning, Rees tinkers with the course and its fixing it, and you don't see the bias ?

I've answered all of your questions, you just don't like the answers.

Tommy Naccarato,

Your response to my question about the water supply is unacceptable even by minimal standards.
  
Referencing unknown third party locals and pawning it off as fact is also a bit of a stretch.

When you present the facts on the water supply, I'll accept them, but let's ascertain what they are before drawing conclusions.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim Weiman,

Noone on THIS thread was critical of the Dye/Doak work at PGA West.  Noone criticized those mounds.  Noone criticized the artificiality forced upon the natural land.  Noone criticized TPC in Florida, Noone criticized Old Marsh, for the mounds or creating something artificial upon the natural land.

My point is simple, if it's bad architecture for one, it's bad architecture for all.  You can't criticize one guy for mounds and give another guy a pass for the same mounds.

And, since you brought up Atlantic City, noone gave Doak a hard time for altering that William Flynn golf course that was very well regarded.  Doak himself gave the course a 6 on his scale.

" 6 - A very good golf course, definitely worth a game if you're in town, but not necessarily worth a special trip to see.  It shouldn't disappoint you."

Where was the outcry when Doak changed that Flynn course forever ?

Tim, I can't comment on a course I haven't seen, but,
I can comment on hypocrisy when I see it.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

No need to lose any sleep over Pat's odd comments. Fairness for all and devils advocacy are Pat's contribution, you must not concern yourself with what you consider his strange/questionable architectural views....the sooner you realize he has no architectural viewpoint the better you will be and can commend him for his special contribution. It is healthy to have your views scrutinized and questioned. Thanks Pat, I just hope some day all this architecture talk will rub off on you some day.

[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

You seem to be suggesting that one can't comment about the artificiality displayed in Tommy's Sandpines pictures without also making similiar observations about PGA West.

Why is that? What other restrictions would you propose?

Do I need to say something like "I don't like the artificial looking mounding at Sandpines.......and every other course with similiar features"?

Would that suffice?

As for Atlantic City, you may recall there are people on this site who believe the owner or developer really sets the agenda. My understanding is that ACCC is a perfect example.

Is it your understanding that Tom Doak took a gun the the new owner's head and said "you must change this course"?

As for the work itself, I can't speak to what existed before, but have no hesitation in saying ACCC is a very enjoyable place to play golf today. I played there this fall with a fairly well traveled group and I certainly didn't hear anyone suggest otherwise.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

One day, I hope to know but one one hundreth (1/100) of what you and all the other experts on this site know.
I continue my quest to learn.

I do want you to know that I do appreciate your posting under your own name, no matter how critical your comments or how much we may disagree on a given issue.  
I view your posts as sincere, honest and agenda free, an expression of your true beliefs.

Tim Weiman,

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm just saying, be fair, be consistent, and apply your standards universally, not selectively.

Forget what I believe about Atlantic City, where was the criticism, especially from the Tom MacWood's and Tommy Naccarato's when Doak altered Flynn's work at Atlantic City ?

So you would apply selective standards on the alteration/disfiguration of classic golf courses ?  
If you like the result, the alteration/disfiguring is okay with you

Is that a reasonable position and standard ?

And, if everyone adopted that standard, what golf course would be safe from alteration/disfiguration, since it is the subjective end that you would have justify the project ?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
Flattery will get you everywhere.

1/100th is a bit unrealistic, but goals should be set high. A job well done on your even-handedness -- keep it up!

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
From what I understand AC was originally a Willie Park design, and one Pawky was quite proud of. Atlantic City has always been known for its corruption, perhaps there is something in the water in NJ.

[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

Almost every place I've seen with obviously artificial mounding I haven't liked.

I hope I now pass the test of being "fair".

As for being "consistent", I'm afraid I must violate that standard. Chicago Golf Club has some obviously artificial features, but for some reason I like them.

I see you side stepped my question about Atlantic City. Do you fault the new owners? Tom Doak? Both? Or neither?

[Paul Turner]

I can't help it.

Patrick

I asked you what parts of Atlantic you felt were natural: no answer.

I asked you for detail regarding Lowell Schulman's input into the Atlantic course: no answer.

I asked you how enviro restrictions impact Rees's style such as mounding and fairway grading: no answer.

I asked wether you conceded that Lowell Schulman didn't research Rees's work prior to hiring him (as strongly implied in his book): no answer.

I clearly wrote about the water hazards at Yale in comparison to those at shown at The Oxfordshire and Sandpines.  Of course I know there are no water hazrads at Atlantic!  Perhaps I should have broken to a new paragraph to make it clearer?.

Don't bring bias up again, it's tedious beyond belief.

Fixing, tweaking, perfecting  don't care what you use.  All I know is that Ross wasn't concerned with removing elemements such as containment mounds blocking grand vistas, nor the shape of his tees!  His course had a bit more substance.

If I was shown Yale and previously had no idea about them "copying" holes from the great British courses (+ 1 French),  I wouldn't have a clue they had done so.  Would you?  They used those holes as inspiration and not simple copying.  Look at Yale's redan!  If Rees built a course like Yale, he'd receive great praise.

One further question which perhaps you might be answer:

If you owned a piece of land with great natural appeal and wanted to build a course, would you interview Rees Jones?

[Paul Turner]

PS

I also asked whether Patrick actually likes Rees's style and I don't believe it was answered.

[Tim Weiman]

Paul Turner:

Your last question to Pat Mucci is interesting. We all know Pat frequently speaks out against what he perceives to be "bias" against Rees Jones.

However, what is most striking to me about Pat is that he has never identified a Rees Jones course and passionately explained why he loves it.

I can't help but wonder why. Does Pat secretly share the view of many here that Rees' work just isn't worth getting excited about?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat,
Unacceptable? You sound like you aren't taking my word for it.

Trust me, the person that told me all about the Sandpines water situation knows more then you and I put together. He is legitimate. In Mafia-speak, "I'll vouch for his credibility." He lives in Florence, and he is well pronounced in Golf and Landscape Architecture. Enough to the point that he has taught me a thing or two about LA and agronomy.

Pat, For the second time, have you read Dr. MacKenzie's Golf Architecture? If you haven't, I will get it for you.

[brad miller]

Pat, the 118 holes of golf is a Maxwell quote, no time to find the reference, but if you are up for a sizable bet please let me know. If more achie's thought this way (asumming the land is great) golf would be better for it.

Rees "might" say, I found 8 holes of golf, now I have to use the bulldozer to create the other 10, mounds and all. I thought the point of this thread was about RJ being true to the comments and "direct quotes" from the article about him in CA Magazine.

["   "]

Pat Mucci,

How is the quote "inapplicable"?

[TEPaul]

First Pat Mucci said to Tom MacW;

"Tom MacWood,

One day, I hope to know but one one hundreth (1/100) of what you and all the other experts on this site know.
I continue my quest to learn."

And then Tom MacW said to PatM:

"Pat
Flattery will get you everywhere.

1/100th is a bit unrealistic, but goals should be set high. A job well done on your even-handedness -- keep it up!"

Tom:

Look, that was probably Pat's first real admission of his inherent lack of understanding of all things to do with golf architecture; so for God's sake give the man a break--it appears now after all this time at least he's trying to learn something! If I really take the time and dedicate it to Pat's ongoing education maybe he can get within about 10% of what we all know instead of only about 1%. That wouldn't be a bad learning curve for Pat if he could do it in the next year or two. Still today only about 2% of what Pat says is true and of that 2%, although true, about half of that is terrible architectural analysis anyway. So what he says at present is only about 1% both true and also proper architectural analysis!

Also,

Atlantic City was basically a John Reid design originally, with lots of penal looking cross hazards. One of the original nines of Reid's old 18 hole course was eventually given up to housing but not before Willie Park added another nine making the course 27 holes. Park's nine was basically what is now the front nine of ACC.

Then Flynn came in in the 1920s and redesigned the course basically reusing many of the Willie Park's holes in a routing and green site sense but redesigning them and also the same with some of the holes of one of Reid's original nines. Then Tom Doak came in and did some redesign of Flynn's holes but basically leaving them all where they were, sort of.

That's kind of broad brush but that's basically the way the course has evolved.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

"In February 1923 Willie Park set sail for America to start his biggest scheme he has ever been asked to complete -- Ocean City." Was it not completed?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom MacWood;

"Ocean City" was built, and is now known as Greate Bay GC.

Our own Archie Struthers is involved heavily there, and I know he's trying to do some things to bring it back as much as possible to Park's original design there.  

It's a fun course, and for years hosted the LPGA event in south Jersey.  

[Fact Patrol]

Mr. Mucci,

If you are going to preach the FACTS, why can't you stick to the FACTS?  

"By 1935 William and June Carey were ready.  They called on Maxwell to look over their prospective site north of the city.  Maxwell came and tramped for days through the sand dunes.  He finally told the Careys that he felt the more ideal site was one several miles east of the one they had selected.  He had spotted the land as he rode the train into Hutchinson.

He was ecstatic, as if he had discovered golf's Shangri-La.  When asked if there were 18 good golf holes there, he uttered his now-famous reply, 'There are 118 good holes there.  I just have to eliminate 100 of them.'"

"This occurred during the midst of the Great Depression, and even though the Carey family's diversified enterprises were not as hard hit as some, they asked Maxwell to lay out 18 holes but opted to build only nine holes."  (p.17, Perry Maxwell's Prairie Dunes, by Mal Elliott)

Time to wave the white towel, at least on this issue!  

[TEPaul]

Fact Patrol:

Not sure what the big issue you just mentioned with Pat is about the 118 holes. But if you think he happened to say Ben Crenshaw may have identified app. 118 holes at Sand Hills and then whittled the routing down to the best 18 that is true. Pat probably heard that from me as I don't think Pat Mucci knows Ben Crenshaw or Bill Coore. And frankly that's obviously one of the primary reasons Pat continues to struggle to understand golf architecture properly!

I think we all know what huge fans Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw are of Perry Maxwell and his courses but if Perry found 118 holes out there once and whittled the course down to the best 118 it sure doesn't mean that Ben and Bill didn't do about the same thing at Sand Hills.

And actually they did just that. Initially they took rides in a helicopter scoping out all the available land (obviously took photos). Bill Coore told me himself when showing me his own photos of Sand Hills under construction that they found an enormous amount of holes or holes that they could probably come at from any direction and then the process of narrowing down the best and the best routing began. My recollection is that he said they may have found up to 150 possibilities.

I find it almost inconceivable that I would ever come to Pat Mucci's defense on anything to do with archtiecture since he's so often wrong but this must be one of those unusual times!

One more thing I distinctly remember Coore saying about his time in the Sand Hills and that project that anyone who might consider working out there should seriously heed.

He said it's scary to think how close he may have come to going blind out there! So his advice to anyone thinking of working out there is to wear, at all times, the best set of David Duval type wrap-around sunglasses you can find.

[Michael Dugger]

Brad Miller.....thanks for having my back on the Perry Maxwell quote;)

Pat.....it is good to see that I'm not the only person here you annoy.  Have you read the last fifteen posts yet?

If this type of thread is "educational" in your opinion......well, then, I guess we have discovered another thing we disagree on.

My question you haven't answered yet is.......do you have as much of a problem with artificial features on a piece of desert land like PGA West as you do on a sensitive coastal property like Atlantic or Sand Pines?  Yes or freaking No

[Fact Patrol]

Mr. TEPaul

Nobody said that Ben Crenshaw didn't say the 118/18 thing.  The question raised was whether that statement was ORIGINALLY made by Perry Maxwell (and used appropriately by Ben regarding Sand Hills) or Ben Crenshaw.  Pat said it was Ben and not Perry.  I think the quotes below will help you better understand the gist of my post.

"Where did you get this notion that 118 holes exist and an architect merely has to eliminate 100 of them, Ben Crenshaw at Sand Hills."  (Mucci Post #74)

"Another thing, it was Perry Maxwell, at Prairie Dunes, who ORIGINALLY (emphasis added) said 'there are 118 golf holes here', not Crenshaw." (mdugger Post #95)

"I doubt Perry Maxwell uttered your quote about seeing 118 holes and eliminating 100 since Prairie Dunes was built as a nine (9) hole golf course.

Maxwell himself, on September 13, 1937, the day of the formal opening round consisting of the foursome of Johhny  Dawson, Dean Woods, Ross Wilson and Ray Hockaday, said after play, " I told you the boys would agree with me when I said that there isn't another 9-hole course like this one in the whole United States"

The second nine opened in 1957 was based on a plan Perry had drafted in 1936, with a few changes in the design of the balance of the original holes.  But, Perry Maxwell never saw those holes on the second nine as he died in 1952.

I believe that you will find your quote attributed to C&C at SandHills.  I like C&C, I just find the idolatry a little excessive." (Mucci Post #96)

Perhaps you jumped to Mr. Mucci's defense a little too soon, as the FACTS don't support C&C idolatry having anything to do with this!  

[TEPaul]

Fact Patrol:

Well then Pat Mucci is just wrong again which doesn't surprise me at all. But so are you for even responding to him for saying 118. Bill and Ben said about 140-150 holes out there in Sand Hills whether or not that had a thing to do with Perry's discovery of 118 at Prarie Dunes 70 years before. I'll tell Pat that Perry was flying around in a helicopter at Prarie Dunes back in the 1930s because somehow he knew that someday there would be these two architects who were going to do that that he would have idolized if he lived long enough!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()