Shivas,
Jeff would look great and be a hit in the clubhouse at Pajaro where in the absent-mindedness of my old age, I failed the Huntley Test of Taste and Propriety. Of course, I was already in trouble and off his list since I couldn't find my way to the MPCC-Shores construction site, and I had the temerity to defend CPC's 18th hole. So, now that I am banned from both coasts, is Chicago still available for a visit? I understand that there are many hotel rooms, rental cars, and public courses in the area.
Mike,
I fully concur that the same criteria should be used in evaluating the $1.5MM Wild Horse, the $8-9MM Texas Star, the $45MM+ Shadow Creek, and whatever multiple of that Cascata ended up costing. My argument is that many people expect much more from a Shadow Creek because of the high budget and the green fee than they do from a Wild Horse, and hold the former to a much higher standard. In effect, there is a judgement made based on value, and not necessarily relative to quality and architecture. BTW, I see some merit in having a value list or ranking, though it would be even more subjective than the current "best" lists.
In regards to what features I liked about Cascata, I tend to focus less on bunker shapes, thematic consistency, or extraneous use of visual enhancements in favor of how the course actually plays. Like many on this site, I too enjoy variety, options, a few tricks here and there, temptations, and the opportunity to recover from an indifferent stroke with one befitting a Tiger (and I don't mean Bernhardt!). I thought that Cascata flowed extremely well with the land, even if it was largely up and down the hills. The water cascating down from the top of the hill was not a feature that I would have spent my money on as the developer, but it didn't do anything to detract from how the course played. In fact, the water features that came into play were very well done and added considerable challenge and thought to my round.
How I play the course, thank God, is not material to my evaluation. Unlike Nicklaus, I've yet to find a particular style which suits my game. An important factor for me is how much do I want to go back and play the course again. In the case of Cascata, I've already talked to my wife about scheduling a trip early next year (and we are not big gamblers). There is a well known course in my backyard where I know a few members, and I haven't had the desire to play it in years. It is full of history, neat greens, bunkers, and surrounds, but not a tremendous amount of variety. Firestone-South is another in this category. As much as I hate to admit it, I guess that I fall in the Wigler/Huckaby camp of evaluating and enjoying golf courses based more on the playing experience and less on neat or quirky features and wildly rolling greens. Of course, I've yet to play a number of the classics such as NGLA, PV, Seminole, GCGC, Merion, etc., so maybe I just don't have the experience to know any better.
In terms of playing, I am at a crossroad. I am leaning towards retiring from the game and taking-up fishing or something else to occupy my spare time, but I might just start getting serious and practice again. You see, I am unlike Dan King who can derive enjoyment from the game vicariously. I haven't found the capacity to appreciate the art without being an active participant in it. And I am not ready to accept your rather astute musing that gca makes us better golfers but worse players (or something to that effect).
Does any of this make sense? Or should I be responding to my emai spam offering all types of medications at low prices, and conveniently delivered directly and anonymously to my home? Dr. Childs once recommended a sleep aide. Do you recall what it was? No referals to Katz, please. Like JakaB, I am self-medicated.