Rees Jones article in Cigar Aficionado

[David Wigler]

Golf courses that blend well with the evironment are preferrable to courses that do not and are clearly artificial

Which design would most architectural scholars prefer...and why?

There aren't ten modern courses better than MV?

Tom,

You made three points above that I want to address:  

Your first is clearly your opinion, stated as fact.  The vast majority of the golfing public could not care less.  A perfectly blended course on Cascata's property would be painfully boring.  Rees (To borrow Tom Paul's thread) made a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  A talented architect recognizes that hand he was dealt and optimizes it.

If courses had to survive on what architectural scholars like, they would all be bankrupt (See Red Mike).  Visual beauty attracts people who can afford to play golf.  Courses must be built to the tastes of their public.  That is business 101.  Never forget that golf is a business.

No there are not ten modern courses better than Muirfield Village and both GD and GW (And I think Golf) agree.

PS - I am definitely not Pat Mucci  

[T_MacWood]

John aka JakaB
If this discussion group is a book....the editor should be fired. This discussion group resembles a bar room brawl more than a book....actually food fight at St.Agatha Grade School when the 1st, 2nd and 3rd graders are lunching.

Even a moron like you and I, can pick up numerous books on the subject architecture...to discover why architectural scholars believe Fallingwater and other important designs work so well. It doesn't mean that the common guy...like you or yours truly...won't prefer some cheap schlock that has man-made waterfall flowing through it...just like some of us would prefer a woman that is physically enhanced, dripping with make up and dressed for a nice walk on Main St. If everybody preferred Fallingwater would wouldn't need the scholars and we wouldn't need a discussion group - everyone would always agree.

[T_MacWood]

David
I don't think financial success or financial viability should be considered when judging the golfing merits of a design.

Stanley Thompson accepted the cards he was dealt...I prefer his direction.

What do GW and GD know....are Kingsley, Rustic Canyon, Victoria National and Friars Head top 10 Modern courses?

[David Wigler]

David
I don't think financial success or financial viability should be considered when judging the golfing merits of a design.

Stanley Thompson accepted the cards he was dealt...I prefer his direction.

What do GW and GD know....are Kingsley, Rustic Canyon, Victoria National and Friars Head top 10 Modern courses?

Tom,

Not the merits of design but the merits of the project.  Go see Cascata.  I believe you will accept that Rees maximized the site and built a course with a chance at success.

Kingsley will eventually be a top ten.  It needs several years to grow in.  Rustic Canyon is not a top 100.  Victoria National is right where it belongs in the top 20-40.  I have never played Friars Head, so I have no idea.  Out of curiosity, how many of those you just questioned me on, have you played?  Do you believe that they are all better than Muirfield?  Have you played Muirfield (Ai am guessing yes to this one, since it is in Columbus)?

[George Pazin]

Your first is clearly your opinion, stated as fact.

We all do this, yourself included. You frequently state courses are top 10, when you really should be saying (if you follow the above quote) you believe the course is top 10 in your opinion. These are simply colloquialisms (sp?) that make the language a little simpler.

If courses had to survive on what architectural scholars like, they would all be bankrupt (See Red Mike).

IMO you couldn't be more wrong on this. Red Mike went bankrupt because it's in the middle of nowhere. Bandon is flourishing, Rustic is flourishing, the list goes on & on. Financial success often has little correlation with achitectural merit.

Cut Shadow Creek loose from its deep pocketed benefactor & it might struggle to stay afloat.

No there are not ten modern courses better than Muirfield Village and both GD and GW (And I think Golf) agree.

See above (opinion stated as fact).

[David Wigler]

George,

Point taken on the first one.  
We disagree on the second one (I think your point about Bandon proves my point about Red Mike - We can agree to disagree).
You are dead wrong on the third one.

I checked on-line.  GD, GW, and Golf agreeing with me is not opinion, it is fact!  GW ranks Muirfield #7 among modern courses.  GD ranks Muirfield #1 among modern courses.  Golf ranks Muirfield #3 among modern courses.  

[Mike_Cirba]

David;

I'm scratching my head wondering how we ever agreed on The Kingsley Club.    

Rustic Canyon "not" a Top 100 Modern Course??

My oh my...I knew Gil should have sprung for some sparkly waterfalls coming down from those hills.  That could have made it a really financially viable course!  Perhaps next time he works in southern California he can take on Ted Robinson as a consultant.  

  

[George Pazin]

Good point on number 3 - I should have been clearer. What I meant was MV is top 10 in the opinion of GD, GW, etc. I've stated before that almost all of the interesting content on this site is opinion & the obsession with facts is misleading.

Is Cascata private/public? Does one have to be a high roller, or are there deals available like SC?

[T_MacWood]

David
I prefer VN to Muirfield Village.

[David Wigler]

George,

Now I understand what you mean.  Point taken.  

Cascata is now accepting deals like SC.  It is a sign of the economy but deals is a very relative term.  I think it is in the $500 range.

Mike,

I have written and debated Rustic Canyon many times.  I know you are kidding but it has nothing to do with waterfalls.  Rustic Canyon (IMO - George ) is a top ten modern from 60 yards in.  It simply does not present enough challenge to the skilled golfer off the tee.  I can drive three of the par fours and have no reeason not to try on two of them.  The par fives are too wide open, etc.  For what they spent, it is a terrific effort and the green complexes are magical.  It simply does not present enough strategy off the tee for my top 100.  For what it is worth, again GW and GD agreed with me.

[Mike_Cirba]

David;

I can drive 3 of 4 short par fours at The Old Course, and the 5th is reachable and I have no reason not to try.

I hesitate to ask the obvious question, but if it didn't challenge you, how many under par did you finish?

[corey miller]

I will preface this with the fact that i have seen less than five of the top modern courses, but if Rustic Canyon is not in the top 100 modern I really need to get out more.

[David Wigler]

Mike,

I said that the tee shots did not challenge me.  The greens were magical.  For what it is worth, I am a five handicap and shot 74.  Are you comparing Rustic Canyon to TOC?  TOC is far more interesting off the tee.

[David Wigler]

Corey,

That is what makes opinions so fun.  I have seen 34 of Golfweek's top 100 Modern and the only one of those I have seen that I would take off the list to make a spot for Rustic is Firestone North.  That written, there are several other courses that I would put on the list in Firestone's place before Rustic.

[TEPaul]

Golf Magazine, Golf Digest, constant throwing around of top 10, top 50, top 100! Jeeesus Christ that stuff is absolutely mind-numbing. Those lists are nothing more than an opiate for the masses and a return for magazine publishing companies, in my opinion.

Why can't we talk about golf architecture, golf courses,  golf holes, golf options, no options, great shots and strategies and vice versa and exactly why they're good, good, good or bad, bad, bad or something in between. Why's it so hard to talk about architecture individually and specifically? Why does it always have to be only better or worse than something else. Is it the USA and it's mentality that does this? Are we the great f... comparative clearinghouse of the world on everything?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Paul;

That's what I've tried to get Lou and David to do.  

Heck, they even have a whole course aerial on the other thread to work with so we can all see what they're saying about Cascata.  

I'm trying to understand their use of the term "line of charm", because I've been all over every inch of that aerial now for multiple times and all I've found is something that looks like Jimmy Hoffa's body floating downstream!    

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Dave,
What are your other top 10 from inside 60 yards?

Did you eagle/birdie all three par fours you drove? If not, might that not be a reason to not drive the green?

Was Rustic soft when you played it?

Do the merits of the project affect your opinions of the course? Your ranking?

[Mike_Cirba]

Hmm...maybe if I move it "here", someone will point out what they mean by "line of charm" on some of these holes.   Where's Max Behr when I need him?  



Is that Jimmy Hoffa's body floating downstream?  

I've been told that the Line of Charm here is so evident that like the Great Wall, it can be seen from space.    

[George Pazin]

I sure hope there's some fairway contour, 'cause the only charm along the line I see is cart paths.

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh WAIT...WAIT...I think I see....isnt' that it??.....yes...there's one!!

Oh shoot....that's a snake.  

[Nigel_Walton]

Perhaps Stephen King would like to write a horror novel about a thread that won't die.

[Matt_Ward]

Corey M:

Amen to your comments on RC. It is without question among the 100 best modern using the definition provided for by GolfWeek IMHO. Yes, it has issues for tee game intensity but it still delivers.

Lou D:

I fully well know the merits of UNM / Championship and that of Cascata. UNM is well done by Red Lawrence and when they don't overwater the fairways the course plays in a superb manner as a high desert layout. Plenty of people just view UNM as your basic college course. It's far from that.

To the group:

I could frankly care less how much is spent on a golf course. I just look at the F-I-N-A-L product. Some places can spend a king's ransome and still get it wrong. Others use their money wisely and deliver big time. I don't believe I'm swayed by other non-course related aspects and I thank Mike for adding that I rate courses irrespective of where they're located. That's what I try to do as I was reared on courses far from the blue blood group when I grew up in Jersey.

Let me be clear -- I enjoyed Cascata but I do disagree with David W who believe that the course is akin to the second coming of the Almighty! Cascata is well done but the layout (hello Shivas ) features an elementary and repetitive routing. Essentially, Rees designed holes to go up and down the sloping property. There is very little differences with the exception of the holes I previously noted. Yes, the 2nd is a grand hole but the predictability of such a routing proves to be overdone IMHO.

UNM is a wonderful design and I urge anyone visiting the greater Albuquerque area to sample the top public courses I mentioned. The State of New Mexico gets short shrift by many but I would say the top ones I listed are no less than a push / tie with the top ones that David W pointed out. In fact -- I believe there are other courses in southern Nevada (Wolf Creek / Mesquite & The Wolf at Paiute) that are really good, fun to play and deserving of more attention than many might even believe. I enjoyed Reflection Bay and believe it's a fine Nicklaus course -- ditto the qualities of Southern Highlands. But, please excuse me if I don't see Cascata as high as I do with The Bridge. I enjoyed Cascata and believe people should play it to see for themselves but Cascata is not in the league with the other previous courses I recommended to David to play. Again -- it's just my opinion.

[David Wigler]

 This course absolutely belongs in GW's top 100.  Put Cascata against true desert courses like Troon, Greyhawk, Apache Stronghold, Desert Mountain, etc. and Cascata blows them away.

 Matt,

Above is my assessment of Cascata.  Don't you think your quote of "Let me be clear -- I enjoyed Cascata but I do disagree with David W who believe that the course is akin to the second coming of the Almighty!", is a drastic misrepresentation.  I believe Cascata has terrific visual appeal, sound strategic options an ingenuous routing (Given the terrain), mediocre bunkering and average greens.  The combination results in a course that belongs in GW’s top 100.  I would feel quite good if it finished anywhere between 60-90.  That is hardly the "Second coming of the Almighty!"  It is hard enough to defend against the Rees haters without you giving me a position I do not want to defend.

[HamiltonBHearst]

terriffic visual appeal. sound strategic options. ingenous routing. mediocre bunkering. average greens?  Not exactly a ringing endorsement. how is this top 100 as it seems rustic canyon scores very high in these categories

[T_MacWood]

David
Who are the Rees haters? Is that how you would characterize those who ask to you to explain your views of Cascata?