Rich Goodale,
I go away for a week and chaos breaks out.
Somehow those who visit and post on this site have taken it upon themselves to ordain that no research has taken place at this club, on Tucker or some of his courses.
How did they arrive at that conclusion ?
Perhaps the research was done some time ago, negating the need to update such research every year.
I wonder if those who feel that the answer lies in READING, put any credibility in those dating books, like....
"HOW TO SCORE ON EVERY DATE." or
"HOW TO PLEASE A WOMAN EVERY TIME",
or the money making books,
"HOW TO MAKE A FORTUNE IN REAL ESTATE, WITH NO MONEY"
Reading can be informative, but it doesn't convey talent, which is inate.
I could read all the books in the world about drawing and painting, but I just don't have the eye nor the talent for it.
Geoff Shackelford,
Perhaps I misread or misinterpreted your post, but it seems to me that one can't disqualify an individual's architectual insight because they haven't read, books deemed essential by some,
to the furthering of their architectural education.
There seems to be, on the part of some, an attempt to disqualify or dismiss players, especially good ones, as serious architectural minds. Charles Blair MacDonald, Donald Ross and Ben Crenshaw would seem to be evidence to dispute that theory.
If one has an abundance of PLAYING EXPERIENCE, it doesn't render them automatically incapable of being impartial.
They are capable of not giving undue special weight or attention to the low, or high handicapper. Instead, they too can forge a tactical challenge that each group can aspire to, without removing the factor of enjoyment.
This notion, that players, especially good players are architectually tainted by their athletic talent, is nonsense.
Each individual should be judged by their architectural abilities, not by their handicap or the number of rounds they play, or don't play.
All too often, in many fields, there is an elitist attempt to quiet the voices of talented individuals who don't have the right pedigree.
Jim Kennedy, et. al.,
Educating the membership can have a disruptive effect on the club. I've never believed in petitions, as I believe that they are devisive and counter productive to the overall health of the membership. Once you begin the engagement process, the political lines are drawn, and the feud begins. Once you go public, you can't go back to working behind the scenes, which I would prefer to do.
As a last ditch effort, if I thought, unequivically, that the course was going to be ruined, I would consider going to battle prior to the general membership meeting.
I have had two one hour meetings with the project chairman and another concerned individual. We have made significant progress. Another meeting is planned for thursday, and I'm hopeful that a RESTORATION effort will be the result of that meeting.
Keep in mind that the project chairman is a lifelong friend, as are other individuals involved in this situation.
I'm also curious as to how many of the posters who have offered their sage advice solve differences of opinion on domestic issues in their households
