News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

TEPaul

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #25 on: September 20, 2002, 07:41:42 AM »
I must say though that whatever peculiar things Pat Mucci is doing on here and for whatever bizarre and tangled reasons it's apparently contributing to making him play better golf!

Pat must be a very natural player and actually I have great respect for his game because any player who can manage to play golf well with a mind like he has and the thought processes that must run through it (basically completely convoluted thinking) has to have some raw talent.

If I thought like Pat does and tried to play golf too I'd definitely blow a gasket by the third or fourth hole!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Patrick_Mucci

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #26 on: September 21, 2002, 08:37:30 PM »
TEPaul,

I'm back.

You're correct about one thing, I do reserve the right to change my opinion.  It's called flexibility, being open to reasonableness.  But I'll get backt to that in a moment.

Redanman,

I agree with you on the multiple tee issue.
I think it was done to maximize angles of attack.
I believe that additional fine tuning will result in the removal of redundant tees.

An interesting thing happened to me thursday.
I was playing the 8th hole at Aronimink, and I noticed the exact same feature that you noticed at Atlantic.
Multiple tees that didn't seem to serve enough of a purpose to justify their existance.

Tim Weiman,

I am biased, hence I didn't post my thoughts on Atlantic.
In fact, If you will carefully read my opening post, I was soliciting the opinions of others, who might not be as biased as I am.  I don't want to post my thoughts at this time, other than responses to others, I'll do that further down the road.

Why should a club be faulted for trying to improve itself ?
Since when is that a bad thing.

Mike Cirba,

You have to admit, Mark Fine lobbied hard for Lehigh.

TEPaul,

Perhaps I'm one of those IDIOT SAVANTS  ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Tim Weiman

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #27 on: September 21, 2002, 10:53:15 PM »
Pat Mucci:

I'll bet very few people who visit this site have seen Atlantic both before and after the changes made last winter.

Indeed, most people who visit this site have very limited exposure to many of the big name courses we discuss at GolfClubAtlas.

So, I'm wondering who, besides you, is better qualified to explain flaws in the Atlantic's original design, what needed to be fixed and whether or not the recent work made significant improvements.

For the life of me, I just can't imagine why you wouldn't just go ahead and do so. Wouldn't people who haven't seen the course benefit from you sharing your insight?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Mike_Cirba

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #28 on: September 22, 2002, 03:05:13 AM »
Patrick;

I don't believe that I mentioned Mark, and the person posting as "orthojerk" didn't either.  He pointed at two other people, and since I knew what happened, I felt it important to correct his erroneous assumption.....or should I say character assassination.

Mark is very proud of Lehigh, and felt flustered that the course had not been seen by many raters of any publication as of a few years ago.  Most who have since been there have been suitably impressed.  Sure, that's advocacy, but it's not like people didn't make up their own minds.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Patrick_Mucci

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #29 on: September 22, 2002, 12:42:03 PM »
Mike Cirba,

I think Mark Fine had a reasonable cause.

Lehigh is a good golf course, and he lobbied hard to get its rating improved.  

Again, you can't applaud one club's effort to improve their rating, and pan another's.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Mike_Cirba

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #30 on: September 22, 2002, 06:58:29 PM »
Patrick;

I didn't pan any effort by Atlantic to have their ratings elevated.

If they are making positive changes there (I haven't seen or played the course prior or after), as I hear they are from various reputable sources, then that is to be applauded and they have every right to try to elevate their status.

Any course trying to improve has my attention and admiration, and I only hope that in the case of classic courses, improvement efforts tend towards "restoration" of lost features, as opposed to trying to keep up with the modern professional game.  

New courses like Atlantic, or like the Ocean course at Kiawah which I visited recently, often need to go through some evolutionary iterations until they get things working well.  I mean...look at Merion....it wasn't until 10+ years after opening that they came up with the present routing, and that kind of tinkering is very often healthy.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:09 PM by -1 »
Logged

Patrick_Mucci

Re: ATLANTIC REVISED
« Reply #31 on: September 23, 2002, 09:42:26 AM »
Mike Cirba,

It was the ROYAL "you", not the personal "you"
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back