Courses and Holes We've Done to Death

[Tom_Doak]

If this board is going to hold my interest much longer, then we've got to move on to discussing DIFFERENT courses and DIFFERENT holes instead of returning to the same ones all the time.

I suggest we blacklist 25 courses and 50 golf holes we've discussed to death and try to avoid talking about them in 2008.  If we can do it, we'll have a far more diverse board.

My own suggestions for the blacklist:

Courses - USA:  Pacific Dunes, Sand Hills, National Golf Links, Shinnecock Hills, Pebble Beach, Cypress Point, Oakmont, Pinehurst No. 2, Augusta National, Winged Foot West.

Courses - Overseas:  St. Andrews (even though I don't think some of the holes have ever been thoroughly discussed).

Golf Holes - USA (besides courses listed above):  10th at Riviera, 5th at Pine Valley, 16th at Merion, 11th at Pasatiempo.

Golf Holes - Overseas:  6th at Royal Melbourne (West).

[Tom Huckaby]

TD:

There's an obvious problem with this idea... do it and we'll REALLY have no good examples to be able to use.  For good discussion a course has to have been seen by a lot of people, and you just eliminated damn near all of the great ones that meet that standard.

I also don't think 11 at Pasa has been discussed ENOUGH.    16 and damn near all other holes there have been beaten to death though.

In the end, I get your point... I just don't see a simple solution.

For example there's a hole at my beloved Santa Teresa that I could have mentioned in the "local knowledge" thread, but given no one would know anything about it but me, what good is it to mention?  THus I fall back on Pasatiempo.

And I think the same thing happens re these other famous courses.  So many people know of them, they are always good examples to use in discussion.

Now starting topics simply ABOUT these courses/holes... that I can get behind blacklisting.  They have been beaten to death.

TH

[George Pazin]

While I understand the sentiment, and might even agree with it, I hope people won't stop discussing Shinnecock. I feel like I learn more from those discussions than just about any others.

What we need is more people willing to take the time to really flesh out opinions on other courses. Take a stance and defend it, don't shy away when someone unfairly criticises you instead of your opinion, and don't take the bait and fire back at them instead of their opinion.

[Matt_Cohn]

There are a limited number of holes and courses that are familiar to a majority of GCA'ers. I think that's a big reason why we keep talking about the same holes and courses all the time.

It would be interesting for people to present more detailed essays on one or two holes that are unfamiliar to most of us, and start a discussion from there.

If we do adopt a blacklist, please add Garden City to it.

[Phil Benedict]

Tom D.,

I certainly agree that the CBM/SR/CB templates, for example, have been discussed to death.

Huck makes a good point about widespread familiarity being a prerequisite for a discussion.

What courses ought we be discussing if we follow your suggestion?  

[Kyle Harris]

Huckaby,

The solution is simple and I think it's the undercurrent to what Tom is saying.... there's a bunch of other golf courses out there to go and see - so go and see them.

Can't begin to count how many times I've tried to bring to light new finds and discuss the evolution of lesser known but still worth courses on this board only to never be able to get passed the complacency of the familiar.

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

A fine suggestion.  Why doesn't everybody pick a course from the blacklist, and choose an underrated hole or two to discuss?

I'll take Garden City.

[Tom Huckaby]

Huckaby,

The solution is simple and I think it's the undercurrent to what Tom is saying.... there's a bunch of other golf courses out there to go and see - so go and see them.

Can't begin to count how many times I've tried to bring to light new finds and discuss the evolution of lesser known but still worth courses on this board only to never be able to get passed the complacency of the familiar.

Harris:  that is quite easier said than done.  Tell ya what, you come see Santa Teresa and then we'll talk.  Note I've played Jeffersonville muni.  

TH

[Kyle Harris]

Yep, I know - love the Jeff and have some interesting stuff to report about it when the time comes.

I get what you're saying about it being a totally regional thing as to course availability - remember I'm currently living in Tampa and apart from Dunedin, Palma Ceia and a few courses out by Mountain Lake we're not doing to hot on the whole hidden gem thing.

Geez Tom, when are we going to see you throw down roots and do a My Home Course...  

[George Pazin]

Can't begin to count how many times I've tried to bring to light new finds and discuss the evolution of lesser known but still worth courses on this board only to never be able to get passed the complacency of the familiar.

And yet you keep doing it, so my hat is off to you.

Merry Christmas.

[Kyle Harris]

Can't begin to count how many times I've tried to bring to light new finds and discuss the evolution of lesser known but still worth courses on this board only to never be able to get passed the complacency of the familiar.

And yet you keep doing it, so my hat is off to you.

Merry Christmas.

Thank you George - same to you. How's the burgh these days? How about you get out to Quicksilver and give us a looksy?

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

Go check to the left - I've done a My Home Course.  It had value at the time.

Finding hidden gems and reporting them to this group has great value, for sure.  But if a discussion is about more general issues and examples are needed, it really does little good to cite an example no one has seen.  I mean it's cool and all, but if people haven't seen it, they won't understand it no matter how great a word-smith or photographer one is.

Thus the problem with blacklists.

TH

[Kyle Harris]

Tom:

*Open mouth, insert foot*

Maybe I should bring back that disclaimer that graced the bottom of my posts for so long...  

[Joe Hancock]

If for no other reason that humility, it would be nice to stray from the usual suspects. There are times when our discussion seems more of a way to show where we've been that to discuss the actual architectural elements that exist.

Joe

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:  no hassles, man.  Now if only Mucci could be so gracious.

 

Joe:  there is an element of that going on here as well, for sure.  But what courses do many people have in common outside of the greats?

That's why I find the various outings people organize to be so darn cool... some times they are at great courses, most times not... and thus we get some new blood courses to discuss.

Maybe we'll do this in California some time in 2008.  Here's hoping....

TH

[Michael Whitaker]

I'll tell you what I would like to see on this site: a committee of 4-6 guys who would come up with a "Hole of the Month" for discussion. It could be presented with pictures and/or drawings so that everyone could participate... and there could be discussion as to WHY the hole is great (or not so great).

What I would like to see is more discussion of WHY something is considered great... not just because it was designed by so-and-so, but what SPECIFIC choices were made by the designer that make a hole better than other similar holes.

Another thing I would like to see is Tom Doak discussing his quote: "Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf course architecture." I have been carrying this quote at the bottom of my posts for a couple of years now so that I would think about whenever I visit. I've read and re-read old threads trying to figure it out, but I'm not smart enough to extract exactly what it means. Please, Tom, start a thread on this subject so that I can learn from you guys what this is really all about.

[John Kirk]

I like to discuss what's brand new, since I believe there's lots of good golf being designed.

I will do what I can to stay away from the usual suspects.

Which hole at Santa Teresa?  11 came to mind as one requiring course knowledge.  Santa Teresa is really nice, with a very good back nine.  Probably the best municipal course in Santa Clara County, though it's been 15-20 years since I played there.

[Joe Hancock]

I'm not sure we have to have a course in common to be able to discuss it. That's part of the fun of learning in this venue; many people see things differently. Look no further than the Sleepy Hollow #16 thread to discover the vast differences of opinion even on a somewhat familiar, faithfully restored hole. I see those differing opinions as a good interaction and a valuable way to learn.

I wish we, myself included, had more confidence in our opinions to cite an unfamiliar golf hole, discuss its attributes, and express what we do or don't like about it. It would broaden all of our perspectives, IMO.

Joe

[Tom Huckaby]

John Kirk:

Well I'll be.  A non-NorCal guy who knows a bit of my home course.  That is very cool and makes my day.

11 is a great choice for local knowledge:  good call, and it hasn't changed much in 20 years - first-timers are still pretty clueless about what to do on it.   But the ones I had more in mind for that other thread would have been 12 or 16 - they seem to me to be tougher to figure out in the long run.

It is a pretty nice course with a darn good back nine.  

It also remains tough for me to cite in discussion.  But maybe not.  You have inspired me.

TH

[Bill_McBride]

John Kirk:

Well I'll be.  A non-NorCal guy who knows a bit of my home course.  That is very cool and makes my day.

11 is a great choice for local knowledge:  good call, and it hasn't changed much in 20 years - first-timers are still pretty clueless about what to do on it.   But the ones I had more in mind for that other thread would have been 12 or 16 - they seem to me to be tougher to figure out in the long run.

It is a pretty nice course with a darn good back nine.  

It also remains tough for me to cite in discussion.  But maybe not.  You have inspired me.

TH

Not sure but I think John went to Stanford.

I'm not sure, however, if he was at the 1982 Big Game.  

[Lou_Duran]

A few years ago Ran asked me to pen an article on Ralph Plummer, ASGCA, after he enjoyed playing Tryall, one of the architect's courses.  I considered doing and linking an in-depth "My Home Course" profile on Plummer's Great Southwest Golf Club, a club that was very highly regarded  in Texas and where I had been a member for 23 years through each of its redevelopments.

I opted not to spend the time based on how little discussion I saw on courses that are not widely known or initiated by quasi-celebrity posters.   The near-total lack of response and discussion on the Plummer article proved my observations true, and I think posts on relatively unknown courses and holes would meet a similar fate.

If learning is indeed what some people look to do on this site, there is plenty left to discuss on even the most familiar of courses.  For example, to my own satisfaction, we still haven't come to a conclusion on what makes holes like Riviera's #10 or CPC's #16 so revered.  Or why a course like Pebble Beach with a fairly even mix of world-class, good, and indifferent holes can be so highly esteemed on an architectural basis.

We can insert pictures, routing maps, and scorecards for unfamiliar courses, but without the common bond of having played them, I don't know that the discussion has much value other than for entertainment and fraternizing.  Though I am not suggesting that these are not valid reasons for spending time here, I suspect that they overwhelm the often professed desire of acquiring knowledge.




     

[Bart Bradley]

All:

If we start talking about courses that fewer people have seen, then we must be more open the opinions of others on this website.  I cannot count the number of times people have discounted others opinion by saying "you haven't played it" so your opinion is less valuable/worthless...just look at the 16th Sleepy Hollow thread.  Now, admittedly, pictures do not always tell the whole and proper story BUT often that is all we have to go by.  Why is it wrong to critique what we can see in the picture?...maybe the critique is not entirely fair to that particular hole if the picture is misleading but the POINT being made should still be considered...not dismissed with a simple "well you haven't seen it in person".  Just my opinion.

Merry Christmas to all....I have enjoyed my infancy on GCAtlas.com.

Bart

[SPDB]

Huck:
I will be in the bay area for a week in the third week in january. Why don't we play the ST Muni at some point and we can have an insider/once around type exchange regarding some or all of the holes?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

The MET area has an abundance of neat golf courses that many have never heard of.

Courses that are sporty, challenging and fun to play.

Hackensack, The Knoll, Essex County, Hollywood, Mt Ridge, Preakness Hills, Ridgewood, Canoe Brook, Baltusrol Upper, Somerset Hills are just a FEW in my neck of the woods.

Long Island and Westchester have their share.

As you know, I"m a big fan of Inwood for one.

The difficulty in discussing these courses is the limited number of posters who have a good deal of experience in playing them, and the lack of photos available for posting.

Bill Quirin wrote a wonderful book, "Golf Clubs of the MGA" which describes and highlights many of these gems.

Discussing these courses inserts a limiting regional or local element.

I'm all for it, but, will we lose the audience ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bart Bradley,

How can you "credibly" critique a hole you've never seen or played ?

Tom Doak addressed this issue years ago, and Charles Blair MacDonald memorialized it on page 295 of "Scotland's Gift".

Do you want the site to lose credibilty by soliciting and encouraging opinions from those who have never seen or played a golf hole ?

In what context could you address and judge comments made about the architecture and play of the hole ?

Shouldn't intelligent opinions be based on reliable data ?

A few years ago someone posted that "Seminole was FLAT".
That's completely untrue.  Seminole has some of the highest elevations in south Florida and the elevation changes are dramatic.

Do you want the site to be reduced to a free for all of "WILD" guesses, absent first hand, factual data ?

That's one of the reasons that Tommy Naccarato left this site.