[Dan_Lucas]

A golf hole, humanly speaking, is like life, in as much as one cannot judge justly of any person’s
character the first time one meets him. Sometimes it takes years to discover and appreciate hidden qualities which only time discloses, and he usually discloses them on the links. --
C.B. Macdonald

Just saw this in a GCSAA online newsletter. I have always maintained that rating courses after one playing does courses an injustice. I guess C.B. agrees.

[RJ_Daley]

Put me in that camp too, Dan.  Are you sweating out the coming freeze-thaw cycles for winterkill? 

[BCrosby]

Dan -

There were many Golden Age guys that went further. Some said that it was the sign of a good course that it took many, many rounds to understand it. Conversely, a course you could figure out immediately, lacked interest by definition.

But they are just old dead guys, so I wouldn't give it another thought.

Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

[Sean_A]

A golf hole, humanly speaking, is like life, in as much as one cannot judge justly of any person’s
character the first time one meets him. Sometimes it takes years to discover and appreciate hidden qualities which only time discloses, and he usually discloses them on the links. --
C.B. Macdonald

Just saw this in a GCSAA online newsletter. I have always maintained that rating courses after one playing does courses an injustice. I guess C.B. agrees.

Unfortunately, given limited time and resources I am obliged to make judgements on all sorts of stuff with limited info.  Thats how life works.  People, films, bands, courses and many more things in life are lucky to get more than one chance to impress.  It may not be ideal, but its a fact. 

Ciao

[Tommy Williamsen]

It is one thing to say it.  It quite another to live it.  I dare say most of us fail as did old CB himself.

[BVince]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

Please tell me the later portion of this comment was a sarcastic statement.

[Rick Shefchik]

A golf hole, humanly speaking, is like life, in as much as one cannot judge justly of any person’s
character the first time one meets him. Sometimes it takes years to discover and appreciate hidden qualities which only time discloses, and he usually discloses them on the links. --
C.B. Macdonald

Just saw this in a GCSAA online newsletter. I have always maintained that rating courses after one playing does courses an injustice. I guess C.B. agrees.

Unfortunately, given limited time and resources I am obliged to make judgements on all sorts of stuff with limited info.  Thats how life works.  People, films, bands, courses and many more things in life are lucky to get more than one chance to impress.  It may not be ideal, but its a fact. 

Ciao

Much truth here. Although I do not dispute CB's initial quote, there are too many other courses to try instead of going back to visit a course I initially disliked. If I'm wrong (and I'm not rating), so be it.

[Jim Nugent]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

John, from reading your comments about Old Mac, you apparently believe you can rate a course before it is even built. 

[John Kavanaugh]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

John, from reading your comments about Old Mac, you apparently believe you can rate a course before it is even built. 

I think I can given what I know about the project and now that I have seen the site.  Jim, I don't think you have played a round of golf in something like eight years.  Are you void of opinion?

[Peter Pallotta]

Sean, Rick - yes, but I think what CB might have meant was something more like:

"A great golf course takes your breath away on first encounter, but (if it's one of MY courses especially) will only reveal its nuance and secrets over years of continued play."

I think that's probably true, but that trick of wowing the senses now while delivering the goods long-term is a tough one to pull off.

Peter

     

[Joe Hancock]

Sean, Rick - yes, but I think what CB might have meant was something more like:

"A great golf course takes your breath away on first encounter, but (if it's one of MY courses especially) will only reveal its nuance and secrets over years of continued play."

I think that's probably true, but that trick of wowing the senses now while delivering the goods long-term is a tough one to pull off.

Peter

     

Peter,

Good revelation, and in my opinion it is even tougher to pull off a great course that doesn't wow you initially, but reveals it's greatness through it's nuances over the ages.

Joe

[Patrick Hodgdon]

Sean, Rick - yes, but I think what CB might have meant was something more like:

"A great golf course takes your breath away on first encounter, but (if it's one of MY courses especially) will only reveal its nuance and secrets over years of continued play."

I think that's probably true, but that trick of wowing the senses now while delivering the goods long-term is a tough one to pull off.

Peter

     

Peter I think you hit the nail on the head. This maybe a bad comparison but I have experienced it multiple times so I hope most can relate. Anyway have you ever bought a c.d. (nowdays itunes gets around this problem) for 1-4 good songs. You listen to only these 1-4 that you like until one day you find yourself listening to the whole thing only to realize that the rest are really good too. Ultimately you find yourself going back to listen to those "other" songs you never listened to first. You then appreciate those songs more down the road as well and even consider them "better" than the ones you bought the c.d. for in the first place.

Anyhow I think this is what C.B. is driving at. When you play a golf course more and more it is the nuances on the "weaker" or less "appealing" holes that ultimately make you fall in love with in a stronger degree than ever before with the few "wow" holes.

I suppose this could relate to women (hopefully everyone's wife) too. The little quirks that you got over when you were first together become what you love the most.

Ok I digress, great quote Dan, dibs on putting in the signature.

[Peter Pallotta]

Joe - thanks.

I think you're right about that.

And I think my tastes lean in that direction, i.e. what some might consider a "boring" course on first viewing, I tend to see as "quiet" (and usually also more natural and humble and inexpensive, at least in my eyes).

But I worry that those type of courses will become extinct, or at least won't be built anymore these days. There's so much pressure on architects to hit the home run that who can risk not having the wow?

Peter   

Patrick - just saw your post; yes, good parallels.
 

[Sean_A]

Sean, Rick - yes, but I think what CB might have meant was something more like:

"A great golf course takes your breath away on first encounter, but (if it's one of MY courses especially) will only reveal its nuance and secrets over years of continued play."

I think that's probably true, but that trick of wowing the senses now while delivering the goods long-term is a tough one to pull off.

Peter

     

Peter

That could be true.  Usually, the more I see a course, the less I think of it because courses are often designed to grab your attention (I don't blame archies for doing this) and they tend to be static.  The courses in which I need time to learn (and usually enjoy more) invariably are on humpty bumpty ground (with or without decent elevation change, but I prefer elevation change) with wind in play - dynamic courses. 

I think the great problem for nearly all of us is that we only get to know a handful of courses really well.  Often times some of these courses don't necessarily warrant getting to know really well, its just circumstances which place us on the 1st tee so often.  Off the top of my head, after playing golf on and off for 30 years, I don't think I know dozen courses really well.  You can only get to know so many courses in a golfing life.  If X amount of plays per course determines one's capability to speak toward a course, then nobody is anywhere near an expert when we consider that there are thousands of courses in the world.  I still believe that in most cases, folks can imagine what courses would be like with more experience.  Sure, everybody will make mistakes and change their mind, but what else do we have other than impressions for nearly all of the courses we play?

Ciao

[Mark Bourgeois]

Peter

I'm not sure that's what he'd say. He would have appreciated the inscrutability of many old links courses.

And IMHO there are plenty of great courses that don't inspire upon the first play, courses like Pinehurst #2, Royal Melbourne and TOC.

And what if we were given the chance to play Augusta before the raft of changes but were told nothing of its provenance, nor were all the trappings of the place on offer? I don't know how many would have been wowed on the first play. I probably wouldn't have understood it, but maybe that's just me.

Wethered and Simpson wrote of Woking as their favorite course despite - actually, no, because - its lack of more than one hole "of true architectural merit."

So I think what CBM would have said, as a corollary to the quote, is, if you haven't played it through all conditions then you should withhold judgement one way or another.

Sean, I have to ask you: you clearly have the resources to play courses many times but it seems to me you've chosen not to, which is fine - but then you think Macd is wrong, yes? Again no wrong or right answer there...

It's one thing to declare a standard too high but seek to follow it in practice, it's another thing simply to disagree with it.

Personally, I believe in that standard and try to live by it - but I am unable to see things as easily as I think many others here, who have a far more practiced eye. (Sean, that's you!)

As a result, I can't say I've learned more about architecture this way than one would by playing a different course every or most times...would you rather play every course in Melbourne's Sandbelt once or play Royal Melbourne 10 times?

So far on that count I have gone for the latter - but that is one long run, lemme tell ya...

Mark

[BVince]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

John, from reading your comments about Old Mac, you apparently believe you can rate a course before it is even built. 

I think I can given what I know about the project and now that I have seen the site.  Jim, I don't think you have played a round of golf in something like eight years.  Are you void of opinion?

To me it is disappointing to hear anyone say that their opinion is shaped by the opinion of others.  How unoriginal.

I have walked the fairways of ANGC during the Masters...but I can't tell you what it is like to putt on those slippery greens.  How would it be possible to rate a course with out experencing at least a round?

[Joe Hancock]

CB did not live in our information age.  I firmly believe I can rate a course solely based on the opinions of others.

John, from reading your comments about Old Mac, you apparently believe you can rate a course before it is even built. 

I think I can given what I know about the project and now that I have seen the site.  Jim, I don't think you have played a round of golf in something like eight years.  Are you void of opinion?

To me it is disappointing to hear anyone say that their opinion is shaped by the opinion of others.  How unoriginal.

I have walked the fairways of ANGC during the Masters...but I can't tell you what it is like to putt on those slippery greens.  How would it be possible to rate a course with out experencing at least a round?

Bryon,

Without getting to hung up on the word "rate", I think many on here value others' opinions when it comes time to decide how and where to spend time golfing and learning about architecture. I don't think Ed Getka will be mad at me for singling him out as one who has people he trusts as to their opinions, then decides where to play based on those opinions of others. I don't see that as unoriginal at all. John K. has seen and played a lot. He likely has a much better ability to "judge" a course before he plays it than I do, and I don't hold that against him.

Joe

[BVince]

With all respect, I disagree.

I don't know John K....he probably is a great guy.  But this site lets him slide with some questionable statements. 

Trust and value in other's opinions about where to play golf is one thing, but to "rate" is to judge a course.  Is he that all knowing because he has played and seen alot of golf courses that he is free to make remarks like this?  That is crazy. 

[Mike_Cirba]

C.B. was smoking crack when he made that statement, and I'm sure he didn't really believe it himself.

I'm sure he just used it as a way to put down what he saw as the uninformed, inexperienced viewpoints of others.

Macdonald was a genius but he could also be a blowhard and I'm sure he held his own opinion in the highest esteem.   

[BVince]

I do want to add, that I like John K on this site...I just have to stand up on this one.  His point of view definately spices up some of the threads.

[Joe Hancock]

With all respect, I disagree.

I don't know John K....he probably is a great guy.  But this site lets him slide with some questionable statements. 

Trust and value in other's opinions about where to play golf is one thing, but to "rate" is to judge a course.  Is he that all knowing because he has played and seen alot of golf courses that he is free to make remarks like this?  That is crazy. 

Let him slide? He gets called to the carpet more than anyone else around.

Crazy, maybe....but it's his prerogative and in a forum such as this has every right to say what he thinks and how he comes to those conclusions, whether you or I agree with his methods.

This isn't a publication with rules on how to rate...or judge.

Joe

[Sean_A]

Peter

I'm not sure that's what he'd say. He would have appreciated the inscrutability of many old links courses.

And IMHO there are plenty of great courses that don't inspire upon the first play, courses like Pinehurst #2, Royal Melbourne and TOC.

And what if we were given the chance to play Augusta before the raft of changes but were told nothing of its provenance, nor were all the trappings of the place on offer? I don't know how many would have been wowed on the first play. I probably wouldn't have understood it, but maybe that's just me.

Wethered and Simpson wrote of Woking as their favorite course despite - actually, no, because - its lack of more than one hole "of true architectural merit."

So I think what CBM would have said, as a corollary to the quote, is, if you haven't played it through all conditions then you should withhold judgement one way or another.

Sean, I have to ask you: you clearly have the resources to play courses many times but it seems to me you've chosen not to, which is fine - but then you think Macd is wrong, yes? Again no wrong or right answer there...

It's one thing to declare a standard too high but seek to follow it in practice, it's another thing simply to disagree with it.

Personally, I believe in that standard and try to live by it - but I am unable to see things as easily as I think many others here, who have a far more practiced eye. (Sean, that's you!)

As a result, I can't say I've learned more about architecture this way than one would by playing a different course every or most times...would you rather play every course in Melbourne's Sandbelt once or play Royal Melbourne 10 times?

So far on that count I have gone for the latter - but that is one long run, lemme tell ya...

Mark

Mark

Now you are making a distinction of voicing the opinion (or judgement - though this sound so final) or just having an opinion.  It may be wise to restrain from expressing one's opinion with limited experience, but then how would a site like this function?

I don't think MacD is wrong at all, just a bit unrealistic.  I choose not to revisit some courses based on a whole host of reasons including value - which oddly frees me up to learn more about other courses that are wonderful and good value.  How do you think I got into Beau Desert?  Let me tell ya, it was a long process, but something kept bringing me back.  Despite playing very poorly there nearly every time, I always looked for (and still do) opportunities to s ee it again.   

I am a bit unique on this site because I don't believe there is a huge discrepency in architectural quality once we are talking about the top 25% of courses (or whatever).  For the big guns, near big guns and sometimes hidden gems, much of what distinguishes courses from each other is personal preference and external factors because they are all good courses.  For instance, I couldn't  say with any degree of certainty which is better between Swinley Forest and Beau Desert.  However, I am certain that they are close in quality and which I prefer to play if I have to pay. 

Its kind of you to say I have a practiced eye, but I don't believe my eye is anymore practiced than most on this site.  I may have tastes which are well developed and I try to play courses which suit my tastes.  In a way, I essentially limit myself so I can learn more about certain styles of architecture.  For instance, I practically write off  mountain and desert golf because of my tastes.  I wouldn't book a golfing holiday around playing mountain courses when I could go to Holland and see some courses of a style which really interests me.  To answer your question concerning Melbourne, I would probably do something in the middle.  Perhaps play Royal Melbourne a few times (depending on circumstances) and a few others to help place Melbourne in context.  I wouldn't try to play 6 courses because I would forget what the heck I saw.  I like trips where I can revisit courses I really enjoy and add one or two new ones.  I do take trips where everything is new and it is much tougher to adjust.  It isn't ideal, but thats how life works out. 

Ciao

[Dan_Lucas]

Dick Daley

Freeze thaw cycles are much tougher on poa than bent so I don't worry about it too much except for my friends with poa greens. At Kingsley anything that kills poa is welcome.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Not so much having an opinion vs voicing an opinion: I don't think that's a meaningful duality with respect to the quote.

I have started a book by a neurologist about how the human mind is wired to convert uncertainty into certainty pretty much automatically.  People convince themselves of all sorts of "facts" when the reality is far messier and less certain.

We have a tendency to believe we know more than we do and then we make a judgment off what we think we know.  I guess in a way misunderstandings are what make the world go around, at least the zero-sum parts of it (sometimes even love!).

I think Macdonald's angle would be for all of us to accept we know a lot less than we think we know, to accept there are far more known-unknowns than the opinionated mind is willing to believe.

And, yes, there must be courses out there -- and holes -- pretty easily figured out.  Isn't this why the penal school is the lowest form of architecture: because it is more easily deciphered?

Mark

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()