Greg,
Thank you for the invitation, I hope you were not too badly scalded by my hyperbolic repartee. I've never been to Cabo and it is a long shot I'll ever end up down there. However, if you make it to San Francisco, I would be more than happy to host you out at Olympic.
The website seems to be getting more and more deadly serious, where tongue-in-cheek rants that used to be taken with a grain of salt are now picked apart with tweezers like that ridiculous Merion thread. The sad part is that with the exception of MacWood, all of those guys once had a sense of humor.
I've had insane games of literary ping pong on there over the years, but until now nobody took anything to heart. Just so you know, I sit at my desk and roar with laughter after writing some of this stuff and never get pissed about anything.
What I said about my philosophy of rating was 100% truthful and you are absolutely right that there are a few couthless panelists I have wanted to slap across the face after watching their sheer arrogance and entitlement on display.
However, they are the very rare exception. I've got quite a few close friends on both panels and the level of comportment and courteousness - even when paying - is almost over-the-top. Believe me, the vast majority of those who have come far enough to obtain a card on either panel are hyper-aware that we represent the magazine and would rather eat glass than be anything but a pleasure to have at the golf course.
BTW, as an example, at one course this last weekend (114 degrees), the last tee time booked was ours at 8:50am due to the heat. The tee sheet was empty until later in the afternoon. I paid for my cart and my two friends slapped down the plastic at full price. By the time we were done with breakfast, lunch, green fees, carts, executive beverages and yardage books, the three of us put more than $300 in the till. Not a bad haul for a new golf course struggling for business under scorching skies.
It goes both ways - which was the starting point of this thread. One time years ago, I was in Scottsdale with some friends as the guest of the G.M. The golf course is an unbelievably high tone club and although two of us had rated the course the previous year, the G.M. insisted that we come back because he sent a group of his members to me at Olympic.
While we had lunch, he mentioned a brand new public golf course (green fees $42) about 40 minutes away that had some wildly interesting architectural features. The designer was a complete unknown and his description had "hidden gem" written all over it in capital letters.
Naturally, I wanted to be the one to discover the next Stevinson Ranch and called the golf shop the minute we finished play. The response from the head pro was shiveringly cold. He was not interested in any panelists coming to rate his golf course and that was that. I explained that we were happy to pay the green fees and whatever else because I had been told it was something to check out.
I was tersely told there were no tee times available for the next two days - which was hard to believe because the temperature was well into the 90's and the Spring Baseball crowd was gone. Okay, I thought, we had to catch an airplane the next night, so I called the pro back and asked if I could rent a cart and just drive around and look at the golf course. "We do not rent carts to non-players and our policy is that we do not allow walkers or spectators on the golf course if that is your next question."
I gave up. Maybe I pressed it too hard, but finding a brand new Rustic Canyon in the middle of nowhere with cheap fees is worth investigating.
The end of the story is that this pro - who did not last long at the facility - took the time to make a series of phone calls to complain and accuse me of "trying to force myself and a group onto the golf course for a free round."
It was a deliberate attempt to try and hurt and embarrass me because this pro obviously hates panelists for some reason. It resulted in a falling out with someone I greatly respect and a lot of hard feelings. The point is that some of these Directors of Golf and G.M.'s have a chip on their shoulder and act like ayatollahs just for the sheer joy of being nasty.
Yet all I was trying to do was be the first to discover something interesting - which would bring more people to their fledgling operation. Isn't that the point of a rating panel? Doak's comment about Crystal Downs is irrelevant because I cannot imagine Golf Digest would ever specifically assign a rater to go there unless it had been remodeled. I've been friends with Tom a long time, but he is all wet on this one.
Much of his success can be attributed to adoring panelists who seek out his creations every chance they get. Would Bandon have been as successful if not for massive publicity - much from panelists who trekked up there? In some ways, we are a conduit to the general public and serve much the same purpose (and add value) as movie critics.
Does anybody call out Roger Ebert because he sees movies for free?