Dysunedumacation

[Kyle Henderson]

I)   What do you consider to be the biggest hole(s) in your lifetime golf course architecture curriculum?

I’ve never played any courses designed in part or whole by:
Devereux Emmet, Walter Travis, Willie Park, Jr., Charles Blair Macdonald, George Crump , Donald Ross, A.W.Tillinghast, Seth Raynor, Charles Alison, Stanley Thompson, William Flynn, Langford and/or Moreau, Perry Maxwell, or Pete Dye (P.B. Dye yes, but not Pete)

I’ve never played any courses in England, Ireland, Japan or Australia, or 45 of the 50 United States of America.

II)   How much must one experience in order to validate his or her opinions of GCA (all other considerations aside, of course)?

III)   Should magazine raters have more GCA experience (relative to the current average) under their belts before they exert their influence in the marketplace?

[Rich Goodale]

I've never played an HH Barker course....

[Tom MacWood]

Tom Simpson

Rich
I thought you had played Merion.

[Adam Clayman]

Kyle, I'm in the camp that believes it's not how many you have seen. It's how one process what they have seen. There are too many examples of individuals who've been and seen everything. Yet, their analysis seems to fall woefully short of credible. I can only assume that their own games and other outside influences reflect how unaware they are to both the physical and emotional reaction to the GCA. 

[Scott Sander]

I - I'm disappointed by the number of tear out/rebuilds where I've had the opportunity to see the "before" and "after" components, but for time, timing, or lack of effort I have failed.

I left Colorado too soon to see what became of Mira Vista, Green Gables, and Los Verdes.
I returned to my home area of in Indianapolis too late to see get a grownup look at the proto- versions of The Fort, Woodland CC, The Brickyard and Coffin.

I think seeing totally different on-the-ground takes on identical land is a wonderful opportunity to gain insight into GCA.  I'm sorry I've missed most I could or should have seen.

II - Depends entirely on the depth of the analysis desired, I suppose.  I don't need to play one more round to know whether I like or dislike something, but every round I play helps me further understand and explain why.  Some come by that abilty quickly, while others never seem to learn it - so there does not seem to be a magic minimum of experience.

III - No, because (and here I invite ire, I'm sure) GCA is not the only factor weighed on these lists.  If it were, raters would be instructed to observe what's on the ground and only what's on the ground.  But most of those lists also have categories for everything from conditioning to service to tradition.  They require someone who can offer an informed opinion on many things, not just GCA.  To that end, I do appreciate when the publication offers full breakouts of categories and scores in those categories.  Some of the things raters rate is of no interest to me.  And vice versa.  So - if you are going to take the dangerous step of publishing a list, gimme more information, please. 

[RJ_Daley]

Kyle, if we took even half your list of ODGs and two of the continents, we probably would narrow down the 1500 on GCA.com to about 100 or less. 

Personally, I think my hole in GCA understanding may be actually constructing a course from a work crew point of view.  Though I've visited construction in progress both new and remodel, I wasn't there for the real day to day process.  The everyday things GCAs have to deal with and work around to keep in tact with their design vision, seems to me to be a point of understanding that must factor in when considering the final product as a critic.  That would apply to what they shouldn't have done as well, IMO.

You should also have strong familiarity with the game, from various level of skills it takes to play well, to understand the validity of various design features and concepts, i.e. placement of hazards, grading and playability from FWs, and greens and surrounds  design and construction.  I'm not saying you need to be a highly skilled player, but you need to know the playing skill objectives of what the designer is trying to present as a test or experience. So playing and watching a lot of golf counts, I think.

I reckon you could play only two courses by two very different archies, or from different era and begin to have an opinion of design styles and playing enjoyment.

[David Stamm]

Pasa affected me greatly, especially the back nine and particularly the 10th, 11th, 14th and 16th holes.

[Anthony Gray]

  Kyle,

 I have no idea what this word means or even if it is spelled correctly, but I would imagine that some are limited because some of the great architects designed mainly private courses. This is why I would love to see Tiger provide a public offering at some time in his design career.

  Anthony

[Kyle Henderson]

  Kyle,

 I have no idea what this word means or even if it is spelled correctly

  Anthony

To my knowledge, it is not a real word.

dysunedumacation: uneducated as spelled and pronounced by the uneducated

[Anthony Gray]

  Kyle,

 I have no idea what this word means or even if it is spelled correctly

  Anthony

To my knowledge, it is not a real word.

dysunedumacation: uneducated as spelled and pronounced by the uneducated

  Kyle,

  I talked to MOM a few minutes ago and she said I was diagnosed with this when I was in first grade. I was writing everything backwards like Leonardo DiVinci and pronouncing my study words similiar to what people would call pig latin. I hope this helps.

  Anthony

[Ronald Montesano]

I)   What do you consider to be the biggest hole(s) in your lifetime golf course architecture curriculum?

CBM and Alistair MacKenzie

II)   How much must one experience in order to validate his or her opinions of GCA (all other considerations aside, of course)?

How much what?  For my money, play one fine course and have the vocabulary and insight to describe it and you are valid.  Play a thousand courses, read a thousand books yet be a buffoon and your opinion is worth nil.  I am much closer to the latter than the former.

III)   Should magazine raters have more GCA experience (relative to the current average) under their belts before they exert their influence in the marketplace?

Huh?  What influence do they have, individually?  No course ever advertises "So-and-so, a rater with Golf Digest, thinks we are the shizzle."  Each individual voice is drowned out by the communal roar/groan.