[Sean_A]

Below are a few quotes about criticism of golf courses that I found interesting and really drove home a point.  I never really thought of it in this light, but the comments seem very reasonable.  While I don't care in the least if someone doesn't care for one of my clubs, holes or aspects of either, many seem to get hot under the collar.  Are folks on this site interested in honest appraisal anymore?  Were they ever interested or is the old GolfClubAccess label what its all really about?


"I don't see any real difference between being hosted by an individual (as in US) and being hosted by a club (as in UK).   

Why should it be any different?  And yet many people seem to think that a highly private/exclusive course has more right to be beyond criticism than the open access courses:  I can't see anyone on GCA getting terribly irritated if it was  suggested that the 4th and 5th holes at Ballybunion be redesigned, because they're the weakest links.  But if a 3 holes at SFGC are suggested for restoration...

I think that polite, honest criticism on a public forum such as GCA, is fine, and you shouldn't need any "permission" to do so.

Don't you think that's done simply because access to British courses (with very few notable exceptions) is much easier?"


"Yes I agree, this is what I'm driving at.  It's not a healthy state of affairs if a club can't be politely criticised just because it's highly exclusive and the potential critic is worried about not being invited back. You don't do this, and it's good that you're willing to criticise your local favourite course, Merion. 

Nearly all of the best British courses are private clubs with members that are proud of their course.  So why is tough criticism (in the public domain on GCA) of these courses any different from tough criticism of say SFGC?"

Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

A thread for our US based posters, I suspect.  I don't understand the horror many express at the idea of criticising a course you have been invited to play on but then I don't get the whole Merion thread thing either.  I guess it's a cultural thing.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

Each golfer has a different viewpoint, seeks different things form not just his own game but the course as well. Perhaps the tendency of private courses brings out the Gentlemen in us, so criticism is not seen as the way to repay the courtesy of playing their courses.

Then there is Criticism against Cnstructive Criticism or ones opinion of the course laid out in the pros & cons of said course.

As you well know each course by its very nature (and man made effort) are different, from the weather conditions, landscape, location, and not forgetting purpose of the course. (To many courses are now trying to be what they are not i.e. Championship Courses and should settle for what they are, just great members courses open to those that want to share that experience).

Criticism if that is the right word, should be aimed at the new ‘Young Pretenders’ to TOC, North Berwick, etc. etc because they are just out and out commercial/industrial units charging more that they are worth in the belief that they are or may become Championship Courses. Criticise the intended purpose but not the course (no matter how we each feel about it), it will please some, while others dislike it for various reasons. As you know, my pet hate is to have a well kept manicured course out in a wilderness with the surrounding land not reflecting any of the courses features.

Criticise the purpose of the course, rather than the course itself and remember the old saying ‘One man’s meat is another’s poison’.

Melvyn
 

[Mike Sweeney]

I think that polite, honest criticism on a public forum such as GCA, is fine, and you shouldn't need any "permission" to do so.

Don't you think that's done simply because access to British courses (with very few notable exceptions) is much easier?"

Lots of people here on GCA and all over the US access private courses without playing with a member. Unaccompanied play, raters, charity events, golf societies, reciprocal clubs, charity auction round, asking the pro very nicely, greasing the starter ........ I would guess that play without a member on private courses in the US is at an all time high.

However, all of those access points are through people and relationships rather than a credit card through a website to play say Rye Golf Club for example.

If I go play Royal Dornoch with Rich Goodale who is a member and has written a book on RD, as opposed to making a reservation through its website and playing with strangers, I am less inclined to be overly critical of RD after the round of playing with Rich. You can blame Frank and Helen Sweeney, because that is just the way that I was raised!

[Rory Connaughton]

"You may steal a man's money, you may sleep with his wife but never never criticize his golf course."

I think any reluctance to criticize courses one has been invited to play in the US has a lot to do with the fact that, at a certain tier, one may typically play only if accompanied by a member or if a member has made the arrangements.  It is a social rather than just an economic transaction and my sense is that most do not wish to appear ungrateful or rude.
One of the great things about being invited to someone's club/course is the opportunity to see the things that get them excited about it.
I have only ever had one negative experience in this regard and it involved a self proclaimed expert (not anyone currently affiliated with this site) who made some absolutely absurd comments about specific holes and was abusive of the caddies and my hospitality he then privately shredded the course to a number of people and his comments got back to me. After my most unpleasant experience, I was not surprised.

As some participants on this site know, I am more than happy to listen to and discuss objective constructive or academic criticism when it comes to my course. I find it entertaining and I certainly have my own criticism's.  What really irritated me with regard to the episode described above was the fact that the guest seemed to believe that by denigrating our course, he would elevate his own.

I think that when someone makes the effort to invite and host you, graciousness is the key.  Be objective when it comes to the course but that also includes recognition of the positive not just the negative.

[Sean_A]

Jeepers!  How hard are you lot on some courses?  I see the odd comment on here about a course being crap, but I tend to put this down to poor experiences.  I have certainly never seen a course I would call crap.  Usually when I dislike a place it is because the course is in n o way special, but it has an expensive price tag.  Even then its only a matter of wishing to play certain courses more than others.

Do you guys really come across courses you think are terrible?  So much so that you are afraid of upsetting a host if you give an opinion?

Ciao   

[Mark Pearce]

Sean,

Playing Devil's Advocate?  You know full well that the problem is that saying something like "SuperToney Country Club has fifteen really good holes but the par 3s are a little repetitive" can be taking as seriously insulting a man's mother on here.  Heaven forbid suggesting that SuperToney would score 4 on the Doak Scale.

[JESII]

Sean,

I criticize the critic when they make a harsh critique and cannot back it up...is that fair?

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I criticize the critic when they make a harsh critique and cannot back it up...is that fair?

Jim

I tend to agree with you.  If one can't back it up (so far as opinion can't go) then its more of a rant than a critique.  How bout when the critic gives a wonderful critique and doesn't back it up? 

Mark

No, I am not playing DA.  I am surprised to learn that folks really get upset over this stuff. Its one thing (and I am sure a very thing at that!) for a guy to blast a course when it can get back to the host.  Its quite another when positive and negative comments are offered - especially when its really understood that the course is good and the comments are really in comparison to the many of the best courses.  Perhaps we are a bit too sensitive.  Its a shame, because honesty is what friendships are meant to be based on.  The best discussion occur when the cards are on the table.

Ciao   

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

I have a novel, if no better, way to deal with the problem.  If I suspect I might not like a course, and don't want to deal with the fallout from saying so, I don't even go see it to begin with!  [And I suspect that is one of the reasons Jack Nicklaus doesn't go see more courses, as well.]

I have tried to go to some courses without anybody knowing, but it nearly always backfires.  I tried to see Whistling Straits on the q.t., and wound up having to make a command performance for Mr. Dye and Mr. Kohler ... tried to go to Chambers Bay quietly, and Robert Trent Jones Jr. met me at the clubhouse!  And they all want to know what I really think, because they assume I will love the course.

That's why I respect anyone here who goes to one of my courses and criticizes it ... as long as what they say is true.  But I reserve the right to challenge them, because sometimes it's just a matter of opinion, and often they don't know the course as well as I do. 

[TEPaul]

"And they all want to know what I really think,"


I think that remark which most might not have considered carefully, is actually pretty central to this subject that this thread has to do with.

I doubt I would criticize some course or things about it gratuitously but if someone from the club happened to ask me what I think (or what I think is worth crticizing) I see no reason at all not to be completely honest with them. After-all, they asked!  If no one asked me for my opinion I might not be inclined to criticize it publicly.

[Sean_A]

Sean:

I have a novel, if no better, way to deal with the problem.  If I suspect I might not like a course, and don't want to deal with the fallout from saying so, I don't even go see it to begin with!  [And I suspect that is one of the reasons Jack Nicklaus doesn't go see more courses, as well.]

I have tried to go to some courses without anybody knowing, but it nearly always backfires.  I tried to see Whistling Straits on the q.t., and wound up having to make a command performance for Mr. Dye and Mr. Kohler ... tried to go to Chambers Bay quietly, and Robert Trent Jones Jr. met me at the clubhouse!  And they all want to know what I really think, because they assume I will love the course.

That's why I respect anyone here who goes to one of my courses and criticizes it ... as long as what they say is true.  But I reserve the right to challenge them, because sometimes it's just a matter of opinion, and often they don't know the course as well as I do. 

Tom

That is one way to cope with the problem.  You, of course, are in a different position than most of us with a professional reputation on the line.  But, judging from the things you say about courses, I don't get the sense you are in anyway overly harsh.  You fins a way to see a course in the light of what it is (was) meant to accomplish - if that be a friendly neighbourhood club or a world famous course.   

How you deal with criticism of your courses is appreciated by myself.  You tend to respond with questions which can open a great discussion and/or give background info which explains why things were done as they were - which is also enlightening.  Well shucks, you are just an all-round good guy.  Maybe one day I will see one of your courses!

Ciao

[SB]

I think Miss Manners would have a very difficult time with this question.

If you are invited to a friend's house, would you jump on an international website immediately after and write a scathing criticism of his wife's brisket or her decorating sense?  Maybe, if you are a food critic, but only the architects here, as possibly Matt Ward, qualify as professional critics.  Public restaurants, on the other hand, invite such criticisms by being for-profit entities and open to the free market.

Clubs are unique because they straddle the line between a business and a "home".  Members take great pride in their club and probably think of it more as a home.  I doubt very few expect their guests to "critique" it on an international website.  My guess is that most members invite guests to have the pleasure of their company, and if their guests should talk about it, they will talk kindly.  At least that is how I approach it.  Maybe that's why I do not comment often, usually about the things that I like, or about facts.   

Of course, everyone today (not just here) tends to confuse opinion with fact.

[Tom_Doak]

SBusch:

Architects are not professional critics, either.  In fact, there were many architects who really resented my critiquing their courses, because they see the profession as more like engineering or medicine, where fellow professionals are NEVER supposed to criticize unless a project is unsound in a malpractice sense.

[Jud_T]

I think Tom's point about self-selection applies to all of us on the food chain as well.  One tends to show an interest in interesting courses.  We seek out the courses that we have a desire to experience.  I know that if invited to play courses by architects that I really like, chances are good that I will enjoy the course.  There may be some minor quibbles, but nothing that can't be discussed in polite society.  One tends to get invited by friend's who know your game and enjoy your company.  And yes, on the odd chance that you are invited to a very exclusive club which you think is vastly overrated, just keep your mouth shut and be a gracious guest....

[Scott Warren]

Can I profess ignorance on reading SBusch's post and ask why Matt Ward, architects aside, is considered (by one member at least) to be on a different strata to the rest of us?

[Rich Goodale]

I personally would like to hear the honest opinions of anybody who plays any of my home courses (whether they played with me or not--and this means you Sweeney!).  How else can one better learn about ways to improve one's own course? I must admit that I am generally disappointed with the depth and breadth of apres golf course discussion when playing with casual friends, including GCAers, regardless of whether the course is mine, theirs or somebody else's.  I mark this down to excessive politeness on everybody's side, including mine.  I'm happy to offer honest opinions on other courses if somebody asks me, but if they don't, I am unlikely to volunteer.  Likewise, when it is my course, I don't like to put people on the spot by asking them directly what they think.  The more I think about this the more I think these behaviors are counterproductive.

Memo to self:  Ask more people what they really think in 2010.

[Mark Pearce]

It was refreshing to play the home course of a GCAer this August which I enjoyed more than I had expected and which he was keen to discuss frankly and at times critically.  Step forward Martyn Glynn Bonnar.....

[Mike Sweeney]

I personally would like to hear the honest opinions of anybody who plays any of my home courses (whether they played with me or not--and this means you Sweeney!). 

Little bit of a bad example on my part. We do this stuff 10 times a day in our world here. Out there in the real world where many private club members play 4-6 courses maybe a year, they get a little more sensitive.

[Matt_Ward]

Look many people use the "excuse" for not wanting to offer an opinion -- particularly a critical one -- because they want top preserve the opportunity to return to such a course. Especially if it's one they might play again.

The sad fact is that you can tell a guy his wife is sleeping around and he may punch your lights out.

But, I can say this for certain - tell the same guy the place he plays is a garbage dump or something akin to that and you WILL certainly get a fistful from him.

If people want to ask me for my candid comments -- I simply say this -- I'll tell you what I really think -- if that's too much to possibly hear then don't ask me.

Simple solution.

[mike_malone]

 As someone who has taken on sacred cows in the past, I do recognize that most of my critiques have been of courses when I have not played with the host. In only one instance, WFW, I did but he did not know me from the man in the moon. In retrospect , I think this was a factor in sharing my opinion.

[SB]

Can I profess ignorance on reading SBusch's post and ask why Matt Ward, architects aside, is considered (by one member at least) to be on a different strata to the rest of us?

Matt is (or was) a journalist who writes about golf courses for a golf publication.

[Scott Warren]

I'm aware of that. How does that make him any different to the many other golf authors, golf magazine editors etc in the DG?

[Matt_Ward]

Scott:

I'm no different than anyone.

Your opinion and others is just as important.

My only comment was that if someone asks me for my personal take I'll provide it.

If you don't want that kind of candor -- then don't ask me. Ask others.

[Scott Warren]

Matt, I was merely responsing to SBusch's claim that it was only you and the architects in a real position to comment on a course. I was not questioning your post above. If you read back through it will make sense.

cheers,
Scott

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()