Is there a common thread when underwhelmed by greatness?

[Bill_McBride]

Isn't this the same thing that most people talk about after they play the Old Course for the first time?... The what the hell is all the fuss about, you call that a golf course, feeling?

A lot of people look back on their college days and say, "Boy, those were the best days of my life, how come we didn't know it then?"

My college fraternity brothers at UC Santa Barbara and I knew it then!

Similarly, I knew how great the Old Course was, or would be, long before I stepped on the first tee.  I had studied the old girl for years, read all the stories and was absolutely enthralled.

Sorry, but my feeling is that a great course smacks you right across the face with its greatness.  It may be the anticipation, it may be the thrill of actually being there, but I have never been truly disappointed.

[Bill Gayne]

Great greens and hazards are easy to recognize. Great routing is more difficult to recognize and especially so based on a single play. It's also possible that the daily set-up doesn't capture the potential greatness.

[Kirk Gill]

Could it be that a common thread in being underwhelmed by greatness is having played too many great golf courses?

[Mike_Trenham]

I'll admit it I was underwhelmed by the US economy 2004-2007 ...in retrospect I was wrong, maybe I just did not play those years well.

[Gib_Papazian]

Professor McBride,

You and I share a commonality of youthful prescience - we both knew at the time that college was going to be the best (and sometimes worst) times of our lives. At the very least, it still represents the chapter in my life when I felt the most ALIVE; the future was limitless, dreams seemed real, love intense, beliefs unshakable and energy and zest for the latest intellectual pursuit yet another opportunity to demonstrate my astounding ability (in my empty head) to reshape the world in whatever form for I chose.

Youth is wondrous because it is oftentimes undisturbed by reality.

As to the question at hand, I find myself underwhelmed by "hard." I'm still a pretty decent player, but long ago abandoned the hallucination that relishing the opportunity to drill a 2-iron at a wildly undulating putting surface at WF West was somehow anything but a chore. I'll repeat myself here, but this 50-year old clown has no business playing from the gunner tees anymore  - and even from the whites, golf courses that demand archer-straight shots directed towards forced-carry putting surfaces have waaaaay more vagina than I got dick.

My father - who is in terrible health at this point and who I take on a long drive at least once a week - always told me: "Kid, you'll get your turn in the barrel."

[Sean_A]

For me, the common thread of being underwhelmed by greatness is the sense of sameness.  I know at Pinehurst I was thinking I just saw this green - what is it doin here again?  I know at many of the championship links venues, I was thinking the bunker scheme was just to simplistic.  Put bunkers everywhere and that will sort the men from the boys.  Its predictability that kills the joy of playing some of the greats. 

Ciao

[Scott Warren]

Sean's answer touches on what I was thinking:

Perhaps the common thread is that in the measure of the underwhelmed golfer, the course just isn't that great.

Just like when a mate recommends a wine to you and it does nothing for you...

[Jim_Kennedy]

As yet there is no common thread, just the likes and dislikes of posters, but even if every golfer on the planet was underwhelmed by one facet of a 'great' golf course, that 'flaw' wouldn't necessarily travel to another.

Mayday, I'm sorry but I don't think there can ever be a 'common thread' as the great courses of the world are way too eclectic a group for that to happen.

[mike_malone]

 There are no objective rules for determining greatness in golf courses. If there were gca.com would not exist because discussion would be useless. It all comes down to personal preference and taste. Some are more affected by group pressure in their feelings. Others are more maverick in their attitudes. When I go to a course for the first time I know its reputation but try to just observe as I go. My biases are to see challenge throughout the hole, imaginative routing,variety in green complexes, and the best use of the property in laying the holes on the ground.

 Each person can have a common thread but I agree that the group does not. But, the group probably has the greatest influence on deciding which courses are named as great. In America I think this group has been most influenced by rich guys who played each other's courses.

[JC Jones]

The common thread is quite simple, subjectivity.  We constantly feel the need to objectify things in our modern society; a relevant example are the golf course rankings by various publications.  But the truth is, we can't objectify everything and I think personal taste is one of those things. 

Its not an issue of being underwhelmed by greatness, its an issue of just not liking the golf course as much as someone else does.  They think it is great, you don't.  That doesn't mean you are underwhelmed by greatness because the course is not great, to you.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying Sand Hills is a better course than Pine Valley or that Winged Foot West is not in your top 100 courses.  You are capable of determining what you like and dislike and that determination is subjectively yours.

Now, what drives your subjective likes and dislikes is an entirely different discussion but if you are asking what the common thread is, it is the subjective human.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim's response gets me thinking about something I thought while playing WFW. Shouldn't a great course have interest from tee to green. I thought the tee shots were well below great. So, when I got to the greens I was dealing with disappointment.

Mayday,

I want to make sure I understand the post above.

The greens at WFW were a disappointment ?

Let's start with the 1st green, one of the great 1st greens in golf.

What about the 1st green disappointed you ?

The slope ?
The contouring ?
The surrounding bunkers ?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mayday,

That's what large samples over extended periods of time produce, objective results. Greatness is also obvious by the attempts to repeat it, or pay homage.

Witness, a 1955 Chevy Bel Air No-Post Two Door:


You may not like this automoblie, but it's styling changed the industry and was copied for years. That, along with its mechanical innovations, like a small block V8, continually earn it a place on 'Top 10'car lists.

Great golf courses are not any different. Their styling,   their iimportance to the game,  their adherence to classic theory and the sometimes innovative ideas found in the best of them earn them the same sort of recognition. 

[Sean Leary]

Jim's response gets me thinking about something I thought while playing WFW. Shouldn't a great course have interest from tee to green. I thought the tee shots were well below great. So, when I got to the greens I was dealing with disappointment.

Mayday,

I want to make sure I understand the post above.

The greens at WFW were a disappointment ?

Let's start with the 1st green, one of the great 1st greens in golf.

What about the 1st green disappointed you ?

The slope ?
The contouring ?
The surrounding bunkers ?

Pat,

He is saying that he was already disappointed with the holes by the time he got to the green...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Leary,

Are you telling me that in his walk from the first tee after his drive, to his ball in the DZ, to his walk to the green after his approach shot, that he was already disappointed with the entire golf course even though he had only seen parts of the first hole, about 5 % of the entire golf course ?

Shirley, you can't be serious.

[Sean Leary]

Sean Leary,

Are you telling me that in his walk from the first tee after his drive, to his ball in the DZ, to his walk to the green after his approach shot, that he was already disappointed with the entire golf course even though he had only seen parts of the first hole, about 5 % of the entire golf course ?

Shirley, you can't be serious.

Pat Mucci,

Shirley you can't be losing your mind due to age this fast. 

Read again closely what he wrote.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Leary,

I put my eyes right up onto the screen, and couldn't read his words more "closely".

Have you ever played WFW ?

The tee shots on 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 are spectacular.
I left off the par 3's, but, anyone will tell you that the tee shots on # 10 and # 13 are anything but "disappointing.

As to the front nine, the tee shots may not be as dramatic, but, if you look "closely" you'll find them anything but disappointing.

# 6 has to be one of the great tee shot decisions in golf.
# 8 is ferocious, especially when you consider the impact your tee shot has on your approach or second shot.

Position off the tee is critical on the front nine at WFW, although those tee shots may be more subtle, and not as revealing of the demands on the back nine.

[Bill_McBride]

Sean Leary,

I put my eyes right up onto the screen, and couldn't read his words more "closely".

Have you ever played WFW ?

The tee shots on 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 are spectacular.
I left off the par 3's, but, anyone will tell you that the tee shots on # 10 and # 13 are anything but "disappointing.

As to the front nine, the tee shots may not be as dramatic, but, if you look "closely" you'll find them anything but disappointing.

# 6 has to be one of the great tee shot decisions in golf.
# 8 is ferocious, especially when you consider the impact your tee shot has on your approach or second shot.

Position off the tee is critical on the front nine at WFW, although those tee shots may be more subtle, and not as revealing of the demands on the back nine.

Hold on there, Mr Mucci, this is not about Mr. Leary, it's about Mr. Day.   May Day.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,

I'm aware of that, but, I sensed that Sean was unfamiliar with WFW so I wanted to provide him with a perspective.

[mike_malone]

 Pat,

   I see where you rave about the tee shots on the back nine. I agree that they were more interesting. I loved 11. But, by that point my disappointment was not to be overcome.


   Sean,

    Thanks for handling my light work while I was previously engaged.

[Sean Leary]

Patrick,

I am unfamiliar with WFW. I have no opinions about the tee shots or the course in general as I have not played it. I was just trying to help convey what I believed that Mayday was getting at.  Which everyone seems to understand but you.

[mike_malone]

 Jim,

   I don't know diddly about cars, but that one seems to have quality from tee to green, something lacking in the early tee shots at WFW. Billy Casper thought the architecture was so lacking he didn't even try to go for the green on a par three

[JESII]

Billy Casper thought the architecture was so lacking he didn't even try to go for the green on a par three

Interesting and unique interpretation...

[Anthony Gray]

Pretty flat greens at Pebble Beach...

  I think they are too small to allow much movement created by undulations.

  Anthony

[Adam Clayman]

Pretty flat greens at Pebble Beach...

You must've played there on a day when they were rolling less than 8 on the Stimp?

For their size, there's a ton of movement when slick. As much as 6-10 feet of break can be had on a putt that breaks 5 inches when slow.

[JESII]

Pretty flat greens at Pebble Beach...

  I think they are too small to allow much movement created by undulations.

  Anthony

Could be...but they still seemed to fail to generate much interest from me...admittedly only two plays and on consecutive days so not much time to grow.