[Rob Rigg]

Jed,

Great thread.

OM will be a polarizing course for sure - and I think a lot of it will depend on a golfer's game and how they think about the game.

If you (meaning any golfer) can't blast your ball into space because you are not 100% where you should be going and then try a fun/crazy shot and shrug when you don't pull it off then there will probably be some disappointment at OM.

I was talking with Jeff Brinegar about the course and we landed on this idea that one of the coolest things about OM was how it provided "hope" for the golfer no matter what - it is incredibly refreshing. Because there are so many options and the architect is not telling you exactly what to do - you can think for yourself.

There are a myriad of options for recovery on virtually every hole which is exciting and empowering. OM is also challenging and I can see people coming off some of the greens in tears after a five putt - saying that "it's just not fair!"

I did not think OM was subtle - I thought it was majestic and thought provoking with all of the contours, movement and slopes.

But that is the polarizing element of the course - golfers will see it in many different ways - as they see the other three courses already there.

I think that BD will remain the most "commercial" course at the resort, with PD in second because it is on the ocean although more "tricky", OM probably third because it touches the ocean and it is "different" and BT will remain in last because it is the "toughest" course, hardest walk, away from the ocean, etc.

I could live on OM and that is not bc I am trying to kiss ass - it is just so much fun for someone who doesn't really care about score and focuses more on being creative and hitting interesting shots that they may or may not be able to pull off. I also view a tee shot as a way to get the ball into play (hopefully) before the real fun begins. OM is my BFF forever.

[Richard Choi]

Ricahrd, I believe one could make a good argument that truly great courses are almost always appreciated more after numerous plays. If you can play a course one time and feel you have taken in all it has to offer I submit it is not that great of a golf course.

I would not put it that way Greg. I would say that a great course is great from the first play on and your appreciation just gets deeper as you play more.

For example, I loved playing Ballyneal the first time. It was cold and windy (and torrential rains that weekend), but you can still see how great and fun the course is from the very first time. I feel like I know the course much better now (about 10 rounds), and I notice the subtle features more which makes me appreciate the course even more, but I still loved it from the beginning.

The same goes for all of the courses at Bandon, Chambers, Bethpage, and other great courses that I had pleasure in playing multiple times. And I love the great courses that I played only once like Plainfield.

[Michael Robin]

Jed -

Would you IM me with an address, I want to send you something that might be interesting to watch.

[Phil_the_Author]

Jed,

Maybe the problem your having can be found in this sentence that from your post:

"I recognize that the golf course is designed to reward angles and strategic decisions, but I was essentially wandering toward each green with no concept of the proper shot..."

A golf course where "angles" are of primary importance, and I confess I have never set foot on Bandon's courses so can't say this is the fact for Old Macdonald but will accept your premise, place value on shot results rather than shogt type. For example, how often have you seen players skip a ball along the ground or even putting from 50+ yards away on a links course in Scotland when viewing an Open championship? Yet when the typical American goes over to play his vision of the "proper shot" is one that finds the ball floating high in the air and landing 4 feet from the target and holding with spin?

Could it be that you were more focused on a type of shot to hit rather than concentrating on the different ways one could get from point A to B that would fit your game and maximize the reward for a properly played shot?

Just a thought... 

[Kevin Pallier]

Philip

Great post. I think you have highlighted the essance of OM for mine. I would suggest more imagination is required to play it than any of the other Bandon courses. I had more fun there and that reason alone is maybe why I prefer it over all the others.

OM will be the course t the resort where (IMHO) a good caddy is most needed from tee to green.

Pete

I disagree - a caddy whom I've just met will not know my game and ability to imagine or create shots. Each to their own as far as a caddies worth IMO.

[Rob Miller]

Maybe we're too conditioned in the States to expect the standardized tight fairway, first cut and deep rough and Old Mac seems to shatter that formula.  I don't have an opinion yet on the course and maybe we should hold off on the TOC comparisons but I love the idea of a lot of options through the green. 

Then again, I do love to spray the ball off of the tee, so I could be biased.   

[BCrosby]

Jed, please excuse this aside. For some reason this thread reminded me of a story that director Frank Capra tells about "It's a Wonderful Life". He says he never recovered from the very luke-warm reception the film originally received in 1946 (by the public and critics alike); he says it shattered his confidence in himself completely. Indeed, during the next 20 years, this multiple Oscar-winning and prolific director made (I think) only or or two more movies, and then left Hollywood for good. And what's especially interesting to me is how he describes his loss of confidence, i.e. he says that for all his best years as a film-maker, he was utterly confident in his directorial abilities/craft, but even more confident in his ability to 'understand the audience' i.e. to understand what worked for a mainstream audience, what they liked and wanted to see. But in 1946, when audiences found depressing and uninteresting what Capra thought was his most life-affirming and best film ever, he lost that confidence forever; he had completely mis-judged what post-war Americans wanted to see, and he found it very hard to live with that. It is sad to me that a director I am very fond of was not able to separate out those two aspects of the art-business, i.e the quality of the film itself from the public reaction it garnered; and that he was not able to realize in 1946 that, while he may have indeed misjudged popular tastes for the moment, those tastes would change over time and the film he'd made and thought was a great one would eventually be seen that way by most everyone. And now that I've finished writing this, I realize what it is that brought it to mind, i.e. I'm glad our own Tom D is more balanced and healthy-minded than Frank Capra was back then, and that he not only seems to have a pretty clear idea of (and be pretty comfortable with) the way the course will 'play in the marketplace', but can also keep the issues of the mainstream-golfer's-reaction to Old Mac separate from the issue of the inherent quality of a golf course that he and his team no doubt worked very hard to try to make great. Apologies again for the ramble; I just started writing and found myself here/there.

Peter

Peter - I did not know that about Capra. Wikipedia has the following on IaWL:

"Despite initially being considered a box office flop due to high production costs and stiff competition at the time of its release, the film has come to be regarded as a classic and a staple of Christmas television around the world. Theatrically, the film's break-even point was actually $6.3 million, approximately twice the production cost, a figure it never came close to achieving in its initial release. An appraisal in 2006 reported: "Although it was not the complete box-office failure that today everyone believes … it was initially a major disappointment and confirmed, at least to the studios, that Capra was no longer capable of turning out the populist features that made his films the must-see, money-making events they once were."[2]

It's a Wonderful Life was nominated for five Oscars without winning any..."

Where do you come up with these wonderful associations? Wasted youth? Opium dens? Etherial transmigrations?

On second thought, I don't want to know.

Bob

P.S. The Oscar winner in '46 was The Best Years of Our Lives, also a great, great movie. So Capra was up against some stiff competition.

[BCrosby]

I can't resist a comment on The Best Years of Our Lives.

Near the beginning of the film three veterans are returning home after fighting in the Pacific theater. They are crammed into the nose of a bomber, converted to a post-war transport, silently looking at the American countryside passing beneath them. Suddenly one of them says, "Look, people are playing golf!"  

A wonderful foreshadowing of the shocks the three men were about to endure as they transitioned back to peacetime life.

Bob

P.S. BTW, Frederick March is (by some order of magnitude) the single most under-appreciated American actor ever. I have no idea whether he played golf.

[Adam Clayman]

Jed, Those who've questioned your sanity for posting this opinion in this forum, fail to realize that you've provided justification for your opinion. No one should ever be berated for doing that on this website. We can debate the justifications, just as Jim U. has described above.

[Jed Rammell]

I've yet to be drawn and quartered - - thank you to all. I poorly worded my initial thoughts regarding the "proper shot." I was trying to make some sort of point about the location, and I think the following analogy might help clarify my position.

Old Macdonald is like a pretty girl who you get to go on one date with, make small talk (she is very shy), and then plan on another date in a year. How can you make a connection with this girl? Instead, say you get to spend lunch once a month with Anthony's mom, and learn everything there is to know. No matter how much more attracted you are to the pretty girl, haven't you formed a much greater appreciation for mom? By the time you get your second date with the pretty girl, the butterflies are gone and mom has promised you peach cobbler . . . it isn't the pretty girl's fault, just a matter of accessibility (no offense Mom).

[Jud_T]

Jed,

If you are inadvertantly advocating dumbing down resort courses or limiting them to paint-by-numbers GCA, then you don't really get the Bandon concept.   Have you ever played golf in GB&I?

[Steve Lang]

  I've played TOC, but it had been a subject of study of mine, so when I finally got there I knew when in doubt play left, which things to line up with on the horizon etc.. two caddies in our group helped me make slight corrections to my intended lines of play, as their players seemed incapable of following directions.., and that local knowledge definitely helped..  it remains a great memory.. and i got it..

i expect to be studied up sufficiently for old mac in mid-may.. and we'll see how it goes..  one taste may have to last for a while..    i appreaciate Jed's concern.. but it needn't be a puzzle

[Jed Rammell]

Jed,

If you are inadvertantly advocating dumbing down resort courses or limiting them to paint-by-numbers GCA, then you don't really get the Bandon concept.   Have you ever played golf in GB&I?

Jud -

I have not, and it looks like I probably wouldn't "get it." I'm all for pretty girls, but the operating environment and location for these courses makes it so I will never get to fully appreciate them.

[Matthew Petersen]

I think Jed's basic concern--that OM is the sort of course that a player better appreciates with numerous rounds played and that such a course is not necessarily well suited to a destination resort--may be right on. But, that said, Bandon is really the perfect kind of resort for such a course. After all, if OM is not your cup of tea you have three other courses of unique character to choose from. And, perhaps even more importantly, Bandon as a golf destination attracts a very different sort of crowd by its very nature.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jed,

I know of a few fellows who had similar feelings after their first play at NGLA.

Often repeat play fosters recognition or rejection of the architectural values of a golf course.

[Mark Pearce]

Jed,

If you are inadvertantly advocating dumbing down resort courses or limiting them to paint-by-numbers GCA, then you don't really get the Bandon concept.   Have you ever played golf in GB&I?

Jud -

I have not, and it looks like I probably wouldn't "get it." I'm all for pretty girls, but the operating environment and location for these courses makes it so I will never get to fully appreciate them.

Jed,

I wouldn't fall for the line, so often postulated here, that all UK courses are wide open like TOC.  Not even the majority of links coursesare as wide and mysterious.  Indeed the vast majority, whilst not being US Open style set ups and whilst certainly offering more width than you may be used to are far more defined.  There's only one way to find out if you'd "get" golf in the UK and tht isn't through reading posts on here....

[Niall C]

Old Mac and TOC (and others) have in common the fact that they rely heavily on contour and undulations. And relatively less so on  bold, obvious features like bunkers or water or trees. There are fewer "lighthouses" (Simpson's word) to steer the golfer.  

And though the contouring might not be very "subtle", it is less obvious than usual sorts of hazards.  

Which is why you usually need multiple plays to "get" TOC  rather than, say, TPC Sawgrass or Pebble. Courses that rely on contouring or ground shaping and less on traditional hazards are almost always going to be harder to appreciate out the gate.

Fascinating thread.

Bob

I'm coming to this discussion a bit late but would like to pass comment on a couple of points. Bob in his quote above refers to contours being less obvious than bunkers, well I'm not sure thats true. Perhaps its conditioning, conditioning of the mind that is, but I play most of my golf on links (although I play my fair share of parkland golf as well) and therefore the first thing I'm thinking of is the roll of the fairway, almost reading it like you would a putt. If thats what you're used to you don't need very big humps or contours on the fairway for them to stand out. Once you figure that out you figure out how to avoid the bunkers but its the roll of the fairway that you look for IMHO.

The other comment was the one Jed Peters said which was he played the course for the first time and was able to figure out what was required. If thats the case then I think Tom and Jim have done a pretty good job. I don't mean that you necessarily need to see everything from the tee but from what Jed was saying he was able to pick up the basic intent of the hole. No doubt the more you play a course the more info you pick up for future use but I would think the basic requirement for a first time play is to be able to appreciate the intent. If you are wondering aimlessly, not being able to formulate any kind of gameplan for the hole then its just a hit in the park. Golf should engage the brain, again IMHO.

Niall

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Bob. And very nice catch (and association) with Frederick March. I hadn't thought of him in years, but reading your comment I've been thinking through some of the films he made, and he is always excellent (see, for example. Inherit the Wind). On the other hand, Spencer Tracey got loads of acclaim his whole career as a great actor, I suppose for being so 'subtle' -- though I never found him anything but dull.

Hope all is well
Peter

[Scott Warren]

Old Macdonald is like a pretty girl who you get to go on one date with, make small talk (she is very shy), and then plan on another date in a year. How can you make a connection with this girl? Instead, say you get to spend lunch once a month with Anthony's mom, and learn everything there is to know. No matter how much more attracted you are to the pretty girl, haven't you formed a much greater appreciation for mom? By the time you get your second date with the pretty girl, the butterflies are gone and mom has promised you peach cobbler . . . it isn't the pretty girl's fault, just a matter of accessibility (no offense Mom).

Bullshit

Here's the analogy:

Anthony's mom gives you four-minute missionary on the first date, with the only follow-up promise of three-minute missionary for all eternity.

Old Mac gives you a hug on the first date, a peck on the cheek on the second, maybe some tongue on the fourth... it develops, you learn more as you go. The more you learn, the more you appreciate. Ultimately, you have put in more work, but the reward is infinitely greater *insert filthiest fantasy here*

The greatest joys in life rarely come easy. Why should the greatest golf courses be any different? That you bothered to start the thread tells me you ought to schedule two rounds at Old Mac next time you are there and see what happens. It obviously affected you in some way, to me that rarely means "forget it", IMO it more often means "dig deeper, you won't be sorry".

Just my two cents.

[Jed Rammell]

Old Macdonald is like a pretty girl who you get to go on one date with, make small talk (she is very shy), and then plan on another date in a year. How can you make a connection with this girl? Instead, say you get to spend lunch once a month with Anthony's mom, and learn everything there is to know. No matter how much more attracted you are to the pretty girl, haven't you formed a much greater appreciation for mom? By the time you get your second date with the pretty girl, the butterflies are gone and mom has promised you peach cobbler . . . it isn't the pretty girl's fault, just a matter of accessibility (no offense Mom).

Bullshit

Here's the analogy:

Anthony's mom gives you four-minute missionary on the first date, with the only follow-up promise of three-minute missionary for all eternity.

Old Mac gives you a hug on the first date, a peck on the cheek on the second, maybe some tongue on the fourth... it develops, you learn more as you go. The more you learn, the more you appreciate. Ultimately, you have put in more work, but the reward is infinitely greater *insert filthiest fantasy here*

The greatest joys in life rarely come easy. Why should the greatest golf courses be any different? That you bothered to start the thread tells me you ought to schedule two rounds at Old mac next time ou are there and see what happens. It obviously affected you in some way, to me that rarely means "forget it", IMO it more often means "dig deeper, you won't be sorry".

Just my two cents.

Great post - but what if the dates with the pretty girl rarely occur because she lives out of the country, and rather than move forward, all you get are first date hugs because you've lost the connection from the previous date?

[Sean Leary]

Judge Smails: "You're playing golf at Old MacDonald and you're going to like it."

You kind of look like Smails..

[Adam Clayman]

Naill hits on the mind conditioning which I believe is the biggest factor in formulating opinion.

One could conclude the customers at Bandon would appreciate something so different, even if it isn't their cup of tea.

I'm curious about Mr. Keiser's rationale behind a course that might turn out polarizing. Knowing he has a proclivity for providing aspects that "hook" the retail golfer, was it a conscience decision to "go the other way" with OM? Or, are there still those elements that the retail golfer values. i.e. Raised teeing grounds etc.

Scott, Post of the year potential. Well done.

[Richard Choi]

Adam, if I get what your saying, you are saying that OldMac is like a really pretty girl who doesn't put any makeup on. Who may look a bit plain in a quick glance, but after getting to know her, she becomes almost a "perfect girl"? While more flashy (say, Shadowcreek), need all of the "enhancements" (fake eyelashes, fake boobs, bleached blond locks, and hair extensions) to look best, which after a little while kinda look sad (i.e Pam Anderson on DWTS)?

[BCrosby]

Niall notes:

"I'm coming to this discussion a bit late but would like to pass comment on a couple of points. Bob in his quote above refers to contours being less obvious than bunkers, well I'm not sure thats true. Perhaps its conditioning, conditioning of the mind that is, but I play most of my golf on links (although I play my fair share of parkland golf as well) and therefore the first thing I'm thinking of is the roll of the fairway, almost reading it like you would a putt. If thats what you're used to you don't need very big humps or contours on the fairway for them to stand out. Once you figure that out you figure out how to avoid the bunkers but its the roll of the fairway that you look for IMHO."

Niall -

Some people are better at reading contour than others (you sound like you are very good indeed), but it seems to me that analyzing contours is almost always a more "subtle" process than analyzing other sorts of architectural features.

That's because contours usually are, in fact, more subtle than other kinds of architectural features. Without a fairly deep familiarity with the course, reading contour will almost always be harder and less certain than reading the playing implications of a bunker or a water hazard or trees or o.b.

Which leads me to the notion that the "subtlety" of a course has less to do with some abstract approach to golf design. Rather it has to do with the kinds of features a designer elects to emphasize. Thus, relying on contour as a primary architectural feature (take OMac) is the reason the course is perceived as being so subtle. That is the same reason, I think, why TOC is also considered a subtle course. It too is about contours.

Bob   

[Pete_Pittock]

Kevin,
That is why I used "good caddie", rather than 'caddie'.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()