My observation of GCA over some years is that frank commentary will live safely forever.
Frank commentary is good.
Providing it is based on knowledge and considered thought and is not pure nonsense or malicious.
When it becomes centred unfairly on one subject for attack, or is plainly wrong or vindictive .... it must be challenged. But then, surely, the response is only frank commentary also?
Or is frank commentary to be reserved to the original frank commentator only? And is the original frank commentator to be viewed as intimidated when he/she choses to express aggressive views of another's work or place in the first place, without consideration to the possible intimidation of his target, and then "suffers" a reply.
It is only because Mr. Warren persists in posting NUMEROUS NEGATIVE COMMENTS on my work on the web .... presumably to stay there for years ... that I find it necessary to state my side of the equation. Not to do so would be to allow his views to be read and reread for years to come and believed to be true as though he were an expert in the field of course architecture.
I draw no comfort from the fact that this is happening in a forum which has chosen to ignore largely or deride the works of many great architects of our age .... Jack Nicklaus (surely our modern day Old Tom Morris.. a great man and a great golf mind , a great and prolific designer of golf courses and a great promoter of our game), Arthur Hills whose artistry is superb, the Jones family whose aggregate corpus of courses is magnificent, all of the designers in Europe (in a recent debate) and on and on. To dismiss maybe 98% of modern design and designers out of hand is a mystifiying action.......
Anyway, back to my own case and that of the unfriendly Australian.
Mr. Warren's knowledge of The European Club is extremely limited. On his own first post on GCA concerning us he stated:-
"I got a bit unlucky with the weather - with gusts recorded at over 100km/h (65mph) through the day: Foam from the sea was landing on parts of the course about 500m inland! - but a mate and I soldiered on and enjoyed using some imagination to keep the ball out of the wind."
It would take an absolute genius to study a golf course of any complexity in such a limited time, in such conditions and while striving to play golf. But the imagination used in playing in a gale was then let off the leash in the matter of an expert commentary on my links.
Mr. Warren met me on the day and could have asked any questions he wished. I gave him the courtesy of the course and would have expected the courtesy of a letter if he had anything to say or ask. Others have approached things differently and I hope that they enjoyed the fact that I gave them plenty of my time and maybe even a spin around the links with stops to discuss various points. But Mr. Warren just rushed away into the ultra-public arena of the internet to , in the guise of an expert .... because what other type of person could set up and maintain a commentary site of his own?, post a negative ....
After Mr Warren posted his negatives on the internet instead of first talking with me or writing to me I took the liberty of writing to him. He went ballistic and remains so! For a man who does not hesitate to bash another in public he has the thinnest of skins when it comes to private comment on vis own views. And he has the gall to suggest that I am defensive or sensitive or wish to suppress views on me and my work!!!!
Anyway, since I wrote to him he has effectively stalked me and I will give these few examples as the basis of my belief:
ONE-
Soon after our encounter, he started a topic "Holes that take you away from the ocean" and by coincidence decided to attack The European Club.....
"One that doesn't do the job so well, I think, is the 16th at The European. A NOTHING hole following the joy of 12-15, and it begins a pretty average closing stretch."
I took issue with him privately over the use of the term "NOTHING" but all that happened was that he went more ballistic still until pretty well nothing at The European Club was worth a damn in his eyes!
TWO -
Soon after that, on his Global Golfer he was full of praise for Silloth-On-Solway. I am sure it is a wonderful place. But Mr. Warren, with over 30,000 other courses to chose for comparisons (which can be odious things anyway) and 47 placed ahead of Silloth on the Golf World GB&I rankings ceased on the opportunity to attack The European Club thus:-
" The European Club is 30-odd places ahead of it in Golf World's poll and would get one, perhaps two, round(s) of a 10-Round Split between the two courses in my book. Silloth is golf as it was meant to be played - The European is an advertisement for the power and capabilities of heavy earthmoving machinery."
Ouch..... If I may comment frankly .... THE LOUSE! Sorry if that is an attack on his "character".
THREE -
Mr Warren is now in full flow and oozing hurt feelings.
So along comes the debate on the Best Holes in Ireland arises on GCA.
Mr. Warren bides his time but not for long. When Chris Roselle posts an opinion on some fine Irish golf holes that were not included amongst the Best Holes in Ireland story:
"Here are some of what I think at the best...
#2 and #4 at Old Head
#3 at Waterville
#7 at The European Club
#15 at Portmarnock"
Mr. Warren is up like a flash. Given a menu of four holes from four venues, and all of Ireland's other 7,200 golf holes, he pops the innocent question:
"#7 at The European Club
Can you talk me through why you are so keen on this hole, Chris?"
Now he has his old pal Pat back in the frying pan! He knows that someone will rise to the bait and help him. He basks for awhile. But not for long until he is back with his coup de grace:
"That's the hole. I'll never understand how, but it was apparently named as one of the best 100 golf holes in the world."
Ouch .......
So, there it is. Some GCA people think I am sensitive, defensive and proud. I don't think so. I'm private as possible, concentrated on my work and my family, and think I have the mental capacity to balance praise and criticism of my work without emotion ... always considering all comments for content which i should consider .... and always admiring the good works of my fellow designers who, to a man, stick their necks on the line to produce the best golf courses they can in whatever circumstances prevail.
But I'm not for being bashed without reply and let the record show that I have counter-commented on this site only twice in all the years. It is my view that both men behaved badly and in a stalking fashion towards me and I am content that I have been justified in replying openly to both. Not to do so would suggest that they might be right. Not to do so would be to allow them to contaminate the world of golf opinion against my work. Beyond that I have no feeling towards them....
Of course, I won't be answering Mr. Warren's loaded questions. Questions of the mode: Have you stopped beating your wife yet? A yes answer means you did beat her. A no answer means you are still beating her. He had every opportunity to get answers when he met me. He could have done so in the weeks after we met and I made him welcome into my golfing home. He has no right to DEMAND AN INTERVIEW with me or anyone else.
Hopefully he will become more thoughtful and considerate with age.
For my part, I do not propose continuing on this topic in this forum but I wish everyone well and hope that they enjoy their golf in 2010 and beyond .
Pat Ruddy