[Mark Smolens]

Any more than the actual Tom Doak would respond to comments about him here?

[jeffwarne]

I just want to make sure I'm getting this right.....

Pros are complaining that a course named DUBSDREAD is too hard for high handicaps?

Just golf your ball, collect your check and THANK your host.

when you've actually done something better, you can comment.
........actually no, just collect your check and THANK your host.

We all know there are many other great architects out there-no need to insult your host to show how smart you are.

[PCCraig]

Question...am I the only one suspicious of whether the actual Joe Jemsek would use the comments section of Geoffshackelford.com to reply to his critics? I mean...

No, I'd be highly suspicious of that too, since he died a number of years ago... 

http://www.linkedin.com/in/jemsekgolfdesign

Wrong Joe 

[Mike_Young]

Some interesting comments @ geoffshackelford's site including one from Joe J:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2011/9/15/jemsek-wants-to-talk-to-phil-about-his-hatchet-job-on-rees.html#comments

Steve,
PM is in a group trying to buy a few course around Phoenix and put hem together with a common membership etc.  Good idea so the more crap he can stir up the more he becomes known as an "expert".  He's using the press to jump
start his golf business..that's all this is.
Whether you like RJ or dislike RJ work think about this:
He's been practicing his trade as long or longer than PM has been hitting golf balls.
The Jemseks have been operating courses longer than PM has been alive.
Do you think because PM can hit a golf ball as well as anyone that he can just step in to the buisnesses of the two guys above?  You probably don't and I probably don't BUT the majority of the golf world would think he could. And that is the problem.

BTW Joe Jemsek had a good response on the Shackelford site.

Mr. Young,

This is one of the oddest posts I’ve read and seems to be the product of some sort of stream of consciousness born from a personal vendetta, rather than a comprehensive and cogent post either defending or reputing the comments of Mickelson, Donald and Stricker (the latter two get an odd “pass” from you).

I’ve no idea what your political leanings are and it really doesn’t matter in this forum. That said, I assume that you have never criticized either Presidents Bush or Obama, as you have never run a country; thus, you are in no position to accurately appraise their work. That seems to be the gist of one of your criticisms of Mickelson: that because Mickelson is merely a professional golfer, he is not capable of offering critiques or, heaven forbid, actually enter into the golf design and ownership fields.

And help me out here: “the more crap he can stir up the more he becomes known as an "expert".  He's using the press to jump start his golf business..that’s all this is.” I can only assume that you feel the same way about talking heads on both cable and talk radio…that they have ZERO credence because their motives are simply to create as much “crap” as possible as it is an attempt to further their own careers/agendas, and should not be taken seriously, in any way, shape or form.

With respect to your theory that longevity should be directly correlated to respect, we are left to assume that you feel Ryan O’Neal is one of the greatest thespians of our time, Pauly Shore is ranked among the greatest comedians of our day and Rosie O’Donnell has to be counted among the all-time greats when naming…… ahhh….. well.. whatever the hell it is she does.. 

Please call me Mike...Mr. makes me feel so much older...

Sorry you don't like my post but nope..no personal vendetta.  Donald and Stricker have been given a pass by most of the media.  But they add to the negative comments and give PM more cred in the public eye.
As for your comments about President Bush and Mr. Obama I don't understand.  I commented on how long RJ or the Jemseks had practiced their jobs.  AND how long PM had practiced his job so naturally they would be better at what they had practiced.   Never did I say he couldn'y do it I just said RJ would know much more about it than he would.  Just like Obama knows much more about community organizing than any of us. 
As for PM stirring up crap.  Yep.  Right now . Today.  He can have a publicist take advantage of all this crap he stirred. 
As for vendettas,  I despise the fact that he did this to a family like the Jemseks.  Do it to a private club but not to a family whether you like the course or not. 

[Terry Lavin]

Question...am I the only one suspicious of whether the actual Joe Jemsek would use the comments section of Geoffshackelford.com to reply to his critics? I mean...

That would be Joe Jemsek's nephew who is a golf course architect himself.

[Tim_Cronin]

Question...am I the only one suspicious of whether the actual Joe Jemsek would use the comments section of Geoffshackelford.com to reply to his critics? I mean...

That would be Joe Jemsek's nephew who is a golf course architect himself.

Grandson, actually. Frank's boy.

[Tony Ristola]

"A great golf course is a course that's challenging for the good player but playable for the average player," Mickelson said. "This is the exact opposite. It's playable, fine for us. We don't have any problems with it. But the average guy just can't play it."

What part of this statement, precisely, does anybody here disagree with?  

Are the greens (and surrounds) at Dubs more difficult than say Pinehurst No. 2

Tony,

No the greens are not more difficult than Pinehurst.  They're also not nearly as good.  The point is the average player at least can play his ball at Pinehurst.  If he walks away with a 6 from a chip and 3 putts that's a lot more palatable than slashing out of deep rough or taking penalties all day.  Doak has made a career out of this realization.  

Didn't ask if they were as good. Wanted to know if they were more difficult, which is what some whining from the pro's was about.

Where are there heaps of penalties? I recall hearing there was only one water hazard.

As far as slashing out of rough, each course has its own setup, and this was set up for the professionals with a US Open in mind. Maintenance practices can change for the masses, and probably do. I'm sure they were testing the setup for hosting a potential US Open, and then going back and thinking about what could be improved. Further, soils in some areas make it a wiser choice to grow grass a little longer around the greens. Not everyone is blessed with sandy, fast draining soils.

Tom has never been asked to design a course with the US Open in mind to the best of my knowledge, nor asked to redesign a course for a US Open, so we are talking apples and oranges. Whether you like the work Rees has done or not, the majority of his work isn't US Open oriented. That was his specific task at Cog Hill. He's been hired a few times with that task in mind too, so I'd venture he has a rough idea what the USGA was looking for.

Then there is differentiation. Not all great or US Open courses will appeal to all golfers or all classes of golfers, and some folks will be drawn to Dubs like bugs to light. You say Tom has made a career out of some realization. OK, Pete Dye made one out of making tough courses for "ardent" golfers. There are a lot of markets to be served.

Chicago is a big city. With the Jemsek's history in the area, they would be able to pull enough players to Dubs even by limiting the handicap requirement to 15 and charging a pretty penny.

If I were them, I'd start advertising the place as "The Course that is too Much for these Coddled Pro's"... and post their photos.

Joe Jemsek replies to my good friend Tommy N.
http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2011/9/15/jemsek-wants-to-talk-to-phil-about-his-hatchet-job-on-rees.html#comments


 

[Jud_T]

Tony,

I hope you're right.  The family has done so much for public golf and the WGA that they certainly deserve it.  But my impression is that a decent percentage of Dubs' business was from corporate outings in the past.  Aside from the fact that these are a fraction of what they used to be due to the serious long-term economic slump, on the margin business people and average golfers like myself who would recommend Dubs in it's former incarnation for such events may very well go elsewhere now that it's no longer manageable and/or fun for many players.  They have one tournament a year and even that's looking a bit iffy now...

[Jay Flemma]

Jud, with all due respect for the Jemseks, who undoubtedly are kind, thoughtful, and love golf and public golf and are great examples of altruism and golf virtue...the standard for granting a venue a U.S. Open should not be the fact that the owners are super-nice.  By that logic we might end up with a lot of crappy U.S. Open venues.  What priority are we supposed to give "they are super-nice and do a lot for golf" in the hierarchy of determining major championship venues?  What does that come above in the list of considerations when picking a venue?  How much weight should it get?  

More to the point, what recent US Open venue of the last 20 years should Cog Hill have replaced??  Oakmont? Shinny?  WFW? I doubt it  Merion?  Oakland Hills?  Pinehurst?  Again, not likely.  Any suggestions?

[Tim_Cronin]

Here's the USGA's Mike Davis on Cog Hill. He was interviewed by Chicago radio broadcaster Rory Spears during the U.S. Amateur. The link:

http://spears.golfersongolf.com/

QUESTION..Across town there is Cog Hill, they have wanted a
US Open for a long time. They have done renovations and Frank
Jemsek has said that you were on the property while renovations
were on going what did you see there. Frank says he will make a
run at the 2022 US Open, when the USGA has indicated they
might back in the midwest. What stands out about Cog Hill now
and does it ever have a chance to land a US Open.

DAVIS..."Getting to Chicago would be a great thing. It's a storied
and wonderful golf town, not just the great courses around the city
but how Chicago supports golf. You look at things like the Evans
Scholar Program, and for us to not be in Chicago periodically
would be too bad.

With respect to Cog Hill, we did our 1997 US Amateur there when
Matt Kuchar won.  I think one of things that came out of this current
renovation is that, agronomically they are far superior that what they
used to be. They have greens that really drain well, they have some
modern grasses on it. So when I looked at it, and I have been there
twice. Once during construction and once right after they opened,
and I am really impressed with all the upgrades in the agronomic
area. When I did walk the golf course, I came away thinking "wow"
that is really one heck of a test of golf. It is hard and for the world's
best players, it is all the test they would ever want. So I think that is
where are, they have had the invitation in. Plus the Jemsek family
is one of the great families in the United States when it comes to
golf. The whole family is just great and they are some of the nicest
people you will meet. So I have to think that the USGA Championship
Committee would like they do with all the invitations we get for US
Opens, will look at Cog Hill very seriously.

QUESTION...Another story that goes around is that the USGA likes
to stay away from courses that host PGA Tour events, inspite of
having US Opens at Pebble Beach and Torrey Pines is there any
truth to that.

DAVIS.."There is some truth to that. When we try to find US Open
venues we try to find special venues if you will, and venues that are
not used all the time for tournaments golf. When we pick a venue
for a US Open you want people to say, that's a neat experience.
So there is some truth to that. We just finished up with a US Open
at Congressional, and we signed up for that US Open they didn't
have the AT & T or Tigers event being played there. So for a number
of reasons it happened, like the renovations at Avenal.

So I will tell you, it did effect the US Open. Because all of a sudden
the world had seen Congressional on a regular basis, and we did
something from a setup basis to make it a little bit different.   

Nonetheless, it took a little bit of the mystique out of Congressional
because you would see it every year. So absolutely there is some
truth to that. But then you say, "wait a minute USGA you go to Pebble
Beach every so often". But when you see Pebble beach in the winter
it has very wide fairways, it tends to be very wet that time of that year.
I don't think it is set up in championship condition because it is a
pro-am event, so they can't get the course very firm and fast. We got
it much faster. So some of us can rationalize saying that Pebble
Beach is a much different golf course in the summer vs the winter.
But when you go to a place whether it's Cog Hill or Congressional
or any place that has regular tour events, it is hard for us to get overly
excited about those venues because there is a drawback to them."

[PCCraig]

.

[PThomas]

Mr. Jemsek said he 'd like to talk to Phil..I hope Phil mans up and does it

[Terry Lavin]

Having played Erin Hills, I can now say that the USGA made the right call in bypassing Cog Hill. There's no question in my mind that Erin Hills is a vastly superior site for an Open. Dubs is a good tour stop site but not quite special enough for an Open. Of course the same can be said for Congressional and Torrey Pines but that's a different debate!

[Mike_Young]

Jud, with all due respect for the Jemseks, who undoubtedly are kind, thoughtful, and love golf and public golf and are great examples of altruism and golf virtue...the standard for granting a venue a U.S. Open should not be the fact that the owners are super-nice.  By that logic we might end up with a lot of crappy U.S. Open venues.  What priority are we supposed to give "they are super-nice and do a lot for golf" in the hierarchy of determining major championship venues?  What does that come above in the list of considerations when picking a venue?  How much weight should it get?  

More to the point, what recent US Open venue of the last 20 years should Cog Hill have replaced??  Oakmont? Shinny?  WFW? I doubt it  Merion?  Oakland Hills?  Pinehurst?  Again, not likely.  Any suggestions?

Jay,
We all know the USGA has been always been a very political group.  And now they have decided to accept sponsors so who knows what and where they will go.  The original members hosted the Opens amongst themselves and notoriety was gained within those clubs over the years.  This was when golf was like the Jamaican Bobsled Team.  Now we have come to the place where we have Amex, Rolex, and Lexus involved.  TV ( and most likely sponsors) is taken into consideration in pairings.  Logistics for corporate events and TV have brought the Open to places like Erin Hills.  So I don't see a precedent that would not allow for a "nice guy" that has the logistics, the calibre course needed and the ability to host  to be considered.  Plus I like free enterprise and courses such as Torrey and Bethpage may be public but they are municipal courses subsidized by taxpayers.  Let's have an Open on a course where an entrepreneur created a functioning course that evolved all the way to a U.S. Open.  It's the American way.

[Tim Martin]

Jud, with all due respect for the Jemseks, who undoubtedly are kind, thoughtful, and love golf and public golf and are great examples of altruism and golf virtue...the standard for granting a venue a U.S. Open should not be the fact that the owners are super-nice.  By that logic we might end up with a lot of crappy U.S. Open venues.  What priority are we supposed to give "they are super-nice and do a lot for golf" in the hierarchy of determining major championship venues?  What does that come above in the list of considerations when picking a venue?  How much weight should it get?  

More to the point, what recent US Open venue of the last 20 years should Cog Hill have replaced??  Oakmont? Shinny?  WFW? I doubt it  Merion?  Oakland Hills?  Pinehurst?  Again, not likely.  Any suggestions?

Bethpage the 2nd time around and torrey pines for starters. Also, Merion hasn't hosted a US Open in the past 20 years.

Bethpage? Really?

[Jud_T]

Jud, with all due respect for the Jemseks, who undoubtedly are kind, thoughtful, and love golf and public golf and are great examples of altruism and golf virtue...the standard for granting a venue a U.S. Open should not be the fact that the owners are super-nice.  By that logic we might end up with a lot of crappy U.S. Open venues.  What priority are we supposed to give "they are super-nice and do a lot for golf" in the hierarchy of determining major championship venues?  What does that come above in the list of considerations when picking a venue?  How much weight should it get?  

More to the point, what recent US Open venue of the last 20 years should Cog Hill have replaced??  Oakmont? Shinny?  WFW? I doubt it  Merion?  Oakland Hills?  Pinehurst?  Again, not likely.  Any suggestions?

Jay,

Where did I say they should get the Open?  I was talking more about the fallout to the rest of their clients from this Don Quixote quest.  It would be nice to have an Open in Chicago, but as detailed elsewhere there's not that many suitable venues that aren't already locked down for other events.  In terms of pure GCA I thought the place was about a Doak 5 or 6 before the latest renovation and it's arguably down to a 4 or 5 now.  Terry has it about right IMO re-Erin Hills, but for better or worse there's more than pure GCA involved in such decisions.  I don't think you'll see an Open at Shoreacres or Chicago Golf anytime soon...  

[Bill Seitz]

Question...am I the only one suspicious of whether the actual Joe Jemsek would use the comments section of Geoffshackelford.com to reply to his critics? I mean...

That would be Joe Jemsek's nephew who is a golf course architect himself.

Grandson, actually. Frank's boy.

And he's been active on Geoff's site in the past. I know I've seen his posts there before.

[Terry Lavin]

Johnny Miller on the criticism of Dubsdread:  I think it's a great ballstrikers course. I don't see anything to complain about.

[William_G]

Johnny Miller on the criticism of Dubsdread:  I think it's a great ballstrikers course. I don't see anything to complain about.

of course!

[Tony Ristola]

Here's the USGA's Mike Davis on Cog Hill. He was interviewed by Chicago radio broadcaster Rory Spears during the U.S. Amateur. The link:

http://spears.golfersongolf.com/

So when I looked at it, and I have been there
twice. Once during construction and once right after they opened,
and I am really impressed with all the upgrades in the agronomic
area. When I did walk the golf course, I came away thinking "wow"
that is really one heck of a test of golf. It is hard and for the world's
best players, it is all the test they would ever want.

Interesting... and I would think if the USGA saw something they did not like they could have and may have said something.

If it is too much for the "professionals" they can soften parts of it aside from the greens easy enough. Added to the course, the place has a great story behind it.

I hope they get the US Open...especially because some pro´s whine about it... and by the time they do get the Open, PM(S) and many others will be about ready for the Senior Tour.

[PCCraig]

Ed Sherman is reporting that the 2013 BMW will go to Conway Farms:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3a5bdac91e-01f4-4eb0-88ef-673d7069ef45&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Personally, I highly doubt that hosting the event in Lake Forest vs. Lemont will make any difference in terms of attendance. I hope it does though, because if not Chicago will loose the event for good in the name of the Evans program (and rightfully soon).

[Jud_T]

let the nitpicking of Conway begin...

[PCCraig]

let the nitpicking of Conway begin...

Jud,

I like Conway and think it's a fine club...but there is plenty there to nitpick. Not to mention the winning score might be -20. By modern standards it's pretty short (at ~7200).

[Terry Lavin]

This has been a pretty closely held secret for some time.  I was lobbying for Olympia Fields, which is a better golf course, a better facility and it has a history of hosting professional golf.  Looks like I struck out again!

Now the whining about how the course is too easy for a FedEx playoff site will ensue.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

This has been a pretty closely held secret for some time.  I was lobbying for Olympia Fields, which is a better golf course, a better facility and it has a history of hosting professional golf.  Looks like I struck out again!

Now the whining about how the course is too easy for a FedEx playoff site will ensue.

Terry, (I don't know you, so take this in good fun, please!) you know we're not supposed to criticise The Tour...

This whole "Fedex" thing is a little much, I wonder if the Tour gives bonuses to players who mention "how much it means, to win the Fedex Cup, etc" and say " THE Fedex Cup", or, as a condition of playing on tour, if they're supposed to mention it in interviews a given number of times.  

Like play in 20(?) events on The PGA Tour to maintain playing status...

...whatever you do, don't criticise the Tour!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()