News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


A_Clay_Man

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2001, 04:08:21 PM »
No thanks for the membership ;D
But,
What really comes to mind is the thought "What the hell is wrong with building mediocrity on such a beautiful site"? Which brings another thought, "Everything"!!
Especially with all these other poor archies who can't find a good site to save their life. ::)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2001, 06:06:29 AM »
Aaron,

What a great discussion you started.  I disagree with Tom on one quick point.  Some years ago, a Japanese development company that has been struggling with finances purchased Riviera.  Last summer I was out in the LA area.  Riviera is not really private anymore.  Anyone willing to pay the $250 that they want can get on the course.  They will pair you up.  LACC is still very private and you need an invitation to play.  Given that both Riviera and Pelican Hill cost about the same, I would play Riviera all day long before Pelican Hill.  The 10th hole at Riviera may be the best #10 in the US (Apologies to Pastiempo and Bel Air right down the road) and the back nine is one of the better back nines in the country.  It really is a treat.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2001, 05:37:30 PM »
David:

Totally agree with you.  For $250, I would MUCH rather
play Riviera than either Pelican Hill course any day!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Tim Jackson

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #28 on: December 12, 2001, 03:29:03 PM »
Mr. McKnight

I am not sure where you play your golf, but to say Pelican's greens have little or no break and are not that severly contoured, it must be in the Himalayas.  I can think of 10 greens off the top of my head which have 2-3 transitions and or 4 or more feet of total elevation change.  Doesn't make it great, but the greens are contoured.

Mr. Nacarrato?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2001, 09:52:12 PM »
Well, after being away from a computer since Sunday night, I will try to answer Mr. Jackson's questions.

Q-How Pelican does not fit naturally into its surroundings.  
A-Like most courses where a routing is planned from a desk and not the field, and millions of yards of ground moved to create terraced or corridor-like areas for golf holes--Pelican Hills is one of these. There is some natural tie-tie in work, only after these corridors have been created and when they are firmly carved into the slopes of the hills.

As I written before, look at Lehigh CC or Ojai Valley Inn and tell me that these places weren't situated on severe sites and yet the best golf revealed simply by taking golf holes into area that only Mother Nature could understand. Yes, Eco reasoning today prevents many from doing this, but I maintain it as the result of many modern designers giving into the process and not standing-up for what can be described as palatable design. Its getting worse, and what do these designers do? They join the Sierra Club and advertize themselves as eco-friendly specialists knowing how to deal with the plight of many various species that aren't in fact endangered. We are talking of building places with natural trees and grass and other natural fauna. How does it compare to housing, where most of these environmentalists shrivel up and die when trying to fight these types of developments?

I could go on, but will answer the next question.

Q-Tell me what great physical features of the site were not utilized.  I think it only fair for you to be as specific as possible.  I did not talk of the how the course lays with the land because I do not see where this ideal has been compromised.  Think of the piece of land it sits on.  Tell me of another course in the area which has been placed on such a piece of severe ground and does a better job of fitting into its surrounds.  

A-To me, the makings of a great course require golf first, and everything else being built around it. That to me is taking advantage of the land. The ground at Pelican could have produced a sporty design that required twists and turns of natural quirk, yet revealing some very interesting natural greensites that could have been talked about for ages. This is the same type of design that once existed at a similar property of a course I have studied extensively in aerial photos and was featured in a photo in Geo Thomas's Golf Architecture in America--San Pedro Golf & CC, also commonly known as The Royal Palms. It was designed by Billy Bell and fell victim to the Great Depression. You could have nearly fit four of these SPG&CC designs on the same land that occupies Pelican Hills 36 holes.

It was a natural routing on very severe land and yet, maintained very natural hazards which sustained native life. You'll have to buy Daniel Wexler's next Missing Link's book to find out the rest.

Q-Tell me of another course in the area which has been placed on such a piece of severe ground and does a better job of fitting into its surrounds.  
A-Let us look at the Links of Monarch Beach, which I rate as one of the worst RTJ Jr. designs I have ever played. It is on just as crummy as land. Had about the same amount of earth moved on, and even has two holes that almost touch the ocean in the same way as Pelican South. I will give in that Ocean North is a far superior course then Monarch Beach ever will be, (architecturally) but the developments are almost exactly the same. (stagnant, boring, mis-used,over-marketed etc.)

This is the spot where I have to defer to Bill V's usual trees/fog/ocean comments on Calfornia. In this context of Pelican Hills and Monarch Beach, those comments couldn't be more then exact. That big huge body of water called the Pacific Ocean, and the view that it yields, is dictating the experience. Surprizingly, Ocean North takes advantage of some older Billy Bell type features on hole #17, where the hole look as if it is ready to fall off the cliff and into the ocean or maybe even deep space, It is the ultimate in horizon green settings. You can get these same types of settings at Torrey Pines, Los Verdes GC, and Sandpiper. Stand by for a shock, but I like that about that paticular hole.

Q-Now, you said the course lacks substance and is stagnant architecture.  Could you elaborate.  Perhaps my perception of the architectural features and design strategy are off base.
A-My views of both courses is as such. Ocean South and Ocean North are two different courses, but please give me a feature of these two courses where one is challenged by a sand hazard in or near the middle of the fairways to spice up play or creat different options that might welcome some interest?

While the seemingly Ocean South does have a severe green or two I have to agree with Peter McKnight on the lack of interest in the putting surfaces on Ocean North. I usually love to remember key features of putting surfaces on the courses I have played in my years, and the only memorable key feature I remember at both Pelican courses is on either #1 or #2 of the South course. The rest I seem to remeber as nothing more then slightly-sloped, kidney and oval-shaped table tops.

Another feature I found at Pelican Hill was that the best way to the green was usually aiming, from the tee, at the fairway bunkers which would be out of play for most. (And yes, I was playing from the PROPER tees. Afte that, and especially on Ocean North, it seemed as if no matter where you were that you had a open shot to the flag. I guess that would mean that the course was designed for playability, properly. (#3 North comes to mind in this regard.)

All in all, I felt that with some chances in routing, even with the same corridors for both courses, something quirky and fun could have been created. Unfortunately, that never came to pass.

In closing, I wan tto also say that yes, you are correct,i always bring up a classic course when shwing comparisons. I think we should as most of the courses I have mentioned usually have features that SHOULD have been handed down to US as LESSONS in how golf courses SHOULD be designed.

My bringing up Riviera and LACC gas everything to do with time spent in the area with the desire to STUDY GREAT GOLF ARCHITECTURE. If your desire is to go play golf with a beautiful view and you can afford it, then go play Pelican Hill and add it to your resume of courses played so you can tell all of your friends. This of course has everything to do with impressing clients and impressing friends. I'll stand by my thoughts and impressions simply because I have seen much better.

And if you do come to SoCal, I will be more then glad to show you around, have dinner, show you my thougts of what could have been some pretty impressive spots for golf that may have been the site of the best Fazio course ever--If minimilism was in those terms.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2001, 11:13:39 PM »
Pelican Hill
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

A_Clay_Man

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2001, 06:35:41 AM »
I was at Doak's website last night (excellent redo) and was reading the section "How we work" and I think I may have pinpointed the reason Mr F often seems to uninspire. If I may be so bold... my impression is that MR. F and his design team probably predominatly count on technology and the subsequent "keeping to the plans" that loses the op for the magic to happen.  Doak's principle has a senior personell there for every green and bunker that is being built. He even goes so far as to not even provide plans to the principles for these greens knowing that each green will have a chance to be magical if constructed by feel and not by the book.
just mho :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #32 on: December 15, 2001, 07:23:15 PM »
I have to make this quick as I'm late for a Christmas party, but, for those of you that haven't played Pelican, try to guess the route for both courses.

Mike Cirba,
I'll answer the Fream post later tonight.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Jackson

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #33 on: December 17, 2001, 03:37:23 PM »
Mr. Nacarrato

I guess the first thing to address would be the fact that Pelican Hill, as all Fazio courses, was not designed at a desk but very much designed in the field.  Ask any contractor, Wadsworth, Landscapes Unlimited, or Foremost to name a few, and they can attest to Fazio's aversion to 'building it to plan'.  A_Clay_Man, sorry bro, but it is fact.  On many Fazio designs the plans become scratch paper after about 2 weeks.  They can do this because they have designers in the field every week, and some on site every day throughout construction.  They too design every green complex and bunker in the field and do not arm chair it or mail it in as has been proposed on this site.  I have many friends in the construction business and they respect how much time the Fazio guys spend in the field.

Secondly, you really do not know how difficult it is to build golf courses in Southern California with respect to permitting and environmental compliance.  Again, it is a nice out to blame the architects for giving in - but it is far from the case and simply untrue.

Thirdly, Lehigh CC and Ojai Valley Inn may be tremendous examples of golf situated on severe ground, but how does this relate to Pelican?  Again, I challenge you to find enough ground with natural grades not exceeding those desirable for golf and not in drainages as there will be limited impact allowed.  I simply disagree that it can be found and I stand firmly in belief that golf is in the only place it could have went, excepting small changes.  With respect to Royal Palms, it was a victim of the depression you say, which means it was constructed pre-1929.  Again I think the correlation is faulty concerning today's restrictions.  I think that many courses built during this period can offer much to the study of architecture, but not much to the realities of constructing a golf course today.  Tommy, it just doesn't apply.

About the greens, I guess I will have to show you on the course.  Many greens are severely contoured and to say they are approximations of table top ovals and kidneys simply is false - by anyone's definition.

About the strategic interest of Pelican, I will say that for many people strategy is defined by the ability (or lack of, truly) of their game.  I find there to be many strategies of playing Pelican with relation to sand as you asked:

1 North:  Any lay-up on the par five to the left half of the fairway, becomes blocked by two large bunkers which hide and protect the left rear of the green.

3 North:  The pinching of the fairway bunkers left and right force me to hit 1 iron off the tee to avoid them.

7 North:  The small bunker in the center of the fairway, if challenged and carried provides a speed slot which takes balls further up the hole and left.  Shots safely played away to the right carry further right and leave a longer second.

8 North:  The pot bunker situated in the center of the fairway at the second dogleg dictates many ways to play the second shot.  A poor drive must be layed up to avoid it and a well struck drive must clear it to attempt the green.

13 North:  Again, pinching bunkers take driver out of my hand forcing an iron.

15 North:  The large bunker guarding the inside of the dogleg (best line of play) nearly capes the hole and if carried rewards tremendously - if not it penalizes stiffly.

But again, I feel strategy varies widely with the golfer.

What can I say?  I just disagree with your asessment.









« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

network

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #34 on: December 17, 2001, 03:44:17 PM »
Mr.Fazio builds beatiful courses but there is a sameness to his designs.  Almost, like his shapers know that he wants a # 7 bunker here and a # 5 bunker there.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #35 on: December 17, 2001, 04:52:28 PM »
Mr. Jacksson,
Just to let you know, the construction of Pelican Hill was handled by Environmental Golf of Calabasas, California.

About two yeas ago, I talked pretty in depth about Pelican with one of the construction foreman--who shall remain nameless since he still works for that company and oneof our particapants has just recently finished working with him at another nearby Environmental Golf construction project. He was proud of Pelican and how it truned out, and you could never have me saying anything against the Fazio teams verve on how to construct a golf course. However, when I asked him about a few key points as far as design, he said, "what does it matter, with that view!"

He was right, but in an architectural standpoint, he knew I was asking some pretty inquizative questions.

there are a few of you that don't realize that I do hope very much that Fazio and company do construct something GREAT. It isn't as personal as many of you think. However, until he does this, his California body of work, including Riviera CC which ironically was Tom Marzloff overseeing,*** is pathetic when compared to the press he gets and receives with all respect. I think it is a commercial sell-out; and the loser in all of it is the game as well as the art because the courses are not only expensive, but lacking strategic merit, regardless of eco concerns. He didn't have those concerns at The Quarry At La Quinta, where they built the course wherever they wanted. The result was 14 lackluster holes and 4 very good ones.

***Sean Berry, In relation to one of your posts, if you are reading this.......If the one specific office in Hendersonville is so much better then the others, how come Tom Fazio doesn't do something about that? After all, his good name is on that "Product" isn't it?

Mr. Jackson, I urge you to look at the aerials of Ocean-South course routing and see if you actually, really, positively think that a better golf-oriented routing couldn't have been presented. I think you will find out that beyond all of the beautiful things Pelican Hills stands for, lies a big "what-could-have-been."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #36 on: December 17, 2001, 05:10:52 PM »
Tommy:

I found your comments regarding The Quarry at La Quinta
very interesting. ;)

Which, in your view, are the 4 very good holes there?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #37 on: December 17, 2001, 05:31:00 PM »
Paul,
It's probably more then obvious for those who have been there, but none the less, 12, 13, 14 & 15.

From my perspective, the 12th is very similar to Apache Stronghold's 12th, although I like the latter hole better. I thought they did an excellent job of cutting the tee into the backside of the hill on the 12th at QALQ. In typical Fazio fashion, it allows you to see all of the hole where AS's has you trying to guess the deception of where the creekbed cuts into the hole, which of course I favor. Their both good golf holes.

While there is a ton of earth movement on #13, it is a pretty good short hole, especially if the wind is cutting across the canyon, from which I understand that it does get pretty drafty back there. The build-up of all of that earth resulted in having to create a drainage swale that seperates the 13th & 15th holes and the club members marvel at the engineering. Supposedly if it rains, one risks being lost in a flash flood back there!

The 14th is the best Fazio par 3 I have played to date and features a VERY good green complex.

15th is a hole similar to many three-shooters i have played by Fazio, but it still is a pretty good hole, make that better then the ones I have played that were similar to it.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #38 on: December 17, 2001, 07:25:20 PM »
Tommy:

Interesting observations on The Quarry.

It used to appear on Golf Digest's Top 100 list.  My guess
is you wouldn't consider it worthy.  Correct? :-/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #39 on: December 17, 2001, 10:37:11 PM »
Paul,
At the risk of offending Fazio fans that have invaded this website, I didn't care for the course other then the holes mentioned above.

In our Golfweek ratings, The Quarry At La Quinta was last hanging on for dear life at #99, but justifiably fell off for the year 2000. How it remained there that long is beyond me. Is it worst then a lot of the other courses on our esteemed list? Absolutely not, but it was lacking severely in the architecture department and I felt akin to being at Disneyland the entire round. Especially at holes #2, 8, 10, 16 & 17 which wreek of manufactrured boulders and lakes.

I can't find the disk of my pictures right now, but if I do, I will post some.

The bottom line for me is.......

-Overbuilt
-Over-engineered
-Overdone
-Paquito strategy

Which all leads to a forced experience.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Jackson

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #40 on: December 18, 2001, 08:02:54 AM »
Tommy

Call me Rommel, but to further your information, Environmental Golf was the golf course contractor on the South Course but their contract consisted mostly of cart path, landscaping, and sodding.  The course features were shaped and constructed by Wadsworth SW of Buckeye, AZ.  On the North Course Environmental was not the golf contractor, only landscaping.  The course was built by Jim Flint and Sons of Citrus Heights, CA.

I am sorry that Environmental's construction foreman had such a limited view of the project, I assure you others don't.

The only re-routing I would gather from the aerial is that golf should have went south of the 11th on the South Course (now Crystal Cove State Park).  The only problem is that The Irvine Co. had to give that land to the state in order to build Pelican.  How's that for a land grab?  So I still remain firm in my stance.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

JakaB

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #41 on: December 18, 2001, 08:51:05 AM »
Mr. Jackson,

Just the fact that you choose to hit 1 iron off of the tee removes you from seeing strategy in the same way as the Fazio Bashers.  Please try to develop a restricted turn flat swing with a 210 yd driver carry and you will understand what makes a course classic.  "We" all know its not how you play that matters its how you think you play...or is it how you think when you play...or is it how fat your ass looks in an ariel photograph when you play that matters so after the reformation future architectural freaks don't mistake you for a principals nose.

And for you that think you are not Fazio Bashers how do you keep quiet about Quail Crossing...That course is a real mistake in a real world...its not Tom Doaks fault anymore than Pelican Hill is Fazios fault...if everything met its potential nothing would be great...everything would be mediocre...and Christy Brinkley would still be married to an ugly little man who can play a little piano instead of running off with a lying scum developer.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #42 on: December 18, 2001, 11:34:35 AM »
It's so good to hear from you again, Barny, er, Jaka.  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Gib_Papazian

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #43 on: December 18, 2001, 12:30:15 PM »
I think it is safe to state that JakaB is not Barnyf. That post lacked the clarity of purpose and rapier wit of John . . . . er, Barny.

Perhaps Johnny Thunders has reemerged from a cave in Afghanistan with a new identity.

Now JakaB,
Help me with this, because I'm confused and perhaps you can help me understand something.

Most importantly, what EXACTLY were you trying to accomplish by posting such a hurtful, inflammatory, vulgar, nasty, insulting spew of fecal poison at my friend Tommy?

Who do you think you are? It looks to me like we have another cowardly pig with a phony name who got sidetracked on the way to a teenage chat room.

You managed to insult Tommy, his golf swing, Christie Brinkley, Billy Joel, some developer I've never heard of and Tom Doak in a single post. Why, that must be a GCA record!

That said, I'll tell you what Mr. Big Shot: I have a constricted backswing and a tee ball that flies around 210 yards. You want to play me? I'll bet not . . . . even at Pelican Hill.

The sad truth is that the Emperor is one of the gentlest, sweetest people I know on the planet, and I guarantee you that you would become fast friends if you ever sat down with him for 10 minutes and discussed architecture over a beer.

But you won't, because it is easier to hide like a jackal in the weeds waiting to shoot somebody in the back than be a man and discuss things like a human being.

By the way, if you read my previous posts, you will see I am not a Fazio basher.

You disgust me.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #44 on: December 18, 2001, 12:49:57 PM »
Gib,
    The reason I figured it was Barny is that JakaB's e-mail address is the same as Barny's:  spooon@usa.net .  Also, Barny's just about the only one who manages to incorporate famous musicians in his posts.  Remember Barry Manilow?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #45 on: December 18, 2001, 12:51:05 PM »

Gib,
        JakaB has the same e-mail address as BarneyF.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2001, 01:15:00 PM »
Tommy,

I must protest one comment from your recent post, specifically the line about "Fazio fans invading this site".

At its best, Golfclubatlas.com should be a place where people who love golf architecture come to discuss their passion.  I'm not worried about the architectural preferences of discussion group participants.  Rather, I just hope they will be articulate, share information where my knowledge is lacking and avoid personal stuff that usually only serves to poison the discussion.

I may prefer the classic era stuff and modern architects that appreciate such work, but Fazio fans are not "invaders".  They are just folks with different taste than you and I may have.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Tim Weiman

JakaB

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2001, 02:34:13 PM »
Gib,

I is BarnyF but he refuses to register so I had to use my real name...I have never seen Tommys swing so I had no idea it was flat but I did have a clue it was restricted.

My comment about the swing and the ability to carry the ball was with respect to my belief that good design has nothing to do with people with double digit handicaps...I really don't care if they play or if they enjoy it when they do...I really don't care if people enjoy the same food, sex or movies that I do...as I participate in most activities alone anyway.   I am interested in people in the golf buisness making a legitimate living as there are plenty of locals outside of my existence they can practice their trade of creating courses that don't discourage poor players.   My wife is eagerly waiting on my arival home as you might imagine so I don't have time to properly finish my diatribe....but considering my only goal of next year is to play you straight up in a game with Tommy and some other Cali guy I thought you deserved a reply.

JakaB
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Kevin_Reilly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #48 on: December 18, 2001, 03:27:18 PM »
Ahhh, J aka B.  John also known as...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"GOLF COURSES SHOULD BE ENJOYED RATHER THAN RATED" - Tom Watson

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: The Woes or Triumphs of Pelican Hill
« Reply #49 on: December 18, 2001, 07:50:11 PM »
Tim,
My Fazio comment was meant to be as a joke. I'm sorry it didn't come out that way.

It was actually a play off of the line, "Rock stars have kidnapped my son." from Frances McDormand's character in Almost Famous, which happened to be on at the same time as I was typing that.

Barney,
Rest assured, I know how fat my ass is as well as how flat my swing is. I don't think of myself as a good golfer nor even an adequate one. However, where and how is any of this talk of Pelican Hill about me, my ass or my golf swing?

It does have a lot to do with my opinion. I'm sorry it differs from yours. So what do you like about Pelican Hill?

Mr. Jackson, thanks for the information, which I have no problem from learning from you. I was in fact told by this fellow from Environmental that he had built both courses.
Judging from your information, I would only assume that you know much more.

I have not a problem with that at all.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »