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.


Matt_Ward

Re: Public Course Rankings
« Reply #25 on: April 21, 2009, 04:03:56 PM »
Sean:

Where did I give such courses (mountain variety) a free pass ?

Read what I wrote my good man -- I did say this -- if cart rides become the ESSENCE of the time spent at such places than I have a major problem with them. Got it now.

Sean, we are much closer in our overall take then you might realize. I agree w Doak that often times if people can agree close to 85% of the time -- chalk up the rest as a healthy difference in opinion.

In regards to a top 100 listing in the USA -- I'm in the process in finalizing my thoughts. Likely I will tie it to a fee structure in which those courses selected cannot be above a certain amount so that what you said previously about such matters can be highlighted for an apples to apples effect.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Public Course Rankings
« Reply #26 on: April 21, 2009, 06:04:25 PM »
Sean:

Where did I give such courses (mountain variety) a free pass ?

Read what I wrote my good man -- I did say this -- if cart rides become the ESSENCE of the time spent at such places than I have a major problem with them. Got it now.

Sean, we are much closer in our overall take then you might realize. I agree w Doak that often times if people can agree close to 85% of the time -- chalk up the rest as a healthy difference in opinion.

In regards to a top 100 listing in the USA -- I'm in the process in finalizing my thoughts. Likely I will tie it to a fee structure in which those courses selected cannot be above a certain amount so that what you said previously about such matters can be highlighted for an apples to apples effect.

Matt

No wonder you love goat tracks.  To me, the essence of something you do is the reason you do it.  I find it hard to believe that folks pay money just to drive a cart around.  Don't be daft man, of course they pay to play so under your definition there is no such thing as a course whos essence is riding. 

Just to make it VERY clear.  To me, walking is a critical part of a routing which is a critical aspect of the quality of a course.  If the course is a lousy walk, for whatever reason, then the routing is compromised and thus the quality of the golf is compromised.  I am not saying that what to me amounts to separate holes linked together by paths can't overcome this major hurdle in a routing, but it is very difficult to do so.  I have yet to see a course pull it off, but then I don't seek to play cart golf.  You obviously are more open minded than myself when it comes to evaluating cart golf and that is what I mean when we seek different things in architecture. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Matt_Ward

Re: Public Course Rankings
« Reply #27 on: April 21, 2009, 07:28:58 PM »
Sean:

Help me out here -- OK.

Where do you get off saying, "you love goat tracks." Let me try to help your understanding of what I wrote -- I have no issue with courses that mandate cart usage. I'd like to have an option to walk if possible but I only object to carts when the ESSENCE / TOTALITY of the experience is thrwarted by more emphasis on the cart than what's provided through the architecture.

In regards to being "daft" -- how bout you become less dogmatic on slinging forward the same tired pablum of the one true way to really embrace quality golf architecture. I value walking a great bit -- much of my metro area golf has been played at BB where walking is mandated as a condition of play.

It's amusing how you set the law down with some concrete / never bending dictum about how courses are routed and how they should be assessed. If that's how you view such courses in your preferred way of thinking then you are clearly throwing under the bus a full range of very fine and at times excellent layouts where carts are part of the picture.

You're right -- if I'm "more open minded" then you must decide what word applies to you -- does the word rigid apply?

I marvel at how people feel that the economics of golf has no bearing on how courses are developed, planned and ultimately routed. In the days of yesteryear -- owners had parcels of land that were far eaiser to create as golf courses -- less environmental issues (if any at all) and no need to provide a related real estate element which ultimately drove the $$ for the golf to be a worthwhile addition.

When you say you "have yet to a see a course pull it off" -- then your portfolio is rather limited and your eyes have really not been open that much -- if at all. It does happen. However, you are entitled to believe what you believe no matter how you arrive at your conclusions.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back