[RJ_Daley]

I don't know to whom or why JK posts an admonishment to " You who believe that you are intellectuals in golf remind me...", as if to minimize some people's deep curiosity and studious approach to the subject of GCA.  I just watched the replay of the Feherty interview with Ben Crenshaw and considered what Ben had to say about his lifelong pursuit of the game and subject of golf history and architecture and his deep desire to pass his knowledge on (as Harvey passed on wisdom).  His expressions and descriptions regarding his understandings of the history, and the philosophy behind playing the game and his GCA work clearly signify to me that in all things golf, he is that intellectual.  I don't see anyone here on GCA.com posting and putting themselves up as an intellectual about golf per se.  Yet, just reading Lyne's post tells me there are people that humbly desire to reach deeper understanding and share it.  While I'm not necessarily seeing anyone self proclaiming being a golf intellectual on GCA, I think if we are long time readers and participants, we know posters that dabble on the intellectual side of golf, and GCA and we owe them the respect they deserve for all the time they take to research, learn and share their insights.  

[Steve Lang]

 

What factors/events/influences/circumstances do you think led most of us to be

a) golfers,

Parents.  My mom took me out to play when I was 9, let me use her clubs (2W, 7I, & P) and we lived adjacent to a vintage 1899 muni-course where the pro let kids play for 50 cents before 10 AM… we called it the Country Club in grade school, a name that stuck and still have an annual reunion / memorial tourney there every summer with the kids who grew up on all four sides +.    When I started lugging her bag to play, I got my first set of MacGregors (3-5-7-9-P-D-3W) tartan bag included..

b) who have an interest in the architecture of the courses we play and

I don’t know about most, but there was a Sports Illustrated article a long time ago, I think by Dan Jenkins, that described himself and friends playing street golf in Dallas/Fort Worth area in north TX; my best friend and I created something similar for evening sojourns to the nearby muni and back home by dark.  We used whiffle balls while in the neighborhood, and changed to real ones at the school yard.

Interest in gca post-college, when $ weren’t prime issue and wanting to be able to score better in friendly competition.

c) are drawn to finding and playing examples of quality architecture, far and wide and

There were some nice local country club courses that we’d get one or two chances a season to play at while growing up..  always felt like Eddie Haskel saying yes sir, no sir, thank you sir…

Hey, if I’m trailing spouse on business trip to UK, definitely planned to take in what ever could be worked out.. TOC & Ganton in mild spetember weather.. priceless!

d) who then want to dig deeper into how/why we have experienced the architecture the way we did and

Tricks of the visual/physical trade.. environmental scientist golfer seeking truth and knowledge

e) who search back into the history and the philosophies past and present of golf architecture in order to contextualize this experience?

   Gca archives and coffee table books..  but I’d rather play and experience than read about it..

[Peter Pallotta]

RJ - I don't really understand it either. I guess I didn't explain myself well or folks might be assuming too much. When someone like Sean writes that he doesn't personally spend much time on d and e, I find it surprising, since I've probably learned more about Colt and his designs and his style/approach from Sean than I have anyone else; and I know for sure that folks like you and JK and Rich have probably forgotten more about what really makes architecture 'tick' than I'll ever now. I just thought, and still think, that many of us here have spent a lot of time 'thinking' about architecture in one way or another, and I wanted to know why folks thought that was, individually speaking/for themselves. (It's certainly a nice thing to think about - gentle and peaceful like and harmless, and, the way Lyne expresses it, quite lovely too).

Peter

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't know to whom or why JK posts an admonishment to " You who believe that you are intellectuals in golf remind me...", as if to minimize some people's deep curiosity and studious approach to the subject of GCA.  I just watched the replay of the Feherty interview with Ben Crenshaw and considered what Ben had to say about his lifelong pursuit of the game and subject of golf history and architecture and his deep desire to pass his knowledge on (as Harvey passed on wisdom).  His expressions and descriptions regarding his understandings of the history, and the philosophy behind playing the game and his GCA work clearly signify to me that in all things golf, he is that intellectual.  I don't see anyone here on GCA.com posting and putting themselves up as an intellectual about golf per se.  Yet, just reading Lyne's post tells me there are people that humbly desire to reach deeper understanding and share it.  While I'm not necessarily seeing anyone self proclaiming being a golf intellectual on GCA, I think if we are long time readers and participants, we know posters that dabble on the intellectual side of golf, and GCA and we owe them the respect they deserve for all the time they take to research, learn and share their insights.  

Dick,

I agree that there are a number of respected researchers and intellectuals of the game on this site.  Sorry but for every Joe Bausch there are 99 John Kavanaugh's, not that there is anything wrong with that. I've never met a serious golfer in my life that doesn't like to play great courses. We just have the time and resource to talk about it. Architecture is the game, nothing more or less.

[Dan Kelly]

Since I am the one who first used the word intellectual, I should clarify that Ieant it in no way pejoratively.

You are a golf intellectual, Peter, which explains why you go all the way to (e).

More power to you!

[Matthew Lloyd]

This is an interesting series of questions....

my answers in turn:

(a) why did i become a golfer?  golf is an activity that i could do with my dad; i learned to play between the hours of 7-9pm during the summer playing with my dad, who taught me how to play.  i've never had the time or resources to play a lot of golf, but i've played consistently since the 4th or 5th grade. it's just become a hobby that is a consistent part of my life.  i'm decent enough to enjoy the game a lot but not good enough to ever get frustrated by not getting better.  

(b) interest in golf architecture -- even as a kid, this was my primary interest, more so than actually playing.  i would look forward to the major championships more to see the courses on tv than the actual golf.  i'm a creative person who works in a creative field so i am really drawn to the aesthetic qualities of golf courses, which i consider forms of art (when done correctly). and i think the process of creating a golf course is not dissimilar from that of writing a book, making a movie, etc.

(c) drawn to finding and playing examples of quality architecture -- i don't play enough golf to be satisfied with average courses; if i'm lucky i'll play 20 rounds per year.  so i like to make my golf count.  i generally take 2-3 trips per year where i play 36-54 holes a day for a few days; if I'm going to make that effort it better be on high-level courses.

something i find really appealing about great golf courses is that they will (hopefully) stand the test of time and become permanent fixtures.  if something is going to exist indefinitely you better take the time to make sure it's worth the space it's taking up.  to me, that's part of the beauty of a great golf course.  they take an existing landscape and perfect it.

[RJ_Daley]

Well JK, I'll make it 100, because I know I'm not by my definition stated above, an "intellectual" of golf.  I believe we can agree about Joe Bausch being well into the (e) category.  It probably isn't a good idea to have all of us go through a list of names of who we personally feel are in the golf intellectual society from our GCA.com ranks, however.  

I like to think I have flirted with aspects of (e) and have a pretty decent golf architecture and turf science library.  But, I'm somewhat lazy or unmotivated most of the time to constantly sort through the archives and books for arcane answers to technical or historically obscure questions.  And, I sure don't fit the bill of teaching others....     But, no doubt about it, our pages here on GCA.com do have enough (e) types to learn a little something every now and then. When you think about it, several of our posters have written some good books, and articles.  I find that often I'll be quite amazed at someone's effort to inform us about a heady matter, and more disappointed that I often don't retain it, just consume it and move on...  

But, it is all in good fun and keeps us from spending too much time at the tavern, I guess....  

[John Kavanaugh]

This is the 5th anniversary.   http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,37474.0.html

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()