Indirect GCA.com reference by Whitten in GD

[Scott_Burroughs]

In this week's "Course Critic" article on GD online by Ron Whitten, his first paragraph refers (not by name) to the thread on GCA.com last week titled: "Should course critics be held to a similar standard?" (link: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=5852)
 in which he posted his thoughts on the matter.

The article opens up by saying: "I logged onto a chat room this week, because the topic was about golf course critics: Is it fair that critics make instant judgments on course designs that architects (and many, many others) spend months, even years, creating? Is it fair that instant judgments are sometimes done without even playing the course?"

The first 2 1/2 paragraphs refer to this thread and topic (article here:
http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/valencia.html )

I just didn't realize that we had become a "Chat room".    

EDIT: I can't get the full URL above to work right for some reason.

[Doug Wright]

Scott,

In some ways it's good he didn't refer to GCA by name. What would the unwashed GD masses make of Patrick Mucci and TE Paul!  

All The Best,

[Scott_Burroughs]

Since I can't get the link to work, here's the first several paragraphs:

"Course Critic

Tournament Players Club at Valencia, Valencia, Calif.

 
I logged onto a chat room this week, because the topic was about golf course critics: Is it fair that critics make instant judgments on course designs that architects (and many, many others) spend months, even years, creating? Is it fair that instant judgments are sometimes done without even playing the course?

We critics mostly defended our actions, arguing that our experience and expertise allow us to arrive at rapid-though-reasoned opinions, and that the nature of the beast doesn't give us the luxury of playing a dozen rounds on any given course before writing about it. (Unless you're David Owen writing about Augusta National. He managed to tear himself away from his detailed research for his wonderful book to play the course about 75 times. Or 750 times, I forget which.)

The topic posed a valid question that made me reassess my motis operandi. Yes, I sometimes pass judgment on a course without having playing it. Augusta National is a case in point. The new TPC at Valencia is another. I visited the newest link in the TPC network, located in the I-5 corridor north of the San Fernando Valley of greater Los Angeles, early one morning in August. I toured the course with project manager-turned-course superintendent Rich Brogan, then photographed most of its holes. I did not play it because I had a plane to catch. Which I know is a lousy excuse. There's always another plane.

Should I wait to write about it until I get back to play it? No, because I don't know when I'll next be back in California. Besides, by then everyone else will have written about it, and my review would be old news. So I pass judgment on TPC at Valencia (a course that was 18 years in the making) with the caveat to readers that my opinion is based on an examination of its design, but without benefit of a single round on the course."

or find it at the top of this page:  http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/

[Doug Wright]

Scott,

Most interesting--maybe this has been covered on the other thread in Q, which I haven't read, but I'd think that someone who's been doing this for  a living could get a decent idea about a course by touring vs playing but not via a whirlwind non-stop cart ride. I spent a good part of a day last week walking a new, as yet unopened, course hereabouts with the architect and came away with a decent idea about the course. However, that was a full 4-hour walking tour with the designer who explained his thinking in detail. Someone who does this regularly sure could do this in less time and less formally I'd think.

What say you Tom Doak? You did this a lot in crafting The Confidential Guide.

[Jeff_Brauer]

For some reason, I like the review he did last week a lot better.  From that one, I say Ron is one guy who knows what he is talking about!

I saw that and thought about bringing it up.  Of course, the related question for all the raters for the various magazines, is:

Do the best new and top course lists get put together the same way, and should we care?  I think most raters rate most courses based on one playing, or tour.

BTW, I know many architects who feel they can evaluate a course better when not playing.  After all, can't your crappy day on the best course possibly affect your opinon?  And whose to say your evaluation of how the course plays from the far right rough, for instance, is better than a slow, considered walk (or ride) down the center of the fairway?  Perhaps taking a few shots or putts to confirm a theory?