Re: Seminole Architectural Redux

[Jay Flemma]

The reason why I haven't posted more so far is that besides having four stories to write, (one for each course I played, and I have to do those first), I'm spending some pleasant hours with my best friend in the world, his lovely wife, and their three year old son.  Moreover, with this storm, getting back north is the priority, not posting to websites. I just put the pictures up to my on-line locker, but it will take time to analyze them and compile thoughts. 

[John Mayhugh]

What difference does it make? I am not as knowledgeable as most here and I find his post interesting. Your post is exactly the kind I refer to above. To me it comes off as snobbish and condescending.

My comment had nothing to do with your knowledge.  If you can for a moment, set aside personalities and cliques and perceived GCA elitism and all that stuff. 

While criticizing the way others responded to Jay's thread, you characterized Jay's comments as "detailed" and "to a high standard."  This was pretty far away from my own view, and seemingly also a disconnect with other posters. Rather than insulting you, I asked if you could clarify.  It's perfectly fine that you find them interesting, but why laud that content as an example of "a high standard?"

Jay's comments on Seminole are on topic, but far from detailed.  I'm glad to see that he intends to post more later. 

At the risk of being perceived as snobbish and condescending, I offer a suggestion: you might try giving someone you have never interacted with the benefit of the doubt before you take things so personally.   

[JC Jones]

Mike - you seem like a very decent fellow, but I think you're missing something here, i.e. what the hell is the point of golf course architecture if not to encourage feelings of snobbishness and condescension! I mean, where's the fun in discussing a bump in the grass or a hole in the ground if Coore & Crenshaw weren't the ones who found them? And what's the point in bogeying a short Par 4 if Tom D didn't design it, and if you didn't have to pay $6000 to play it? You see what I mean? And then, even if you did find a C&C bump or an easy (but far flung) Tom D gem, it would only feel truly special if most of the others on this board hadn't. Frankly, I'm surprised that I have to explain this all to you, i.e. the very basis and foundation of what gca is all about. (Are you sure that Ran let you in here? You didn't get here under an assumed name, did you?) Good god, man -- next you'll be telling me that you enjoy playing public courses that no one has ever heard of!!

Peter

You think I'd join this crummy snobitorium?  Why this whole place sucks!  The only reason I'm here is maybe I'll buy it!

[Mac Plumart]

John...

You are right.  Those thoughts weren't detailed and/or very deep regarding analysis...but sometime that can get the ball rolling in terms of discussion.  So, maybe that's a start.

I've had the good fortune to play Seminole 3 times.  I think it is a course that you need to play more than once to come to grips with it, at least I did.

From my first play, I could easily see the routing genius...highlighted by the use of the big dune.  You go up and down the dune and sometimes you are on the side of it.  It makes for interesting golf.  Also, the way the holes line up...Ross seemed to maximize the impact that wind would have on play and shots.  And with a seaside course...you know wind is a big deal.

I could also see, from my first play, the diabolical nature of the bunkering.  I thought then, and still do, that your opinion on that aspect of the course depends on your skill level.   Perhaps a scratch player might think the bunkering is brilliant...while a high handicapper might think it is over done.

The way the course in maintained is fast and firm...multiple plays confirms that.  Tee to green...that is fun!  Holding those greens, in wind, is an issue.  Add in bunkers...Ugh!  Especially for the high handicapper.

Now, over multiple plays I think you can pick up on ways to handle those greens...angle of attack becomes vitally important.  Knowing your game and what you can pull off, also becomes vital.

Now, these are not amazingly detailed comments...but perhaps it can bring on more discussion of the course and its design.

I personally think that playing Seminole is an important part of an architectural education.  I really do think the routing and use of angles is genius and a must see.  If you only get one play, I think pre-round studying is important.  If you get more than one play, over time, you can learn as you go.  It can become and eye opener.

[Mike Schott]

What difference does it make? I am not as knowledgeable as most here and I find his post interesting. Your post is exactly the kind I refer to above. To me it comes off as snobbish and condescending.

My comment had nothing to do with your knowledge.  If you can for a moment, set aside personalities and cliques and perceived GCA elitism and all that stuff. 

While criticizing the way others responded to Jay's thread, you characterized Jay's comments as "detailed" and "to a high standard."  This was pretty far away from my own view, and seemingly also a disconnect with other posters. Rather than insulting you, I asked if you could clarify.  It's perfectly fine that you find them interesting, but why laud that content as an example of "a high standard?"

Jay's comments on Seminole are on topic, but far from detailed.  I'm glad to see that he intends to post more later. 

At the risk of being perceived as snobbish and condescending, I offer a suggestion: you might try giving someone you have never interacted with the benefit of the doubt before you take things so personally.   

I'm not taking it personally John. I think it's about a certain level of knowledge here that tends to exclude those with less experience. The point is not if Jay's review is world class nor if he's 100% correct. The fact that he obviously took the time and effort to make this post should be lauded not ridiculed. I dislike the attitude that says this is not good enough. I'm sure there are far more viewers of this site than members. Most of these don't have access to clubs like Seminole. CPC, Sand Hills and the like. I'm fortunate to be a member but will likely never have access to these courses and am thrilled to see pictures and read reviews like what Jay has posted. To me, these courses are the forbidden fruit of the public access golfer so any glimpse is precious. And I happen to think the addition of one more discussion of Seminole to be valuable.

[Steve Lapper]

Mike,

   You mistake lauding Jay's post for having any altruistic motive. It doesn't, and instead he's only interested in trolling here for material that others can provide for him to "para" quote along with his self-aggrandizement and pseudo-journalistic promotion.

  I laude you for wanting to experience and learn about the "forbidden fruit" great courses like Seminole, et.al. That is what Ran hoped the DG would inspire. Should you take the time to diligently search the archives here, you'll find multiple reviews, discussions and meaningful dissections of Seminole and it's illustrious history. In fact, the majority of such searches will yield highly qualatative substance from quite a few more knowledgeable folks who've had the good fortune to play there multiple times. BTW...No other top 20 US course is likely as subtle and nuanced as Seminole and having played there a number of times, none as requiring of subsequent plays to reveal most of itself.

  Value at GCA.com is found in many places. Most of us have formed relationships that started from scratch and evolved into long-lasting bonds. Many, like yourself, came to learn, and will eventually help pass the knowledge along. Unfortunately, Jay Flemma and his egregiously self-promotional charlatan-like behavior isn't deserved of the kind of respect doled out on this site. Too many incidents of his threats and harassment disqualify him.

 I look forward to your observations and participation, but suggest you look elsewhere here on GCA.com for a knowledgable discussion of Seminole, Streamsong, Old Memorial and their respective merits.

[DMoriarty]

Jay's initial post wasn't about Seminole.  It was about how he was going to get to play Seminole.  Sure, he gussied it up with a few superficial comments and questions, but Jay has been around and he either knows the answers to those questions or could easily access the answers without a thread about how he was going to get to play Seminole.

Of course now that he has been called out, Jay and others will try to twist this into a golf architecture thread. Jay has already started by changing the title away from the "Prop Bet" nonsense, promising some future substantive discussion, and even going so far as to go back and edit his initial post. (This last one  speaks volumes as to the nature of his original intent.)  And surely the thread will end up with a thin veneer of discussion on architecture.  But that doesn't change what this thread is.  A belt notching thread.  And as for belt nothing threads, I tend to agree with Scott Warren: "IMO these are the worst kind of threads and a cancer on GCA - insincere bragfests dressed up as attempts to explore a course's qualities."

It comes down to how we view the purpose of the website and discussion group. Is it about frank and in-depth discussion of golf course architecture?  Or is it just an forum to give us a chance to publicly gush about which courses we get to play?


____________________________________________________________

RJ, Is it really "bullying" to point out that in my opinion this is an insipid belt notching thread?  I don't think so.

[Jay Flemma]

Mike,

   You mistake lauding Jay's post for having any altruistic motive. It doesn't, and instead he's only interested in trolling here for material that others can provide for him to "para" quote along with his self-aggrandizement and pseudo-journalistic promotion.

  I laude you for wanting to experience and learn about the "forbidden fruit" great courses like Seminole, et.al. That is what Ran hoped the DG would inspire. Should you take the time to diligently search the archives here, you'll find multiple reviews, discussions and meaningful dissections of Seminole and it's illustrious history. In fact, the majority of such searches will yield highly qualatative substance from quite a few more knowledgeable folks who've had the good fortune to play there multiple times. BTW...No other top 20 US course is likely as subtle and nuanced as Seminole and having played there a number of times, none as requiring of subsequent plays to reveal most of itself.

  Value at GCA.com is found in many places. Most of us have formed relationships that started from scratch and evolved into long-lasting bonds. Many, like yourself, came to learn, and will eventually help pass the knowledge along. Unfortunately, Jay Flemma and his egregiously self-promotional charlatan-like behavior isn't deserved of the kind of respect doled out on this site. Too many incidents of his threats and harassment disqualify him.

 I look forward to your observations and participation, but suggest you look elsewhere here on GCA.com for a knowledgable discussion of Seminole, Streamsong, Old Memorial and their respective merits.

Translation:  "Because we hate him, we will suppress his discussion of architecture and try to make his time here as miserable as possible.  Email me so I can bad mouth him to you some more behind his back."  

[Mike Schott]

Mike,

   You mistake lauding Jay's post for having any altruistic motive. It doesn't, and instead he's only interested in trolling here for material that others can provide for him to "para" quote along with his self-aggrandizement and pseudo-journalistic promotion.

  I laude you for wanting to experience and learn about the "forbidden fruit" great courses like Seminole, et.al. That is what Ran hoped the DG would inspire. Should you take the time to diligently search the archives here, you'll find multiple reviews, discussions and meaningful dissections of Seminole and it's illustrious history. In fact, the majority of such searches will yield highly qualatative substance from quite a few more knowledgeable folks who've had the good fortune to play there multiple times. BTW...No other top 20 US course is likely as subtle and nuanced as Seminole and having played there a number of times, none as requiring of subsequent plays to reveal most of itself.

  Value at GCA.com is found in many places. Most of us have formed relationships that started from scratch and evolved into long-lasting bonds. Many, like yourself, came to learn, and will eventually help pass the knowledge along. Unfortunately, Jay Flemma and his egregiously self-promotional charlatan-like behavior isn't deserved of the kind of respect doled out on this site. Too many incidents of his threats and harassment disqualify him.

 I look forward to your observations and participation, but suggest you look elsewhere here on GCA.com for a knowledgable discussion of Seminole, Streamsong, Old Memorial and their respective merits.

That may or may not be the case. Frankly I don't care and don't want to involve myself in any male ego stroking on this site. I am not here to  take sides, but learn about architecture and the great courses. I have no beef with you, Jay or anyone here.

[David_Elvins]

I am not here to  take sides, but learn about architecture and the great courses. I have no beef with you, Jay or anyone here.

Give it another year...

[Scott Warren]

Translation:  "Because we hate him, we will suppress his discussion of architecture and try to make his time here as miserable as possible.  Email me so I can bad mouth him to you some more behind his back." 

Jay,

If you think people are targeting your posts for criticism, the first question to ask yourself is "why?".

Every time any of us post on GCA, that post will be read through the filter of the reputation we have created for ourselves through our previous posts here and our other interactions with DG members (and for those who work in the industry, their design/maintenance/building/writing).

Our previous contributions and interactions create a context for all our posts. Knowing a little about the person submitting an opinion or thought adds important colour and context (for example, if an unknown-to-me poster lauds a course and recommends I see it, that might mean less to me than if John Lyon or Mark Pearce or John Mayhugh says the same thing, because I know what they like and what else they have seen). If that weren't so, all posts could be anonymous and it wouldn't matter.

All of our reputations - good and bad - are what we have cultivated through our previous behaviour on this site. The good news is that if you want your reputation on GCA to change, you're singularly positioned to change it. And the same is true for all of us.