[Terry Lavin]

Just more work by our resident agent provocateur. Along with some of the old grudge bile flinging, we've had some good gca discussion about a great architect. One can shoes which content to focus upon. As for me, Boston Golf Club just got put on this year's list.

[David Kelly]

As for me, Boston Golf Club just got put on this year's list.

Boston GC has been open for awhile and has received its share of plaudits.  Have you guys really not been paying attention?

[Terry Lavin]

As for me, Boston Golf Club just got put on this year's list.

Boston GC has been open for awhile and has received its share of plaudits.  Have you guys really not been paying attention?

Oh, I've heard that before, but thanks for the nudge.

[Rich Goodale]

I'll give you two of many reasons why I like Hanse's work.

Thanks to my friend Dan H for hosting me many times at French Creek:

http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/albums/FrenchCreek/

And about four years ago in November I saw Applebrook for my first and only time.  I've culled the herd and re-processed this photo album today (I guess you could say it was 'Arble-ized, grin) and think it is fantastic:

http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/albums/Applebrook/

Thanks for those pics, Joe.  I played Applebrook in a Novemeber that included games at Merion, Gulph Mills, NGLA, Shinnecock, Pacific Dunes, Bandon Dunes and a walkabout the then uncompleted Friar's Head (all for the first time), and it very much held its own in that company.

My least favorite of the 5 Hanse courses I have played was Rustic, and that is a very interesting golf course.

[Norbert P]

Gil Hanse - Why the Love?


 I was going to say "It's the mustache."  but,  alas,  it's gone.

or  maybe because he's a Jet's fan?  No that only evokes pity.

   I liked Rustic a bunch.  An evil man couldna done that layout.

   I've worked with a few that liked working with him and Wagner.  That's enough for me.

   His biz phone is still ringing. That's enough for him.                (?)

[Tim_Weiman]

Quote from: John Kavanaugh on Today at 05:54:33 PM
There isn't an architect in the world that wouldn't love for me to start this exact thread about them. This was simply a chance for Gil's fans to hit a softball out of the park. Sadly a few decided to take a swipe at me instead. Either way, Gil is the winner here.

Really?  Wow!  So every "architect in the world" would have JK diss them publicly with a hard swipe at their work, proclaiming their sole achievement is to "sell mediocre courses" to excellent clients?   

Isn't there a list for posters like this?

J,

I think I agree with John K. He asked a reasonable question and really did provide an opportunity for fans of Gil to articulate why they are fans.

[Garland Bayley]

Quote from: John Kavanaugh on Today at 05:54:33 PM
There isn't an architect in the world that wouldn't love for me to start this exact thread about them. This was simply a chance for Gil's fans to hit a softball out of the park. Sadly a few decided to take a swipe at me instead. Either way, Gil is the winner here.

Really?  Wow!  So every "architect in the world" would have JK diss them publicly with a hard swipe at their work, proclaiming their sole achievement is to "sell mediocre courses" to excellent clients?   

Isn't there a list for posters like this?

J,

I think I agree with John K. He asked a reasonable question and really did provide an opportunity for fans of Gil to articulate why they are fans.

So Tim. Did you see John's original post, or the one he modified it to at a considerably later time to show himself in a better light?

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,

It is clear from quotes of my original post that the only edit I made was to correct the spelling of Gil's name. This is a common courtesy of even the worst reviews.

Please note that I have not participated on the thread that your call back referenced.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

It is clear from quotes of my original post that the only edit I made was to correct the spelling of Gil's name. This is a common courtesy of even the worst reviews.

Please note that I have not participated on the thread that your call back referenced.

My apologies John. I made assumptions that were unwarranted.

[Tim_Weiman]

GJ:

Now that the name spelling issue is cleared up, do you still have an issue with John K's original question?

Put another way, if I started a thread "what makes people think Donald Ross was so good?", would that be a problem? Or would it just be an opportunity to discuss what Ross fans thought was good about his work?

[Greg Chambers]

I'm lucky enough to play two Hanse courses on a regular basis-a watered down Soule Park, and Rustic.....he excels in visual deception...a quality I find to be underrated in the pantheon of excellent architecture.

[Tim_Weiman]

I'm lucky enough to play two Hanse courses on a regular basis-a watered down Soule Park, and Rustic.....he excels in visual deception...a quality I find to be underrated in the pantheon of excellent architecture.

Greg,

Visual deception seems worthy of its own thread.

[DMoriarty]

Put another way, if I started a thread "what makes people think Donald Ross was so good?", would that be a problem? Or would it just be an opportunity to discuss what Ross fans thought was good about his work?

Tim,  you aren't Kavanaugh.  But if you had a history of trolling a working architect going back a dozen years, and if you started off your thread by proclaiming the architect's body of work to be "mediocre" then I think even you would get some blowback, and rightfully so.

That said, productive discussion is still possible and many of the responses have been interesting, which only goes to show that sometimes the most effective fertilizer is of the barnyard variety.

[Gib_Papazian]

It is difficult to believe - given the "good taste" initiative Ran and I discussed on the phone a couple weeks back - that Barny's original post was not deleted immediately. I think we all know Barny has an ugly, repressed darkness within his psyche - hidden from polite company in the light of day, but something he cannot contain once the moonshine rises.  

It is one thing - buried in the context of a thread - to piss in the cheerios of an architect (guilty as charged, re: Rees and Nicklaus) and quite another to come straight off the bat with a j'accuse right in the grill of a respected gentleman. It's a bit like talkin' smack about John Harbottle or booing Matt Kucher coming down the stretch in a tournament.
  
Redanman took me on a tour of Applebrook and I loved what I saw - it had a quality of intimacy, sense of space and proportionality. I was quite sorry we did not play it and think it a better golf course from the standpoint of architectural interest than Aronimink. Does that make Gil better than Donald Ross? Probably not, but in a small sampling, I would rather play his modern offering than that particular recognized classic.

I'm not sure why nobody ever mentions Stonebridge Links on Long Island. I LOVED what Gil and Uncle George did out there - a wonderful, scaled down version of Raynor/C.B. - like if you put Westhampton in the dryer and sort of re-stretched it over a funky piece of ground. Last time I was there, it was obvious the Superintendent didn't have a clue how to properly maintain the golf course to optimize the strategies, but if you look past management stupidity, the architecture is terrific.

The inability to remember more than one hole of Rustic Canyon is either evidence of a brain aneurysm or the onset of Alzheimer's. Look, Rustic Canyon is not a perfect golf course by any means. The routing works very well until you try to figure out where the 13th tee is hiding, in this case down a dusty road along a wire fence - or that awkward, three-tier 15th green that looks like a parody of R.T. Jones Sr.

The putting surface on the par-3 17th is too small relative to the prevailing wind, the firmness of the rest of the golf course and hazard placement. The right side of the short par-4 #12 looks incomplete (just my opinion) and the opening tee shot on #1 is horrible - with an incomprehensibly bad geometry, horrible sight lines (for an opener) and needlessly hidden hazards.

However, aside from those flaws, it easily passes the essential test that I am willing to travel many hours in a car just to play it. How many low-budget, public, neighborhood courses are worth that? There are at least 12 holes out there I think about on the drive down to Moorpark - and it is all I can do after putting out on #18 not to run back to the tee and have another go. That is the ultimate compliment - a course as addicting to me as Donkey Kong or the Grateful Dead.

[Jon Cavalier]

I've become a fan of Hanse over the years. I second Gib's thoughts on Applebrook a highly enjoyable golf course. French Creek really exceeded my expectations and I found it a worthy cousin to the two bordering Doak gems at Stonewall. I loved what he did at Inniscrone and I've been sorry to see some of his more interesting work modified of late. Boston Golf Club is high on my list of courses to play. And I'm likewise a fan of his restoration work, as I noted in my Sleepy Hollow tour.

Granted my sample size is small, but from what I've seen, I'm not sure what's not to like.

[Tim_Weiman]

Put another way, if I started a thread "what makes people think Donald Ross was so good?", would that be a problem? Or would it just be an opportunity to discuss what Ross fans thought was good about his work?

Tim,  you aren't Kavanaugh.  But if you had a history of trolling a working architect going back a dozen years, and if you started off your thread by proclaiming the architect's body of work to be "mediocre" then I think even you would get some blowback, and rightfully so.

That said, productive discussion is still possible and many of the responses have been interesting, which only goes to show that sometimes the most effective fertilizer is of the barnyard variety.

David,

Honestly, I wasn't aware of any specific history of John K's writing and Gil's work. Just thought he had a well known and perhaps provocative style that, after all these years, wouldn't  surprise or upset anyone.

That being my assumption, I thought it only fair to suggest that a general inquiry about what is good about any well known architect's work is quite reasonable and might even produce a good thread.

I guess it didn't turn out too bad.

[DMoriarty]

So because Kavanaugh has been a troll for years, we are just supposed to accept it?

To each his own, I guess. 

[Tim_Weiman]

So because Kavanaugh has been a troll for years, we are just supposed to accept it?

To each his own, I guess. 

David,

I guess the options are to ignore such a thread or respond with the best golf architecture writing possible. Feels like the latter contributes more, but nobody is under any obligation, especially if they just don't enjoy interacting with a particular person.

[Chris Johnston]

John is a good and generous man.  I can't recall playing any of Gil's courses, and am interested in hearing about them from those who have.

Agree with Tim - this site is about discussing, sharing, and learning...all in good cheer.

Rather than see a thread hijacked, I'd like to learn more about a topic I know little about.

[DMoriarty]

David,

I guess the options are to ignore such a thread or respond with the best golf architecture writing possible. Feels like the latter contributes more, but nobody is under any obligation, especially if they just don't enjoy interacting with a particular person.

A third option - one that covers all the bases - is to call Kavanaugh out for his obvious trolling, while at the same time turning to a more productive discussion of golf course architecture.  That seems to be what happened here.

Why not let it go at that?

[Tim_Weiman]

David,

One could do that, of course. But, for me one of the more enjoyable golf experiences I had was playing Rustic Canyon with Tommy. Playing with Tommy is obviously a real treat, so much so that perhaps I really didn't fully take in the golf course. So, I'd love to see some really good writing about the course. Ditto for Boston Golf Club which has my curiosity. I just don't know when I will have the chance to see it.

I'm with you one hundred percent that trolling can be quite annoying. I just think the perfect anecdote is good architecture writing. For those of us who really appreciate the art form, it is truly a great pleasure.

[Mark Hissey]

A great architect and an even greater guy.

[John Kavanaugh]

This is a link to every post that I ever made mentioning Rustic Canyon. It's fun, interesting and informative.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?action=search2

Sorry, that was a fail as I can't get the link to work. Either way the advanced search feature does allow you to search for everything any individual has ever said about a specific course. I have taken the time to read every post I have made about Rustic and believe it all to be a truthful and honest opinion. I fully accept that standard does not make it an accurate opinion.

[Tim_Weiman]

John K:

I guess I have to thank you as I did not recall participating in a discussion of Rustic Canyon back in 2003. It is always interesting to read something you wrote that many years ago. But, more importantly it appears the merits of Rustic Canyon were fairly well discussed. I'm only a bit embarrassed I argued so strongly in defense of a course that I apparently had not yet seen at that point. However, golf architecture discussions are also about concepts, so the failure to actually see a course just might not rule out being able to discuss it (contrary to conventual wisdom).

[DMoriarty]

Tim,  Do you find it all ironic that over and over again you are telling me (and others) that we should have just ignored Kavanaugh's trolling and moved on to a discussion of golf course architecture?  Ever thought of heeding your own advice when it comes to those who called out Kavanaugh?  Regardless, I think it is about time we agreed to disagree on whether or not calling out Kavanaugh for his trolling is appropriate.
________  

Kavanaugh alias JakaB,

Whatever that link, it most certainly was not to everything you ever posted about Rustic Canyon.  It couldn't have been because you used to post under a different name.  Read the posts under your alias and even you will see that you were already trolling Gil, Geoff, Tommy, and Rustic a dozen years ago, long before you ever played the course.  Once you played it you loved it and praised it (both on and off gca.com) but now in your post above to Tommy you tell us that you were being insincere  and that Gil's work is "mediocre."  

So much for your "truthful and honest opinion."

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()