New Melvyn Morrow In My Opinion piece is posted

[Jason Thurman]

Tom, it's amazing that so much is being made of me saying that I "smiled" at a single line in Melvyn's piece and a trolling response I threw at Sven. You do realize Lenny Wilkens has the second most coaching wins in NBA history, right? He's unquestionably one of the ten best coaches ever. It's not like I compared The Donald to Byron Scott. You yourself gave a course like Pine Needles, which is surely in the top quartile of Ross' work by acclaim, a "5/10" in your most recent volume of The Confidential Guide. Well above average, good if you're in the vicinity and looking for a game, but don't spend another day away from home to see it. To me it sounds "good" but not "exceptional." Perhaps you're just more liberal with the latter adjective than I. "Less than exceptional" means just that - I've never suggested Ross' work isn't consistently good.


Ross gets design credit for 399 courses. As I've said in this thread, there's rarely a bad hole among them and I rate all of the dozen or so courses of his that I've played somewhere between "pretty good" and "one of my 10 favorite courses in the world". I just personally find that, outside the top 4% or so of Ross' work, a few other architects produce courses I find a little more exciting or dramatic. If others disagree, I won't try to stop them from playing every topo-designed Ross course they can get their balls on. I'll even be happy to join as long as I don't have an invite to a Mackenzie, Maxwell, Raynor, or Old Tom Morris course on the same day!

[Sven Nilsen]

I'll even be happy to join as long as I don't have an invite to a Mackenzie, Maxwell, Raynor, or Old Tom Morris course on the same day!

Again with the so stupid you must be joking comments?  When are kids these days going to learn that sarcasm is a crutch.

[Jason Thurman]

So now it's stupid to have a greater curiosity with regards to Mackenzie, Maxwell, Raynor, or Old Tom Morris designs as opposed to Ross courses? Umm, okay.

[Jim_Kennedy]

For the record, Ross is the Lenny Wilkens of golf design. An excellent playing career with a post-playing career characterized by extraordinary volume, a few very real highlights, and a thick portfolio of workmanlike but less-than-extraordinary work.

A "few" highlights?  Ross' 50th best course is better than the single best design of most living architects.  His 100th best course might be, too.


You've taken the early lead in the "ridiculous post of the year" category.

Probably a toss up w/Melyvn for first place in the "ridiculous post of the year"  - M2 seems to think that Ross learned nothing from his time at Dornoch, nothing at all from OTM (not even by osmosis), and couldn't possibly have enough imagination and skill to fit holes through Scottish dunes land. 

Stunning.

[Tim Martin]

Tom, it's amazing that so much is being made of me saying that I "smiled" at a single line in Melvyn's piece and a trolling response I threw at Sven. You do realize Lenny Wilkens has the second most coaching wins in NBA history, right? He's unquestionably one of the ten best coaches ever. It's not like I compared The Donald to Byron Scott. You yourself gave a course like Pine Needles, which is surely in the top quartile of Ross' work by acclaim, a "5/10" in your most recent volume of The Confidential Guide. Well above average, good if you're in the vicinity and looking for a game, but don't spend another day away from home to see it. To me it sounds "good" but not "exceptional." Perhaps you're just more liberal with the latter adjective than I. "Less than exceptional" means just that - I've never suggested Ross' work isn't consistently good.


Ross gets design credit for 399 courses. As I've said in this thread, there's rarely a bad hole among them and I rate all of the dozen or so courses of his that I've played somewhere between "pretty good" and "one of my 10 favorite courses in the world". I just personally find that, outside the top 4% or so of Ross' work, a few other architects produce courses I find a little more exciting or dramatic. If others disagree, I won't try to stop them from playing every topo-designed Ross course they can get their balls on. I'll even be happy to join as long as I don't have an invite to a Mackenzie, Maxwell, Raynor, or Old Tom Morris course on the same day!

Jason-You have given yourself credit for seeing "a dozen or so" of Ross courses. That translates to roughly 3% of his portfolio. Seems to be a rather small sample size to make what you deem to be empirical evidence supporting your position. Go play Glens Falls, Essex County Club and Wannamoisett and report back.

[Jason Thurman]

Empirical evidence for making a decision about what golf course to play, Tim? My "most ridiculous post of the year" has been trumped.


I like Ross' work. He's not my all-time favorite. I wouldn't have thought that stance would be so controversial.

[Tim Martin]

Empirical evidence for making a decision about what golf course to play, Tim? My "most ridiculous post of the year" has been trumped.


I like Ross' work. He's not my all-time favorite. I wouldn't have thought that stance would be so controversial.

Empirical refers to first hand knowledge if you weren't aware. Your firsthand knowledge of his work is miniscule. The more you see of each architects work the more empirical evidence you have to make an informed decision. Wonder how much Colt you have seen to know you like him better than Ross?

[Jason Thurman]

If you use empirical evidence to decide where to play, I'm happy for you. I use recommendations from friends, curiosity about new architects and places, Jon Cavalier's photos and Ran's profiles, proximity to taco stands and wood-fired pizza restaurants, gut feelings, and random guesses myself. I have a lot more fun that way, and despite your, Tom's, Jim's, and Sven's objections, I truly am the only person qualified to decide what my own preferences are. Thanks for playing though.

[Tim Martin]

If you use empirical evidence to decide where to play, I'm happy for you. I use recommendations from friends, curiosity about new architects and places, Jon Cavalier's photos and Ran's profiles, proximity to taco stands and wood-fired pizza restaurants, gut feelings, and random guesses myself. I have a lot more fun that way, and despite your, Tom's, Jim's, and Sven's objections, I truly am the only person qualified to decide what my own preferences are. Thanks for playing though.

Nice deflection. No "empirical" evidence of Colt huh? I know it's cool to say you love Colt.

[Jason Thurman]

I have literally mentioned Colt one time in all my posts on this site, and it was not a comment on my feelings on his work one way or the other. You're confused. It's a shame you think observation skills are so important. Your eyes are clearly unreliable.

[Tim Martin]

I have literally mentioned Colt one time in all my posts on this site, and it was not a comment on my feelings on his work one way or the other. You're confused. It's a shame you think observation skills are so important. Your eyes are clearly unreliable.

You clearly stated you would rather play Colt than Ross with what now appears to be no first hand experience. 

[Jason Thurman]

I have literally mentioned Colt one time in all my posts on this site, and it was not a comment on my feelings on his work one way or the other. You're confused. It's a shame you think observation skills are so important. Your eyes are clearly unreliable.

You clearly stated you would rather play Colt than Ross with what now appears to be no first hand experience. 

Umm, no. I didn't. The only people who have mentioned Colt in this thread are Dan Moore, Ran, and now you.


The Ignore List may be broken, but the new Advanced Search feature is a huge upgrade over the old one. Take it for a spin. You'll find this is my only mention of Colt in the history of this site, along with one mention of the football team and a few quoted posts from Jim Colton: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,60060.msg1419052.html#msg1419052

[Philip Hensley]

..

[Jim_Kennedy]

I have a lot more fun that way, and despite your, Tom's, Jim's, and Sven's objections, I truly am the only person qualified to decide what my own preferences are. Thanks for playing though.

Actually you're mistaken about that - no one has said anything about your architectural preferences, only your premise as it pertains to classifying Ross' architectural capabilities.

I just happened to read Ron Prichard's post about this subject at M2's Facebook site. His remarks are more lengthy than Tom's, but the message is the same.  Give it a glance, as you fellas now have two knowledgeable architects saying you're both OOB. If you fellas aren't "deniers" you might heed their words.

 

[Jason Thurman]

Honest question Jim: Where did I demean Ross' architectural capabilities?


I said that Melvyn's statement made me smile, and that I read it as an implication (on his part, obviously, since that's how implications work) that Ross was inferior. I also called it unfair, if indeed he meant it that way, and elaborated on reasons why. Nonetheless, it made me smile - a reflection of my own preferences.


I've said over and over again that Ross is an excellent architect with many courses that I love, but that ultimately, there are other guys who I'm more interested in. My preferences.


Every statement I've made in this thread has been blatantly couched in the context of what my own preferences are, with the exception of a wisecrack comparing Ross to Lenny Wilkens after Sven told me to stick to basketball. And even then, I compared the guy to a hall of fame coach, the second-winningest of all-time in the NBA, and the man who coached Seattle to its only title and won a Gold Medal in 1996.


So really, what is it that's so offensive about Ross not being my all-time favorite architect, my explanation that I find too much of his work to be solid but unexciting, that I prefer other architects who I simply find more audacious or artistic, and the fact that I smiled at an offhand line in Melvyn's two-page article? Those are all just MY preferences. Your mileage clearly varies. I've never been outraged when someone claims Ross is their favorite, and I can't imagine why you and Sven would be outraged at the opposite, or why Tim Martin would be compelled to start making shit up altogether to try to discredit my own ability to judge what I do and don't prefer.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Nevertheless, the fact remains that Melvyn is correct regarding the largely American body of work that Ross assembled,

We know MM's position, Ross didn't have the chops to design anything in Scotland, and you're agreeing with him. That's an 'assessment of' Ross' capabilities, not a 'preference for' those of others.

 An excellent playing career with a post-playing career characterized by extraordinary volume, a few very real highlights, and a thick portfolio of workmanlike but less-than-extraordinary work.

A few highlights? Again, you're making an assessment of his capabilities. "Assessment" and "Preference" have distinctly different meanings.

I can't envision Ross ever designing something like Old Tom's Dell Hole at Lahinch.

This is a particularly blatant assessment of Ross' capabilities and has nothing to with personal preference.



 

[Keith OHalloran]

Jason,
It may help people better understand your position if you listed the 12 Ross courses you have seen. That way there would be a baseline for your opinion.
FWIW, if you like the unexpected, you should definitely try and play Essex County, it may change some of your perspective.

[Tim Martin]

Honest question Jim: Where did I demean Ross' architectural capabilities?


I said that Melvyn's statement made me smile, and that I read it as an implication (on his part, obviously, since that's how implication's work) that Ross was inferior. I also called it unfair, if indeed he meant it that way, and elaborated on reasons why. Nonetheless, it made me smile - a reflection of my own preferences.


I've said over and over again that Ross is an excellent architect with many courses that I love, but that ultimately, there are other guys who I'm more interested in. My preferences.


Every statement I've made in this thread has been blatantly couched in the context of what my own preferences are, with the exception of a wisecrack comparing Ross to Lenny Wilkens after Sven told me to stick to basketball. And even then, I compared the guy to a hall of fame coach, the second-winningest of all-time in the NBA, and the man who coached Seattle to its only title and won a Gold Medal in 1996.


So really, what is it that's so offensive about Ross not being my all-time favorite architect, my explanation that I find too much of his work to be solid but unexciting, that I prefer other architects who I simply find more audacious or artistic, and the fact that I smiled at an offhand line in Melvyn's two-page article? Those are all just MY preferences. Your mileage clearly varies. I've never been outraged when someone claims Ross is their favorite, and I can't imagine why you and Sven would be outraged at the opposite, or why Tim Martin would be compelled to start making shit up altogether to try to discredit my own ability to judge what I do and don't prefer.

Jason-I meant Old Tom Morris and not Colt and for that I apologize. The same question would apply though to Old Tom. Do you have plays at a number of Morris courses that would allow for a proper comparison?

[BHoover]

Old Tom may be the most accomplished person the game has ever known. He was a skilled club maker, player and architect.  He even moonlighted as a pitchman for those Golf Now commercials.  Honestly, who else in golf has that resume!

[Philip Hensley]

a few very real highlights, and a thick portfolio of workmanlike but less-than-extraordinary work.

A "few" highlights?  Ross' 50th best course is better than the single best design of most living architects.  His 100th best course might be, too.


You've taken the early lead in the "ridiculous post of the year" category.

[Jason Thurman]

Thanks Tim. You're right that I haven't played an Old Tom course. After counting, I've played 13 Donald Ross courses. So yeah, if given the choice, I'd play an Old Tom over a Ross. It's not that I think Old Tom is better - as you mention, I have no experience that would lead me to that conclusion. But my playing experience doesn't include one of his courses, so if given the choice between rectifying that or playing a 14th Ross, I'd choose to get an Old Tom under my belt. Frankly, I'd be surprised if any architecture aficionado in the same position wouldn't make the same choice.


Jim, if you think it's not a mere personal assessment to say something like "I can't envision...", then we just need to agree to disagree. My own experience with Ross is bound by its limitations, and it doesn't lead me to think he'd embrace something like the Dell Hole in one of his own designs. That's just my own assessment, and I think my phrasing makes quite clear that this is just a personal assessment of mine. You don't see Ross the way I do. I'm content with that and understand that I won't change your mind, nor will you change mine.


Keith, you might be right in that listing my Ross courses played would change people's thoughts, but that's not really the point of this thread and I've threadjacked it badly enough already. I'll simply state again that I love many Ross courses - Holston Hills, Idle Hour, Pinehurst #2, White Bear (which I don't consider a Ross, but some do), Beverly, and Pine Needles are all among my personal top 25, and I think Broadmoor might have the best set of greens I've ever seen. My experience tells me to play more Ross courses, but not at the expense of Mackenzie, Maxwell, or the work of other legends I have little experience with. Maybe future courses will change my mind - I hope to have at least 59 more years of golf left after all.


On that note, it's time for me to bow out of this thread and let it get back to being about Melvyn's article.

[JC Jones]

Jason,

You need to write the following on the chalkboard 50 times before you post again:

I WILL NOT SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT (NOT DEGRADING OF, BUT JUST DIFFERENT) FROM THE GCA GROUPTHINK


My favorite GCA bee swarming trick when someone says they prefer something other than the groupthink, is to immediately challenge how many courses they've played.  Now, had you said something along the lines of "I played a Gary Player course one time and it was terrible, I'd much rather play a Donald Ross course" you'd be perfectly fine.  But, saying something totally innocuous like (and I'm paraphrasing for the swarm, here) "I like the Ross courses I've played but I like something a bit crazier than what I've seen so I'm more interested in seeing the work of other architects whom I feel deliver something more on that front", is sure to get the Queen Bee buzzing and when she makes a visit, the worker bees are not too far behind.

But really, the problem here is people don't understand basketball (which I'm sure they are happy to tell you all about).

[Josh Tarble]

Wow, this thread escalated quickly...


Getting back to MHM's article, I have a hard time with the entire premise of it.  Sure Old Tom is a seminal figure in the game of golf, but was he really doing anything other than finding golf holes on supremely awesome land?  And maybe that is all being a great architect entails, who am I to make that call.  But to me, I feel like he was whacking his ol' feathery with a brand new mashie he built, and letting the ball come to rest where it may.  That was hole #1.  Repeat process 18 times.

I don't mean to belittle Old Tom, because I do think he is one of the curators of the modern game of golf.  But I think calling him the greatest architect is over stating it a bit.

[Sven Nilsen]

My favorite GCA bee swarming trick when someone says they prefer something other than the groupthink, is to immediately challenge how many courses they've has played. 

My favorite is to criticize their grammar.

[JC Jones]

My favorite GCA bee swarming trick when someone says they prefer something other than the groupthink, is to immediately challenge how many courses they've has played. 

My favorite is to criticize their grammar.

It was a typo, Sven.  Thanks for pointing it out.  I was only on my first cup of coffee this morning and these things tend to happen.  Then again, as we all know, good spelling and grammar are only for those who lack vision and common sense.