News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #25 on: October 29, 2020, 10:03:17 AM »
Some of the courses mentioned that get all this exposure are not "sleepers".  The sleepers are the ones we won't discuss much on this site but the golfers that play them probably don't want the PR anyway.  Just makes their courses even busier than they already are.  We all probably know some of these true "sleeper" courses that are nearby.  Mayday mentioned a few already like Llanerch.  There is some really unique and creative architecture going on there but I have to say, if you are not a good golfer you will struggle to finish several of the holes.  It is now what I would call a good match play course.  Many in my old golf league would switch to tennis if they had to play there.  Way too tough for them but I think the club wanted a difficult test. They got it. 

Jeff Spittel

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #26 on: October 29, 2020, 10:23:00 AM »
I've had the pleasure of playing it a few times since the redo. Tom, Mike, Don and their team did a stellar job with what was a pretty bland canvas. Although I'm very excited to see Tripp's upcoming work at BraeBurn, I think Mike and Don would have been a wonderful fit too - they are obviously talented folks and I think they would have pushed the design envelope.
Fare and be well now, let your life proceed by its own design.

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2020, 10:44:38 AM »
Damn...I generally can only stand to watch the aerial assault of the PGA tour these days during a Major championship, or on a course I'm interested in seeing.   I read Peter's first post wrong and assumed the tournament at Memorial Park was this week, not next.

I was really looking forward to the pre-election distraction over the next few days, but alas.   Port Royal (which I've played) isn't going to fill the bill, I'm afraid.   Whither Mid Ocean?
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #28 on: October 29, 2020, 02:42:25 PM »


Lou!
Wolf Point was built for 1 person with zero oversight.
Memorial was redesigned to be played by 60,000 public players a year & 100+ tour pros a year, with oversight by the City of Houston, the PGA Tour and the Astros Golf Foundation.
You seem disappointed that Wolf Point was added to the list.
I don't think that Memorial will be added to any lists, other then great munis that hold great events.
No one said anything about any lists at any point during the project - the same is true for Wolf Point.
That is one of the points Peter has been describing.
It is an excellent piece of work that many will enjoy.


Re: Memorial Park, you described the course before the latest redesign as I would have, bland.  It was challenging and capable of holding local amateur tournaments, but in my only play, I found it rather ordinary.  Perhaps part of this was due to my expectations going in based on the course's history and the Bredemus/Plummer involvement.  Since the folks involved in the redesign are sympathetic to Wolf Point's style (Tom Doak, I think, stated that Wolf Point had the best set of greens in TX.  Knowing of his hit and run style in forming opinions for public consumption, the statement begs the question on how many courses in the state has he actually set foot on.  My bet is that they are a relative few to merit such an endorsement.  Caveat emptor). 


Re: me being seemingly disappointed that Wolf Point was added to GOLF's U.S. Top 100 list, not at all.  Tom Doak noted in the current rating thread that such lists are silly.  My first thought when I read Ran's highly complimentary review of Trinity Forest was that it would place high on GOLF's list.  When I actually went through the list and saw Wolf Point as the only TX course in the top 100, my first thought was that the list was unserious.  Having played more than half of the courses on the list and upon further reflection, I am good with my initial assessment.


I have no idea what GOLF's criteria is or the minimal # of votes required to be included in the list.  I do know TX courses pretty well having played all but one of the top 50,  many of them multiple times, and all but a handful in the second 50.  As great of an effort and outstanding achievement that Wolf Point was/is, it was designed for a single client with few if any formal tees and a routing which would not work well for a typical course with a tee sheet.  Back in 2008 you asked me for my evaluation of the course and I completed it using the Golfweek model.  My recollection is that you disagreed with it, which is fine.  These are only opinions based on limited perceptions after all.


If I am disappointed in any way it would be in the sense that I believe rankings serve a useful purpose and should be completed carefully.  Ran mentioned to me a couple of years ago when he joined Golfweek to manage its ratings that one of his objectives was diversity of opinions in his panel.  I see a lot of the Golfweek/GCA.com orthodoxy trending in GOLF.  In the past, I thought that Brad Klein was a major thought leader among golf architecture aficionados.  It now seems that maybe it was Ran all along.   

David Wuthrich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #29 on: October 29, 2020, 02:45:31 PM »
Given what they were given to work with, Tom, Mike and Don did a wonderful job!!


Damned by faint praise?  There wasn't much to work with.


I don't have any idea what to expect from the tournament or whether anyone outside of GCA (and of course the regulars in Houston) will care about the golf course.


 It is certainly not typical of my work, because it was a much different problem to solve, and a much different site than my norm (flat with heavy soils).  So, maybe not the course I would choose to be featured on TV, but of course that's not how the PGA TOUR works. 


I do think it will come off as different.  The last six holes are designed toward producing an exciting finish, so that the leader in the clubhouse is unlikely to win.  The giant lake on 16 & 17 is there to store runoff and minimize the use of city water, first, but as long as we needed it we decided to make it a main feature of play.


It would have been more fun with a bigger gallery, but hopefully the 2000 fans / day will add a bit of life to the competition.


Tom, Didn't mean to sound like you guys didn't do a wonderful job!  I'm an Aggie, so you have to forgive me!  ;D
You touched on what I meant.  Not the usual land that you have to work with.  Houston is FLAT with GUMBO soil.  What you guys did was amazing.  I just sold out a charity tournament that I am running there the week after the Houston Open.  Lots of interest to see what you have done by people who don't normally play public golf!

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #30 on: October 29, 2020, 10:40:22 PM »
Tom,


Unfortunately, I still haven’t played the course, but I did stop in a while back and asked an employee how he thought people were enjoying the new course. He said:


5% were indifferent. Didn’t care much either way


5% strongly disliked the changes; this group was happy the way things were


90% are very happy and are enjoying their “new course”
Tim Weiman

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #31 on: October 29, 2020, 11:21:52 PM »
Tom,


Unfortunately, I still haven’t played the course, but I did stop in a while back and asked an employee how he thought people were enjoying the new course. He said:


5% were indifferent. Didn’t care much either way


5% strongly disliked the changes; this group was happy the way things were


90% are very happy and are enjoying their “new course”


In the old days, way more than 5% would have been indifferent.  We live in polarizing times!  ;)

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2020, 06:23:59 AM »
Lou,
I'm not understanding why you decided to bring WP into this discussion, but since you did...
You, and some others, have always felt the need to point out what has been made obvious from the first mention of WP here, WP was not designed and constructed for a full tee sheet. So, if that is something you can't get past, then fine. Maybe we should only rank busy courses, or courses built on sand, or courses built on sand on large bodies of water. Whatever the case, yes WP was created for one man and if that should disqualify the course from being ranked, that man would have agreed with you. Because he didn't give a damn if you liked it or not. At first I struggled with his approach because we build and care for our golf courses hoping most enjoy them. But Al truly didn't care and once I realized that my job was really very simple; create and care for a course that he will want to play everyday, then I embraced his approach too. It was pure golf. No sales, no rankings, no tee times, just golf. And while I loved showing it off and hosting, I was fine with anyone who didn't like it as they were more than welcomed to never return. I don't know, but it feels to me like if that attitude had wider appeal we might have a few more true sleepers to talk about each year.
I do remember your visit. you said it was too wide as it should matter where you drive your ball, but then you also said the greens were too firm and needed to be punched to better receive an approach shot. I made a short attempt to explain maybe it did matter where you were in the fairway, but you quickly dismissed me. And I also remember in the letter you wrote how you explained the 6th hole was unfair since you missed right (playing away from the more daring line of attack) and said that bump on the right prevented you from chipping at the flag. I knew then that you'd never like the course, you never returned, and I think we were all fine with that.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2020, 04:37:37 PM »
Don,


The only reason I brought up Wolf Point (WP) in this thread is that as I started reading it, WP popped into my mind.  Essentially, it seems clear to some of us that gca.com has become a bit like the Academy, a closed loop of like-minded folks with rather narrow perspectives and a strong resistance to non-conforming views.  I was suggesting that since the mindset that put WP as GOLF's top course in TX is also dominant on this site, that a course cut from a similar cloth, i.e. Memorial Park, has a great chance of winning the honor ("sleeper of the year").


I do agree that my comments vis-a-vis WP, specially my response to Nuzzo!, would have been better made on the GOLF thread. I do trust that those who choose to consider my comments are also familiar with that discussion and are able to put them in context.


Re: my evaluation of WP, your memory of what I conveyed to you is at odds with mine.  First of all, it was Nuzzo! who asked me for my opinion at a time that the three of us were pretty good friends.  Using Golfweek's criteria, I attempted to adapt the evaluation to a course which has the limitations that you note are obvious and provided a grade for each of the categories.  Though Golfweek raters arrived at a rating without tying these together, I did so for Mike and suggested to him that it would place the course in the top 20 in Texas.  BTW, I might have the pertinent correspondence in an old computer that won't boot up presently.  If I can get it to work and I can find the file, I'd be willing to post it here with your and Mike's permission.


Mike on a number of occasions has opined that WP is the best course in Texas.  Me, back in 2008, I thought that being in the top 20 was a very good thing- I know any number of courses in the state that would have been tickled pink.  Apparently, not you guys.


For the record, I think very highly of the work you and Mike did at WP.  I tried on at least three occasions to visit WP in subsequent years when I was in the Houston area but was not granted the opportunity (and mind you that Al told me when he was leaving for lunch to "come back" any time, something that impressed Dale enough to tell me that the gesture was highly unusual).


I am also surprised of your recollections of my comments about #6.  "Unfair" is not a term I use.  I do believe that green contours should not be random, but tied in so as to allow a great shot to have a chance to end in a place where there is a good probability of holing the next.  I only played that hole three times, but I remember thinking that there was so much going on from the safe side- the alternative was a ditch with chest high vegetation on the left- that not even Tommy with total sensory deprivation could get it up and down.


Re: that I thought the course was too wide, the greens too firm, that I suggested you should punch them, that I dismissed your explanation, Don, that is just not me or my style.  It is common knowledge that new greens, especially bermuda, will be very firm when they're new.  And if there is something I appreciate better than most people is experience and knowledge, something that you have in spades.  I would never dismiss your opinions on anything dealing with the maintenance and setup of a golf course.


I may have said something regarding the speed of the greens from purely a personal preference, but I knew who buttered your bread and since you only had the one client to satisfy, whatever he wanted was the right thing to do.  I was just tickled to have the opportunity to play the course and be around you guys.  That Mike took my honest evaluation poorly and that you apparently did as well, that is disappointing.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #34 on: October 30, 2020, 08:35:14 PM »
Sweet Lou

I am not saying this is true in this case, but often times the context of comments are not fully appreciated. Most of the courses we discuss on this site are anywhere between good and world class. I try to keep this in mind as an unstated starting point.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #35 on: October 30, 2020, 10:31:10 PM »
Lou!
I would say that Memorial and Wolf Point are more like opposites than like twins.
Mostly because of the project requirements.
Both turned out very, very well for their requirements.
One of the priorities for Memorial was to have the best players show up to play.
So far, so good.
 
Cheers
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #36 on: October 31, 2020, 11:07:09 AM »
Sweet Lou

I am not saying this is true in this case, but often times the context of comments are not fully appreciated. Most of the courses we discuss on this site are anywhere between good and world class. I try to keep this in mind as an unstated starting point.

Ciao


Good advice.  That is one reason I seldom comment in any detail on specific courses here.  A relative few appreciate the frankness and candor of opinion.  It is a universal maxim: who wants to be told that his baby is less than perfect?  And, as they say, beauty is in the eye of a beholder anyways.


I do commend you for your thoughtful and detailed course reviews.  A lot to be said for getting out there intimately with the game and reflecting on the experience.  There is much to enjoy and learn from courses which do not attract the limelight.  That the expectations are probably more realistic makes it easier to remain positive.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2020, 02:42:48 PM by Lou_Duran »

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #37 on: October 31, 2020, 02:27:55 PM »
Lou,
When you told me the course was too wide for your liking and that the greens didn’t hold approach shots, you didn’t say it in the way you are characterizing my comments. It wasn’t said in a smug or know it all manner, I felt you were just being honest. I’m fine with that, but your smug comments above about criticizing my baby are just way out of line. I never ever felt WP would be liked by everyone and honestly was surprised that so many did seem to like the course. It was not built for a one time play and critique.   
What did bother me about your assessment was when you described 6 green as severe as it’s not, with over 75% of the putting surface less then 2.5%, only the back area where it ties into the creek and one small bump in front are not pinnacle. So I knew you hadn’t remembered the green correctly and when you said the bump on the right surround was too severe (I don’t remember whether you said unfair) I knew you hadn’t really gotten the hole since 90% of the area right of the green is flattish. If it’s not the tamest green complex on the course, then I’m not sure which one is.  #6 is all about the tee shot and dealing with the creek on the left
I don’t mind critics one bit, have at it, but at least get the hole number correct or be honest about the features.  I don’t think that’s unfair of me and it has zero to do with not accepting criticism. 
With rankings come criticisms.  It’s the way it is. I’m proud of my work at WP and at this point don’t care at all if the course is ranked or not.  I’d liked that Al didn’t want it judged by others. And I’m comfortable enough with my work and time there that I really don’t care at all who thinks it’s the best this or that as I don’t control any of that.


John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #38 on: October 31, 2020, 02:42:07 PM »
Don, as a ranker how do you decide which courses you care get ranked?

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #39 on: October 31, 2020, 02:51:07 PM »
Don:


Nuzzo!


Lou;


Jaka?????????
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #40 on: October 31, 2020, 02:54:43 PM »
Don, as a ranker how do you decide which courses you care get ranked?
Pretty much based on how much swag I get and how many drinks they buy me.  Al bought me a shit ton of drinks over the years so I’ll have WP as the best course in the world for a few more years at least.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #41 on: October 31, 2020, 02:59:58 PM »
Don sounds like a parent arguing balls and strikes at a little league game.


It’s standing around after the game saying that you don’t care who won that is offensive.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #42 on: October 31, 2020, 03:04:28 PM »
Btw: Lou’s comments are idiotic. What kind of nut case writes a letter to a call girl the next day offering suggestions?

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #43 on: October 31, 2020, 03:07:09 PM »
Btw: Lou’s comments are idiotic. What kind of nut case writes a letter to a call girl the next day offering suggestions?
Exactly, especially considering he bought me nothing. The gall!

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #44 on: October 31, 2020, 03:10:06 PM »
Don sounds like a parent arguing balls and strikes at a little league game.


It’s standing around after the game saying that you don’t care who won that is offensive.
Yup, More than once I’ve tried to hand them my gear if they think they can do better.  That usually shuts them up

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #45 on: October 31, 2020, 03:23:06 PM »
Since Doak is the gold standard around here for rankers, architects and private club members the fact that he openly cares deeply where his courses fall in the rankings the don’t care ship has sailed.

Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #46 on: October 31, 2020, 03:25:38 PM »
Don, as a ranker how do you decide which courses you care get ranked?
Pretty much based on how much swag I get and how many drinks they buy me.  Al bought me a shit ton of drinks over the years so I’ll have WP as the best course in the world for a few more years at least.
Soon we will uncover that the 2nd gunman on the grassy knoll was a rater no doubt!  ;D
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #47 on: October 31, 2020, 03:36:07 PM »
I'm sure its been asked before...

But how much do non-GCA folks care about/analyze/decompose the rankings lists?

P.S.  And I understand why this group does, its very natural that we would care...

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #48 on: October 31, 2020, 03:50:13 PM »
Join a decent course and learn.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT - The architectural sleeper hit of the year
« Reply #49 on: October 31, 2020, 06:37:06 PM »
John K,


Thanks for your blast!  Not that context matters when you see an opening to demonstrate your wit, but I only gave my feedback to Mike and Don when asked and because I considered them to be friends.  As a rule, I don't discuss golf courses with the clubs I visit at any length and detail, and you will seldom see me post anything on this site that can be considered a critique of a specific course.


Kalen,


Most golfers I encounter have a great interest in how golf courses are considered.  Even some members of highly private clubs whose leadership claim that they don't care about ratings have very strong opinions about their course's standing relative to others.  A big difference is that a rather few understand or care to discuss golf architecture in technical terms and many wouldn't know Tom Doak from Mike Nuzzo, though they might know a course designed by Jack Nicklaus.


Don,


Perhaps it is my fault, but you seem to have a real knack for misinterpreting what I mean to convey.  My response to Sean was in general and it applies to golf as it does to any number of things ranging from the proverbial beautiful baby, to sartorial choices, business strategies, advice solicited by wives, etc.  In my experience in the corporate world as a knowledge worker, more often than not my input was sought from higher up to affirm an already established position than to help direct action.


What I've noticed about the golf industry is that there is even less respect for the opinions of others- e.g. a current thread suggests that architects should resist the preferences of golfers, I suppose in the context that innovation requires overlooking what the customer will accept.  I've talked to GMs, superintendents, club pros, architects with some regularity over the many years I've been playing the game and the lack of confidence not a small number seem to have in each other and a tendency to regard the golfer as a necessary nuisance is shocking.  Coming from a consumer products background in the first half of my working career, that is just seems foreign and totally counterproductive to me.


I don't remember you ever expressing an opinion where WP should rank, only that your client was highly satisfied with the results.  I don't recall saying that the course was too wide for my liking, especially since I knew how windy the area is, the ruggedness of the site, and the design intent I assumed was to overcome the lack of elevation changes/rather flat topography, and the desires of your client.  I've been in Texas since 1978 and have played on many new courses with bermuda greens which are nearly always extremely firm for the first two to three years.  I suspect that I wasn't very clear in my communications and, perhaps, that you might be generalizing and attributing to me comments made by others.


Re: #6, i remember the hole pretty well.  I don't know what the reference to the wrong hole number is all about, but I am looking at the scorecard of my first round where I hit a 3-iron from 189 yards into a southern wind left in the ditch and on the green 15' from the hole on my second ball.  My recollection from the second or third round where I missed right is that the green has a number of small mounds throughout and from hole high I could not figure out which two or three mounds I would have to engage in order to get the ball somewhat near the hole, say 10'.  As my memory doesn't always serve, I looked at Google Maps and while the definition is not great, the high spots which have a lighter color than the valleys seems to confirm my recollection- some 6-10 mounds in the green with valleys in between them.  It just struck me that a long hole into/quartering the prevailing wind with a large hazard on the left (hook) might offer some mercy on the slice side.


I think that I have now exhausted the subject and should leave it die.  It may not matter to you what people think about WP- everyone I know including me who has played the course has been impressed and valued the experience.  It is not important to me that you think highly of my gca acumen, but I do take exception in your questioning my honesty.  I suspect that if I took 10 avid golfers selected at random and put them on #6 that the great majority would remark on the mounding and contouring of that green.  If 90% is "flattish" and it is the flatest green on the course, my eyes must have already gone bad nearly 12 years ago.  Borrowing from Nuzzo- peace.  'Nuff said.