Golf Club Atlas

GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 05:50:03 PM

Title: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 05:50:03 PM
I almost started a brawl the other day when I said something about Sand Hills here that was not 110% positive.  And there's another active thread where Mr. Rigo is about to be lynched for writing heresies about Fishers Island.

What are the other sacred cows of GCA?

I ask because we might as well put them on a list and declare them off-limits to criticism, and spend our time discussing other courses which are not beyond argument.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Phil Benedict on July 12, 2006, 05:53:38 PM
National Golf Links of America and Pacific Dunes.  The 10th at Riviera.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Matt_Ward on July 12, 2006, 06:01:27 PM
Tom D:

Since you asked it -- a Tom Doak designed course. ;D

Few here will venture a straightforward opinion because of the TNT it causes. I, on the other hand, have ventured into plenty of sacred cow areas and still possess my ten fingers -- hoops I just counted them again and have only nine. ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tim Pitner on July 12, 2006, 06:02:28 PM
Royal Dornoch, North Berwick, St. Andrews Old.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 12, 2006, 06:03:41 PM
"Restoration Quality" aka

Bethpage Black

Engineers CC

Yeamans Hall

Hollywood

Aronimink



Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 12, 2006, 06:10:48 PM
The good news about a brawl on GCA is that it's a virtual brawl, you're not actually going to get punched in the nose!  ;)   For that reason I don't think any course should be considered a sacred cow or completely off limits.

Unless maybe the back nine at Pasatiempo... 8)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Andy Troeger on July 12, 2006, 06:18:14 PM
I almost started a brawl the other day when I said something about Sand Hills here that was not 110% positive.  And there's another active thread where Mr. Rigo is about to be lynched for writing heresies about Fishers Island.

What are the other sacred cows of GCA?

I ask because we might as well put them on a list and declare them off-limits to criticism, and spend our time discussing other courses which are not beyond argument.

Longaberger!  ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Shane Gurnett on July 12, 2006, 06:21:12 PM

What are the other sacred cows of GCA?


Tom Doak?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: tonyt on July 12, 2006, 06:25:03 PM
Tom,

It is an unfortunate but necessary bi-product of greatness that many will take a stance that something is sacred. This is not a bad thing, since the lack of anything sacred after multiple applications of human nature can only be the result of there being no greatness for someone or a collective to blindly defend.

That there be such places on earth worthy of these tunnel visioned subjective defences is a fact to be lauded.

Cliches about anything in life are tired and boring, but some of them did many many years of hard yards and long term earning of respect and being tested over time to become accurate cliches in the first place.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tommy_Naccarato on July 12, 2006, 06:25:58 PM
The Stonewall Logo.....

(http://www.camphillsoltane.org/images/Stonewall/Moooooh.JPG)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Joe Hancock on July 12, 2006, 06:31:19 PM
I thought it was only in Texas that the cows are scared..... :P

There's plenty of sacred cows on here, and the only way one can dare discuss is if they have played many times and know the courses intimitely.

Joe
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 12, 2006, 06:42:55 PM

Firm and fast

The reverse Jans

Ran Morrissett
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jordan Wall on July 12, 2006, 06:43:23 PM
Sheep Ranch
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 12, 2006, 06:45:17 PM
Sheep Ranch

Actually, Jordan, those are "sacred sheep" at the Sheep Ranch.   ::)

Looks like I will be spending a little time out there next Wednesday afternoon.  
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on July 12, 2006, 06:47:50 PM
GCA views all coures similarly.....

99% of those built pre 1935 are sacred cows....

99% of those built post 1960 are cow pies....

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 06:57:03 PM
I agree with many of these but I like Tommy's answer best.  It's certainly the best cow logo out there, although Rock Creek's will be a close second ... a cow skull.

I don't need any of my courses to be sacred cows, because I'm available to answer questions about them (as I have in the past).  And I'm fine with people criticizing them as long as they get their facts straight.

Bill M:  If the back nine at Pasatiempo is sacred, how come they still want us to do work on 16, 17 and 18?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Andrew Summerell on July 12, 2006, 07:01:12 PM
I don't think we really have any 'sacred cows' in Australia. Royal Melbourne (West) would come close, but there are plenty of people wanting to say it's too short & irrelevant. I think it's perfect just the way it is, but Australians love to tear down people & things, so the 'sacred cows' fall to the 'tall poppy' syndrome in Australia.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 12, 2006, 07:13:45 PM
I think this might be my first time disagreeing with Tom! Hope they don't take away my DBB card.

I don't think people were unfair to Joe Rigo, on either the Fisher's Island review or the other thread, nor do I think anyone is making the case that FI is above any criticism. When you make brash, over the top statements, dismissals and insults, you shouldn't be surprised when others take the same tact with you.

Tom, my recollection of The Confidential Guide... is that you gave FI a 7. I think you said something about there being few other places you might rather spend a day, but the implication was it was more the setting and experience than the perfection of the course. Yet, no one came on here and ripped you for your views.

Mr. Rigo's prose doesn't exactly evoke the memory of Darwin, nor were his comments as insightful architecturally as many of the reviews posters on here offer quite frequently.

And calling out the maintenance practices at FI shows a lot of what Mr. Rigo is looking for, imho.

There is a lot of terrific discussion of this site of FI, for anyone who cares to search for it. All of it is a lot more of the type of discussion we are seeking here, as opposed to reviews like Mr. Rigo's, imho.

I don't think there are any sacred cows on here, but I also think that if someone is going to make strong statements, they should be prepared to back them up, and not be surprised when people take umbrage.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 12, 2006, 07:22:12 PM
I think this might be my first time disagreeing with Tom! Hope they don't take away my DBB card.

I don't think people were unfair to Joe Rigo, on either the Fisher's Island review or the other thread, nor do I think anyone is making the case that FI is above any criticism. When you make brash, over the top statements, dismissals and insults, you shouldn't be surprised when others take the same tact with you.

Tom, my recollection of The Confidential Guide... is that you gave FI a 7. I think you said something about there being few other places you might rather spend a day, but the implication was it was more the setting and experience than the perfection of the course. Yet, no one came on here and ripped you for your views.

Mr. Rigo's prose doesn't exactly evoke the memory of Darwin, nor were his comments as insightful architecturally as many of the reviews posters on here offer quite frequently.

And calling out the maintenance practices at FI shows a lot of what Mr. Rigo is looking for, imho.

There is a lot of terrific discussion of this site of FI, for anyone who cares to search for it. All of it is a lot more of the type of discussion we are seeking here, as opposed to reviews like Mr. Rigo's, imho.

I don't think there are any sacred cows on here, but I also think that if someone is going to make strong statements, they should be prepared to back them up, and not be surprised when people take umbrage.

Well said George-  

When the data is there to dissect then the discussions here are at their best.  When brash statements are made without bothering to back them up then as you said - people will take umbrage.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Carlyle Rood on July 12, 2006, 07:27:11 PM
I ask because we might as well put them on a list and declare them off-limits to criticism, and spend our time discussing other courses which are not beyond argument.

Please add Rustic Canyon to the list.

Carlyle
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 12, 2006, 07:27:58 PM
Tom,
I think there are many forms of sacred cows on here.  Whether it be courses , architects, posters or.....  The one that bugs me the most is the Dead guy associations such as DRS.  So many posters are afraid of these things and give them credibility.... one of the biggest sacred cows on here is Walking....not that I disagree.....
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony_Nysse on July 12, 2006, 07:35:27 PM
Would The Bridge count?  ;D ;)

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 12, 2006, 07:36:17 PM
Bill M:  If the back nine at Pasatiempo is sacred, how come they still want us to do work on 16, 17 and 18?

Tom, I assume the work you're going to do is taking some of the steep contours out of the greens and restoring the bunkers, right?

Don't you think setting the mowers to hold the Stimpmeter under 10 would take care of the greens and restore most of the 'lost' pin locations?  We've had that discussion a lot on this discussion board, most recently the dust up about Engineers and the flattening of those greens.

The bunkers didn't look bad last time around, maybe that's not part of your scope.  What ARE you doing there?

#10 is certainly a more wonderful place than 10 years ago!

If it's your favorite nine holes in the world (as it is mine), you can overlook a few warts.  Which is why there are no sacred cows IMHO.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 12, 2006, 07:42:54 PM
Carlyle, how can Rustic Canyon be a sacred cow when it gets rerouted every time there's a serious flood?!  ???  One thing about sacred cows is they have to be timeless and frozen in a time warp.

Mike Young, you and I are Southernors and therefore know there is a time to walk and a time to ride..... :P  Right now is the time to ride, it was 95 degrees today and maybe 80% humidity.  Jeez.  All the sacred cows were lying in the shade with their tongues hanging out.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on July 12, 2006, 07:49:19 PM

National Golf Links of America and Pacific Dunes.  The 10th at Riviera.


Phil,

I don't think NGLA is a sacred cow.

That criticism is rare may be a testament to the genius of it's design.

Several years ago there was some heated debate about the direction in which NGLA was moving.   Criticism was launched from the West Coast with respect to a number of issues, and a passionate debate begun.

Recently TEPaul criticized the expansion of the 13th green and we engaged in a passionate debate on that subject.

I'm convinced that another tee existed behind or to the left of the 11th green, thus making the 13th at NLGA play like the 7th at TOC, whereas, from the current tee, the 13th plays like the 11th at TOC.

A year or two previous I was critical of proposed or discussed changes with respect to the 16th green.

If someone has a criticism of NGLA, I'd like to hear it.

With respect to Pacific Dunes I brought up several issues a few years ago.

Perhaps PD is another example where the golf course doesn't provide much in the way of substance for criticism.


 
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 12, 2006, 07:53:47 PM
Sheep Ranch

Jordan,

I've said this before and I've been to Bandon and have zero interest in seeing the Sheep Ranch.  I am delighted to hear that it has become an overpriced tourist trap and take comfort that I will never go...The thought of playing a routing off the top of the head of some amateur architect pukens me...
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Garland Bayley on July 12, 2006, 08:22:59 PM
I agree with many of these but I like Tommy's answer best.  It's certainly the best cow logo out there, although Rock Creek's will be a close second ... a cow skull.
...

Doesn't Jawbone Creek in Harlowton, MT already have a cow skull for their logo?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jonathan Cummings on July 12, 2006, 08:23:50 PM
Does sacred cow = overrated??
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 08:25:48 PM
Bill M:  No course is frozen in a time warp.  Most of the candidates for sanctity have seen major changes over the past twenty years, though much of it is restorative in nature.

As for Pasatiempo, they are talking about moving the 17th green thirty yards further back and to the left (hanging out into the ravine) where it was originally located, and expanding the 18th green to the front and left, which is way more severe than what they have now.  They've never brought up changing the contour of the 16th green, but the greenside bunkers are much different than what was there in 1929.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 08:29:08 PM
Jonathan:

I don't think any of the sacred cows are necessarily overrated -- half the ones named so far are comfortably in the top 50 courses in the world, and I don't think even the detractors really quarrel with their rankings.

But many of them are considered to be one of the top five courses in the world by a couple of people on the board -- and that seems to be the point at which ANY examination of the course touches a nerve.  In that sense, pretty much every course is overrated by someone or other who thinks it's THE greatest beyond debate.  Which is silly because there is no such thing.

Garland:  Is there really such a place as Jawbone Creek?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 12, 2006, 08:31:14 PM
"Does sacred cow = overrated??

My definition would be "beyond reproach" by some sort of informal concensus.  Whether deservedly or not.

See NGLA
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on July 12, 2006, 08:35:38 PM
"Does sacred cow = overrated??

My definition would be "beyond reproach" by some sort of informal concensus.  Whether deservedly do or not.

See NGLA


Gary,

How is NGLA overrated ?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kyle Harris on July 12, 2006, 08:39:06 PM
"Does sacred cow = overrated??

My definition would be "beyond reproach" by some sort of informal concensus.  Whether deservedly do or not.

See NGLA


Gary,

How is NGLA overrated ?


I think they were mutually exclusive statements.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 12, 2006, 08:41:06 PM

Pat ..

Take another look at my post.  
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jonathan Cummings on July 12, 2006, 08:41:21 PM
Maybe Gary is onto something here.  

The difference between 'sacred cows' and the 'beyond reproaches' is that the sacred cows are still debatable, while the beyond reproaches are not.

JC
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: cary lichtenstein on July 12, 2006, 08:45:56 PM
Coore and Crenshaw are certainly scared cows, as well as Hidden Creek and Cuscowilla

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jesse Jones on July 12, 2006, 08:58:34 PM
Shinny..
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Steve_Roths on July 12, 2006, 09:16:54 PM
Isn't Sutton Bay's logo a cow's skull as well?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Phil McDade on July 12, 2006, 09:17:29 PM
The front nine at Machrinhanish (the new tee at the 1st notwithstanding...)

Merion East? Pine Valley? Wild Horse? Genius, go-it-alone, fanatical-about-one-course architects (Crump, Fownes, others?)

The Redan as a design concept?

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Ryan Farrow on July 12, 2006, 09:19:58 PM
Commenting on golf courses you have not played!


Even if you are not talking about the golf course and you are just talking about distribution on par 3's throughout a round of golf. Then Pat makes a Rainbow thread and Jordan chimes in all because an unnamed person doesn’t like the idea of 6 par 3's on a course even though 5 is perfectly acceptable any day of the week.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Phil Benedict on July 12, 2006, 09:22:36 PM

National Golf Links of America and Pacific Dunes.  The 10th at Riviera.


Phil,

I don't think NGLA is a sacred cow.

If someone has a criticism of NGLA, I'd like to hear it.



Patrick,

Guys on this site speak with such reverence about NGLA, so maybe it's sacred, not a sacred cow.  I know non-GCA's who don't much care for it, probably because it's quirky or pales in comparison to Shinnecock in their minds.  They may also be cretins who think Fazio is the apogee of the golf course architecture profession.  I haven't played it so I am neutral.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Michael Whitaker on July 12, 2006, 09:29:27 PM
Isn't Sutton Bay's logo a cow's skull as well?

So is Tobacco Road's and Bulls Bay's.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Phil Benedict on July 12, 2006, 09:43:37 PM
Tom D:

Since you asked it -- a Tom Doak designed course. ;D

Few here will venture a straightforward opinion because of the TNT it causes. I, on the other hand, have ventured into plenty of sacred cow areas and still possess my ten fingers -- hoops I just counted them again and have only nine. ;D

I sort of agree with Matt.  People here seem to be reluctant to criticize Tom.  That may be the result of good manners; the high quality of Tom courses; or because Tom is so much better informed about his own designs that engaging him in a debate is a fools errand.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill Gayne on July 12, 2006, 09:44:09 PM
Friars Head is somewhat of a sacred cow because:

1. Not many people have seen the course.
2. It was done by Coore and Crenshaw.
3. It's probably very good maybe great (but not perfect) so there's not a whole lot to be overly critical.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 12, 2006, 09:50:48 PM
The Golf Club?
Pasatiempo?
Garden City?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: HamiltonBHearst on July 12, 2006, 09:56:43 PM


I would list the sacred cows I see on this site but it might get me banned from the clubs.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Paul Payne on July 12, 2006, 10:13:20 PM
Jeff Brauer's "Jane Mansfield" hole.

Talk about Alps.....
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: kevin on July 12, 2006, 10:13:52 PM
I am a huge Raynor Fan, probably because Carmargo was the first of only 4 courses in the top 100 I have ever stepped foot on.  The others being NGLA, Shinnecock and Fishers.  

I am not up on all this as much as everyone else, but I would like to get your thoughts on a few things.

1. Who has a better Punchbowl than Fishers????? Not NGLA in my opinion.

2. Who is or was the best designers of One shot holes? again I have not seen a lot of top 100, but I am not sure you can beat Camargo's 4 Par 3's all are unbelieveable.

Is Raynor a Sacred Cow....My vote is yes.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: T_MacWood on July 12, 2006, 10:32:51 PM
Fishers Island
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 12, 2006, 10:42:47 PM
I have never played it bt seems to me Longaburger is definitely a sacred cow.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: TEPaul on July 12, 2006, 10:50:57 PM
Is this the fastest thread in the history of GOLFLCLUBATLAS.com to three pages and fifty posts? I think so. Fifty posts and three pages in about five hours is extremely rapid action.

Good for you Mr Doak. Excellent thread.

I think some other threads should be initiated, such as;

Is GOLFCLUBATLAS.com;

1. Elitist in too many ways?
2. Far too one dimensional?
3. Undemocratic?
4. Just another example in golf and architecture of--"it's my way or the highway?"

For my part, all I can say, is, you know me----I'm a huge advocate of "The Big World" theory---which essentially is.

"Golf and golf course architecture is a great big world and there really is room in it for everyone! ;)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Doug Ralston on July 12, 2006, 10:53:59 PM
I would still have to go with 'walking golf' as the Most Sacred Cow here. Dunno why......seems to limit your choices sadly.

Doug
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 12, 2006, 10:59:26 PM
Bill M:  No course is frozen in a time warp.  Most of the candidates for sanctity have seen major changes over the past twenty years, though much of it is restorative in nature.

As for Pasatiempo, they are talking about moving the 17th green thirty yards further back and to the left (hanging out into the ravine) where it was originally located, and expanding the 18th green to the front and left, which is way more severe than what they have now.  They've never brought up changing the contour of the 16th green, but the greenside bunkers are much different than what was there in 1929.

I was being kind of ironic by talking about the time warp.  "Sacred cows" would imply no changes; how can you change a sacred cow?

That is interesting about #17 green.  That would be a great hole.  Any idea why the green was moved forward?  Maybe those houses on the left that get pretty close?

So rather than flattening the existing greens, the plan is to make #18 even more contoured and not change #16?  #17 has one of the most sneaky contoured greens (Ask Dave 'Shivas' Schmidt!), the green comes down off the hillside in steep and slick fashion.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 12, 2006, 11:11:38 PM
I opened this 'Sacred Cows' thread expecting to find out that it was the name of Tom Doak's latest course design job. Having read all fifty posts I kind wish that it were still were true... I'm seeing a halo made out of cowskin for the logo.

TD, I can send you my address for my check later. ;)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 12, 2006, 11:19:26 PM
Anthony:

Actually, the working name for our next new course is "Wicked Pony".

I just build them, I don't name them!
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gene Greco on July 13, 2006, 12:36:07 AM
Tom:

      It's a little late to really get this party started. ;)

But I would be remiss if I neglected to first thank you for your gracious invitation to your new creation in Colorado.

Two weeks ago another fine member of Ballyneal did in fact extend the same invitation to see and play it, an invitation which I have already accepted. I will look forward to heading to Holyoke  either later this summer or sometime next.

But, again, thank you very much for thinking of me.

If I have the time I will "comment" on your somewhat questionable topic sometime on Thursday.

Good night.





Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jordan Wall on July 13, 2006, 12:42:18 AM
Sand Pines

Forgot about that one
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kevin_Reilly on July 13, 2006, 01:06:51 AM
Sand Pines

I don't think that fits the commonly accepted definition of a SC:

Quote
Sacred Cow

A person or thing immune to criticism or questioning.  This term alludes to the honored status of cows in Hinduism, where they are a symbol of God's generosity to humankind. It has been used figuratively since about 1900.

Off the top of my head, I'd list:

Firm & fast
Caddies
Ground game

I don't think any of the courses talked about here are immune from questioning...NGLA and Sand Hills to my mind haven't been granted immunity...the fact is there is little to criticize about each course and hence they appear relatively unscathed compared with the other courses in the upper echelon.  



Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Matt_Cohn on July 13, 2006, 01:09:55 AM
Ran Morrissett

Sorry, I feel bad even saying it, and for all I know he might just be that good of a guy. But I had to just put it out there...
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mark_F on July 13, 2006, 03:44:55 AM
Royal Melbourne (West)

Kingston Heath

Barnbougle Dunes - although if MC's name were removed from the credit list it would be a different matter.

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on July 13, 2006, 06:14:49 AM
MUFC.  well at least to Peter McKnight. ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: T_MacWood on July 13, 2006, 07:04:44 AM
Old Tom Morris is the biggest sacred cow followed closely by all the big name golden age architects: Ross, MacKenzie, Tillinghast, Colt, Raynor, Macdonald etc.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Paul_Turner on July 13, 2006, 07:14:35 AM
All the great, ultra exclusive clubs.  We're scared we won't be invited back.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: john_stiles on July 13, 2006, 08:22:18 AM
I would think most everyone would have a sacred cow from golf course, to architect, to some aspect of golf that they just love without being able to explain it.

It just stands to reason that there must be room for a sacred cow in the big world theory.

Everyone has a sacred cow, trust me on that one.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Shimp on July 13, 2006, 08:55:21 AM
By architect:

Sacred             MacKenzie
                      MacDonald/Raynor
                      C&C
                      Doak

Not quite           Ross
sacred              Tillinghast
                       Thomas (or does belong above?)
                        Hanse
                        Silva

Heathens          Fazio!!
                      Rees
                      Nicklaus (or is he moving up?)

Lowest circle     Arthur Hills
of hell               Others?


Who else belongs where?  Other categories?  Who disagrees?

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 13, 2006, 09:11:31 AM
Anthony:

Actually, the working name for our next new course is "Wicked Pony".

I just build them, I don't name them!

What the .....? Since when did people start naming golf courses after strip clubs... ??? ??? ???
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 13, 2006, 09:15:57 AM
By architect:

Sacred             MacKenzie
                      MacDonald/Raynor
                      C&C
                      Doak

Not quite           Ross
sacred              Tillinghast
                       Thomas (or does belong above?)
                        Hanse
                        Silva

Heathens          Fazio!!
                      Rees
                      Nicklaus (or is he moving up?)

Lowest circle     Arthur Hills
of hell               Others?


Who else belongs where?  Other categories?  Who disagrees?



This is pretty damn close. I think you have Arthur Hills ranked a little too high though. ;D Do Coore and Crenshaw need to do some more courses before they hang it up as Sacred?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on July 13, 2006, 09:36:58 AM
Anthony:

Actually, the working name for our next new course is "Wicked Pony".

I just build them, I don't name them!

What the .....? Since when did people start naming golf courses after strip clubs... ??? ??? ???

My first ever solo project in 1984 - rebuilding a defunct Dick Wilson course in Las Vegas named Winterwood - was re-named "Desert Rose" which was also the name of a local brothel.

One of my earliest discussions on this board about five years ago was whether or not gca's named the courses they designed, with the poster "aghast" that I didn't control everything.  My reply was that "the next course I name will be the first course I name."  

That said, I have been on a roll lately, with both the Quarry and the two Wilderness(es) being named after my suggestions.  The only problem is, those names don't translate well to shirt logos, with the text being about it, whereas I see some real possibilities with a "wicked pony" logo.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Michael Moore on July 13, 2006, 09:50:56 AM
Courses that don't allow cameras.

Courses that enforce privacy laws regarding the dissemination of photos taken on private property.

Courses that have been ripped from "Courses by Country".
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: D_Malley on July 13, 2006, 10:03:46 AM
i think a better topic regarding sacred cows would be:

who are the sacred cows of this site?

posters who are all knowing, and other people refrain from disagreeing with.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike Hendren on July 13, 2006, 10:05:09 AM
Jeff,

Yet another name change at your course in Nashville:  Gaylord Springs Golf Links.

Mike
A Linkster
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on July 13, 2006, 10:10:05 AM
Bogey,

Is that true, or are ya just funnin me?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike Hendren on July 13, 2006, 10:12:53 AM
(http://www.madeline-kahn.com/Picture/kahnf.jpg)

It's twu. It's twu.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jeff_Brauer on July 13, 2006, 10:19:08 AM
Well, I knew they were rebranding the hotels.  Here in Texas, they changed the original name of their facility across from Cowboys Golf Club from Opryland Texas to the Gaylord Texas.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Garland Bayley on July 13, 2006, 10:25:11 AM
...
Garland:  Is there really such a place as Jawbone Creek?

Yes there is. It is the course built on top of the course that I learned on. I have played it once. I was disappointed, because they took out my favorite hole, which was a 200+ yard par 3 with the green just beyond Jawbone Creek. I've fished many a ball out of Jawbone Creek.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: D_Malley on July 13, 2006, 10:38:03 AM
i guess the sacred cows of this site must be extremely sacred because nobody wants to comment on them. except for matt c
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Garland Bayley on July 13, 2006, 10:48:00 AM
Courses that don't allow cameras.

Courses that enforce privacy laws regarding the dissemination of photos taken on private property.

Courses that have been ripped from "Courses by Country".


Are they sacred cows here, or are they sacred cows in their own estimation?
It seems ANGC is a sacred cow in their own estimation, but not here. (And, not even for certain famous members anymore!)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tim Pitner on July 13, 2006, 10:52:06 AM
Sheep Ranch

Jordan,

I've said this before and I've been to Bandon and have zero interest in seeing the Sheep Ranch.  I am delighted to hear that it has become an overpriced tourist trap and take comfort that I will never go...The thought of playing a routing off the top of the head of some amateur architect pukens me...

John,

Play Sheep Ranch and then tell me if you still feel the same way.  Yes, they're charging $90 to play and have a suggested routing, but "overpriced tourist trap"--hardly.  I put it in the top 5 or 6 courses I've played (even with hairy greens) and spent one of the best afternoons of my life out there.  It's a special place.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John_Cullum on July 13, 2006, 11:50:47 AM
Anthony:

Actually, the working name for our next new course is "Wicked Pony".

I just build them, I don't name them!

Maybe you should
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tim Pitner on July 13, 2006, 11:58:21 AM
Wow, after Gene's post, I think we can take Tom Doak's name off the sacred cow list.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: henrye on July 13, 2006, 12:08:13 PM
The irony of this thread you have posted is that it is YOU who is the Sacred Cow.

Gene, I don't know if your being serious or not, but based on a number of previous threads, Tom Doak's designs are not 'sacred cows'.  They are popular with the majority of this group, but there have been numerous criticisms about elements of some of his courses.  You have done so yourself, and shouldn't get upset if you're politely challenged on your views.

I think Tom's question shows an element of frustration, and in answer to him, nothing in terms of golf design should be considered a 'sacred cow', including both Sand Hills & Fishers Island.

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 13, 2006, 12:18:14 PM
Anthony:

Actually, the working name for our next new course is "Wicked Pony".

I just build them, I don't name them!

What the .....? Since when did people start naming golf courses after strip clubs... ??? ??? ???

My first ever solo project in 1984 - rebuilding a defunct Dick Wilson course in Las Vegas named Winterwood - was re-named "Desert Rose" which was also the name of a local brothel.

One of my earliest discussions on this board about five years ago was whether or not gca's named the courses they designed, with the poster "aghast" that I didn't control everything.  My reply was that "the next course I name will be the first course I name."  

That said, I have been on a roll lately, with both the Quarry and the two Wilderness(es) being named after my suggestions.  The only problem is, those names don't translate well to shirt logos, with the text being about it, whereas I see some real possibilities with a "wicked pony" logo.

I'm seeing a topless woman waving her cowboy... (sorry, golf hat) around her head as she rides a bucking bronco. She may not be a hooker, but she definitely doesn't slice it! Salem Country Club is still top of my 'crazy woman' logos, but this has potential...

 :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tiger_Bernhardt on July 13, 2006, 12:32:44 PM
There should not be any sacred cows other than the logo for Stonewall of course. However, It seems whether it be my comment  in comparison of the sites, not the golf courses, at Sand Hills to Ballyneal to the others mentioned herein people do get all fired up. This site is about discussion and opinions. No one should get mad at anyone for good healthy normal thoughts, questions and discussions about any course.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 13, 2006, 01:53:55 PM
200 years from now, the Salem logo will still be top 5!!!
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tim Pitner on July 13, 2006, 02:07:59 PM
Well Gene, it looks like you deleted your post--probably a good thing.  You twisted Tom Doak's point about Sand Hills having smaller undulations than Ballyneal into an accusation that Sand Hills was "flat," then asserted that Doak was disparaging Sand Hills to promote his own course.  And to think that it's been suggested that some people are overly sensitive about certain courses.  I don't know what Tom Doak's or any other architect's motives are in sharing opinions here, but let's give people credit and assume positive intent.  
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gene Greco on July 13, 2006, 02:42:12 PM
Tim:

    I'm not going back down that road with you or anyone else.

    In all this Ballyneal was the unfortunate indirect recipient of unintended ill will. However, I'm confident Ballyneal will stand on its own with or without Tom's blessing. From all accounts, the land, passion of its founders and Tom have come together to create a masterpiece.

   I am happy for the owners, Tom and all their lucky members.

   



   
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Wayne Wiggins, Jr. on July 13, 2006, 02:47:28 PM
By architect:

Sacred             MacKenzie
                      MacDonald/Raynor
                      C&C
                      Doak

Not quite           Ross
sacred              Tillinghast
                       Thomas (or does belong above?)
                        Hanse
                        Silva

Heathens          Fazio!!
                      Rees
                      Nicklaus (or is he moving up?)

Lowest circle     Arthur Hills
of hell               Others?
                       AULT CLARK  

Who else belongs where?  Other categories?  Who disagrees?



This is pretty damn close. I think you have Arthur Hills ranked a little too high though. ;D Do Coore and Crenshaw need to do some more courses before they hang it up as Sacred?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Jay Flemma on July 13, 2006, 02:49:26 PM
How bout C&C?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 13, 2006, 03:17:08 PM
200 years from now, the Salem logo will still be top 5!!!

On top of that, it reminds the members that they need to pick up some things for the wife on the way home from the club...  ;D

BTW-maybe not sacred cow status, but I believe that Salem and Essex are both better courses than TCC. At least the clyde/squirrel nine configuration most commonly played. TCC's ranking inside the world's Top 50 is almost entirely supported by the historic events that have taken place on its grounds. The quickest way to get a major tournament back there would be to yank it out of the Top 100.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kevin_Reilly on July 13, 2006, 04:08:04 PM
The Sacred Cow thread from three years ago:

Don't criticise their bloody golf courses... (http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=387)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: TaylorA on July 13, 2006, 04:25:46 PM
Jeff,

Yet another name change at your course in Nashville:  Gaylord Springs Golf Links.

Mike
A Linkster

I heard they're building a new course next door to this one: Gaylord Focker Golf Links.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 13, 2006, 04:26:58 PM
Kevin:  I'm gonna drive east and personally lob eggs at your house if your digging up of that thread causes me to have to re-explain my point in that one again.

 ;D

That one was SUPPOSED to be about sacred cows, but I somehow missed the point completely and then got put on trial for it.  I recall all of that pretty well and it was not fun.  So if any of you read that thread for examples, well... just disregard my posts, OK?

 ;)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kevin_Reilly on July 13, 2006, 04:55:14 PM
Kevin:  I'm gonna drive east and personally lob eggs at your house if your digging up of that thread causes me to have to re-explain my point in that one again.

 ;D

I'll issue my second apology :) (see post #64 in that thread...I must have been the one to knock someone in another thread for kissing and telling after an invitation to play a course).
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 13, 2006, 04:57:01 PM
Kevin - you remain absolved.  But watch our for eggs nevertheless.

 ;D ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 13, 2006, 07:06:51 PM
Getting back to Tom's original idea, the folks who would impose a GCA orthodoxy seem to be outnumbered by those who prefer to express their own opinions.

Having said that, it's become distressingly clear that a lot of posters may censure or calibrate their views so as not to piss off the folks who can get them onto the courses they want to play.

Let me take the lead on this:

I will accept no invitation to play or to join NGLA
Please do not ask me to join you at Cypress Point
Fisher's Island is out of the question, as is Pine Valley

Augusta National .. we'll talk.

Yours for unbridled discourse,

Gary
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: JMorgan on July 13, 2006, 07:20:51 PM


I will accept no invitation to play or to join NGLA
Please do not ask me to join you at Cypress Point
Fisher's Island is out of the question, as is Pine Valley

Augusta National .. we'll talk.

Yours for unbridled discourse,

Gary

Gary, care to elaborate on this? Some serious sacred cow there....
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 13, 2006, 07:51:12 PM

James,

Not the first cows I've tipped :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Ian Andrew on July 14, 2006, 12:46:03 AM
As Charles Blair MacDonld said, every hole and every idea has room for improvement. A sacred cow occurs when people blindly defend a course or architect as perfect.

(For example) While I greatly admire the work of Coore and Crenshaw, not all the work is perfect, but there are lots of people here who think everything they do is. It doesn't lead to good dicussion of the subject.

I once questioned whether a particular greens at Friar's Head may be over contoured and I was asked if I still possessed testicles.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bob_Huntley on July 14, 2006, 12:51:22 AM
Gary,

What course would make you put on your lipstick and rouge to play?

From what I read on GCA there seems to be a surfeit of inquiries about "What's available in Peoria of merit." Or some such banality, when the real question is, can you arrange for me to play the Chicago G.C.

Bob
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 14, 2006, 07:38:10 AM
Bob,

Funny that you of all people should send a snarky response that either misses or ignores the point of my post.

Why "you of all people?"  Because some weeks back I received an IM from a well-meaning person I am not acquainted with warning not to piss off Bob Huntley.  Something about Bob being a very powerful guy.

Just for old time's sake, and just in case you missed it, here's the salient part of my post.

".. it's become distressingly clear that a lot of posters may censure or calibrate their views so as not to piss off the folks who can get them onto the courses they want to play."

Since you seemed a little slow on the uptake, Bob, I'll go ahead and spell it out for you:  our discourse on this board might be more useful were people not afraid to cross "sacred cows" like you.

And Bob.. I'm not sorry for having taken an innocent swipe at your pal Bill Murray, which is why you seem to have your panties in a wad.

Gary









Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on July 14, 2006, 07:53:59 AM
Ian Andrew,

Can a green be overcontoured ?

I would guess you were refering to the 7th green at Friar's Head.

It's certainly a challenging green, but, I find it highly interesting and since it's a par 5, the approach to that green is usually with a mid to short iron.

When I first came on this site, I categorized certain issues and architects as having enjoyed "Most Favored Nation" status.  That's probably akin to "Sacred Cows"
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 14, 2006, 09:01:49 AM
Thank you all for participating in my little survey.  I've gotten a number of other private responses which added to the interest.

Here's my take on the results:

1.  I am considered a sacred cow by many, which is too bad.  If that's the case then I have nothing to learn from being here.  Feedback is essential to growth.  I HAVE gotten some good feedback over the years, and I'm even trying to respond to it with some of my current design work, but there are less and less posters who are providing it, and some of them lay it on so thick that it's difficult to cut through the cliches to get to the point.

2.  It's not just me.  Pretty much any architect who participates here regularly is automatically deemed to be a good guy, and polite discourse prevents all but a handful of posters from really asking a serious question about design.  The same holds true for Bill Coore and Gil Hanse and Mike Strantz (for the saddest of reasons) even though they don't actually post.

3.  Despite denials by various posters, I believe that National, Shinnecock Hills, Pacific Dunes, Bandon Dunes, Pine Valley, Friars Head, The Kingsley Club, Cypress Point, The Old Course at St. Andrews, and especially Seth Raynor are indeed Sacred Cows on this site.  All the hair-splitting about them being above criticism was just comical.  Only an idiot would argue that they aren't great courses, but that doesn't mean that you can't learn something about architecture by discovering something that they are lacking ... but anyone who suggests such a thing is subject to immediate Guantanamo-style interrogation.

4.  There is also the converse, for which I can't think of a proper term ... "Devil Incarnate" is a little strong, but that's how some people treat certain architects and/or courses.  I don't understand why we can't just cut through the b.s. and analyze a golf hole on a Jim Engh or Tom Fazio or Rees Jones course, without it devolving into personal attacks on their motives or style.

5.  There seem to be very few living architects in between the Sacred Cow or Devil Incarnate categories, therefore we don't really discuss anybody's work.  And that is the real reason why most modern architects dismiss this site as a worship place for Old Dead Guys ... they're all we've got left to talk about.

6.  I am bothered that there seem to be a handful of posters who think of themselves as the police of the site, who report politically-incorrect infractions to Mr. Morrissett ... and that Mr. Morrissett seems to respond accordingly.  Y'all know who you are.  And there's nothing worse than somebody who thinks they should be a sacred cow.  I will check back here in a month to see if that point has been deleted!

7.  Since a fair percentage of people seem to think I participate here mostly as a self-promoter, I have determined not to respond on any thread which discusses any of my courses in general.  Often, I'm drawn in because someone asks a question about something that I can answer, but that's when I come across as self-promoting.  So, if you want to ask me a question, start a thread that invites me in.  Otherwise I'll just read and hope to God that the level of analysis and discourse here picks up a notch in the months ahead.

Best wishes,

Tom D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: paul cowley on July 14, 2006, 09:21:28 AM
By architect:

Sacred             MacKenzie
                      MacDonald/Raynor
                      C&C
                      Doak

Not quite           Ross
sacred              Tillinghast
                       Thomas (or does belong above?)
                        Hanse
                        Silva

Heathens          Fazio!!
                      Rees
                      Nicklaus (or is he moving up?)

Lowest circle     Arthur Hills
of hell               Others?


Who else belongs where?  Other categories?  Who disagrees?





...John, you might want to add Unmentionables as a category.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 14, 2006, 09:35:28 AM

How did we miss Flynn?

Tom --

Thanks for starting a thread that let us blow out the pipes a little.  

As for your decision/threat to join posts about your work only when invited, I hope you're not serious.  It's pretty clear that your career is going quite well, and anyone who thinks you need this site to promote yourself is, to use your word, an idiot.

As for hoping the level of discourse picks up, we can all hope for that, but I'm sorry to see you joining the chorus of handwringers.  Don't despair.  Overall this board is a good thing.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Peter Pratt on July 14, 2006, 09:45:31 AM
Tom,

I agree that it would be a great loss if you stopped posting on your own courses. Few of us have an opportunity to hear a working architect's thinking behind his/her decisions and I would hate to lose that.

BTW, I'm not in love with the 15th hole at High Pointe or the 12th at Pac Dunes. I'm sure I've ruined your day!!

Peter
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 14, 2006, 09:55:11 AM
Gary,
I think Tom is correct in his analysis.
There is an overall lack of respect for the architecture business on this site.
I enjoy reading here but a large number on here  don't even have a good definition of golf architecture and what it involves.....of course someone will come on here and say I am being "Aloof" or whatever.
As a practicing architect I am not going to ever comment on another architects work.  I will comment on dead guy stuff and the current fad or cottage industry of restoration experts.
I just think it is important that people understand the site for what it is.....entertainment....with a few interesting topics here and there.  And there is nothing wrong with that.
I think anybody that has been in this business for a few years has a very thick skin...if not they wouldn't still be in it.  And that even goes for us that are mediocre.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tiger_Bernhardt on July 14, 2006, 10:18:58 AM
Tom, I am sorry you feel you are a sacred cow and feel that some of your posts should not put forth. I enjoy your contribution to this site even when it is at my expense. I certainly have no problem pointing out things about your posts or courses which come into question. I would like to think much of the success of this site is the self policing done by the contributors. I also think the industry contributors are important to the content as well. There are always posts and posters which are not so good but they have a way of going away on there own from boredum or whatever reason.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John_Cullum on July 14, 2006, 10:23:41 AM
Tom D

Don't try to take all the credit. Some people may hesitate to be critical of a course because of gratitude to their host, or an accomodation afforded by the club.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 14, 2006, 10:43:22 AM
What a disappointing conclusion to this thread.

Mike Young -

I'm sorry to hear you think there is a lack of respect for the achitecture business on this site. I think quite the opposite. But if you do feel that way, a few pointed posts educating the rest of us might go a long way. :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 11:00:14 AM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kirk on July 14, 2006, 11:09:36 AM
It's obvious that potential access to great courses stifles honest analysis about them.  Perhaps this is an unavoidable by-product of the website.   The whole access thing is a little creepy.

We spend a disproportionate amount of time discussing Doak, Coore & Crenshaw, and the golden age courses.  Of course I'm as guilty as anyone in that respect.  If we were really serious about having a well rounded knowledge of the subject, more time would be devoted to other architects.  Maybe the subject is too big to get our arms around.

Or maybe we need a couple more members to pony up the jillion dollars to join a Fazio course so we can all play it and study it.

Add Crystal Downs to the sacred cow list, and please nominate Pasatiempo for sacred status.  Underrated!
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 11:09:59 AM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.

Please explain John -

You seem to be implying that raters will never be critical and architects will always suck up for rating points.

Ran is a rater and its his site  :o  Should all architects give up their practice so they can discuss architecture on here in your idyllic pure forum?

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kevin Edwards on July 14, 2006, 11:12:58 AM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.

What is the potential of this site in your estimation?

Thanks.. What is your vision?  Shouldnt it be Ran's vision?
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 11:13:34 AM
Several people have called Pastiempo a sacred cow... that I don't get.  We've roasted and toasted it over the years.  I think I've played it as much as just about anyone here, and I do love it so... but for years I've lamented that they keep the greens too fast for the contours... Dave M. and I had a great debate about #10 - he wanted the trees removed, I thought they made for a better tougher tee shot... Others have ripped the bunkering on 10 (Goodale for one, can't recall exactly who else but there were others)... Many have questioned the whys behind Doaks re-do of 11 green.... We've discussed the blandness overall of the par fives, which I believe Brad Klein pointed out in his review...

Just how is this golf course a sacred cow?

TH

ps - John Kirk - I get that you just want to call it sacred and that you find it underrated - and that's cool - but others did add the cow to the sacred... that has me puzzled.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bob_Huntley on July 14, 2006, 11:21:31 AM
Bob,

Funny that you of all people should send a snarky response that either misses or ignores the point of my post.

Why "you of all people?"  Because some weeks back I received an IM from a well-meaning person I am not acquainted with warning not to piss off Bob Huntley.  Something about Bob being a very powerful guy.

Just for old time's sake, and just in case you missed it, here's the salient part of my post.

".. it's become distressingly clear that a lot of posters may censure or calibrate their views so as not to piss off the folks who can get them onto the courses they want to play."

Since you seemed a little slow on the uptake, Bob, I'll go ahead and spell it out for you:  our discourse on this board might be more useful were people not afraid to cross "sacred cows" like you.

And Bob.. I'm not sorry for having taken an innocent swipe at your pal Bill Murray, which is why you seem to have your panties in a wad.
Gary



Gary,

I did indeed get your humerous jibe and thought it well done. My question to you was basically, is there not an Elysian field where you would set aside your resolutions?

I must say that is the first time I have ever heard that I was powerful or a sacred cow, I wish it were so.

As for having my knickers in a wad over some comment made about Bill Murray is ludicrous and I certainly did not remember you and I having a conversation on this. Can he be an ass and upset people, you bet, like the rest of us.

Bob

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Sweeney on July 14, 2006, 11:34:47 AM

I must say that is the first time I have ever heard that I was powerful or a sacred cow, I wish it were so.


When the Huntley Group pulled up to the Fishers Island ferry in my car, we were suddenly told about the "20 Minute Rule". Well it is not marked anywhere on the website or confirmation email. It just is, and we arrived 17 minutes before the ferry and were placed in the standby line. Panic set in.   :o Where can we charter a boat? Do I send them over and bring the car later?

In a flash, I considered using my Sacred Cow in the passenger seat, but then I came to my senses and realized that the Fishers Island ferry guy probably did not care that my Sacred Cow could get him on some golf course 3000 miles away! :D

Fortunately, the Sacred Cow was not needed and we made it through the standby line.  :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 14, 2006, 11:40:17 AM
our discourse on this board might be more useful were people not afraid to cross "sacred cows" like you.

If people are afraid to discuss things, it's not Bob Huntley's fault, it's said people's fault. The only "power" he wields in that of being a good person.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kirk on July 14, 2006, 11:42:21 AM
Tom,

Just my way of saying I dig Pasatiempo the most, baby, and feels it deserves the recognition and reverence worthy of a cow.

Bob,

Anybody who uses the word "surfeit" in a sentence deserves some sort of elite status.  "Sacred cow" is probably not your first choice.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 14, 2006, 11:42:21 AM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.

John, you've made many bizarro statements over the years, but this one is the prizewinner, imo.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gary Daughters on July 14, 2006, 11:45:54 AM

Bob,

I say let's call it good.

You seem to have accrued tremendous respect and affection here, and I doubt it's because you're doling out chits to neat clubs.  At least I hope not.

I'm glad that you seem to have gotten my point.  Your question still goes over my head.  If you feel it's worth pursuing feel free to IM.

Gary

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 11:47:15 AM
Tom,

Just my way of saying I dig Pasatiempo the most, baby, and feels it deserves the recognition and reverence worthy of a cow.


Gotcha.  But others have tried to call it a sacred cow.  I too very much dig it, but I don't find it beyond reproach.  6-7-8 are indeed too bunched together and they do at times keep the greens way too fast for the contours.  So reproach away....

As for vocabulary and Mr. Huntley, stick around - surfeit is just kid's stuff.  The man can turn a word.   ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 14, 2006, 12:06:56 PM
Tom,

Just my way of saying I dig Pasatiempo the most, baby, and feels it deserves the recognition and reverence worthy of a cow.


Gotcha.  But others have tried to call it a sacred cow.  I too very much dig it, but I don't find it beyond reproach.  6-7-8 are indeed too bunched together and they do at times keep the greens way too fast for the contours.  So reproach away....

As for vocabulary and Mr. Huntley, stick around - surfeit is just kid's stuff.  The man can turn a word.   ;D

I am guilty of calling it a sacred cow, I just haven't seen anything bad written about it here, I know I won't say anything bad about it.


Anyone,

I need an explanation, if Tom Doak wants to put his blood, sweat and tears into a project and then encourage people to play it and he talks about it reverently, HOW ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH IS THAT SELF-PROMOTION? Seriously, what is he supposed to say that is not very good and dull to play? Whether it is over my head or I just think differently, there quite a few things that Tom says that I am not totally on board with, but to say that self-promotion is going on is just an insult to him and any hard-working professional architect or author or anything else. The guy enjoys a good golf course and believes his to be so and likes to share on them, wake up, that is all it is.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike Benham on July 14, 2006, 12:13:43 PM
Some people may hesitate to be critical of a course because of gratitude to their host, or an accomodation afforded by the club.

The recent KP event to Stone Eagle is an obvious example of this.  30-40 GCAers play the course, and although there were a lengthy thread or two on the course, the posts were dominated by a few defenders and an attacker or two (World Cup analogy).  It should be apparent to all that Stone Eagle is/was not everyones cup of tea.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 12:19:11 PM
Glenn - you haven't been around ling enough - Pasatiempo certainly does have its critics, and rightly so.  The course isn't perfect.  It is freakin' great and I do love it to death - I surely defend it more than I criticize it - but it is not above reproach/sacred cow.

And I'm one who believes there are such things that some of us have... Gene Greco was right early in this thread to connect Sand Hills to me in that respect.  As much as Doak is right logically in that no course is perfect, well... emotions rule there for me as much as logic and that IS my Sacred Cow.

TH
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 12:21:24 PM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.

Please explain John -

You seem to be implying that raters will never be critical and architects will always suck up for rating points.

Ran is a rater and its his site  :o  Should all architects give up their practice so they can discuss architecture on here in your idyllic pure forum?


Geoffrey,

With the recent expulsion from a major panel of a rater who fell overly in love with a less favored architect I think it is safe to say that we rarely get the truth on this site in the future.  If people are not auditioning for a ticket they are protecting one.  


Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 14, 2006, 12:24:52 PM
TH,

Oh, your sacred cow, that is different. I listed what I thought were THE sacred cows, I have not been around nearly long enough, although I was a pretty damn regular lurker for a long, long time. My personal? Crooked Stick is my cup of tea and always will be. 16 holes out there would never get old to me and the other 2 are just fine and without shennanigans. Nice and solid golf holes if not spectactular, I have no doubt that there are more agreeable courses out there for the masses, but I am just fine with Crooked Stick.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 12:28:00 PM
I have nothing against personal sacred cows, so long as people have good humor when defending them.  I believe I do this with Sand Hills... or at least I try.

As for overall site sacred cows, I really don't think there are any, not universally.  Oh some come close - the ones Doak listed - but even those do tend to have their critics.  I take his point as more that if you do dare criticize one of those, prepare to take your lumps from several here who have those as personal sacred cows.

TH
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Sweeney on July 14, 2006, 12:31:26 PM
The guy enjoys a good golf course and believes his to be so and likes to share on them, wake up, that is all it is.

Glenn,

I agree with everything you said until "that is all it is". . I think that Tom Doak is probably the King Of Golf Architecture Geeks in a den full of them. My guess is that Tom can't help himself, he really really loves this stuff. Even when he talks about his year in Scotland, it is golf and more golf. Were there no women or beer in Scotland that year? ;)

However, as a result of the Confidential Guide, Tom's decision to NOT join the ASGCA, some early "disagreements" with developers, Tom has positioned himself as the outside insider. Again it may be savy or it may just be Tom's personality (the latter being my guess, I have not met Tom), but this website and his postings do nothing but confirm that position in the industy as this website is viewed in a similar manner.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 12:33:12 PM
Tell me...has Tom Doak been asked to join ASGCA..
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 14, 2006, 12:37:03 PM
The guy enjoys a good golf course and believes his to be so and likes to share on them, wake up, that is all it is.

Glenn,

I agree with everything you said until "that is all it is". . I think that Tom Doak is probably the King Of Golf Architecture Geeks in a den full of them. My guess is that Tom can't help himself, he really really loves this stuff. Even when he talks about his year in Scotland, it is golf and more golf. Were there no women or beer in Scotland that year? ;)

However, as a result of the Confidential Guide, Tom's decision to NOT join the ASGCA, some early "disagreements" with developers, Tom has positioned himself as the outside insider. Again it may be savy or it may just be Tom's personality (the latter being my guess, I have not met Tom), but this website and his postings do nothing but confirm that position in the industy as this website is viewed in a similar manner.

Mike,

Just my poor way of wrapping up a rant, I guess. If I built or played for that matter, one of those courses, I would be shouting its praises and telling all my friends that they should try it and saying why it was good. Any other behavior, is just weird.

TH,

What were some of the knocks on Pasatiempo? Do you know any of the threads or anything? Thanks
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 12:40:19 PM
Glenn:  I listed several a page back.  To wit:

for years I've lamented that they keep the greens too fast for the contours... Dave M. and I had a great debate about #10 - he wanted the trees removed, I thought they made for a better tougher tee shot... Others have ripped the bunkering on 10 (Goodale for one, can't recall exactly who else but there were others)... Many have questioned the whys behind Doaks re-do of 11 green.... We've discussed the blandness overall of the par fives, which I believe Brad Klein pointed out in his review...

Others have definitely commented on the bunched-in nature of 6-7-8.  Some like 14 and call it a great hole (count me in there), others call it bland.  People critiqued the hell out of the renovation of the bunkers around 15.  Some like the renovated #1, some don't.  LOTS of people think the course is overtreed and could use a dose of chainsaw.

Is that enough?

If this is a sacred cow, then I'm Michael Jackson.

 ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 14, 2006, 12:46:40 PM
Michael Jackson,

Thanks, that was plenty. I just wanted to see some. 6-7-8 are a little tight.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Voytek Wilczak on July 14, 2006, 12:49:08 PM
I think Tom D frequents and contributes to this site in order to stay sharp.

He wants to pick everyone's brain. No man is an island.

Everyone needs constructive feedback to grow. Everyone who is creative, that is.

If we want to keep TD here - give him what he asks for.

Tell him which holes are great and which are not-so-great. He'll be more grateful for such posts than the kiss-ass posts.

On that note, Tom - the 8th at Sebonack is pedestrian, and you should have made it a downhill hole.

There...

 ;D
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kirk on July 14, 2006, 12:53:11 PM
Some people may hesitate to be critical of a course because of gratitude to their host, or an accomodation afforded by the club.

The recent KP event to Stone Eagle is an obvious example of this.  30-40 GCAers play the course, and although there were a lengthy thread or two on the course, the posts were dominated by a few defenders and an attacker or two (World Cup analogy).  It should be apparent to all that Stone Eagle is/was not everyones cup of tea.

Mike,

Most notable was the lack of participation in the thread by many people who played Stone Eagle during the tournament.  I knew the course was rather coolly received by the lack of participation.  A pretty clear indicator that people were reluctant to criticize this project.

I wrote a few posts challenging Tom H's assertion that the greensites were a little tight.  I don't think people perceived me as being defensive or angry about it.  Curiously, I didn't find the lukewarm response threatening or depressing.  I'm quite happy with Stone Eagle, flaws and all.  The course plays better at 75 degrees on a full night's rest.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Glenn Spencer on July 14, 2006, 12:54:34 PM
It has been a long time, 13 years in fact, but the 18th hole at Riverdale Dunes was a letdown for me, on a course that I otherwise LOVED. I was confused by it.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kirk on July 14, 2006, 12:55:05 PM
Michael Jackson,

Thanks, that was plenty. I just wanted to see some. 6-7-8 are a little tight.

No...6 is the greatest hole in Santa Cruz County, especially the big screen in front of the houses.  You guys are wrong!

Pasatiempo should be a scared cow.

 :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 01:01:03 PM
I'd say that if you want to seriously discuss architecture you should give up your rater card...As long as people jockey for position (raters and architects) this site will never reach its potential.  I'm reminded of the time some people out in the desert built a golden cow to worship...and that sacred cow didn't even have a golden ticket.

Please explain John -

You seem to be implying that raters will never be critical and architects will always suck up for rating points.

Ran is a rater and its his site  :o  Should all architects give up their practice so they can discuss architecture on here in your idyllic pure forum?


Geoffrey,

With the recent expulsion from a major panel of a rater who fell overly in love with a less favored architect I think it is safe to say that we rarely get the truth on this site in the future.  If people are not auditioning for a ticket they are protecting one.  




John

You seem to know more about and monitor what is going on with the various panels then the raters. Do you keep a database on this stuff?

Frankly, if you think we rarely get the truth on this site then why don't you point out each example and make them defend their remarks. Instigate some frank and honest debate about golf courses.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 14, 2006, 01:11:21 PM
I wrote a few posts challenging Tom H's assertion that the greensites were a little tight.  I don't think people perceived me as being defensive or angry about it.  Curiously, I didn't find the lukewarm response threatening or depressing.  I'm quite happy with Stone Eagle, flaws and all.  The course plays better at 75 degrees on a full night's rest.

John, you might be the only person on board who accepts criticism of his course.

 :)

I've said it before a million times, but the hardest thing about this board is discerning poster intent, so my own personal solution is to assume that everyone's posting as though we're sitting around at the 19th, sharing a beer and BSing about golf. But every now and then I get caught up in the vitriol as well, it's hard not to do with the style of posting some people have. I don't care if people disagree with me, but I do get annoyed when they start questioning my motives, or questioning my reading comprehension, or my honesty, etc., or if they start doing the same with posters I know and respect.

P.S. My only criticism of Tom's courses is that none are in my neighborhood. :)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John_Cullum on July 14, 2006, 01:17:37 PM
Frankly, if you think we rarely get the truth on this site then why don't you point out each example and make them defend their remarks. Instigate some frank and honest debate about golf courses.

Geoff,

Be careful what you ask for.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 01:22:18 PM
Frankly, if you think we rarely get the truth on this site then why don't you point out each example and make them defend their remarks. Instigate some frank and honest debate about golf courses.

Geoff,

Be careful what you ask for.

JohnC

I've got nothing to hide.  I've called out Doak on Pasatiempo #11 green and Rans beloved Yeamans Hall.  I've blasted my home course over a period of years.  I've defended Rees Jones restorations.  I love Merion. How much more honesty do you want from me?  ;)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John_Cullum on July 14, 2006, 01:23:51 PM
You mean there are people who don't love Merion???
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 01:24:04 PM

Frankly, if you think we rarely get the truth on this site then why don't you point out each example and make them defend their remarks. Instigate some frank and honest debate about golf courses.

Well, that is usually when I get in trouble.  Just answer me one question...Would this be a better site if every poster had equal access to all courses.  If the quality of baseball in the Negro league was at a high level why did Jackie Robinson choose to move to the Majors.  I don't see his desire to play for or with people who hated him any different than your bashing of Yeaman's Hall.  With the execption of course that his mission was good for all men and not just himself.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 14, 2006, 01:33:41 PM
John K:  No one is officially "asked" to join the ASGCA.  You apply and then you are accepted or not.  I've never applied, although I have been encouraged to apply by several members over the years, including by pretty much every member who participates here.

Tom H:  Yes, every individual has personal sacred cows, that's human nature and there is no getting around it.  But I am concerned that when the sacred cow belongs to one of a few Most Favored Posters, that discussion is COMPLETELY STIFLED by multiple flaming posts in all caps or even color, and that if it goes far enough, somebody will tell the teacher that so-and-so is being a bad boy.

As to those two critiques of my work:

Voytek:  All the ground behind the eighth tee at Sebonack is lower, and it is all wetlands.  We built it up about eight feet as you might notice on the drive in, but then the surface elevation of the pond had to be built about three feet above ground level so the bottom of the pond wasn't into the water table.  It would have taken a LOT more fill to make the hole downhill and there might not have been enough room.

Shivas:  For most people, that mound to the left of the fifth green at Lost Dunes is there to hold up a shot played deliberately short, if the pin is in the front of the green and the hole is downwind.  But, for a selected few, it's just there to distract you from the right play.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom Huckaby on July 14, 2006, 01:37:30 PM


Tom H:  Yes, every individual has personal sacred cows, that's human nature and there is no getting around it.  But I am concerned that when the sacred cow belongs to one of a few Most Favored Posters, that discussion is COMPLETELY STIFLED by multiple flaming posts in all caps or even color, and that if it goes far enough, somebody will tell the teacher that so-and-so is being a bad boy.

That does suck - you will get zero argument from me there.

TH
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on July 14, 2006, 03:59:18 PM
Most notable was the lack of participation in the thread by many people who played Stone Eagle during the tournament.  I knew the course was rather coolly received by the lack of participation.  A pretty clear indicator that people were reluctant to criticize this project.

I wrote a few posts challenging Tom H's assertion that the greensites were a little tight.  I don't think people perceived me as being defensive or angry about it.  Curiously, I didn't find the lukewarm response threatening or depressing.  I'm quite happy with Stone Eagle, flaws and all.  The course plays better at 75 degrees on a full night's rest.

John, like some of the other participants at KPV, I played Stone Eagle once as a second round of the day in 110+ degrees and was actually somewhat disoriented at times by the heat!  I thought the course was a great layout on a difficult piece of land.  I loved the green sites, the hidden fall offs in several of the greens (#13 par 5?  #17 par 5) - loved the skyline greens - didn't like the walks back to some tees but mainly because it was so friggin' hot  :o and wasn't crazy about the convoluted cart paths which were obviously essential on that wild site.

I wrote pretty much the same thing immediately after the round, and I thought there was some other criticism as well.  But this is not criticism of the design itself as much as what a difficult site required to build a golf course up there on top of the world.

I don't believe the course was "cooly received" at all.  Not in that weather!  :P  

75 degrees in January would be a welcome sight, but I'm sure I'd still be whining about the need to ride and the cart paths required to do so.
Title: Building Tom Doak
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 14, 2006, 04:28:02 PM
Tom Doak, if he is indeed a sacred cow, should be in a separate category of his own.

Back in the 60s Marshall McLuhan famously said of GE "They are not in the business of selling lightbulbs, they are in the business of selling information about lightbulbs..."

In that same manner, the main thing Tom Doak and Renaissance Design sells s a philosophy of how to design and build a golf course. That's what people are buying when they hire Tom to design a course for them.

Out of the 1,500 people who are members at GCA.com, I'd venture a maximum of 50 have played Barnbougle Dunes, but the information made available and shared about it helps sell Tom's name and more geographically accessible designs. Even more important, Tom finds many willing accomplices in this effort. Most people are less willing to trash a brand when they've participated in its creation.

*** Think about what would happen to Donald Ross's reputation if he was to raise from the dead, get a broadband line installed, and start contributing to golfclubatlas.com. :o :o :o
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 14, 2006, 06:50:37 PM
What a disappointing conclusion to this thread.

Mike Young -

I'm sorry to hear you think there is a lack of respect for the achitecture business on this site. I think quite the opposite. But if you do feel that way, a few pointed posts educating the rest of us might go a long way. :)
George,
Golf has always been a funny business..just look at the original golf stocks.....business men that would never have made such a stupid decision in their company would fall head over heels to be in a golf stock or golf company.....golfers have a hard time separating the game from the business....why would a golf grip ever go public?  How much $$$ did Greg Norman make off of Cobra??
Most people would not write a will without a lawyer or think they could do knee surgery w/o a doctor yet that same person would attempt to handle $5 million as an architect.  All because he has an idea.  I am not one to discourage people from following their dreams but most people feel they can do this golf architecture stuff...I see it everyday....And in truth they have no idea where it begins and ends....
I see these "design contest" and some guy sends in a 2 dimensional hole design and somebody chooses.  Nothing is stated as to drainage, irrigation grassing etc.  these are just some simple examples.
I have followed college BB for years and have watched how many fans think they can coach....and many have no respect for many of the coaches......only those that win get their respect.....yet there are 300 D1 coaches that have some idea of what they are doing.
Same goes for architects....people only respect those that they THINK are the "winners"....and so we end up with an idividual respect issue yet an overall disrespect for the business because most only know enough to be dangerous and feel they can do the entire process better.  I see it everyday.
Mike
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 08:01:14 PM

Frankly, if you think we rarely get the truth on this site then why don't you point out each example and make them defend their remarks. Instigate some frank and honest debate about golf courses.

Well, that is usually when I get in trouble.  Just answer me one question...Would this be a better site if every poster had equal access to all courses.  If the quality of baseball in the Negro league was at a high level why did Jackie Robinson choose to move to the Majors.  I don't see his desire to play for or with people who hated him any different than your bashing of Yeaman's Hall.  With the execption of course that his mission was good for all men and not just himself.

JohnK - No - the site would be neither better nor worse if every poster had equal access (my opinion only of course). Why are you so focused on access and raters? That seems to be your equivalent to Roger Rulewich for me. I sure hope everyone understood my hangup better then I do yours.

I speak up when I have something to say or contribute (or at least I think I can) and other times I sit back and read trying to learn something. I've also come to respect some opinions and others less so.  If those others happen to have access to and speak up on more courses it would make little difference to me and what I learn. Maybe that's my loss - who knows but more is not always better.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 08:24:13 PM
Geoffrey,

I think you are an excellent and valuable contributor to this site.  It is your roll as a rater that I find completely self serving to both you and the magazine you represent.  It is a scam built on blackmail and bribery that hurts golf more than helps....That is, unless you think the current work at Plainfield is a direct result of the slam presented to them by Golf Digest...and of course if you think the work is an improvement.

note:  If asked I would gladly be a rater too..but I'm a selfish bastard at heart.

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 08:41:58 PM
Geoffrey,

I think you are an excellent and valuable contributor to this site.  It is your roll as a rater that I find completely self serving to both you and the magazine you represent.  It is a scam built on blackmail and bribery that hurts golf more than helps....That is, unless you think the current work at Plainfield is a direct result of the slam presented to them by Golf Digest...and of course if you think the work is an improvement.

note:  If asked I would gladly be a rater too..but I'm a selfish bastard at heart.

John - How would you know if I (or anyone else) played a single course this season "as a rater" by using that status to gain access?

Are you really sure Gil and his master plan for Plainfield and its restoration were finalized AFTER the GOlf Digest ranking came out? Would you be willing to bet on that one? - and YES - I'e seen it before and after Gils work and it is a VAST improvement over an already teriffic golf course - and NO I did not access it as a rater.

Blackmail and bribery - That's where I end my participation in this discussion.

To John C  - About Merion- I love it in spite of the fact that it has been ruined by that demon Fazio and McDonald and Company - That's what I meant about bucking the trends (cows) here.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 08:47:32 PM
Geoffrey,

Bribery is the initial promise of a ranking and blackmail is the threat of removing said ranking once achieved.  It can't be helped under the current system.  

I am glad to hear that the impovements to Plainfield had nothing to do with the system...thanks.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: paul cowley on July 14, 2006, 08:48:32 PM
John....wait, ya mean you are not a rater? jaysus.

I am not going back to reread allyopur posts mother
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 14, 2006, 09:23:21 PM
Geoffrey,

Bribery is the initial promise of a ranking and blackmail is the threat of removing said ranking once achieved.  It can't be helped under the current system.  

I am glad to hear that the impovements to Plainfield had nothing to do with the system...thanks.
I was informed by one of the marketing team at a course near me that they would get a favorable ranking for their new course if they hired a specific architect.  And it was the arcitect that relayed that promise.  they hired him. JK, we feel the same way about the rating system.

Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 09:40:00 PM
Geoffrey,

Bribery is the initial promise of a ranking and blackmail is the threat of removing said ranking once achieved.  It can't be helped under the current system.  

I am glad to hear that the impovements to Plainfield had nothing to do with the system...thanks.
I was informed by one of the marketing team at a course near me that they would get a favorable ranking for their new course if they hired a specific architect.  And it was the arcitect that relayed that promise.  they hired him. JK, we feel the same way about the rating system.

Mike

So an unethical architect makes a promise that he can't keep to a marketing team who believes his lies/claims.  Everyone seems to take this in stride without reporting unethical practices and its the rating panels that are at fault?

Perhaps we should do away with democracy or at least our congress because a few representitves take some questionable or illegal junkets on private planes and accept a vacation to Hawaii to study the effects of volcanos so they can save their district in lets say Indiana.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 09:42:40 PM
Geoffrey,

I bet the architect keeps his promise...the system is that corrupt.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on July 14, 2006, 09:53:59 PM
Geoffrey,

Bribery is the initial promise of a ranking and blackmail is the threat of removing said ranking once achieved.  It can't be helped under the current system.  

I am glad to hear that the impovements to Plainfield had nothing to do with the system...thanks.
I was informed by one of the marketing team at a course near me that they would get a favorable ranking for their new course if they hired a specific architect.  And it was the arcitect that relayed that promise.  they hired him. JK, we feel the same way about the rating system.

Mike

So an unethical architect makes a promise that he can't keep to a marketing team who believes his lies/claims.  Everyone seems to take this in stride without reporting unethical practices and its the rating panels that are at fault?

Perhaps we should do away with democracy or at least our congress because a few representitves take some questionable or illegal junkets on private planes and accept a vacation to Hawaii to study the effects of volcanos so they can save their district in lets say Indiana.

Geoffrey,
No where have you heard me complain of an indvidual rater.  IMHO the rating SYSTEM is a product of the American marketing mentality and is the problem.  The rating system and marketing dollars go hand in hand .  And while I don't think we should do away with democracy...I do think we could do away wth rating. I feel there would be no rating if no courses advertised in the particular magazines.  We have a new course opening this year where the marketing company recommended inviting the raters and giving the round, lunch and hat or shirt and all written off as a marketing cost.  Whether is is intended or not this is what has evolved.  I am not condemning any individual raters....I have many friends that are raters....I am always kidding them about how they are being used by the system....and they know it....some aren't even sure their vote even counts......how do we know????  
As I mentioned in the above post....when someone at the head of magazine rating panel can assure a ranking..why do the individuals matter???  
P.S.  I am not speaking of BK in this post...so you can eliminate that one.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Geoffrey Childs on July 14, 2006, 09:58:51 PM
Geoffrey,
...the system is that corrupt.

John - seriously - if you have evidence of corruption and bribery then I'm sure that everyone in the business who are affected would welcome your input. In the absence of such evidence you are just blowing smoke up our *****.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: John Kavanaugh on July 14, 2006, 11:26:35 PM
Geoffrey,

Call Geoff Shackelford...this may me the one subject we agree on.  
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Gene Greco on July 14, 2006, 11:34:11 PM
  Why it's almost like "A Miracle on 34th Street" - (Macy's and Gimbels)
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on July 15, 2006, 07:31:07 AM
So let me get this straight:

IF the pin is up and

IF the hole is playing downwind and

IF a player plays intentionally short

THEN that's what the mound is there for...

otherwise, it was intended as a diversionary pseudo-feature to fool the strategic-thinking golfer?

I ain't buyin' it, not from you... ;D

Sounds like the 18th at Turnberry



Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Kevin Pallier on July 15, 2006, 09:19:37 AM
I ask because we might as well put them on a list and declare them off-limits to criticism, and spend our time discussing other courses which are not beyond argument.

Tom

I believe as there's no such thing as absolute perfection then no course is off-limits when it comes to critcism [even my old favourites TOC, Royal Dornoch and North Berwick  ;)]
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: George Pazin on July 15, 2006, 10:42:38 AM
George,
Golf has always been a funny business..just look at the original golf stocks.....business men that would never have made such a stupid decision in their company would fall head over heels to be in a golf stock or golf company.....golfers have a hard time separating the game from the business....why would a golf grip ever go public?  How much $$$ did Greg Norman make off of Cobra??
Most people would not write a will without a lawyer or think they could do knee surgery w/o a doctor yet that same person would attempt to handle $5 million as an architect.  All because he has an idea.  I am not one to discourage people from following their dreams but most people feel they can do this golf architecture stuff...I see it everyday....And in truth they have no idea where it begins and ends....
I see these "design contest" and some guy sends in a 2 dimensional hole design and somebody chooses.  Nothing is stated as to drainage, irrigation grassing etc.  these are just some simple examples.
I have followed college BB for years and have watched how many fans think they can coach....and many have no respect for many of the coaches......only those that win get their respect.....yet there are 300 D1 coaches that have some idea of what they are doing.
Same goes for architects....people only respect those that they THINK are the "winners"....and so we end up with an idividual respect issue yet an overall disrespect for the business because most only know enough to be dangerous and feel they can do the entire process better.  I see it everyday.
Mike


Mike, speaking as someone who enters all those contest, we, or at least I, do it because it's fun. It's an interesting intellectual exercise, and it's fun to do. To me, it's analogous to the various fantasy leagues for sport. It's a way of participating on a very low level in something I really love, the game of golf and its tremendous playing fields. I love the feedback of others telling me what they think is wrong and what they like. In no way whatsoever do I harbor any delusions that I could build a golf course.

And I think there are plenty that respect everyone out there making a living out there in the dirt. The reason "the winners" are so widely spoken of is because there is a certain critical mass that must be attained before anyone or any course can even be discussed.

Look at someone like Kelly Blake Moran. He doesn't have a wide following, but he does have a slight advantage in that the courses he's built happen to be in the neighborhood of a small group of devoted architecture nuts, so his courses get discussed.

I am dying to discuss Rawls, but only a handful of posters have played it and I've discussed it with them already. And that's Tom D, one of the guys I'm guessing you'd lump in with the winners.

If you think that golf course architecture is the only business that gets the type of second guessing from amateurs that one sees on here, you couldn't be more wrong. My piddling little t shirt business draws comments from people I encounter on a daily basis. Everyone seems to know have an idea for a t shirt that will sell millions, and everyone seems to know how to run my business better than me, in spite of the fact that I started it with nothing and have been doing it for 13 years. Some have good ideas, some not, some are insulting, some are complimentary. That's life.

You're in a business that is seen as somewhat glamorous by those outside of the industry who love the game. It's no different from the second guessing that goes on by every couch potato sports commentator who calls into his local sports talk show, criticising the coach or manager. Or every person who's been to a movie, offering his own thumbs up or down, thinking he  has a great idea for a better movie.

I hope I can tee it up at one of your courses someday so we can discuss it on here.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Matt_Ward on July 15, 2006, 11:57:41 AM
George:

The Rawls Course is only the tip of the iceberg.

Minus the left and right coasts and the folks from Chicago you get a number of other courses in the middle of the USA that are far from sacred cows -- people actually believe that quality golf (national acclaim level) doesn't even exists in these other areas -- and I'm not speaking about Sand Hills and the like.

Frankly, people need to get out and play more than the narrow range of courses that far too often get too much ink even though a certain few of them are world class.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 15, 2006, 12:16:36 PM
Matt:

They need to get to the Midwest; you need to get overseas more; I need to get to Canada more.  Everybody's got their weak underbelly, but most don't have time to address it.

But, I have been surprised to notice this week that most of the board have played maybe two of my twenty designs.  Collectively, the site has got about every corner of the globe covered (except Asia), but individually, many people's experience is more limited than I would have guessed.

But I can't really point fingers ... I've been dying to start a thread on Jeff Brauer's best and worst golf holes to give him equal time, but I have only seen one of his courses myself.
Title: Not made of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 15, 2006, 12:27:01 PM

But, I have been surprised to notice this week that most of the board have played maybe two of my twenty designs.  Collectively, the site has got about every corner of the globe covered (except Asia), but individually, many people's experience is more limited than I would have guessed.

Perhaps it's because you, Mike Clayton (and Neil Crafter) are about the only members of this board who can figure out how to make a trip to Barnbougle and Cape Kidnappers a business expense.  :)

I can probably insert a trip to St. Andrews Beach into my next trip to Australia because one of our good friends is the GM/General Manager at a Mornington Peninsula winery, but I'm going to have to do some fast talking to add a two-day side trip to Tasmania for a couple of rounds of golf.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on July 15, 2006, 12:32:12 PM
Anthony:

I'm not exactly made of money either, though I'm doing better nowadays.  I got around more in my student days when fancy accommodations were not necessary; I believe my trip to Great Britain and Ireland in 1982 cost $9,500 all in (for nine months), including golf and film!

But there are some very good wineries on the way from Launceston to Barnbougle; I think Pipers Brook was one of them.
Title: Re:Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Butler on July 15, 2006, 12:44:14 PM
Anthony:

There are some very good wineries on the way from Launceston to Barnbougle; I think Pipers Brook [GOOD PINOT!] was one of them.

I will include this fact in my formal proposal to the wife.... :)
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Mac Plumart on March 01, 2012, 06:15:55 PM
I think Seminole and Ballyneal are sacred cows on this site.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Gray on March 01, 2012, 06:20:37 PM


  NGLA. It has alot of blind shots early in the round but nobody mentions it.


Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: George Freeman on March 01, 2012, 06:25:25 PM


  NGLA. It has alot of blind shots early in the round but nobody mentions it.


Anthony - is that a good thing or a bad thing (the blindness)?
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tim Martin on March 01, 2012, 06:29:10 PM


  NGLA. It has alot of blind shots early in the round but nobody mentions it.


Anthony - is that a good thing or a bad thing (the blindness)?

So blind is now a negative? Somebody better tell the raters. ;)
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on March 01, 2012, 07:44:14 PM
I think Seminole and Ballyneal are sacred cows on this site.

Mac:

I don't think Ballyneal is a sacred cow.  I think there are a lot of people who are hoping to gain access to it, so they suck up.  That's probably also true of Seminole -- even though I don't believe there is a single person on GCA who can host people at Seminole.  Same goes for National, incidentally.

Perhaps some people are afraid of criticizing these courses for fear of looking stupid.  That's not the same thing as a sacred cow.

Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Simon Holt on March 01, 2012, 07:53:51 PM
Tom,

Do you think the concept of Askernish is a sacred cow?  Having not been there I am curious to see whether it is really 'cool' or just 'cool to say its cool'.  I suppose not enough people will have seen it to make that call yet.  Perhaps not specifically Askernish but that sort of concept.  If it was readily accessible to the mass market would they embrace it?

I cant remember hearing one negative comment about Askernish, when I for one have said a similar project like Mach Dunes that just doesn't do it for me.

Simon
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Jud_T on March 01, 2012, 07:55:45 PM
Pebble is at least a semi-sacred cow...
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Simon Holt on March 01, 2012, 07:59:22 PM
Jud,

Really?  People say its overrated quite often.  I have never played but walked it quite a few times.  Looks pretty good to me but I have definitely noticed GCAers saying its NOT all that.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Dan King on March 01, 2012, 08:14:53 PM
Jud Tigerman writes:
Pebble is at least a semi-sacred cow...

If Pebble is a sacred cow on this site I guess I really don't understand the definition of a sacred cow.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
By all means screw their women and drink their booze but never write one word about their bloody awful golf course.
  --Henry Longhurst (advise to a fellow journalist being pressed to make a trip to a new expensive golf development)
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on March 01, 2012, 08:19:08 PM
Jud Tigerman writes:
Pebble is at least a semi-sacred cow...

If Pebble is a sacred cow on this site I guess I really don't understand the definition of a sacred cow.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
By all means screw their women and drink their booze but never write one word about their bloody awful golf course.
  --Henry Longhurst (advise to a fellow journalist being pressed to make a trip to a new expensive golf development)


Dan King!  Having 38 posters call me a sacred cow was worth it for an appearance by Dan.  Even if I've seen that quote before!
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on March 01, 2012, 08:22:06 PM
Tom,

Do you think the concept of Askernish is a sacred cow?  Having not been there I am curious to see whether it is really 'cool' or just 'cool to say its cool'.  I suppose not enough people will have seen it to make that call yet.  Perhaps not specifically Askernish but that sort of concept.  If it was readily accessible to the mass market would they embrace it?

I cant remember hearing one negative comment about Askernish, when I for one have said a similar project like Mach Dunes that just doesn't do it for me.

Simon

Simon:

"The concept of Askernish" [very well put!] could be a sacred cow, though really not enough people have seen it.  I think it's completely different than Machrihanish Dunes, because it was built by the locals for themselves and to attract visitors, but not as a commercial enterprise as Machrihanish Dunes is.  And, it's very hard to spend time with Ralph Thompson and the locals and not find affection for what they've done up there.

Speaking of which, I've got to get back up there in 2012.  Maybe you should come up with me.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Mac Plumart on March 01, 2012, 08:24:24 PM
Tom...you might be right.  I need to think about it some more.  And you touch on one thing that kind of stinks...and that is people not wanting to speak truthful criticisms for whatever reason.  And to your point about people not wanting to say negative things because they are afraid of looking stupid...is that a signal of a sacred cow?  I think it might be.

Simon...I think you might be correct regarding Askernish as well.  I would really, really enjoy a BUDA or something were a ton of GCAers would go to Askernish and experience it for a day or three.  Then talk about it honestly online.  And I mean talk about the great things and the things that people didn't like about it.  To me, that would be one of the most interesting discussions we could have.

Pebble can't be a sacred cow on this site.  People criticize it all the time.  Maybe it is a sacred cow in the real world, like Augusta is.

Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Anthony Gray on March 01, 2012, 08:24:49 PM


  NGLA. It has alot of blind shots early in the round but nobody mentions it.


Anthony - is that a good thing or a bad thing (the blindness)?


  If they criticize Cruden Bay for the blindness than why not The National. There is too much blindness early on in the round at NGLA.

  Anthony

Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Dan King on March 01, 2012, 08:38:20 PM
Tom Doak writes:
Dan King!  Having 38 posters call me a sacred cow was worth it for an appearance by Dan.  Even if I've seen that quote before!

Why thank you Mr. Doak. I'm thinking about a return to golf in preparation for Kings Putter 2013.

Hopefully my below quote is one you haven't already seen.

Anthony Gray writes:
 If they criticize Cruden Bay for the blindness than why not The National. There is too much blindness early on in the round at NGLA.

Cruden Bay is crap. Please, everyone stay away from there. If forced to go to Cruden Bay you are much better off staying in there very pretty clubhouse and just stay away from the golf course. Maybe make a stop at the Kilmarnock Arms Hotel to get some Bram Stroker vibe, but then get out of town.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
[Crudin Bay] A great personal favorite of mine which I hated to leave out of my Gourmet's Choice; but I couldn't list it as superior to Simpson's Ballybunion. Cruden Bay is more of a "cult" course, thanks to it's huge sandhills, superb views, great and terrible holes, and relative anonymity.
 --Tom Doak
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Simon Holt on March 01, 2012, 08:44:04 PM
Tom,

Sure, that would be cool.  Tough to convince my North Berwick pals and the pros at Renaissance to venture to such places.

Mac,

Cool concept for BUDA to go to Askernish.  I think Machrihanish and Mach Dunes is a much more doable venue which could provide some really interesting debates with regard to Old v New, conditioning, blindness.  There is also more golf so logistically worth doing a BUDA there.

Anthony,

There is not too much blindness early in the round at NGLA-  for me it will remain sacred!  Good for you for airing your honest thoughts though.

Is a certain golf course developer the anthesis of a Sacred Cow?  He certainly seems to be at the moment!
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Tom_Doak on March 01, 2012, 09:27:19 PM

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
[Crudin Bay] A great personal favorite of mine which I hated to leave out of my Gourmet's Choice; but I couldn't list it as superior to Simpson's Ballybunion. Cruden Bay is more of a "cult" course, thanks to it's huge sandhills, superb views, great and terrible holes, and relative anonymity.
 --Tom Doak

Dan:

That's a good quote, but there's no way I put the apostrophe in "it's".  And I hope to God my publisher didn't, or I will never hear the end of it from my wife.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Dan King on March 01, 2012, 09:58:59 PM
Tom Doak writes:
That's a good quote, but there's no way I put the apostrophe in "it's".  And I hope to God my publisher didn't, or I will never hear the end of it from my wife.

See, I told you I could find an unfamiliar quote. I checked just to make sure (I'm sure I got the quote from your self-published version.) And it looks like I added that apostrophe years ago when I typed it in (just part of being young and foolish.) What can I say: my bad. It's good to see you still got your editor chops.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
“The fool supply was controlled...”
― John Steinbeck, The Moon is Down
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Mike_Young on March 01, 2012, 10:11:32 PM
"Sacred Cows make the tastiest hamburger"  Abbie Hoffman ;) ;)
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Peter Pallotta on March 01, 2012, 10:15:11 PM
I've been thinking about such things lately.  I think the reason there are sacred cows is not that we love the cows so much but that we're hungry for the sacred.  We're so hungry for it that we're willing to attach it to just about anything that stands out as special or different.  I'm glad we attach it to golf courses -- that's so much more peaceful and non-invasive than attaching it to the latest "ism"  (fascism and communism being just a couple that marred on an entire century).  Thankfully, as far as I know, none of the minimalists around are planning to overthrow the government.

Peter

 
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: archie_struthers on March 01, 2012, 10:17:23 PM
 ::) ??? :P

Hey guys , there are lots of sacred cows here,  courses and a few people, so be it !  There were a few sacred cows that left, and the site would be better with them .  Let's leave what ever cow chips are left to fall in the field and enjoy the discussions on GCA , golf in general and the occasional ot thread.

Thanks to all the architects who participate , we are richer for your analysis and interaction. Ditto for the superintendents and operators who regularly post , thank you!

Don't be afraid to question, and try to make criticism constructive and we will all be the wiser.  For those above criticism, mooooooooooo!
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on March 01, 2012, 10:17:59 PM
Jud,

Really?  People say its overrated quite often.  I have never played but walked it quite a few times.  Looks pretty good to me but I have definitely noticed GCAers saying its NOT all that.

Simon, that's from GCA'ers trying to be cool.    Pebble is World Top 100.  
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Simon Holt on March 01, 2012, 10:19:47 PM
I dont doubt it Bill.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Matthew Sander on March 01, 2012, 10:33:15 PM

Thankfully, as far as I know, none of the minimalists around are planning to overthrow the government.

Peter

Peter,

Your above line caught me off guard and nearly caused a laughter induced aneurysm.

However, I wouldn't be so sure...from the looks of Mr. Crenshaw's hair in the Streamsong videos ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7w_P45hNoU ) it seems his inner-anarchist may be bubbling to the surface.
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Dan King on March 01, 2012, 10:38:33 PM
PPallotta writes:
Thankfully, as far as I know, none of the minimalists around are planning to overthrow the government.

As a proud minimalist, my No. 1 goal is a return to the three-hour golf round. My No. 2 goal is to overthrow the government (and just in case all you folks at Homeland Security are paying attention, I'm not even planning on starting my No. 2 goal until I have achieved my No. 1 goal.)

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
Are not laws dangerous which inhibit the passions? Compare the centuries of anarchy with those of the strongest legalism in any country you like and you will see that it is only when the laws are silent that the greatest actions appear.
 --Marquis de Sade
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Chip Gaskins on March 01, 2012, 10:39:07 PM
Merion
NGLA
Frairs Head
All, sacred cows....

Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Bill_McBride on March 01, 2012, 11:26:21 PM
I dont doubt it Bill.

Whoops, I meant World Top 10.   Are we still good?
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Sean_A on March 02, 2012, 03:08:54 AM
Tom Doak writes:
Dan King!  Having 38 posters call me a sacred cow was worth it for an appearance by Dan.  Even if I've seen that quote before!

Why thank you Mr. Doak. I'm thinking about a return to golf in preparation for Kings Putter 2013.

Hopefully my below quote is one you haven't already seen.

Anthony Gray writes:
 If they criticize Cruden Bay for the blindness than why not The National. There is too much blindness early on in the round at NGLA.

Cruden Bay is crap. Please, everyone stay away from there. If forced to go to Cruden Bay you are much better off staying in there very pretty clubhouse and just stay away from the golf course. Maybe make a stop at the Kilmarnock Arms Hotel to get some Bram Stroker vibe, but then get out of town.

Cheers,
Dan King
Quote
[Crudin Bay] A great personal favorite of mine which I hated to leave out of my Gourmet's Choice; but I couldn't list it as superior to Simpson's Ballybunion. Cruden Bay is more of a "cult" course, thanks to it's huge sandhills, superb views, great and terrible holes, and relative anonymity.
 --Tom Doak

There are all sorts of lovely tyops in the above.  Long may it be so.

Related to the topic, I thought a scared cow was something held above criticism, but maybe unreasonably so.  I am seeing some courses listed that I think are universal givens as great.  So are folks saying they are critical enough of these courses to knock them off the great pedestal or is it just nit picking?



Ciao
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Ben Sims on March 02, 2012, 04:10:16 AM
I've been at the Golf Industry Show for three days now and I've met a lot of sacred cows. 
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Patrick_Mucci on March 02, 2012, 04:56:17 AM
Tom Doak,

Because of your generous participation and contributions to the quality of the discussions on this site, I think it's safe to say that both you and your golf courses are sacred cows.

But, that's certainly not the worst thing in the world, and you are in good company ;D
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: Kalen Braley on March 02, 2012, 05:44:46 AM
When I went to India, I saw a lot of sacred cows...

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3626/3391879608_b9568dfa4e.jpg)

Speaking of India, any projects going on there?
Title: Re: Sacred Cows
Post by: archie_struthers on March 02, 2012, 06:17:40 AM
 ;D

Now that's on point Kalen!