Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Robert Kimball on November 29, 2007, 03:29:11 PM
-
I thought this was funny:
I am interested in this book, and saw this following description on ebooks.com. Whoever wrote this certainly isn't a golfer and most likely didn't read the book. :)
And is the part concerning all the spectators accurate? I wouldn't think the real CPC would let that happen.
-- Rob
Description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eddie Lowery left his first imprint on the game of golf in 1913 as the 10–year–old caddie to underdog U.S. Open champion Francis Ouimet. Best–selling author Mark Frost continues Lowery’s story 43 years later with Lowery as a multi–millionaire car–dealer, who boasted to fellow millionaire and golf staple George Coleman that amateur golfers Harvie Ward and Ken Venturi could hands down beat any other two golfers in the world in a best ball match. A bet was made for a substantial sum of cash, and a tee time was set at the prestigious Cypress Point Country Club (Hampton Roads, Virginia) for Ward and Venturi to play whomever Coleman decided to bring. The morning of the match, Coleman showed up with the other half of the foursome: Ben Hogan and Byron Nelson, the two most distinguished golfers in the world. Despite efforts to keep the match under wraps from the public, word leaked out as soon as the men arrived at the course and a hundred people surrounded them by the time they reached the first tee. Three and a half hours later, nearing the conclusion of what many in the game now refer to as the greatest private match in the history of American golf, the crowd lining Highway 1 and the eighteenth fairway numbered close to five thousand people. Mark Frost brings to life an unlikely golf match that changed golf forever.
-
I just finished this book last night.
It gives a good description of the course, although easier to follow having been there.
As for the fill, there are long chapters about Ken Venturi, Harvie Ward, and especially the careers of Hogan and Nelson. Having read the "Hogan" biography last year, those parts were a bit repetetive for me.
The match itself is very interesting, but without the biographical fill, it would've been a 50-page book. My biggest complaint about the match commentary is that there are numerous mentions of winks, looks, grimaces, but less of the actual golf is described. When a player makes a birdie, it's kind of anti-climactic.
A decent read for a Monterey/CP aficionado.
-
Here we go again. Are we to believe that all those "winks," "looks" and "grimaces" were so etched in Ken Venturi's memory that he was able to accurately describe each of the ones mentioned in the book?
I don't think I can read "The Match." Every descriptive liberty taken with the actions of these four players (three of whom are not around to verify anything) would simply drive me crazy, and cause me doubt other parts of the narrative. The straight facts (and Venturi's most vivid memories) of this remarkable match would have been enough.
-
I have not read the book and feel that I might blow a gasket should I do so.
Is this in it?
"Three and a half hours later, nearing the conclusion of what many in the game now refer to as the greatest private match in the history of American golf, the crowd lining Highway 1 and the eighteenth fairway numbered close to five thousand people. Mark Frost brings to life an unlikely golf match that changed golf forever."
Any one that knows Cypress, would tell you that Highway 1 does not border the 18th hole, in fact the road is not even in Pebble Beach. Secondly, to say that there were five thousand spectators on the 18th hole is simply absurd. You would have to have all of those spectators standing shoulder to shoulder covering the fairway from tee to green.
Some of the stuff about George Coleman is incorrect.
Bob
-
Well Bob, given that the Cypress Point described in that quote is said to be in Hampton Roads, Virginia, then heck, the stuff about Highway 1 and 5000 spectators could well be true.
;D
I am not sure which "facts" in that mini-review are coming from the reviewer, and which are coming from Frost's book, but either way it sure doesn't reflect well on either of them.
I've been a defender of Frost before... I still say I enjoyed his book about the famous Ouimet US Open win ("Golf's Greatest Game")... but I guess it took something hitting relatively close to home to get me bothered.
Because this DOES bother me.
TH
-
Huck; its about time. Historical fiction is a popular and interesting genre. It ordinarily places a fictional character in and around historical events and allows the author to try and give the reader an insight into how it "must have felt" to be there while creating an interesting story to go along with the history. A fine example is Forrester's Hornblower series set in the british navy during the Napoleonic wars. These are clearly works of fiction and denominated as such.
The problem I have with Frost's work (and I haven't read the new one, only excerpts in magazines) is that he doesn't add characters or a plot, he simply tells the "story" but with "details" that only he could imagine. Too often he gets it wrong based on the historical record. For me, his attempt to humanize the history doesn't add anything and candidly, his "insights" and prose aren't anything out of the ordinary. I will give him this; he selects interesting events. Its going to be harder to write books like this as time goes on because modern TV coverage reduces the amount of ambiguity as to what really happened and the press coverage and journalistic style explores many of the subjects which Frost is free to invent. But I suppose we might expect a novel chronicling Nelson's win streak or any number of events predating comprehensive TV coverage.
-
Shel:
I understand all of that. My defense remains that at least with the prior books, Frost made no attempt to declare this as anything but fiction.. and the parts that bothered people here were so obviously fictitious (thoughts inside the minds of each of Ouimet and Vardon, for example) that to be bothered by them not being "fact" just struck me as odd.
But when he gets obvious geographic details wrong, well than that's too much, even for me.
BTW, I know Dan King cited the publisher saying these were non-fiction books, but I still don't buy it. To me they are all historical fictioln at best.
TH
-
Huck,
Wouldn't it make all this nit-picking moot if Frost's publisher would simply label his books accurately? I wouldn't make a peep about them if they were categorized as "historical fiction."
This is the same argument the nation engaged in a year or so ago when "A Million Little Pieces," labeled a memoir and hyped to the skies by Oprah, turned out to be fiction. My wife read it, thinking it really happened to this guy, and was enthralled by it. I think she would have enjoyed the read every bit as much if the publisher had called it, accurately, fiction.
Then again, Oprah probably wouldn't have picked it for one of her books, and it would have sold about 900,000 fewer copies...
-
What does he add? There are no new characters of importance? No plot. No insight. Merely an attempt to be a mind reader scores of years after the fact. Even the psychological "insights" are sophomoric at best. I guess since the books are about golf and intersting events connected with the game we love, some of us will read them and be satisfied. I am afraid I'll receive a copy as a gift, the same way I got the last one.
-
Some trial lawyer somewhere is trying desperately to find a plaintiff who's suffered irreparable damage....
Now THAT'S non-fiction!
:)
-
Rick: it would make this all a lot easier if they were labelled as historical fiction. But reading "Greatest Game", it was so obviously such to me that I was shocked when Dan showed me how they were labelled. As a consumer and not an author, I was unconcerned. But yes, in a more perfect world they are labelled correctly.
Shel: well, I enjoyed the Ouimet tale, however one wants to label it. What he added for me as a fleshing out of a tale I had previously only known the barest details about. If he embellished things on the way to getting to these bare details, it did not bother me. But again, since to me it was so obviously historical fiction, I was looking at it as such and it was thus pretty mindless entertainment. Because yes, it was about golf, and it was a pretty darn exciting tournament.
TH
-
Its going to be harder to write books like this as time goes on because modern TV coverage reduces the amount of ambiguity as to what really happened and the press coverage and journalistic style explores many of the subjects which Frost is free to invent.
As he tapped in his miss, the rage was palpable and a hush fell over the thirteenth green. Garcia hovered over the edge of the cup, and, to the astonishment of the gallery, delicately released a strand of saliva towards it. Whether it landed "in the middle" remains a question for the ages . . .
-
Great example, Michael. I would add these embellishments (if I were a Frost-like reconstructionist):
"As he tapped in his miss, the rage was palpable and a hush fell over the thirteenth green. "I am such a sheeety poatter," the fiery Spaniard thought to himself as he hovered over the edge of the cup. To the astonishment of the gallery, Garcia delicately released a strand of saliva towards it, all the while mentally cursing his father for failing to teach him the crosshanded putting grip when he was first learning the game.
Whether his gob landed "in the middle" remains a question for the ages . . .
-
My beef is that if you wish to embellish your story, fine, but at least have some idea of the geography of the place where these events happened. Ian Fleming never put a foot wrong in his Bond stuff, which made it all the more interesting.
Bob
-
I have not read the book and feel that I might blow a gasket should I do so.
Is this in it?
"Three and a half hours later, nearing the conclusion of what many in the game now refer to as the greatest private match in the history of American golf, the crowd lining Highway 1 and the eighteenth fairway numbered close to five thousand people. Mark Frost brings to life an unlikely golf match that changed golf forever."
Any one that knows Cypress, would tell you that Highway 1 does not border the 18th hole, in fact the road is not even in Pebble Beach. Secondly, to say that there were five thousand spectators on the 18th hole is simply absurd. You would have to have all of those spectators standing shoulder to shoulder covering the fairway from tee to green.
Some of the stuff about George Coleman is incorrect.
Bob
Not to dispute you,but does anyone here know for a fact that Highway 1 wasn't moved at some point between the 1950s and today? It could be that it ran through the coastal communities before being rerouted into the bypass of Carmel, PG and Monterey that it is today.
I have no idea if that is true or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it originally ran around the point rather than over the hill as it does today.
-
All:
I just read the appendix to the book, with Frost's recounting the story of how Cypress Point came to be. He touches on the history of Monterey, Samuel Morse, Pebble Beach, Marion Hollins, and how MacKenzie was hired and built the famed layout.
I spotted a classic error, at least I think. In going over MacKenzie's background, it is explained how he originally partnered with Colt before striking out on his own.
It is highlighted, in italics, that Colt's full name is Harry "Shapeland" (in italics, not quotation marks) Colt, and how "fitting" this was for a golf architect to be given a middle name of Shape Land. Ha.
I've always seen the middle name as Shapland. If I'm right, this is a ridiculous sentence, such an easily checkable mistake, and blasphemy to us GCA geeks. This is a big error to get written and past the editors. They must have assumed he spelled it right if he was going to make a pun on the spelling...
What a great golf course architecture malapropism!
Ouch...
-
Rick: it would make this all a lot easier if they were labelled as historical fiction. But reading "Greatest Game", it was so obviously such to me that I was shocked when Dan showed me how they were labelled. As a consumer and not an author, I was unconcerned. But yes, in a more perfect world they are labelled correctly.
What makes it difficult for me is that each of the people who have recommended the book to me thought it was nonfiction. And I believe they are typical.
I only got about a quarter of the way through it before I gave up and started looking for an author's note about the story. It's in the back of the book, and he did not call it historical fiction.
Ken
-
I am pretty sure I will get it for Christmas as well. My wife, who doesn't know much about golf, knows well enough that I am a big fan of MacKenzie and CPC and Pasatiempo.
It will be hard to top the bag of colored tees I received one Christmas. Nothing like a pink tee to give you confidence on your drive!! :)
Maybe one day Huckaby and I will have a match at CPC to rival this one -- and I will turn it into a best seller!! ;)
-
I have not read the book and feel that I might blow a gasket should I do so.
Is this in it?
"Three and a half hours later, nearing the conclusion of what many in the game now refer to as the greatest private match in the history of American golf, the crowd lining Highway 1 and the eighteenth fairway numbered close to five thousand people. Mark Frost brings to life an unlikely golf match that changed golf forever."
Any one that knows Cypress, would tell you that Highway 1 does not border the 18th hole, in fact the road is not even in Pebble Beach. Secondly, to say that there were five thousand spectators on the 18th hole is simply absurd. You would have to have all of those spectators standing shoulder to shoulder covering the fairway from tee to green.
Some of the stuff about George Coleman is incorrect.
Bob
Not to dispute you,but does anyone here know for a fact that Highway 1 wasn't moved at some point between the 1950s and today? It could be that it ran through the coastal communities before being rerouted into the bypass of Carmel, PG and Monterey that it is today.
I have no idea if that is true or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it originally ran around the point rather than over the hill as it does today.
John,
I can assure you that in the fifties Highway 1 is in about the same place as now. Pebble Beach was a gated community decades before The Match.
Bob
-
Mark Frost has to earn a living too!
However, his latest is a pale shadow of the Greatest Game. In that case, even if he took liberties with the facts, the story itself is so improbable and wonderful that I can live with it. I mean c'mon, the kid from across the street winning the US Open with a 10-year old caddie on his bag. You couldn't have made it up.
What was sort of interesting about the Match is stuff like club selection, which I assume Frost gets right. They all hit driver on 16 on what was supposed to be a fairly calm day. Moderns pros would be hitting a 3 or a 4-iron. Shows how much the game has changed.
There are a couple of interesting factoids as well. For instance, the Masters invited Harvie Ward back after the USGA had taken his amateur status away. Even in those days, before television made the Masters a world class sporting event (as Hootie used to say), Cliff Roberts and Bob Jones were already a law unto themselves.
-
I literally just got off the phone with Frost, and asked a lot of questions about all three of his golf books. I don't have time to transcribe the quotes now, but I'll put some of them up on my blog with my review of the book next week.
He defends his position well, and says a lot of the commentary about use of direct quotes in Greatest Game and The Match is "overdone." He says he had access to most of the individuals in question -- or friends who had heard direct accounts on the stories from Ward or Lowery.
It is an interesting debate -- and I'll throw some of the audio clips on the blog as well, so people can hear his perspective directly.
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design. As he told me, Cypress is treated like a character....
-
Looking forward to reading that, Robert. If you would be so kind, please alert us here.. or give us the URL to your blog now. As a some-time defender of the man, I will be very interested in Frost's defense.
I'll also be interested in hearing how in the heck he managed to gain access to the inner thoughts of Vardon and Ouimet.
;)
Rob - to make descriptions of our match a best seller, I think we'd need a writer with the imagination of Frost, and I don't mean Mark.
TH
-
Frost writes what he considers non-fiction. He does it in a very sloppy manner, doing little to no research. My only experience is with his Greatest Game book. It had so many details wrong, I never got past page 100. Some of you seem to believe facts aren't as important as a good story, but I'm glad to see Huckaby is finally coming to see the danger of writing such sloppy history.
I look forward to hearing Frost trying to justify his sloppy research.
Regarding Highway 1, there is a Web sight discussing the history of the California highways. I don't know the geography of Monterey as well as some of you, but I don't see anything about the highway running through Pebble Beach.
Click here to read a history of Highway 1 (http://www.cahighways.org/001-008.html)
That took me about 15 minutes of research, apparently more time than Frost bothered taking.
Cheers,
Grandan King
A library, to modify the famous metaphor of Socrates, should be the delivery room for the birth of ideas—a place where history comes to life.
--Norman Cousins
-
Well now Dan don't get too gladdened about me - I still think Greatest Game was a very fun and worthwhile book, as whatever errors he had in there were meaningless to me... and again, to me it was so obviously historical fiction, I don't care what he or his publishers call it.
Now this new book however does hit a little closer to home, so yes, it tends to bother me more.
So see, I continue to have zero principles in this matter and remain a selfish consumer.
;D
TH
ps - the stuff about Highway 1 comes from the mini-review... can someone who's read this book confirm if Frost makes this mistake? If he does, then he's losing me.
-
I literally just got off the phone with Frost, and asked a lot of questions about all three of his golf books. I don't have time to transcribe the quotes now, but I'll put some of them up on my blog with my review of the book next week.
He defends his position well, and says a lot of the commentary about use of direct quotes in Greatest Game and The Match is "overdone." He says he had access to most of the individuals in question -- or friends who had heard direct accounts on the stories from Ward or Lowery.
It is an interesting debate -- and I'll throw some of the audio clips on the blog as well, so people can hear his perspective directly.
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design. As he told me, Cypress is treated like a character....
Robert,
Frost may well have spoken to some friends of Lowery et al but two he should have called were Coleman's daughter, who was a very good golfer and his butler Franco, who was there the whole time.
Bob
-
Tom Huckaby writes:
it was so obviously historical fiction, I don't care what he or his publishers call it.
Frost believes he is writing non-fiction. His publisher believes he is writing non-fiction. His fans believe he is writing non-fiction. I believed he was writing non-fiction (very poorly.) The only one who seems to be making the claim he is writing fiction is you.
People keep diaries and talk about their feelings all the time. It isn't impossible to write about peoples inner-feelings as a non-fiction writer. It just requires work and crediting sources.
I've seen numerous critiques of Frost's books where readers have said they learned new things. But there is no way of knowing if it is new historical facts or just information coming from Frost's imagination. What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if 5,000 people lined Highway 1 to watch the match or not? As long as it makes an interesting story! Why do you care?
Cheers,
Grandan King
Anybody can make history. Only a great man can write it.
--Oscar Wilde
-
Robert Thompson writes:
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design. As he told me, Cypress is treated like a character....
The problem for many writers writing about golf design is that have to bother with research, something that often takes time. Many of them could pump out a lot more words on design if all that was needed was to make up crap. Find enough gullible people, and you've brought plenty of attention to golf design.
What if Cypress wasn't a character?
Cheers,
Grandan King
History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.
--Winston Churchill
-
Tom Huckaby writes:
it was so obviously historical fiction, I don't care what he or his publishers call it.
Frost believes he is writing non-fiction. His publisher believes he is writing non-fiction. His fans believe he is writing non-fiction. I believed he was writing non-fiction (very poorly.) The only one who seems to be making the claim he is writing fiction is you.
People keep diaries and talk about their feelings all the time. It isn't impossible to write about peoples inner-feelings as a non-fiction writer. It just requires work and crediting sources.
I've seen numerous critiques of Frost's books where readers have said they learned new things. But there is no way of knowing if it is new historical facts or just information coming from Frost's imagination. What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if 5,000 people lined Highway 1 to watch the match or not? As long as it makes an interesting story! Why do you care?
Cheers,
Grandan King
Anybody can make history. Only a great man can write it.
--Oscar Wilde
Well, it does remain exceedingly strange to me that something so obviously NOT non-fiction can be sold as such by anyone.
But maybe I'm just that much smarter than the entire world?
Since that can't be correct, I fall back on people believing what they want to believe.
And I continue to believe that Greatest Game was a hell of a fun read, and no historical errors bothered me at all.
As for the rest though, as is usually the case, you make great points. I know you are basically correct about all of it, and this type of thing SHOULD bother me.
But why is it that it doesn't?
Because for me, fun trumps all.
TH
-
I get really exorcised when Rudy Giuliani makes up data about his tenure as mayor of New York, but Mark Frost's inaccuracies just don't bother me that much, although I must admit that the only one I could pick out for myself in the Match was the statement that Tom Watson won 7 majors (he won 8).
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it. I did object to the addition of a love interest in the movie, however.
-
For the record, I recommended this book a few weeks ago because it was entertaining. I've gotten so used to writers mucking up the facts that I hardly notice anymore. But that's no excuse. I agree that if someone sells himself as non-fiction, then get the facts right. The reason I bought it was because of the interview Venturi had given years ago about this match and it sounded incredible. Plus, any chance to read something about CPC is always a plus. With all these inaccuracies, I feel ashamed I recommended it and I need to pay more attention and not get so lazy with my reading. It's entertaining, nothing more.
-
David - don't feel bad. It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things. Us consumers need not have any issues. And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.
Phil, my take on Greatest Game is exactly the same as yours - well said. Hope I didn't doom you to the kids' table with me now.
;D
-
Tom Huckaby writes:
It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things. Us consumers need not have any issues.
Backtracking a bit?
It was you or your evil twin who wrote:
but I guess it took something hitting relatively close to home to get me bothered.
Because this DOES bother me.
Are you bothered or not bothered?
And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.
I'd say I'm one of Frost's biggest detractors, and it has nothing to do with envy of his success, though it does bother me when he gets attaboys such as this one:
Phil Benedict writes:
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.
The story was compelling before Frost got near, the story is still compelling after Frost finished changing it.
or this one:
Robert Thompson writes:
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design.
You know what would make WWII more interesting to read? If Adolph Hitler was Jewish. Wouldn't that add an interesting twist to WWII history? There is no reason to let the fact that he isn't Jewish get in the way of ignoring a good story. All you have to do is write it in a book, walla, compelling history books.
It's sad you golf nuts are so desperate for attention that you'll applaud no matter who pays attention to your game.
Cheers,
Grandan King
You can bend it and twist it... You can misuse and abuse it... But even God cannot change the Truth.
--Michael Levy
-
David - don't feel bad. It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things. Us consumers need not have any issues. And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.
;D
Tom,
I am not a fellow writer but I am a stickler for the facts. The recent piece from the Week End Journal about the writer hooking his ball into the sea off of the first hole at Carnoustie was a palpable untruth. One blooper can be excused (but not by me) more than one and the article is consigned to the waste paper basket.
I await Mr Frost's mea culpa with interest.
Bob
-
Grandan (love that name, btw):
I am bothered by what are reported to be inaccuracies in The Match, because they do hit close to home. But they don't bother me enough to wholly renounce Frost and all his works (and empty promise - whoops, lapsed into an old Catholic thing there).
Are you SURE Frost's commercial success has nothing to do with things?
Come on, you can tell me. It's OK.
TH
-
David - don't feel bad. It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things. Us consumers need not have any issues. And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.
;D
Tom,
I am not a fellow writer but I am a stickler for the facts. The recent piece from the Week End Journal about the writer hooking his ball into the sea off of the first hole at Carnoustie was a palpable untruth. One blooper can be excused (but not by me) more than one and the article is consigned to the waste paper basket.
I await Mr Frost's mea culpa with interest.
Bob
Bob: you can live happily as the exception to my rule here.
;)
-
I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.
And I you did say that, I would say (in the words of a friend of mine, named Joe Soucheray):
B as in B, S as in S.
I have a request:
Get rid of the stupid smileys, Tom, and say what you really think!
P.S. You didn't offend me. You pissed me off!
-
Phil Benedict writes:
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.
The story was compelling before Frost got near, the story is still compelling after Frost finished changing it.
I commute to New York 5 days a week and need something to read on the train. Along comes a book about something I was vaguely aware of that entertained me for a couple of days while I schlepped into work (not too enthusiastically). Could someone have done it better than Frost? Probably, but nobody else did in book-length form that I am aware of. Am I mis-informed about the story recounted in the Greatest Game because Frost is my only source? Maybe.
But the basic story gave me so much pleasure that I am happy he wrote it regardless of the damage he has done to accuracy.
-
Dan:
I live by the smiley. Sorry, my friend.
To that end, I am just having fun with this. But since you asked, here is what I really think - no smileys, no bs.
1. Greatest Game was a very fun read and at least for me, did flesh out a story I only knew the barest details about. Dan pointed out historical inaccuracies that bothered him, but didn't change a thing for me. I also really could care less how it is labelled, as for me it was obviously historical fiction at best given he quotes from inside the minds of people long since dead.
2. The Match seems to be making errors about an area I tend to know a bit about, and tells a story I really don't care that much about, so not having read it yet.... well... if these errors are correct, well they do bother me. But not that much such that I'd call the guy out and want to kick his ass, as my friend Dan seems to want to.
3. The part about you writers being jealous was just a fun attempt to call you out, you know, shit-giving? I didn't think it possible to piss any of you off - least of whom YOU, but if so, well then I apologize.
There, no smileys. That's the way it is.
TH
-
My wife read it, thinking it really happened to this guy, and was enthralled by it. I think she would have enjoyed the read every bit as much if the publisher had called it, accurately, fiction.
You know her immeasurably better than I do -- but I doubt it.
-
What always bugs me about situations like this - modifying historical events to sell a story - is simply that the original story is usually more than good enough to sell. The writer is just being lazy, imho (and I know all about laziness!).
There is pretty much nothing he can say to justify his errors, other than he just didn't care enough to find out the real facts, or thought too highly of his own version to present the real facts. Either sucks, imho.
No envy, no smileys, just pure unadulterated annoyance.
-
Some trial lawyer somewhere is trying desperately to find a plaintiff who's suffered irreparable damage....
Now THAT'S non-fiction!
:)
So is this -- from www.amlpsettlement.com:
Welcome to the Information Web Site for the
A Million Little Pieces Litigation
www.amlpsettlement.com
(Last updated on May 31, 2007)
This website was established to provide information in connection with the settlement of a lawsuit concerning the book A Million Little Pieces.
The proposed settlement involves persons who purchased the book A Million Little Pieces in any format (including, but not limited to, in hardback, paperback, cassette, CD, or any other electronic media), on or before January 26, 2006.
The Class Notice and other documents explain the settlement, the benefits it provides, and the options that you have, including how to submit a Claim Form. Claim Forms are due by October 1, 2007. If you would like to download a Claim Form online, please click here.
You may obtain further information about this Settlement by clicking on the appropriate link(s) at this website. For more detailed information, please click on the Class Notice.
Certain documents are in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. If your computer is not already configured with the Acrobat software to view and print these documents, you may get Acrobat for free by clicking the logo below.
-
Tom; I have been thinking about this for awhile. You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success. I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.
I place a significant value on truth. I know that may sound a bit dramatic but it really troubles me that we are prepared to let someone distort the truth for the purpose of our entertainment. Its probably irrelevant that the embellishments weren't needed to make the story interesting.
But it is relevant that the errors could have been avoided by careful research and editing. Either the author was too lazy to get it right or he didn't care. I am not sure which is worse.
As I previously noted, had the author acknowledged that this was a work of fiction based on historical facts seeking to interpret what the parties must have been thinking/feeling and had he accurately described the events, I would have had no problem. But I suspect the book would not have sold as well. In my view honesty was traded for profit. Not the first time, but not a trade I choose to make or reward. Nor do I find it entertaining.
-
Tom; I have been thinking about this for awhile. You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success. I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.
I place a significant value on truth. I know that may sound a bit dramatic but it really troubles me that we are prepared to let someone distort the truth for the purpose of our entertainment. Its probably irrelevant that the embellishments weren't needed to make the story interesting.
But it is relevant that the errors could have been avoided by careful research and editing. Either the author was too lazy to get it right or he didn't care. I am not sure which is worse.
As I previously noted, had the author acknowledged that this was a work of fiction based on historical facts seeking to interpret what the parties must have been thinking/feeling and had he accurately described the events, I would have had no problem. But I suspect the book would not have sold as well. In my view honesty was traded for profit. Not the first time, but not a trade I choose to make or reward. Nor do I find it entertaining.
Bravo.
-
I didn't think it possible to piss any of you off - least of whom YOU, but if so, well then I apologize.
Apology accepted.
-
Tom; I have been thinking about this for awhile. You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success. I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.
SL,
You should be.
Bob
-
These are GOLF books! These are not books about REAL history. Whatever inaccuracies were written, or whatever thoughts the writer made up for the story line, none of this is about real life.
When I read about wars, presidents, inventors, industrialists, I will expect the writer to do impeccable research.
But when I read about athletes or actors, all I expect is that the writer accurately portray the essence of the people being written about. But in the end, these types of books are just entertainment about entertainers.
-
Shel:
As always we can count on you for wisdom and balance. I understand now quite well why all of this bothers you.
But let me ask you this: did you read "Greatest Game?"
If so, then please do point out what historical errors bothered you, if you could...
See, that's the thing. Dan was bothered by what he saw as massive historical errors. I can understand that; he's into golf history. But I'm not exactly a slouch myself when it comes to golf history Judge, at least relative to most golfers, and for sure relative to the general public.
And I never noticed a single error until Dan pointed them out to me in discussions here.
So you see... well... I get that writers ought to be more diligent and careful and try harder. I get the principles here. Truly I do.
It just seems like so much ado about so little to me, that well... I tend to give shit rather than take it all that seriously.
Pin me down and force me to take this seriously, and yes I can see Frost should have done better.
I just kinda refuse to get all that hot and bothered about it.
And that extends to the current book as well. Though an error like putting Highway 1 next to Cypress does bother me, well... like I said, it doesn't bother me enough to want to kick the guy's ass, or wholly condemn him.
I guess this is difficult to explain. Lord knows you did a hell of a lot better job explaining your position than I have with mine. Yours also is much easier to defend.
Oh well. I yam what I yam.
TH
-
These are GOLF books! These are not books about REAL history. Whatever inaccuracies were written, or whatever thoughts the writer made up for the story line, none of this is about real life.
Non-fiction is supposed to be about real life. Not some lazy mischaracterization, but actual real life.
-
Man: "Son, why are smashing your head against that wall?'
Son: "Because it feels so good when I stop!"
I stop now.
Oh, and it does feel good.
-
Dan: come on, don't bail on me now!
But I understand. Sides aren't tending to budge at all in this issue. Such happens in here. Oh well.
But maybe, if you want to take a couple more whacks at the wall, well....
Did you read Greatest Game?
If so, did you notice errors in it?
That seems to be the real sticking point between me and Dan King. If errors are in that book - and he sure pointed them out to me years ago when this first came up - they seemed so inconsequential and so trivial that well... I couldn't see getting that hot and bothered about it.
I guess I have no absolute love for the truth.
TH
-
I think not noticing the errors in even worse.
Next thing you know, you'll be telling me that dancer wasn't interested in me, only my cash....
-
She was, George. Sorry man.
I think in the end Dan Kelly may be the wisest of all. We seem to have a situation regarding these books where some value truth absolutely, some relatively, some not at all.
And the different categories are just never going to agree, nor budge the others.
Still to me it is fun discussion.
TH
-
Tom; I don't want to go back and look at that book again. At the time of the first thread I posted noting that I couldn't get through it (a rarity for me) because of the profusion of errors. I also thought the writing was mediocre at best but we all have different tastes. I must confess that I am somewhat amused that the inaccuracies about matters known to you such as those alleged to exist in the new book bother you, but those you didn't notice are irrelevant. So the truth matters when you are aware but you would prefer to remain ignorant and entertained? Harsh but accurate? Isn't that part of the point and the reason some of us place a consistent value on the truth? How many are misinformed because they don't have the background to judge. Is that a good thing?
As for the argument that it doesn't matter because sports writing is the "toy department" we are not talking about "little white lies" to children (a practice which I don't condone very often), we are talking about big business. Moral and ethical standards don't change with the subject matter and once one starts down the slippery slope of overlooking half-truths, sloppy work and outright untruths because they are "not important" or "inconvenient" we can't forsee the next area where the truth becomes unimportant. This is not the most important issue any of us (with the possible exception of the author) will ever face but each person must decide whether to start down the slippery slope. I can't claim that I always get it right and in certain more complex circumstances one might be willing to forgive an untruth but here there is no compelling reason to understand why the untruths occurred and there is no reason to forgive other than the entertainment value of the book. Thats not nearly enough for me.
-
Dan: come on, don't bail on me now!
But I understand. Sides aren't tending to budge at all in this issue. Such happens in here. Oh well.
But maybe, if you want to take a couple more whacks at the wall, well....
Did you read Greatest Game?
If so, did you notice errors in it?
That seems to be the real sticking point between me and Dan King. If errors are in that book - and he sure pointed them out to me years ago when this first came up - they seemed so inconsequential and so trivial that well... I couldn't see getting that hot and bothered about it.
I guess I have no absolute love for the truth.
TH
Tom IV --
Since you asked me not to leave ...
This is my last whack at the wall. Really, my head felt so much better for a few minutes there; I owe it to myself to stop.
The reason you have so much trouble explaining your "position," as you put it in your post to Mr. Solow, is that you don't *have* a position that makes any sense.
Inaccuracies bother you -- but they don't really. Sometimes they do; sometimes they don't.
"I have no absolute love for the truth" is the closest you've come to articulating a coherent position. And I accept that. Thanks for your honesty.
I DO have an absolute love for the truth. It's my business, and usually my pleasure, to have it.
Mr. King has it; Mr. Solow has it; Mr. Shefchik has it; Mr. Pazin has it; Bob "He Told Me Once to Call Him Bob" Huntley has it. Others have it, I'm sure -- and many others don't. (Note to self: Duh.)
I did read "The Greatest Game." I was not particularly bothered by any of the factual inaccuracies Dan King cited -- because I was not aware of them. When he pointed them out, they bothered me.
What bothered me originally -- feel free to read my comments In that original thread -- is that Mr. Frost did not disclose, till the Afterword (or whatever it was called) that he had embellished the truth. He and his publisher let the reader believe that the reader was reading a work of history -- not a work of historical fiction.
Had he labeled it, up front, "historical fiction," I'd have had no trouble with it. My absolute love for the truth would have been perfectly content with being told the absolute truth that what I was reading was a work of imagination, not history. (Of course, that would not have excused the ACTUAL historical errors Dan King pointed out.) Historical fiction must, first, be historical.
You say it was obvious and abundantly clear to you that it was fiction, in that Mr. Frost had gotten inside the minds of the participants. Well, guess what! It's possible to do that (sometimes) if one does exhaustive enough research.
Have you ever watched one of Ken Burns's documentaries? He gets inside the minds of his "characters" via good old research -- reading their diaries, and their letters, and their published works, and newspaper accounts, and other books.
That is all for me.
Dan
-
But there is no way of knowing if it is new historical facts or just information coming from Frost's imagination.
this thought made me equate this book with the movie JFK, which tells a lot of non-truths behind the assassination
-
There is a really interesting article in the Autumn edition of The Wilson Quarterly by Max Byrd who was commissioned to write a "historical novel" about Thomas Jefferson. Unfortunately it isn't on the web. But, he makes the point that even in fiction that is based on history, the writer must get the little details correct. Before he wrote it, he had to figure out how to write a historical novel as he had just written detective fiction before. He offers the following example:
But, there is another sense in which the writer of historical fiction wants to be realistic. Perhaps the single most interesting and suggestive fact I know about novels is this: When he was writing Tom Jones, Henry Fielding set a scene on November 28, 1745, not long after sunset, as, according to the novel, the full moon rose. Historical records show that there was indeed a full moon on November 28, 1745, and that it rose at just the time Fielding had it rise. In his biography of the novelist, Wilbur Cross confirms that "Fielding, in his aim to give an air of perfect reality to Tom Jones, actually consulted an almanac for his sun and moon." This is an amazing thing to ponder - why would Fielding go to so much trouble? ...
One answer may be that the ultimate goal of the novelist, any novelist, is not "creation" or "creativity" as those words are so carelessly used. The goal is mimesis - imitation so complete and faithful to experience, so widely connected to the larger order of things, even of sun, moon and stars, that imitation at its furthest point of accuracy passes over and becomes truth.
If a novelist can show such depth of caring, why can't someone is purportedly writing non-fiction? And why shouldn't he be held to an even higher standard?
-
As an alluded-to writer who has participated in this thread, I simply want to say that I have made mistakes when writing about facts, and it has mortified me -- every single time. I die a little when I make a mistake.
I don't envy Mark Frost. Not one iota.
-
I am reading it now, and it is not nearly as good as "Greatest Game". I haven't finished yet, but I am almost positive that the "Highway 1" reference came from the reviewer, not the author.
-
Dan Kelly:
Thanks for the final whack. That does help. And I guess in the end, it does come down to this:
I have a relative love for the truth, not an absolute one like you and the others you name. I do sincerely believe there's a time and a place to be persnickety, and none of Frost's books merit that level for me.
All the rest truly matters not.
But again, thanks for boiling it down.
Shel: thanks for your efforts also. But our differences also come down to your absolute love for the truth and my relative love for such. When someone says Ouimet hit a cleek on a hole in 1913 and it really was a rut iron, well that doesn't bug me, because I don't know for sure and I really don't care... but if someone says Highway 1 runs by ther side of 18 at CPC, well that does bug me because I know that's not true and damn likely never was.
Some facts matter to me, some don't. I live a pretty light existence.
Maybe that makes sense to you, maybe it doesn't. I will say I am pretty happy with the way I look at things... as I'm sure you are as well.
Vive' l'difference.
TH
-
I've read this thread with interest but little enthusiasm for either side of the debate. That has changed after reading the arguments here, reading the book and reflecting on my life experiences.
I read the book without knowing and without having much interest in determining whether Frost got his facts right or, at a minimum, made the necessary effort to get them right. However, upon reading the Appendix, I was astounded to learn that, after Cypress point , Mackenzie "enjoyed a career renaissance, traveling around the globe designing courses that are still regarded among the finest in the world: Crystal Downs, Royal Melbourne, the Valley Club, Lahinch and Pasatiempo." (Appendix, p. 247)
I'm not a Mackenzie expert by any means but this assertion cannot withstand 20 minutes of research.
First - at least two of the listed courses predated Cypress.
Cypress opened in 1928. Mackenzie travelled to Australia in 1926. Mackenzie's last trip to Lahinch was in 1927. It is unclear to me whether the Valley Club pre or post dated Cypress.
Second - Mackenzie did not travel the globe to design courses after Cypress Point, at least he does not appear to have done significant design work out of the US after 1928.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/opinionbeck.html
Finally - I think it is tough to charecterize Cypress as spurring a career renaissance. It looks like he was busy on many great designs before and during Cypress as he was afterwards.
Failure to check readily available facts is inexcusable, particularly in a book where Mr. Frost asserts that the facts are based on either firsthand accounts of events or memoirs. (Notes on Writing - 249-50)
I also think it is important even though the subject here is decidedly not important. First off - you never know when a misstated fact is important. I'm a lawyer and have watched reporters at the competing papers in my city disagree with each other regarding who won cases I litigated. (They could have called me to confirm I lost). I have also seen reporters take the most readily available take on a story without considering the perspectives of both sides. I have seen halfhearted efforts to get the facts right cost people their credibility, cost their employers millions of dollars and create embarassment for everyone involved. During clinics in law school, I saw police reports that were loosely based on fact, not because of any malice on the part of the officer but rather because of laziness.
Anyway - I've decided I'm on Dan's side on this one. Frost's failure to make sure this simple sentence was acccurate sheds significant doubt on the accuracy of his book.
-
Jason:
I'm not sure you're on Dan's "side", given I have never doubted there are historical errors in Frost's books. That's not what we are taking sides about. If the issue is "are there errors", then put me on the side of YES for sure also! But I don't think that was the argument here.
The argument remains how much these errors matter.
Because you see, this sentence about Mackenzie would bug me also. Note I haven't read this book.
But it also changes none of the points I've made. This bugs me, but arcane details about what he said or she said or what club he used or which way a hole went in the 1913 Ouiment match don't.
I've said all along I sure as hell don't rely on Frost for history. And yes it's pretty sad that he characterizes these as non-fiction.
But to me, "Greatest Game" remains a fun, harmless read.
Thus my "relative" love for the truth.
One thing's for sure: I can certainly undertand how those with absolute love for the truth dislike Frost as an author.
TH
-
Jason:
The argument remains how much these errors matter.
Tom - I agree with this framing of the issue and I struggled with it a bit, in part because of how much I too enjoyed the Ouimet book.
I have no problem with an author making a mistake. What I have a big problem with, however, is an author not making a reasonable effort to determine the accuracy of his work.
One could not make the Mackenzie mistakes if one made any sort of reasonable effort.
I think that accuracy is important even if the topic is not.
-
Jason: fair enough. So it would seem you have an absolute love for the truth as well.
I do not.
Again, I could care less how much effort a writer makes to accurately get each club used correct in a 1913 match, or how much effort he goes to to determine the color of one of the player's trousers, or the effort gone to to determine other details I see as trivial. But I do care if he mischaracterizes an architect's body of work.
Certain things matter to me more than others.
But again, vive l'difference!
TH
-
Tom, maybe you should go back and read the earlier threads. The argument wasn't so much about his making up quotes or picking the wrong club. The bigger issue was his getting easily verifiable information, such as Vardon's record or MacKenzie's work, wrong. This is why it first came up was his mention of Mackenzie's work redesigning Gaston prior to 1896 and that there was a course at Muirfield prior to the Honourable Company building a course there. At the time you thought these were trivial details. Now you are creating a new argument about the color of someone's trousers.
If Cypress Point suddenly makes Mackenzie a world-famous architect, doesn't that make The Match a better story? So what difference does it make if it wasn't true?
Cheers,
Grandan King
Facts are many, but the truth is one.
--Rabindranath Tagore
-
Grandan:
In the discussions of "Greatest Game", what you saw as easily verifiable information he got wrong, as I saw as trivialities.
So I didn't care if he failed to verify them.
And I still don't.
But I do care if he totally mischaracterizes Mackenzie, as he seems to in the instance Jason lists.
I realize this makes little sense to you, but you are among those who have an absolute love for the truth, and I am not.
And this is just one of those binary things... we're never goint to see this eye to eye.
Which to me is just fine.
TH
-
Grandan:
In the discussions of "Greatest Game", what you saw as easily verifiable information he got wrong, as I saw as trivialities.
But I do care if he totally mischaracterizes Mackenzie, as he seems to in the instance Jason lists.
TH
Thomas,
Trivialities to you, might well be something of importance to me. It would seem to me that Frost needs to attend a class given by Dan Kelly and told that the details count.
Bob
-
Bob:
I fully understand that trivialities to me may well be very important to you and to many others.
But that doesn't change the fact that I enjoyed Greatest Game, and that I will continue to look on the truth in a relative fashion.
Again, vive l'difference.
TH
-
Tom Huckaby writes:
I realize this makes little sense to you, but you are among those who have an absolute love for the truth, and I am not.
Originally that was our argument. But what now makes little sense to me is the inconsistency of your argument. To you, it was important Frost gets Mackenzie's late career right, but trivial that he get his early career right. Who knows why you make this distinction. Only you could tell us the difference and you haven't yet.
Trivial to Tom: Mackenzie redesigned Gaston prior to 1896. (absolutely wrong.)
Important to Tom: Following Cypress Point, Mackenzie enjoyed a career renaissance. (arguable)
This has nothing to do with love or lack of love of truth, this just shows an inconsistency that makes no sense.
Cheers,
Grandan King
We despise all reverences and all objects of reverence which are outside the pale of our list of sacred things and yet, with strange inconsistency, we are shocked when other people despise and defile the things which are holy for us.
--Mark Twain
-
I'm hoping that this thread just goes on and on and on, ad infinitum -- for one reason, and one reason only:
I want to read every last one of Dan King's fantastic signature quotations. That Twain line is one for the ages.
Speaking of twain, and their never meeting -- inspired by the reference to things "binary":
Did you know that there are only 10 kinds of people in the world? Those who understand the binary system, and those who don't.
As the French say: Vive la difference!
-
Dan:
When one deals in absolutes, it easy to be consistent.
Mine is a relative position so of course it will seem inconsistent to you. That's because by it's very nature it IS inconsistent.
And I continue to have no problem with it. It makes sense to me. I also fully understand how it makes little sense to you.
TH
-
I'm hoping that this thread just goes on and on and on, ad infinitum -- for one reason, and one reason only:
I want to read every last one of Dan King's fantastic signature quotations. That Twain line is one for the ages.
Speaking of twain, and their never meeting -- inspired by the reference to things "binary":
Did you know that there are only 10 kinds of people in the world? Those who understand the binary system, and those who don't.
As the French say: Vive la difference!
Well Dan K. II (King was here way before you, so you get II), your wish may be fulfilled if you guys keep trying to convince me to become a an absolute lover of the truth, and tell me how much I shouldn't have liked Greatest Game.
I too enjoy Dan K. I's quotes... and I appreciate the French spelling correction. I have very little knowledge of that language, sadly.
TH
Tom Huckaby, to Dan Kelly: Bite me. Relatively, not absolutely.
-
Tom Huckaby writes:
And I continue to have no problem with it. It makes sense to me. I also fully understand how it makes little sense to you.
So help us Tom, why is Mackenzie's early fictional career trivial but his fictional career late important?
Cheers,
Grandan King
He knows nothing; he thinks he knows everything - that clearly points to a political career.
--George Bernard Shaw
-
Grandan:
No explanation I could possibly give you will make sense to you. Thus I shall not try.
But I assure you that's my inconsistent position on this.
TH
Some things are neither meant to be explained nor understood.
- Tom Huckaby
-
Huck, you can put the whole thing to bed by simply saying you really enjoy Frost's fiction.
:)
-
Huck, you can put the whole thing to bed by simply saying you really enjoy Frost's fiction.
:)
I really enjoy Frost's fiction.
But then again George, I've said that many times along the way. If my inquisitors have any wish to continue, I'd be quite surprised if this puts it to bed.
TH
-
If you really enjoy Frost's fiction, make sure you check out "Twin Peaks."
It's particularly enjoyable fiction in that it never pretended to be anything else.
(Inquisitors? That's funny!)
-
I thought you'd like that, Dan.
As for the rest, I shall at last let it lie.
TH
-
Had to pick up book to check it out. Sounds like other Frost books, great idea/topic but a little short on research and truth.
Anyone know about cover photo by Loon Hill? Is this a 50's photo of The Clambake at Cypress Point? Is that Hogan swinging?
Thanks,
Dave
-
Got this book for Christmas, after reading and enjoying "The Greatest Game...". Knew there was going to be some back and forth about it on this site, so I decided I'd stay away from this post until I got into it.
After starting the book the other night I was immediately engrossed by this story. But, about 75 pages into it I was filled with angst after reading a passage about Byron Nelson's asst. pro job at Ridgewood CC. The author details it as "one of the oldest private New York Metropolitan area establishments... crafted out of old celery fields by Arthur W. Tillinghast."
What the %&$*! Who the hell is Arthur Tillinghast? And, more importantly... who the hell is the proofreader/editor/or whatever position is supposed to make sure these errors don't happen.
The rest of the book is ruined for me.
-
I put The Match down with about 25 pages to go when I realized it was more bullsh*t than fact. Later I talked to Bob Labbance who pointed out many more problems with it. I have a real problem with authors portraying work as fact and then making it up as they go. Does anyone know Frost? Does he consider himself a historian or does he just embelish stories so they can me made into movies?
Anthony
-
Does anyone know Frost? Does he consider himself a historian or does he just embelish stories so they can me made into movies?
Anthony
Well, his other recent work is the screenplay for Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer.
Ken
-
No further questions, your honor.
Anthony
-
Concerning the cover photo, it is based on 50th photo in at
http://www.julianpgraham.com/galleryCypressPoint.htm
It appears to be Ben Hogan loosening up on 1st tee at Cypress Point during 1950 Crosby Clambake. It was taken from second floor clubhouse roof and editing was done on tee to remove people and shadows to support "The Match" theme.
Many other Monterey area photos from 1924 to 1963 are at
http://www.julianpgraham.com/gallery.htm
Dave
-
I just finished reading The Match. What surprises me in this thread is that many of the posters want to put this book into the realm of "historical fiction," when the book seems to be the opposite. The "history" part seems to be more fictitious than the actual plot (the match). Are there any known inaccuracies concerning the match itself?
I did not like the Appendix about Cypress Point and MacKenzie because I had the feeling Frost didn't really know what he was talking about. However, the match itself was intriguing, and the descriptions of the holes seemed rather insightful for the most part, although I've never been to CPC.
I guess my feelings about the book are somewhat along the lines of:
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.
That being said, it was unfortunate that I couldn't trust many of the other parts of the book.
-
I have to say that I am enjoying the book.
-
I put The Match down with about 25 pages to go when I realized it was more bullsh*t than fact. Later I talked to Bob Labbance who pointed out many more problems with it. I have a real problem with authors portraying work as fact and then making it up as they go. Does anyone know Frost? Does he consider himself a historian or does he just embelish stories so they can me made into movies?
Anthony
Anthony: I interviewed Frost in the spring, but never really wrote about it. I should dig up the interview and post it on my blog, as we talked at length about the people who have attacked his accuracy. Don't remember his response off the top, but this would make an interesting piece.
BTW, finished reading "To the Nines" the other evening and very much enjoyed it.
-
A couple of weeks ago I played Cypress with Matt Roman as my caddie, quite possibly one of the most professional of that ilk. His father, the famous Blackie ,was a prominent caddie at the time so I asked Matt if he could go through his Father's effects to see whether there was any piece of paper, record or diary of the Match. He said he would.
Bob
-
Bob,
Did you ever hear back from Matt Roman?
Please update when you do. I will be very aggrevated if that hole story is made up. I figured the story was true and the author added/improvised to make it a "better?" read.
-
I guess the best way to find out what is true or not true in that book would be to just ask Venturi. He's still around, right? Who today would know better than he would? After-all he played in it. ;)