Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Ran Morrissett on August 14, 2010, 06:14:15 PM
-
Reports of the death of the world's most infuriating Discussion Group are greatly exaggerated.
IMO the 'problem' at the moment with the Discussion Group is that too many people who aren't particularly strong in architecture are making too many posts. Their drivel hides what continues to be an outstanding amount of knowledge. In turn, others grow weary and spend their time elsewhere.
When you post, say something meaningful. If you are agreeing with someone, say why. If you are disagreeing, state why and be clear.
FYI I paid our hosting company to create a report on all off-topic threads. They came back with twenty-nine pages of threads and they are preparing to delete them this month. I don't know if your post count will be effected but if it does go way down, you know you are spending your time on too many non-architecture threads.
It is a compliment to the site that so many people elect to spend so much time here. However, just because you like Raquel Welch, that doesn't mean that you should spend all your time standing in front of her house. Unfortunately ;) there are laws against that sort of thing. No 'laws' apply within this Discussion Group so we have to rely on each person to show good judgment. This community feeds off the behavior and examples set by each of us on a daily basis and as with most things, it can easily slip toward the lower common denominator if we aren't careful. For instance, I just learned yesterday morning from reading the WSJ that a golfer only burns off two Krispy Kreme glazed chocolate doughnuts while walking eighteen holes. Sadly, I was munching on a doughnut at the time and needless to say, 1) I was very troubled but 2) I am not going to make a post about it though it is golf related.
Here is a recent clunker from an extremely active poster: 'I like the new bunker on 6.I believe the knock on the hole was that it played shoort and needed some teeth.Looks like they found it.What a great joy pulling off a shot fro in there.Always looved 5 when most everybody hates.Tee ball to the left second to the right and pitch to island.WHAT IS NOT TO LOVE? A very unique hole.Again GIVE ME SOMETHING.In the clughouse each hole should have some memorable to discuss and these two holes posted meet that criteria.Fun course period.And derserving of majors.' Really - the guy is so busy that is the best he can do? :-\ What would Strunk & White say? Whatever it may be, it is a poor reflection on this Discussion Group and thus on the web site as a whole. Everyone needs to slow down and take their time - no awards are being handed out for speed posting and/or quantity of posts. After all, complete sentences and going light on misspelled words only helps your point, not harm it (and if you don't have a point, why post?).
Remember: If you are going to post on a near daily basis, the burden is squarely on you to stick to architecture and to add to the subject matter overall. This site remains about quality, not quantity.
Some suggest that we need a moderator that hawks the Discussion Group on a continual basis. Give me a break. What we need are people who can articulate their thoughts on golf course architecture in a meaningful manner. To that end, Ben and I continually add (and therefore subtract) approximately 15% of the 1,500 registered participants on an annual basis, trying to find the mix that yields the most informative Discussion Group possible. Clearly, I need to do a better job of screening people initially and/or being quicker to push the eject button for nincompoops who don't grasp what we are trying to do here. GolfClubAtlas.com is meant to be a way to give back to a fascinating subject matter within the great game of golf. Golf course architecture wins, as do we all, by sharing knowledge within this free access site. It is not and will not become the personal playground where people put their own amusement ahead of these higher goals.
This web site is read in all the corners of the world where golf is played and we have an obligation to present our best foot forward. 99% of you understand and act like that and we thank you for making this the best web site in the world, bar none.
Cheers,
-
I look forward to the fallout from the house cleaning.
Actually, I am going to pay attention to my thread count to see if I had spent much, if any time on those OT threads.
-
Ran,
Very well said. Unfortunately, when you stated, "This web site is read in all the corners of the world where golf is played and we have an obligation to present our best foot forward. 99% of you understand and act like that and we thank you for making this the best web site in the world, bar none..." you must not have been reading the latest round of Merion related threads.
I almost emailed you today with the intention of resigning from the site because of the absolute lack of respect that is being shown on these threads. By the vulgarity, constant 8-year old (if that) name calling, non-stop testosterone arguing rather than any semblance of a discussion, the participants are damaging both themselves and the website and, as a result, all who post here in the eyes of many. I've actually had lurkers who are not members privately email me and suggest that my participation here hurts my own reputation.
Despite what some say, nobody who has ever seen one really likes a train wreck and that is what these latest threads have become. I have privately emailed the participants encouraging that they use common sense and courtesy, privately emailed you asking that you do something about it and now am doing so publicly.
It is time for this nonsense to end. The Merion discussion could very well be one that this website would have been greatly proud of, instead it has turned into that family in the neighborhood whose house you drive quickly by and whose children you warn yours against playing with.
Have you given any consideration to the idea that maybe the proliferation of OT subjects and comments might have a great deal more to do with not wanting to post on some threads where you think you'll be drawn into the nonsense? I do.
Ran, you really do need to do something about this, especially as within the flames of the "discussion" your name is also bandied about as parties keep threatenting each other with you...
Please act.
-
thanks for your post Ran...a fine reminder of what GCA should be all about....I shall certainly try to remember your ideas when I post
-
Many threads are about GCA Outings, official or unofficial, or just someone saying "I am playing there on that date, anyone care to join me?" Are these threads also considered off-topic?
Ulrich
-
Ran,
I beg of you. PLEASE create an Off-Topic area. I, with many others, asked of it at the last 're-shape' and it never appeared. I honestly believe it would settle many of our issues.
I love our subject and I love the internet for giving me my VERY FIRST IN MY LIFE opportunity to discuss it on a worldwide basis, but I also firmly believe that, like a GREAT golf club there should be a place for eedjits like me to shoot the breeze outwith the real bones of our place.
I love GCA. Let it reflect what its members wish it to be.
or am I wrong?
FBD.
-
OK you got me.I'm the one with the clunker post.My typing sucks.I just can't see the mistakes at times even after proof reading.Sorry to all.I love GCA and find it to be a great way to get away from the daily grind.Understood it may not be the purpose of the site,but it is educational and also entertaining because of the mix of topics.
Anthony
-
Back, some years ago, when I first met GCA, I thought it was a small group of guys trying to sort out local problems with their clubs. Not sticks, but clubs. We had a problem, and were looking for answers.
This was our thinking board, and unfortunately it turned into a political advertizement for discussion.
It is still the best of arguments if we can eliminate those trying to be political !
-
Ran,
thanks for the input....I hope people listen....Look forward to seeing you in Jersey...RHE
-
Ran,
I believe the other problem I have seen with this discussion board are the threads/comments requesting other members of GCA to get them out on a particular top 10 golf course I understand people want to play great courses to see great architects work but there is a time and place.
-
Ran,
I beg of you. PLEASE create an Off-Topic area.
Ran, Don't do it.
It would only divert the focus away from GCA and diminish the quality of the threads/posts made, resulting in the dilution of the intent and appeal of the site
I, with many others, asked of it at the last 're-shape' and it never appeared. I honestly believe it would settle many of our issues.
If you have OFF TOPIC issues, go somewhere else to discuss them
I love our subject and I love the internet for giving me my VERY FIRST IN MY LIFE opportunity to discuss it on a worldwide basis, but I also firmly believe that, like a GREAT golf club there should be a place for eedjits like me to shoot the breeze outwith the real bones of our place.
Go shoot the breeze on another site devoted to the topic you wish to discuss.
I love GCA. Let it reflect what its members wish it to be.
You want the inmates to run the Asylum, I don't.
This site isn't about what the "guests" wish it to be, it's about what RAN wishes it to be and he doesn't wish to have off topic threads.
If you want to go off topic, go to another site that discusses that topic, rather than ruin a great GCA site.
or am I wrong?
You are dead wrong
FBD.
-
IMHO one of the main reasons that many think the site has drifted is simple. There are no new courses being built to bring about discussion...people are not out checking on new construction sites and bringing that discussion back to the discussion group therefore it is easier to go OT....
-
Mike Young,
I'd disagree.
This site doesn't need 12 new stellar courses a year in order to remain relevant and interesting.
The propensity toward inane OT threads has diluted the quality of the discussions and discouraged serious posters from contributing.
Just go back and reread Donnie Beck's post on the "jumping" thread, he makes an excellent point.
-
Mike Young,
I'd disagree.
This site doesn't need 12 new stellar courses a year in order to remain relevant and interesting.
The propensity toward inane OT threads has diluted the quality of the discussions and discouraged serious posters from contributing.
Just go back and reread Donnie Beck's post on the "jumping" thread, he makes an excellent point.
Pat,
Let me put it another way....
Could you agree that with less new work ...it would naturally lead to less posting regarding new courses...so would it be fair to say the percentage of discussions relating to new courses would be down and which would lead to the percentage of OT threads increasing?
-
IMHO one of the main reasons that many think the site has drifted is simple. There are no new courses being built to bring about discussion...people are not out checking on new construction sites and bringing that discussion back to the discussion group therefore it is easier to go OT....
Mike,
One other factor with people's disenchantment with the site is that there are a limited number of possible topics on the theory of golf course architecture. Anyone who has been reading the site for ten years will have 'heard it all before'. Of course, it is not up to the site to change to reflect their needs and I think some regular posters need to accept that the site might not fill their needs in the way it did 5-10 years ago.
Having said that, I am a bit embarrassed to be posting on this thread. I don't think anything that Ran says on this thread should be up for debate.
-
I agree with Mike and Marty. I have also been in the camp of wishing you'd create an off topic button, that is also monitored for abuse. Just because it is off topic doesn't mean it can become a flame thrower's ball, or a place to exhibit extrovert attention getting blather. But, it would not detract from the real GCA comments, only allow the real GCA to exist in a more pure and refined form.
And, I'll go on the record to say that I'm not terribly offended or feel brought down by a little poor grammar or spelling. If a person is pressed for time, and still wants to get a comment in (and I certainly don't think the above about WS is off topic) I can definitely look past typos and poor spelling and the like.
Ran, thanks for the site, and many years of enjoyable times. I'm a bit older, and I do enjoy the commeraderie and socialiability that the site provides along with many informative and knowlegeable posters in the actual GCA and related topics. But, I for one don't only seek pedantic rehashes of the same old subjects over and over again, without a little opportunity to read when people digress a bit from the topic at hand. The digressions often give a much more human touch and they provide a touchstone to participants as people, not just a 'wiki' recitation of GCA knowlege or where they've played on their bucket lists. I seriously think that if you take the extemporaneous tendency to make off-topic asides and comments, you kill the soul of the people participating. I like the souls who love the topic who come from all backgrounds to share their knowledge and personalities here more than the data and just the facts mam, as I can read the scads of on-topic books that abound on GCA, GCM, and construction or history of the game. I like the people, even with our warts.
-
IMHO one of the main reasons that many think the site has drifted is simple. There are no new courses being built to bring about discussion...people are not out checking on new construction sites and bringing that discussion back to the discussion group therefore it is easier to go OT....
Mike,
One other factor with people's disenchantment with the site is that there are a limited number of possible topics on the theory of golf course architecture. Anyone who has been reading the site for ten years will have 'heard it all before'. Of course, it is not up to the site to change to reflect their needs and I think some regular posters need to accept that the site might not fill their needs in the way it did 5-10 years ago.
Having said that, I am a bit embarrassed to be posting on this thread. I don't think anything that Ran says on this thread should be up for debate.
What? Ran posted the thread for comments I am sure.....he began it with IMO.....no need to be embarrassed .....his comments were correct IMO and I was just adding additional....
Cheers,,,
-
Mike,
First, I don't believe that's the cause and effect.
Second, I think there's enough to discuss, absent new courses, to keep the site occupied for some time.
As to the decremental effect vis a vis fewer new courses, I think it's de minimus.
Certainly, "Old Macdonald" created an unusual buzz/activity, but, I attribute that to the fact that Tom Doak, George Bahto and Brad Klein were active contributors.
If a non-participating architect opened a new course, I doubt it would get as much attention.
If you examine the topics that the OT threads are about, how do you equate their creation to the absence of new courses.
How is the lack of new courses responsible for the initiation of a thread about "food on a golf course" ?
I don't see the connect.
-
Mike,
First, I don't believe that's the cause and effect.
Second, I think there's enough to discuss, absent new courses, to keep the site occupied for some time.
As to the decremental effect vis a vis fewer new courses, I think it's de minimus.
Certainly, "Old Macdonald" created an unusual buzz/activity, but, I attribute that to the fact that Tom Doak, George Bahto and Brad Klein were active contributors.
If a non-participating architect opened a new course, I doubt it would get as much attention.
If you examine the topics that the OT threads are about, how do you equate their creation to the absence of new courses.
How is the lack of new courses responsible for the initiation of a thread about "food on a golf course" ?
I don't see the connect.
Pat,
I am not saying that the absence of new courses equates to the creation of OT threads or that the lack of new courses is responsible for the content of OT threads....just saying it makes the percentage of OT threads increase...
-
David Elkins makes a good point,after 5-10 years what do you talk about.Sometimes the DG turns into the 19th hole.Maybe someone should start a DG called the 19th Hole.Or does that sound too much like a lounge?
Anthony
-
I am not in favor of the OT-forum.Those discussions seem better served on sites devoted to the related topics.
-
Ran - This site needs more participation by you. You set the tone. You set the example. You present thoughtful questions that lead to interesting discussions. Not many of us have that gift.
As Mike Young said, with fewer new courses there is less fresh subject matter. As a result, it gets harder and harder to find new takes on existing subjects. Not everyone is a great conversationalist... just look around at your next cocktail party. You are the best GCA conversationalist on this site, but you participate the least. We need your leadership and conversational talent. Please... just one good post per week would do the trick.
Unfortunately, some of the folks on this site with the greatest architecture knowledge are not very good conversationalists. Also, their breadth of courses is so narrow that they keep rehashing the same topics on the same courses, over and over. This gets a bit boring. I wish they would get out, see some different courses, and expand their repertoire as their insights are usually very enlightening.
As for the Off Topic section... absolutely! Those that think it is a bad idea can just stay away from that section. Give it try. What have you got to lose? If it doesn't work and proves to be a mistake just delete the damn thing. No problem.
-
This all sound well and good, but in all honesty are we going to get designers and architects talking to us. Will they come out and discuss various topics ranging from some location are just not suitable for the game; that many courses are no longer set up for the general public but more to attract tours etc.
Design has moved away from its core, the idea seem to build a course for specific golfers in mind, and not generalise as per the pre war second golden age. Then we have the added distraction of cart tracks and island greens. Will all these be openly discussed freely and openly?
Subjects that intrigue me are those that relate to challenges or hazards, not a decorative bed of bunkers all around the green or shadowing the fairway. The cursed lack of technical control over equipment that allows our courses to be butchered, sorry the R&A might call them lengthened. Yet the subject most dear to my heart are those often heard of words ‘Oh the designer would not get away with that today’. Sorry but these holes are among the most talked about and challenging holes on the courses (just look at my recent list of my preferred courses with video clips links, I posted last week). If they are that much fun why are the designers ignoring such holes., of course they can be designed and built today, but yes it might take guts to push hem through.
Then we have courses like Askernish, built on land fit for purpose for just under $100,000,. Does that embarrass the designers, after all most designers who have visited the island have said it’s a great course. Are we learning from Askernish or are we trying to do the usual, bring it down to that of our comfort zone. I firmly believe with the climate and financial problems we are facing Askernish has something to tell us, but will our architects and designers listen and learn so that they can produce more enjoyable and challenging course throughout the world.
To have the gift to design is special, yet there are times that the design takes an age to shape itself in one’s mind yet on other occasions it materialises in as the survey is being completed.
There is much to be discussed and questions to be asked, but the discussion will greatly depend upon the input or replies from the designers on GCA.com.
In closing let’s not forget the old saying “all work and no play makes GCA.com a dull site”
Just some food for thought
Melvyn
-
Pat Mucci,
Probably the most interesting thing that I've read on this site in recent years was an O/T posted by your good self on "remembrance of things past." It was the history of Mucci pere and Patrick and the whole golfing scene over a fifty year period. I enjoyed reading it much more than the bad tempered post on the Merion genesis.
Pat, I am not sure, as in old age my memory fails from time to time, but was their one reference to golf architecture in your wonderful reminiscence?
Bob
-
One reason why there are not more architects on the site is because people are over critical.When you're out designing courses and putting your heart into it who wants to hear your work is crap.Trust me, it is not the OT stuff that is keeping these guys away.Look how Pete Dye is getting smacked this week.
Anthony
-
IMO the 'problem' at the moment with the Discussion Group is that too many people who aren't particularly strong in architecture are making too many posts. Their drivel hides what continues to be an outstanding amount of knowledge. In turn, others grow weary and spend their time elsewhere.
I couldn't agree more. It seems in earlier days newer members would hang around for a while posting occasionally before jumping right in. Nowadays it seems like this has become a posting contest to see who can amass the most posts in the shortest amount of time.
I also disagree with creating a separate OT area. We got by for years without the need. If you can't respect Ran's wishes to keep them to a minimal then maybe you shouldn't be here!
-
"GolfClubAtlas.com is presented to promote frank commentary on golf course architecture."
Everyone has interests other than golf course architecture. But OT threads attract too many posters who are more interested in other matters than in golf course architecture. "Frank discussions on golf course architecture" get pushed to the back pages. Keeping off OT threads is an indirect way of policing the make-up of the membership and making sure our purposes in being here are in-line with the Ran's reasons for having us here. If you are more interested in the OT stuff, then this probably isn't the website for you.
Bob, I agree that sometimes there are real gems which are off-topic, and no doubt that will always be the case. But something is wrong when a large portion of the threads dominating the conversations are focused on things like "Tiger's problem" and the "best food experience" while interesting efforts to discuss golf courses drop immediately to the back pages. If we all stuck to golf course architecture as much as Patrick then I doubt a thread like the one you mentioned would raise much of an eyebrow from Ran or anyone else.
-
" 'Frank discussions on golf course architecture' get pushed to the back pages."-- DMoriarty
Well, there can't be frank dicussions of architecture if most of the people complaining about OT threads aren't willing to contribute anything to the obviously GCA-related threads that occupy the majority of the front page -- today, and most days.
Is a 9-hole course in Youngstown, OH, too beneath your GCA tastes to comment on? Or a really interesting-looking 18-hole course in Oil City, PA? (both courtesy of the tireless Rich Hetzel, whose chronicles of golf courses I always look forward to viewing).
Nothing to add about speed slots? Others have found a way. No thoughts on template holes (two front-page threads, currently)? What about the bunkering at Augusta National? Any thoughts, at all, about Whistling Straits?
Ever a word of thanks to those, like Sean Arble, who spend countless hours documeting courses through pictures for, presumably, those of us here to enjoy, and comment on?
Or are all of these threads taking time away from posting on the Merion threads, which -- as Philip Young astutely notes -- many of us might like to participate it, but don't, largely to avoid the vitriol expressed by you and others on those threads.
I'll end by repeating what I said on a related thread -- those who can't find archirtecture-related threads on the Discussion Board aren't trying very hard.
P.S. Thanks for the photos of the 14th at Rock Creek Cattle -- they've helped further my understanding and education about the course.
-
Bob Huntley,
I've never started an OT thread.
As to participating in one, I've done that occassionally, but it's rare and usually confined to golf related events.
OT's are harming the site.
Ran confirmed that.
Let's abide by his wish/directive and do away with them
Glad to see you're back participating, even though that's an OT subject ;D
-
I am conflicted on this. On the one hand, I do get annoyed when I see three or so OT threads on different sides of the Tiger Woods melodrama on the front page of the DG. But on the other hand, I can see why OT threads get started and sometimes become very popular. Even though we all gather here bound by the common bond of an abiding love for golf courses and golf course architecture, the mutual respect for opinions on said subject between so many DG participants naturally extends to discussions of other matters--both golf-related and otherwise.
I love this site because of its unique topic, but primarily I enjoy the cast of characters that hang out and give their thoughts here on a daily basis. There are many people whose posts I always look out for because of their keen interpretations and insights into golf course architecture. As a result, I am also very interested to see what they think about the state of professional golf, their favorite golf-related meals, or even the books they've been reading lately. The intelligence and intellect of many posters regarding GCA makes me want to know what they think of other things.
I find that OT threads function as a sort of glue on the site, culture-wise. If all we did here was talk about golf course architecture, we wouldn't really learn a lot about each other otherwise unless we contacted each other and hung out off-GCA. Which a lot of people do, but not everyone can do it so easily. So, good OT threads (rare though they are) provide a chance to lend a little more color to many characters on here. Granted, too many OT threads pollute the site, but I think we might be doing ourselves a little bit of a disservice by suggesting the complete outlawing of OT threads.
Just my opinion. I will try to curb my participation in OT threads--especially the firepits--from now on. I played Copake (NY) CC today and LOVED it. I will try to be very on-T and post a picture tour tomorrow. It was an AWESOME course!
Cheers.
--Tim
-
Phil McDade,
Sometimes it is not a matter of "willing to contribute" but more a matter of refraining from posting when we have nothing of substance to contribute. I think that was part of Ran's point. No course is "beneath my gca tastes" to comment on, but why would I comment on courses I've never seen or played and know nothing about? Why would I post if I have nothing to add to the conversation? I don't build courses so I don't know how to build speed slots, but what Tom Doak wrote made a lot of sense to me. Etc.
Ideally threads like Rich Hertzel's would stick around near the surface for a few days or more instead of instantly drowning under wave after wave of OT drivel. That way even those with nothing to add could have a better opportunity to enjoy them. A thread shouldn't need a constant stream of posts just to stay above water. As it is, it would be a full time job to dig out the gems among the junk, much less comment on them.
As for the Merion threads, this isn't one, but I agree with you and with Phillip. Those threads are a travesty and an embarrassment, not only to me personally but also because they discourage those who might have something interesting and relevant to say from saying it. I'd like nothing more than to discuss Merion civilly and productively with you or anyone else interested without anyone being beaten down by the constant vitriol and personal attacks. Unfortunately, given the state of things, that seems unlikely.
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
-
Ran, please give me fair warning before kicking me out. I don't add much as my knowledge of GCA is so limited, but I'm learning much. I'm trying to abide by the adage of: "if you have nothing to say keep your mouth shut and have those around you think you are stupid rather than open open your mouth and prove them right." I love this site, and hope to add more once I feel that I can.
-
John,
He'll argue that those three are all related to gca at least tangentially, and he might even have a point. If so, you could always go for the jugular and pull up a few of his annual reminders that NORAD tracks Santa on the internet.
Go easy on him, though, because as much as I dislike OT threads, not even I hate Christmas.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?action=post;quote=37825;topic=1947.0;num_replies=8;sesc=3b4178225e85ef068dd250e7e7b87683
The North American Radar Airspace Defense system (NORAD)
has picked up Santa on their radar screens.
To view the NORAD radar tracking of Santa, go to NORADSANTA.ORG.
When you get to the sighting of Santa, click on the red dot and view the most recent radar clip of his travels.
The radar track is updated hourly
-
One reason why there are not more architects on the site is because people are over critical.When you're out designing courses and putting your heart into it who wants to hear your work is crap.Trust me, it is not the OT stuff that is keeping these guys away.Look how Pete Dye is getting smacked this week.
Anthony
Somebody has that wonderful Tom Watson quote in their signature.... golf courses should be enjoyed, not rated.
I guess you could consider this one of the more disappointing aspects of this place for me. It seems like everything is about rank and ratings and prestige and why X is better than Y and why Z is a "terrible architect".
I'm interested in every style of golf course and I believe every individual who pursues this for a living has something to offer. I like some of RTJ's work, some of Fazio's work, some of Nicklaus', some of Palmer's.... even Art Hills, although I have to admit I do dislike a couple holes at his nearest course to me.
It is disappointing to me to see those who, forgive the cliche, seem willing to throw their colleagues and peers under the bus.
I guess I'd just like to see less emphasis on ratings and scales and maybe more about styles, philosophy, or even more educational aspects for idiots like me who don't do this for a living but are always trying to learn more about it. That's why I'm here. Before I joined, I couldn't have told you in the slightest what a biarritz was, despite having drawn golf holes on napkins and posters and my PC screen for 20 years.
-
I'm an ODG fan. Played a lot ODG courses. Kind of like art, I know what I like. Spend much of my days
seeing golf holes alongside highways, or redesigning the course I am playing :D
I definitely post in some off topic forums, and will sometimes take things personally when players are disparaged as a group,
but I have learned a lot in here, and will refrain as best I can, unless I have a question or thought that is more relevant to GCA.
Thanks for the post Ran, there are some things that negatively boggle my mind on your site, but many more things I enjoy
-
Ran,
I have enjoyed meeting a lot of the people on this discussion group in person. The truth is when you talk face to face the discussions seem to be more entertaining and truthful.
-
Maybe do away with the "posts" tally as well as the OT stuff?
Everyone on the board knows the guys who bring really interesting info and analysis to the site, whether they have 10k posts or 500 or 150.
Just a thought - then there is no pressure to post a bunch of crap to get into "Senior Member" status?
That might lead to more reading and thoughtful responses versus rushed posting?
-
This is great - clean up the ill effects of entropy.
-
FINALLY, I've found a benefit to my recent weight gain: I can no longer contemplate my navel.
You guys feel free to go right ahead, however.
Mike
This goes round and round and it’s so boring I can’t be bothered to look in here much these days.
Ran, you’re a great guy but I find it hard to believe you actually read the DG much these days. Doesn’t the general stench of nastiness that’s just below the surface, waiting to re-erupt at a moment’s notice, concern you? It permeates the whole DG and it’s no longer a place I look forward to visiting with the same JOY I once felt. I have pointed more than a few good men in the direction of this group and when I meet them again it’s always “Did you see that ++++++ thread?”. It’s not the positive stuff they are referring to.
Kick out those who can’t be civil and encourage the humour back on here. Exhibit one above.
PS 1 . Ran please ask your enablers to do a comparison on the percentage of O/T threads on here 4 years ago (about when I started) and today. I’ll double my contribution this year if there’s more than 10% difference. Often it’s the O/T threads that provide the bonding on here. You refuse to countenance the obvious solution to what you say is the problem and that’s your choice.
PS 2. In all these recent threads no one has mentioned “It’s the economy stupid”. Am I the only one, working harder and spending less time on the computer? I have lots of research ideas and no time to follow them up and I know I’m not alone. So put the house in order now and good times will return.
See you guys on the golf course.
;D
-
I only read say 10% of the posts and there are a few posters I just dont read their comments to threads I am interested in. By and large I think its a great forum and I know I have learned a lot, whilst I have little use for Zoysia or Bermuda its nice to gain some knowledge. The mix of archies, superintendents, managers, raters is great, there are some very interesting outside of the trade posters, I dont always agree with Sean Arble but I read pretty much read everything he posts and the photo tours that he and other post are magnificent. I dont like the constant turning of threads into anti golf cart warfare but in any discussion group you are going to get sandcastle kickers. You are always going to get topics going off topic, and topics where architecture is only partially related. I think my number of posts is 1607, it will be interesting to see my drop.
-
Hey all,
An excellent post by Ran. I haven't posted anything on here in years (though I still lurk) in part because there is so much fat on this DG that the meat is hard to find. The trouble is, there is nothing really wrong with the fat, per se. Many of us are old friends here, with a feeling of this being a 19th hole, and it's often just simply "fiun" to talk about topics that are slightly OT or not so "serious"
Just throwing this idea out, but how about two discussion groups, as was mentioned above. The first would be the "meat" discussion group, as Ran and all of us would ike to find. A concentration of insightful, well-written, on-topic discussions about golf course architecture. The second would be the "fat", with the OT posts, the "I'm playing ___ next weekend, who wants to join me?" and all other water-cooloer chit-chat.
From a site-management perspective, posts in the first DG would be permanent, with a well-stocked archive. All posts in the second would all be deleted after a month.
Just a thought.
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
Pat,
I can't believe they are picking on you.I've never started an OT thread either.
Anthony
-
Maybe do away with the "posts" tally as well as the OT stuff?
Everyone on the board knows the guys who bring really interesting info and analysis to the site, whether they have 10k posts or 500 or 150.
Just a thought - then there is no pressure to post a bunch of crap to get into "Senior Member" status?
That might lead to more reading and thoughtful responses versus rushed posting?
Good idea.The post tally can make it look like it is a competition rather than participation.
Anthony
-
No course is "beneath my gca tastes" to comment on, but why would I comment on courses I've never seen or played and know nothing about?
David, first off let me say I'm not trying to be a wise guy or put you on the spot. I am curious, however, how many times you've played Merion and how many hours you've spent on site. The same question goes for the other antagonists.
Kindest regards,
Mike
-
Ran and the Discussion group,
I am glad to see that we are openly addressing some of the opportunities that have reduced the quality of the discussion group. I must admit that I still hang around the site and check it every few days, but the outlandish personal attacks that some of the members in this group participate in is utterly classless and embarrassing. The result is several of the GCA discussion group members have elected not to participate. Waiting on the sidelines does not mean that we love GCA any less, but we choose not to get involved with the meaningless conversations that clog this website and waste the time of those who come here for real golf course architecture analysis.
One of the problems is that some of the people that post on here have a false sense of entitlement since they have 10000 or more posts. Since they spend so much time following this site, then they feel like they are an expert on Golf Course Architecture and they can dominate the discussion through aggressive attacks on other's opinions. Don't get me wrong, some of these members are of great value to the site, but some bring a childish destruction when they disagree.
Another problem of the site, is that when there are legitimate post asking questions about a particular feature, course, or other related topics, these threads slide off of the first page so quickly and get lost in a sea of OT threads. If you look at it statistically, I guess that means that there is not as much demand of pointed conversation about GCA versus the high-demand for off topic rants. I think breaking up the discussion board to include a golf course architecture and an off-topic folder is a great idea. Those who want the personal gratification of discussing Tiger Woods' off course issues and other topics still have a forum to do it while the people that want to stick to architecture do not have to navigate through the onslaught of personal attacks to find a sliver of real architectural opinion.
I do enjoy the site and I always will. It is frustrating for some of us who would like to see it get back to the main idea of the discussion group. Golf course architecture is an art and with a piece of playable design there will be differing opinions and interpretations. I am excited to see the change and if all goes well, I may venture back onto the playing field instead of observing from the sidelines.
-
Go easy on him, though, because as much as I dislike OT threads, not even I hate Christmas.
Only having some fun. I'm just bitter because he scheduled Mucci-stock (Mountain Ridge outing) the week after Buda and I'm not able to go!
-
Adrian
I do not want to derail this thread but feel that your comment” I dont like the constant turning of threads into anti golf cart warfare but in any discussion group you are going to get sandcastle kickers.” Is that actually fair as a discussions can travel along different paths depending upon those who decide to participate. But yes I do take your point but its seems that attacks on the individual seem more prevalent than posts on ant carting.
I would put it to you that cart and cart tracks are very relevant when discussing GCA. They constitute an expensive part of the process as well as challenge the designer to camouflage the tracks. When we talk of courses with 200 carts, I feel we are no longer in the realms of golf but have entered either F1 or the Indi 500 or in this case the 200.
I will not pursue the point any further as it’s the wrong thread but I suggest that discussing carts if far closer to GCA than wasting hours on ratings and rankings of courses which let’s be honest is as varied as our choice in women
Melvyn
-
Melvyn,
Yesterday, I played golf for the first time since I had some unpleasantness occur in early May. I played the Senior Ladies tees at 5400 yards, although I did go to the back markers on the Dunes 14th hole, the one along the ocean. The pin was at about 175 yards and I busted a driver some thirty yards short and bogeyed the hole. I was ecstatic.
I could not have experienced such happiness had I not used a cart.
Bob
-
Melvyn,
Yesterday, I played golf for the first time since I had some unpleasantness occur in early May. I played the Senior Ladies tees at 5400 yards, although I did go to the back markers on the Dunes 14th hole, the one along the ocean. The pin was at about 175 yards and I busted a driver some thirty yards short and bogeyed the hole. I was ecstatic.
I could not have experienced such happiness had I not used a cart.
Bob
who could reasonably argue that the above does not close the case about using carts??
I'm happy for you Sir Bob!!
-
Random thought. Why not have a second board where anything goes. Maintain the DG as an architecture/design discussions only and the other board is everything else.
The fact is that you have brought together a group of people who enjoy chatting with each other. Why limit it to one topic? Just create another forum and call it "The 19th Hole" where folks chat about anything and everything if they wish.
The group you have bright together have other interests and quite frankly some of the peripheral discussions are far more enlghtening than 5 guys consuming half the world's bandwidth arguing about Merion.
-
Bob
Great to see you able to get back on the golf course. I do keep repeating myself on this point but carts are fine for those who need them for medical reasons, NEVER had a problem with that if it allows more to play golf. As you know I am unable to walk distances with or without a golf bag.
Pauls, no you are totally wrong it closes no case whatsoever, but clearly you have jumped in without reading my past posts on the subject. If only those that needed them used the cart then it would not be a problem for others or require special cart tracks due to the greatly reduced numbers. I was at Moray GC the other week - their stock was 4 carts for those that requires assistance around the course.
Again please to see you are able to get out and about, but do not overdo it.
Best wishes
Melvyn
-
Ran, two quick things...I'm here with the WSJ people (JP Newport and Steph Wei and Jeff Neumann)...who ever said that in the journal was close to right, but may have underestimated a bit.
They are doing an experiment here at the tournament giving out pedometers and having a contest each day and all week to determine who walks the most. I won on Tuesday, walking about 17 miles. The prize was a flag from the 18th at Hazeltine signed by Yang.
According to the contest, if you walk 10,000 steps you burn off 500-800 calories depending on your weight. That's about 4 miles. I don't have any idea how many cals a KK donut has, but we all should walk the course more, except of course in 95 degrees or more, where it would be totally rude to be the only one doing it, or if you have a medical reason like Bob, or age like my 86 y/o dad, who still plays w/ my 75 y/o mom. It's clear whatever the amt of cals burned, you still have to eat sensibly and exercise a little more as well to stay healthy.
Also, thanks for the reminder. I know sometimes I see something fun and want to share, but you're right, this isn't the place:) I'll try to keep to interviews I do with architects or a great new place I may see from time to time.
It's nice to see you so active of late, and thank you for running GCA. We are all better for it.
-
Jay:
Great work covering the PGA...keep it up; looks like a fun day today!
-
Looks like the Discussion Group is about to go more elitist.
One where those of you in the inner circle who have had the chance to play the great courses can all rabbit on about where the inspiration for the design came from, meanwhile the rest of us who have not been so lucky or well connected can just read the posts without making comment for fear of offending the elites with our philistine commentary.
Too bad, I liked it here.
-
Jeremy Glenn:
It was nice to see your post on here. It's been a long time for sure. Seeing your name reminds me of those good old days when things were shorter and to the point on most all threads. I doubt anyone would be for it now but it just occured to me about those good old days when things were shorter and more to the point and apparently better-----is that in those days back then there was no registration on this website----eg anyone on the INTERNET could post on this DG. Back then you could also delete your entire post at will back then. There were some problems with that as I recall but it never was like it is now.
Somebody said on a post above that a lot of the real quality people from the old days may've left because when you're on here long enough pretty much everything just starts rerunning over and over again. Even when some new good blood comes on they want to start out and probably need to start out where we all did in the beginning and it gets to be like a deja vu even though of course you certainly want to help them out and help them learn like what someone helped you with in your beginning.
Anyway, it's all probably hard to say and hard to determine. People like me and Pat and Ran have been talking about it on and off together for years and nothing real good seemed to develop to fix some of the inherent problems. It may just be the natural maturity of any website on a particular subject----after a while there is only so much to concentrate on and discuss with golf course architecture and so people who like to chat on here almost daily just begin to find other subjects to discuss----like OT subjects.
-
Ran,
Firstly a very big thank you to you and Ben for this website, its discussion group and for allowing me to join. I’ve been on here now since spring 2008 and in that time I’ve learnt an awful lot. Hopefully my occasional posts have been informative and given an extra insight into golf over here in the UK? But I’ve also made many new friends and hope to make and meet many more, all who enjoy discussing a subject close to my own heart, golf courses, their history and design.
I also feel I should thank you for using such a wonderful word as nincompoop in your opening post!
Now to the crux of the matter:
“This web site is read in all the corners of the world where golf is played and we have an obligation to present our best foot forward. 99% of you understand and act like that and we thank you for making this the best web site in the world, bar none.”
So, if we are to make sure this website remains the wonderful and informative resource that lives up to this statement above, then I believe that we probably need more than to just ask people to keep to GCA related topics and to tidy up their grammar?
If we see this as a resource used by others, then we need more active moderation? I’m not suggesting that you or Ben needs to be on here every day, but surely we could have some junior moderators?
These extra moderators would allow for there to be various sub headings to the forum. This is the only DG or forum that I actively partake in, but there many others out there that all seem to have their threads under various sub headings? If GolfClubAtlas was to copy this, it would mean that similar threads could all be grouped together and would also mean it would be easier to find them in future (especially seeing as how tricky the current search engine can be at times)? Take for instance Photo Tour threads, something that many people say is a big bonus of the DG. Many actively partake in these discussions in an informative and interesting manner, and they very nicely compliment your “Course by Country” reviews. If we were to have a junior moderator or two that could make sure these threads are titled correctly and in the right sub heading, then people from “all the corners of the world” would have a much enhanced resource? And in the case of Photo Tour threads, we already have something similar:
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45478.0/
so why not bring something like this in house?
Other sub headings could be:
- Maintenance and greenkeeping
- Golf course construction
- Historical research
- Travel (There is after all a Golf & Travel section to the main website, though I notice it has been removed from the main navigation tabs)
- Other GCA links and resources (perhaps a regular GCA related book review could be an interesting topic if someone had the time and inclination)
- OT (yes why not, if they are all kept in their own section)
And probably several others, but at some point in the future, these could all be reviewed and expanded or removed.
Another query? If OT threads are to be omitted, then I’m curious as to how far we take something to be OT?
We all know that Tigers private life is OT or discussions related to other sports, but I’d hate to see some of the discussions on travel advice, book suggestions, recent events on the pro tour, even the architecture of clubhouses, all of which aren’t specifically GCA related but can be very interesting and not far off the mark.
Ran, I am hesitant in posting this response, but I hope my suggestions are taken as they are meant, which is well meaning and in no way a criticism of the way this place is currently being run. And I hope that one day I will have the opportunity to meet you in person, and thank you for this great website!
Cheers,
James
-
James,
Amen - here's the URL or the Off Topic section of a favorite website: http://www.dbstalk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16
Here you can see the section devoted to OT topics. Essentially everything goes as long as it's not political or demeaning to a person or to people (obviously no racism or sexism). Obviously, an OT forum here would need to be related to golf, but not necessarily GCA.
I think that just the creation of an OT forum here would do wonders. And this OT forum could have its threads purged every 45 days or so. And I'd limit the people that could read OT threads to members of the treehouse to prevent any grandstanding.
Or not :)
-
Dan,
I like the idea of the OT section being for members only. That way, as Marty suggested much earlier it can be like the 19th hole for a whole bunch of like minded guys, but the quality of GolfClubAtlas.com as an informative resource to everyone including none participants is maintained at a high level.
Cheers,
James
-
Isn't this thread OT...... :) :) Just saying.....
-
Isn't this thread OT...... :) :) Just saying.....
Finally, someone with some sense.
-
I would like to see less O/T threads; I likely participate in them far too often. I do feel though that this place is a great resource for those interested in golf course design and construction. I have learned an incredible amount from this place and being here. Hopefully I'm not one of those sitting on the ejection seat with anyone else's hand on the switch... :-[ :-[ :'(
-
John
5,4,3,2....................
-
Jay:
Great work covering the PGA...keep it up; looks like a fun day today!
thank you Phil, I didn't write about architecture the last couple of days, but I'm really having fun and feeling good about my work product over at Cybergolf. Thanks for reaching out. I hope you like the one I wrote last night that just went up, and the caddie story. As for my interviews with S.Y. Noh and Wen-chong Liang...I think I need a new translator because they went nowhere:)
http://www.cybergolf.com/golf_news/fog_delays_make_potpourri_out_of_pga_championship_leaderboard
-
Melvyn,
Yesterday, I played golf for the first time since I had some unpleasantness occur in early May. I played the Senior Ladies tees at 5400 yards, although I did go to the back markers on the Dunes 14th hole, the one along the ocean. The pin was at about 175 yards and I busted a driver some thirty yards short and bogeyed the hole. I was ecstatic.
I could not have experienced such happiness had I not used a cart.
Bob
Bob,
You should be playing those markers all the time.
Your pal,
Jed
Ran:
Thank you for your informative and guiding post.
Being one who tries to adhere to all things beard-pulling related, I really like what you're trying to emphasize.
Jed
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
You'd have to be a moron if you don't see the connection to golf and/or GCA.
As to the NORAD post, I was asked by many, via email and IM, including Ran, to cite the Santa tracking site.
-
Ran I have to say Pat wasn't someone who immediately sprang to mind, but are you happy with your name on a site that allows posters to call other posters names like "moron"? Do you hope your kids wil one day take an interest in this site and will you put an age limit on that?
As I said in an earlier post people are choosing not to join because of the low standards of courtesy on here.
As I say it's all entirely up to you, but I'm not happy with it and I can make my choice too.
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
You'd have to be a moron if you don't see the connection to golf and/or GCA.
As to the NORAD post, I was asked by many, via email and IM, including Ran, to cite the Santa tracking site.
Mr. Mucci,
Please lighten up. I was only trying to joke around and insulting me for it is beneath you. I'm really disappointed by your reaction. You probably introduce more quality topics than anyone else, but you're not infallible.
Given that I am a moron (at least in your opinion), please explain the connection between a Happy Fathers Day message and discussion of golf course architecture. As I understand it, merely discussing golf would not be on topic.
-
Ran I have to say Pat wasn't someone who immediately sprang to mind, but are you happy with your name on a site that allows posters to call other posters names like "moron"? Do you hope your kids wil one day take an interest in this site and will you put an age limit on that?
Tony,
Get a life.
I said, "you'd have to be a moron if you didn't see the connection".
If you took offense because you didn't see the connection and felt that you were now in the moron category, that's your fault.
As I said in an earlier post people are choosing not to join because of the low standards of courtesy on here.
What hard evidence do you have, from people who chose not to join, to support the above statement ?
Have you taken a poll of everyone who has chosen not to join ?
As I say it's all entirely up to you, but I'm not happy with it and I can make my choice too.
Oh Gee, you're unhappy, what shall we do ?
What kind of childish threat is that ?.
Make your choice.......resign
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
You'd have to be a moron if you don't see the connection to golf and/or GCA.
As to the NORAD post, I was asked by many, via email and IM, including Ran, to cite the Santa tracking site.
Mr. Mucci,
Please lighten up. I was only trying to joke around and insulting me for it is beneath you. I'm really disappointed by your reaction. You probably introduce more quality topics than anyone else, but you're not infallible.
Given that I am a moron (at least in your opinion), please explain the connection between a Happy Fathers Day message and discussion of golf course architecture. As I understand it, merely discussing golf would not be on topic.
Cool, we even get some sassyness in this thread!
Anyway, I'd love to see an OT forum here. Sure, we could go to other sites to talk about that kind of stuff. I do that actually. Thing is, I'd like to be able to have those kind of OT topics where I can converse with my GCA friends and acquaintences. Sites like GolfWRX are great, but it's a vastly different crowd.
-
Maybe 1500 is about 1300 too many? JC
-
I've never started an OT thread.
Almost never - none of us are perfect. But your batting average is VERY high!
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35074.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23579.0/
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7743.0/
You'd have to be a moron if you don't see the connection to golf and/or GCA.
As to the NORAD post, I was asked by many, via email and IM, including Ran, to cite the Santa tracking site.
Mr. Mucci,
Please lighten up. I was only trying to joke around and insulting me for it is beneath you.
I'm really disappointed by your reaction.
You probably introduce more quality topics than anyone else, but you're not infallible.
John, how can you post that those three threads have nothing to do with golf ?
Did you bother to read them ?
I'm really disappointed by your citation.
It's ruined my day.
Maybe my evening too.
I'll never be the same
Given that I am a moron (at least in your opinion),
Selection to the "moron" category is by self appointment, not by my determination
please explain the connection between a Happy Fathers Day message and discussion of golf course architecture.
As I understand it, merely discussing golf would not be on topic.
John,
I can see why you chose to put yourself into the moron category.
Didn't you read the entire Father's Day message.
The part about the U.S. Open ?
-
Ran I have to say Pat wasn't someone who immediately sprang to mind, but are you happy with your name on a site that allows posters to call other posters names like "moron"? Do you hope your kids wil one day take an interest in this site and will you put an age limit on that?
As I said in an earlier post people are choosing not to join because of the low standards of courtesy on here.
As I say it's all entirely up to you, but I'm not happy with it and I can make my choice too.
Tony,
In the last twenty two (22) pages of this website, have you created any new threads ?
What ? Not one ?
So, you don't contribute very much in the way of introducing new topics, but, you want to threaten Ran to make a choice between you or me ?
Good luck.
-
Mr. Mucci,
Why are you yelling? I'm sitting here watching many of the contenders falter on the clown nose of miniature golf that is Whistling Straits and it strikes me that your angst today would be better served in that direction.
I don't consider myself a moron and John Mayhugh certainly is no moron. I reread the posts that he hyperlinked and I found arguable golf architectural merit to the second two and zero architectural merit to the first one linked. This isn't an attack, on the contrary. It is merely a an attempt to ask you to explain the architectural merit of those threads without name calling or assessing that its obviousness absolves you from discussion. To be sure, I have no ax to grind with you and I enjoy your posts on this website. I wanted that to be written before you got upset.
As an aside, I would like to formally apologize for PM'ing you a few months back asking for information on NGLA. I find your passion for the golf course to be infectious and between you and George Bahto, the information is endless. It wasn't until now that I look at how I approached gathering information and even access to golf courses as uninformed and ignorant at times. I have tried to change how I approach this website and the members of it. It wasn't until a few good friends on this website clued me in to how I was presenting myself that I saw the err of my ways. I--like dozens on this website--weren't brought up to understand the unwritten intricacies of private golf clubs. It is through sheer want of an education in golf architecture and turf management that I want to see great golf courses. I am sure that there are some that are trophy hunters. But for every one of them on this website--in my experience--there are five that only wish to se the course and understand why it is great.
-
Mr. Mucci,
Selective reading comprehension is at work.
Each of the threads that I linked to are off-topic when the topic is golf course architecture. That is all that I asserted. Of course they each have something to do with golf, but merely discussing golf is not supposed to be the purpose of the discussion group, is it? If discussion of topics related to golf is on-topic, I'll be surprised if Ran is able to remove 32 pages of threads.
Since you seem to have overlooked my question, please explain what a Happy Father's Day message has to do with golf course architecture.
-
Pat I seem to have upset you? As I said I don't participate so much on here because of the lack of civility and I don't need to justify my contribution on here to you or anyone else. Please explain how those threads were on topic when you started them. I always enjoy you arguing long after the cause is lost.
I also have you in high regard as a poster on here but Mayhugh has you right when he says you’re not infallible.
Again I don’t have to tell you the names of the people who have explicitly blamed poor behaviour on here for reasons of not wanting to join. However Ran knows of one of them because the guy turned Ran down for an interview on this site.
Please reread what I’ve posted because I never said that is the only reason. It’s also typical of you to change someone’s argument to make your own position valid.
I’m outtta this, but feel free to continue with the colour splashes.
;D
-
"I'm sitting here watching many of the contenders falter on the clown nose of miniature golf that is Whistling Straits..."{
Ben:
You're not enjoying this? I can't remember a more exciting finish to a major, involving more golfers, and a great bunch of stories to boot.
-
Mr. Mucci,
Why are you yelling?
Who's yelling?
I'm sitting here watching many of the contenders falter on the clown nose of miniature golf that is Whistling Straits and it strikes me that your angst today would be better served in that direction.
What angst ?
I'm also watching.
And, I'm also having fun at the expense of some very uptight people.
Is asking the gallery to block the sunlight a rules violation ?
When he begins his backswing, I didn't notice a mark IN the sand that would indicate that he grounded the club prior to making his swing.
They showed a nice close up of the ball prior to his swing, but not when he began his swing.
I don't consider myself a moron and John Mayhugh certainly is no moron.
I reread the posts that he hyperlinked and I found arguable golf architectural merit to the second two and zero architectural merit to the first one linked. This isn't an attack, on the contrary. It is merely a an attempt to ask you to explain the architectural merit of those threads without name calling or assessing that its obviousness absolves you from discussion.
Perhaps you're late to the site and unaware of the distance issue and how it relates to drivers.
Perhaps you're unaware of how the USGA blinked on driver size.
If you don't see the connection to the distance issue and the distance issue's effect on GCA, then Ben, I'm afraid that you're going to have to be classifed with the others.
To be sure, I have no ax to grind with you and I enjoy your posts on this website.
I wanted that to be written before you got upset.
Ben, I'm not upset, not in the least.
If you think the typings of some on this site are going to upset me, you don't know me.
As an aside, I would like to formally apologize for PM'ing you a few months back asking for information on NGLA. I find your passion for the golf course to be infectious and between you and George Bahto, the information is endless. It wasn't until now that I look at how I approached gathering information and even access to golf courses as uninformed and ignorant at times. I have tried to change how I approach this website and the members of it. It wasn't until a few good friends on this website clued me in to how I was presenting myself that I saw the err of my ways. I--like dozens on this website--weren't brought up to understand the unwritten intricacies of private golf clubs. It is through sheer want of an education in golf architecture and turf management that I want to see great golf courses. I am sure that there are some that are trophy hunters. But for every one of them on this website--in my experience--there are five that only wish to se the course and understand why it is great.
Ben, I never gave your PM a second thought in terms of my responding to Sean Arble about access.
Trust me, your name never came to mind, so don't worry about it.
-
Pat I seem to have upset you?
Tony, I'm NOT upset.
You didn't upset me.
I just thought you were being a little pedantic.
As I said I don't participate so much on here because of the lack of civility and I don't need to justify my contribution on here to you or anyone else.
I'm not so sure.
When you made a veiled threat I just thought I'd respond accordingly.
Please explain how those threads were on topic when you started them.
I always enjoy you arguing long after the cause is lost.
Did you bother to read the threads about the drivers ?
Have you read any threads having to do with the distance problem and GCA ?
If you can't connect the two, then, what can I say.................. moron ;D.
I also have you in high regard as a poster on here but Mayhugh has you right when he says you’re not infallible.
I NEVER said I was infallible.
Again I don’t have to tell you the names of the people who have explicitly blamed poor behaviour on here for reasons of not wanting to join.
And, you can't take an isolated incident and craft it into a generality.
You know that. And, if you don't...................... moron ;D
However Ran knows of one of them because the guy turned Ran down for an interview on this site.
Maybe Ran didn't offer to pay him as much as he pays the others
Please reread what I’ve posted because I never said that is the only reason.
It’s also typical of you to change someone’s argument to make your own position valid.
Oh, so now you're claiming that someone broke into your computer and has been typing and posting under your name ?
I haven't changed anything you or the moron who broke into your computer has typed.
I’m outtta this, but feel free to continue with the colour splashes.
;D
-
Ran,
24hrs after posting the OP of this thread you register a fake user as Dustin Johnson for a laugh?
Maybe I've missed something, but I am confused.
-
Pat - I'm definitely not a moron and I don't see that these treads are directly related to golf course architecture. Neither are your annual threads on whether CBS is enhancing the color green during their broadcast of the Masters golf tournament.
-
Despite my relatively low number of posts, I do have some thoughts on the issues raised in Ran's, as well as Jeff Fortson's, post. To begin with, this board is a tremendous resource. I was drawn here when Ron Whitten wrote a Golf Digest review of Black Creek in Chattanooga. He wrote about how Brian Silva had designed the course as a tribute to Seth Raynor's architectural style. I had no idea who Raynor was but was fascinated by his descriptions of the holes and the accompanying pictures. In the internet version of this article, there was a link to Ran's review of Black Creek. I found his descriptions and commentary fascinating and wanted to learn more about this subject. Seven years ago, he was kind enough to allow me into this group.
Since that time, this site has certainly given me more than I have contributed to it. I try not to participate in a thread unless I have something substantive to add. Usually, that involves mainly courses in Ohio and the Midwest since that is where I have played most of my golf. Hence, my low number of posts. However, as a result of this site, my horizons have been broadened and I have played a number of interesting and wonderful courses that I never would have known about except for discussions here (Yale, Lookout Mountain, The Creek, Mountain Lake, Hidden Creek, Holston Hills, Kirtland to name a few). The people that I have met through this board at events like the Dixie Cup, Pat Mucci's Hidden Creek outing, Mike Sweeney's charity outing to benefit his son Dusty's school at the Creek and other get togethers have been top notch. Interesting people who are fun to be around and excited about this topic.
I find most people who contribute here to be intelligent and insightful. I am put off by the suggestion, as someone said to me last year, that "all the smart guys have left." I find that attitude insulting and demeaning to those people who are still active here and to Ran, whom I have never met but am constantly amazed at his ability to recall and analyze a course after a single playing. If he is not one of the smart guys, I don't know who qualifies for that distinction. Sure, some valuable contributors have left this site. Some have jumped, some may have been pushed but to constantly bemoan their absence is a bit much. It is well known where some of them hang out in cyberspace. Look there. Call them. Email them. But spare most of us the insinuation that we are not worthy of gracing this group. It is Ran (and Ben's) playground, if I am no longer welcome here so be it. I will thank Ran for the experience and the knowledge that I have gained here, continue to lurk and will move on with my life.
What I do find disappointing about this group is that over the past year it has devolved, to some extent, to a 1500 member golf version of Facebook. At times, the emphasis is not on participation but on personality. I enjoy humor and the occasional good natured banter here. The quirky nature of some of the people here has its charms. But some feel it is more important to be a GCA personality rather than a GCA contributor. This is not to single this participant out because I like him and would tee it up with him at any time. But if I see the picture of Dr. Gray on the mower at St. Andrews one more time, I think I will puke. Get a Facebook page. Friend me (or unfriend me). Let me look at all the pictures of you in your caddie outfit and in bars with women licking your face there. Here, give me your thoughts on golf architecture. You have them and some of them are quite interesting. Let's see more of that and less of the "look at me" posts. Slow down, consult spell check or a dictionary and show us what you've got. I don't mean to pick on Dr. Gray and in many ways find him refreshing. If I offend, my apologies. It is not intended to be so. It is an example that comes immediately to mind. Maybe because he is such a constant presence here. There are others out there. The ratio of tripe to quality has increased somewhat. That doesn't invalidate the site. It just makes it more difficult to find the wheat among the chaff.
The other thing I find is that people mistake passion for wisdom. We are all passionate about golf and golf course architecture but that does not necessarily translate into having something meaningful to say on every topic. It appears that some feel a need to chime in just to let us know that they are still among us. A dog yapping in the night does the same thing... and contributes about as much to this site. That isn't to say that every post saying "Great photo tour" or "*" should disappear. But how about a comment or question that moves the discussion along? A sixteen year old in love is passionate, but does not necessarily have insight or wisdom. Mix in some analysis, do some homework, give some examples.
There is a lot of good stuff on this website. The photo tours of Sagebrush and Sand Hills were phenomenal. Ed Oden posted an interesting thread on how architects renovating Ross courses have their own distinct style. There are other topics of note. However, many have been pushed off the first page by at least five discussions of whether Dustin Johnson got screwed on the 72nd hole of the PGA. Those topics get traction because they are easy to discuss. It's like the great actor who on his deathbed said, "Dying is easy. Comedy is hard." Golf talk is easy, architecture discussion is hard. Let's try to ramp up the discussion of architecture. I know I will.
-
David, first off let me say I'm not trying to be a wise guy or put you on the spot. I am curious, however, how many times you've played Merion and how many hours you've spent on site. The same question goes for the other antagonists.
Kindest regards,
Mike
Mike,
I hope you don't mind me saying so, but while i am sure it was unintentional on your part your question strikes me as one loaded with the implication that only those inside the inner circle of these clubs ought to comment upon them. Surely that wasn't what you meant, but I have been hearing this quite a lot lately. Admittedly I may have rabbit ears to the issue, but nonetheless I think it important, so please forgive me if in answering I give a bit detail than you asked for.
I've played Merion East once. I used to live within walking distance and spent some looking for TEPaul's lost dog, but except for the one round on the East and some twilight rounds on the the West, that's it. But miraculously, my single play helped me understand that Hugh Wilson's well-known writings on the creation of the course had been completely misunderstood, that he didn't travel abroad to study the great courses until after Merion East was designed built, and that he went to NGLA during the planning phase to learn how the course should be laid out (not for travel advice.) I learned that CBM was extensively involved in planning the course from the time he helped them choose the land until after he chose their final layout plan for them. I also noticed lots of other little things - stuff about the neighborhood, the land deals, that Merion's method of measuring golf holes long caused the distances of some of the holes to be exaggerated (conseqently some of Bobby Jones' famous drives were a lot shorter than reported,) that contrary to popular belief the 10th or "Alps" hole played uphill -- but I won't bore you with all that. Additionally this one play lead me to strongly suspect that the 1912 version of Merion East had holes based upon the concepts of a redan, a road hole, a long, a short, the first take on CBM's chasm/biarritz (complete with a "valley of sin,") another green with a biarritz swale, a double plateau, probably a hog's back, and a fascinating take on the bottle. I almost forgot the leven and the cape, probably because the former didn't last long and the latter wouldn't be built for over a decade. There is more, but you get the message I am sure.
Not bad for one play, huh? Most of those who have played the course hundreds of times didn't notice any of that stuff and probably never will. Imagine what I'd find if I ever played there again! (Fat chance.) I'll admit though that I had a couple of big advantages. First, I played my hickories. Didn't Ran once start a thread on how that was the best way to understand these old courses? Second, I am horrible with my hickories, so I got to hit a lot of shots, and from places not likely visited much in the past in 98 years. Third, I had just played NGLA a few days before, so I was in the right frame of mind to notice CBM's extensive influence. Fourth, I had an open mind and wasn't burdened with a monolithic version of the history/legend. I went into it with an open mind and still try to keep an open mind to the issue. Fifth, I am sure I must have stayed at a Holiday Inn at some point on that trip. Let's see, what am I forgetting? Oh yeah, the little matter of all the extensive research but surely that hasn't much to do with it.
I don't want to put you on the spot, but now that I've answered, I hope you don't mind if I too ask a few questions . . .
-- None of us played Merion East in 1912. What does it matter how many times I have played the course a century later? Does that have any bearing on whether or not I am qualified to comment on Merion's history?
-- Would our understanding of the history of golf course architecture be improved if only those within the inner circle of these clubs were allowed comment on them.
The reason I ask is that the qualification for participation around here really ought to be what you know, not who you know. Yet many comments often seem nothing but not-so-subtle attempts to make it about the latter, not the former. And while I am sure it wasn't your intention, challenging a poster's opinions based upon nothing more than how many times he has played a famous course obviously goes latter as well.
Best,
David.
-
Bill Steele, I love you, I miss you, I need you.
I think you bring up a great point about Ed Oden's Donald Ross thread. What I found most disappointing is that after Ran's great post, Ed started a great thread and all the people who could probably have some great insight (i.e. Ran, Brad Klein, Pat Mucci, etc.) posted in the Dustin Johnson debacle and not in Ed Oden's great thread.
Things that make you go hmmm....
-
David,
I think you may have misunderstood why Michael asked what he did. In fact, I almost asked it myself and for what I believe is the same reason.
YOU stated, "No course is "beneath my gca tastes" to comment on, but why would I comment on courses I've never seen or played and know nothing about?" (bold & Underline mine).
Now I've followed all of the Merion threads and its always been my impression that you've NEVER played Merion based on things I believed you said. Obviously I was wriong, but I think that Michael simply thought the same thing. With that in mind, when someone states "why would I comment on courses I've never seen or played" and they have been participating in numerous heated discussions about a course he seems to not have played, the obvious thing is to question him about it and that is all that Michael did.
Your answer shows that both of us, and I'm sure some others as well, had not realized that you've been to Merion a number of times.
-
Jason,
You said above, "What I found most disappointing is that after Ran's great post, Ed started a great thread and all the people who could probably have some great insight (i.e. Ran, Brad Klein, Pat Mucci, etc.) posted in the Dustin Johnson debacle and not in Ed Oden's great thread.
Things that make you go hmmm....
Like you I wish the truly knowledgeable folks on this site would contribute to interesting threads like Ed's. Instead, they either stay away or focus only on their own threads.
-
I'd like to see the participants on this site provided the ability to vote on topics so that really good threads can be highlighted by the group. This feature is built into the SMF software that runs this forum. Here are a few of the feature details from the SMF website:
Feature: POLLS
>>> Can be added or removed to existing topics.
>>> Ability to set expiration date.
>>> Ability to hide results till expiration of poll.
>>> Ability to hide results until after people have voted.
>>> Ability to determine how many votes a user may cast.
>>> Polls can have up to 256 options.
If we had the ability to vote on the quality or interest level of threads it would reward the good ones and keep people from wasting their time on the bad ones.
Also, I wish Ran would do away with the feature that shows the post count and "ranks" the participants. This forum should not in any way reward quantity instead of quality.
If we dropped the post counts and rewarded quality threads by allowing everyone to cast a vote for them the cream would definitely rise to the top.
-
Pat - I'm definitely not a moron
We'll be the judge of that.
Often, misspelled words are a sure sign.
and I don't see that these treads are directly related to golf course architecture.
"Treads" ? I thought this was about GCA not tires.
Here's Ran's quote for the discussion group.
Would you show me where the word, "directly" appears.
Or is the above just another disengenuous reply on your part ?
Golf Course Architecture (free access forum)
A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture related matters.
I thought drivers and the distance issue, especially as it impacts the obsolescence of architectural features, was related.
How is it that you think they're not ?[/b][/color]
Neither are your annual threads on whether CBS is enhancing the color green during their broadcast of the Masters golf tournament.
I don't initiate annual threads on the use of filters, that's just another disengenuous statement on your part.
However, in one of the golf broadcasts this year they mentioned that they're not using filters and that's why the greens looked so splotchy (sp?)and discolored.
It must be difficult for you to accept that you're wrong on the filter issue.
Obviously, like a woman scorned, you can't get over it ;D
By the way, how many threads have you initiated ?
Ran was quite clear in this post.
ONLY a MORON wouldn't understand the gist of what he's saying.
If Ran felt that I was diverting the focus of the site with OT, he'd call me in a heart beat and tell me so.
In our many discussions and in our recent discussions that's never been the case.
Stop being a whiner and a weiner and get on with it.
-
Pat,
Perhaps Ran is too afraid to call you out because he knows you can get him access to places? ;) ;D
-
I almost emailed you today with the intention of resigning from the site because of the absolute lack of respect that is being shown on these threads. By the vulgarity, constant 8-year old (if that) name calling, non-stop testosterone arguing rather than any semblance of a discussion, the participants are damaging both themselves and the website and, as a result, all who post here in the eyes of many. I've actually had lurkers who are not members privately email me and suggest that my participation here hurts my own reputation.
Please don't consider leaving, ever. That's throwing the baby out with the bath water. You are a very valuable poster, do not let silliness detract from the vast amount of terrific stuff on here.
Hey all,
An excellent post by Ran. I haven't posted anything on here in years (though I still lurk) in part because there is so much fat on this DG that the meat is hard to find.
Please do everyone a favor and start posting some meat! :) Seriously, for all the people that complain about OT threads, the architecture threads are far too often ignored. Share something, bump one if you like it.
Looks like the Discussion Group is about to go more elitist.
One where those of you in the inner circle who have had the chance to play the great courses can all rabbit on about where the inspiration for the design came from, meanwhile the rest of us who have not been so lucky or well connected can just read the posts without making comment for fear of offending the elites with our philistine commentary.
Too bad, I liked it here.
The best way to fight this (if you believe it, I don't) is to post some architectural stuff!
-
I almost emailed you today with the intention of resigning from the site because of the absolute lack of respect that is being shown on these threads. By the vulgarity, constant 8-year old (if that) name calling, non-stop testosterone arguing rather than any semblance of a discussion, the participants are damaging both themselves and the website and, as a result, all who post here in the eyes of many. I've actually had lurkers who are not members privately email me and suggest that my participation here hurts my own reputation.
Please don't consider leaving, ever. That's throwing the baby out with the bath water. You are a very valuable poster, do not let silliness detract from the vast amount of terrific stuff on here.
What George Pazin said.
-
We don't need moderators, OT boards, or anything more than the occasional bit of restraint.
I don't post that to boost my count - heck, I'm embarrassed of my count, and would suggest that removing it might actually cause some folks to really go crazy - but rather to try to boost the morale around here while at the same time maybe improving things a tiny little bit (not that I think it needs to be improved...).
If you want to share an OT thought, try to find a thread on the topic, rather than starting a new one (can't help but think all of the 2010 PGA thoughts could have been compressed into the 2010 PGA at Whistling Straits discussion thread (http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45511.0/)...).
If you like an architectural thread but don't have something to share, figure out some way to keep it on the first page! It's not that tough!!
Don't like the OTs? Don't post in them saying that, ignore them! Post in the architecture threads!
And get over the access issue already, everyone, please!
-
The best way to fight this (if you believe it, I don't) is to post some architectural stuff!
This is not directed at you, but I am rather surprised at the direction of this thread and a lot of the huffy indignation by some who yearn for the old days. That always sounds, to a newcomer, like 'before arrivistes like you'. Reminds me rather of the attitude of some of the older stuffier golf clubs in parts of England, actually.
If anybody is unhappy about the amount of OT stuff, or finds it beneath them, seems to me like they have 3 choices.
1. Don't participate in it or read OT stuff. Most of the OT stuff is prefixed OT, and has obvious thread titles. I find it quite easy to ignore threads which do not sound of interest me. I don't see whay others should not be able to do so too.
2. Post something else worthy and draw people to that discussion.
3. Get a life.
I don't know Philip, but if he contemplates resigning because of it, I think he needs to look at himself rather than the discussion group. This is a website forum that talks about golf, not a matter of life and death.
Trust me, I know the difference.
-
Random thought. Why not have a second board where anything goes. Maintain the DG as an architecture/design discussions only and the other board is everything else.
The fact is that you have brought together a group of people who enjoy chatting with each other. Why limit it to one topic? Just create another forum and call it "The 19th Hole" where folks chat about anything and everything if they wish.
The group you have bright together have other interests and quite frankly some of the peripheral discussions are far more enlghtening than 5 guys consuming half the world's bandwidth arguing about Merion.
I like this idea and think it would keep most people happy. I have seen it work on other sites.
-
Did I miss something again ? What exactly is the problem ? ;D
-
. . .
Anyway, I'd love to see an OT forum here. Sure, we could go to other sites to talk about that kind of stuff. I do that actually. Thing is, I'd like to be able to have those kind of OT topics where I can converse with my GCA friends and acquaintences. Sites like GolfWRX are great, but it's a vastly different crowd.
This seems to really be the crux of the OT issue to me, and a very good reason try to cut back on the OT that goes on here. Sites like GolfWRX do attract a "vastly different crowd" because that crowd likes to discuss the things that are discussed there. Likewise, the OT discussions around here attract and keep posters whose primary interest here might not be the "frank discussion of golf course architecture." When this happens the website suffers because it moves further away from its stated purpose. This site doesn't need to be another GolfWRX or whatever. If the OT stuff is necessary for anyone to enjoy the site, maybe there are websites better suited to their interests.
___________________________________________
Phillip,
With the repetitious portrayal of me as an outsider who is unqualified to comment, I'm not surprised you thought I had never played or even seen Merion. It goes to show that such portrayals do impact how others view these matters even when the portrayals are irrelevant and baseless. Therein lies my dilemma of whether to respond or ignore this type of thing. Responding puts me right in the muck, but ignoring it allows the entire conversation to be framed as one of "who I know" instead of "what I know." Unfortunately as your comment and perhaps Mike's question demonstrate, even well meaning people get caught up in it and don't see this stuff for what it is.
Also, I still have no idea why you or anyone else thinks it matters one bit whether I have played Merion once, twice, or a hundred times. We are talking about 100 year old history here. Membership and/or access doesn't change what happened. Admittedly, seeing the course is helpful and it definitely caused some lightbulbs to go off for me, but the merit of my work doesn't depend upon how much I've played it, but whether or not I accurate analyzed the information I had available to me. Likewise for those with full access. Just claiming superiority because of access shouldn't cut it. If they have a superior understanding, then the presentation of their facts and analysis ought to reflect that. No need to flout access over substance if what is learned through access has actually improved one's understanding.
Bottom line for me is that this website should be about what you know, and not who you know and whether they can get you on here or there. If you've got something relevant and of substance to say and you can back it up, then you should be welcomed and encouraged to say it, no matter what access you've had. Those who have something to offer ought never be shouted down or dissuaded from posting because they are not in some inner circle.
-
David,
I tend to see things as a whole. This combines the good and the bad which are inextricably intertwined. It seems to me that these nasty encounters would subside if people don't take the bait.