Andy,
I noticed the Augusta like holes - near copies of the 12, 15, and maybe 6 and 2 spring out. I have spoken to Damian P about it, but he has never mentioned that design influence. I am guessing John Fry requested that they put that stuff in.
I also read through the old thread, where someone here credited Neal Meagher with the design right away, because he was a gca.com member.
Not so. The project was the work of Graves and Pascuzzo, and Graves was still alive and well at the time. Neal was a design associate, and Damian credits him with some great work on the project, and for being an all around standup guy. Damian has always told me it was a true collaborative effort and they used everyone's ideas to make it the best possible project.
But, it is a G&P course, even if John Fry himself now seems to be claiming credit and leaving the designers out.
This is obviously an interesting subject to me! No one here would call a Ross course a "Maples" course when Ross didn't ever show up, would they? They probably wouldn't even give a Gil Hanse type credit for a Doak course that he happened to work at, even if Tom would be gracious enough to note Gil's contributions. At the same time, for other gca's, it seems like the work of rewriting history begins, for a lot of reasons, and via a lot of people who have differing reasons to credit it differently, whether that's ego owners, associates going out on their own, or whatever.
Attribution is a tricky business, but I still believe that the head of the firm who has the contract gets the attribution. Period. If he wants to share it, no problem. But, he/she is the one who calls the final shots, got the job brought in the door for the associate to work on, and would be the one to get sued if the associate screwed up somehow and made an unsafe or unbuildable design. It's a lot different to make a decision when there are legal consequences!