Pennard

[Doug Wright]

Matt,

From your post above, "quirk...situations that are based on a preponderance of luck" and "When luck becomes the dominant factor."

Are you saying that quirk=luck? That's not how I view quirk at all, and I suspect it's not how a number of folks hereon view quirk. As indicated by the definition below, quirk is an idiosyncracy, an odd or peculiar trait. If you look at some of the posts on the Black Mesa thread, you'll see folks gushing about situations and shots they faced where the course or green design made the player do something OTHER than just aim it at the hole and hit it straight. See, eg, the posts about the backboard on #7 green and the sideboard on the front of #10 green. To get the correct result, the player had to recognize the idiosyncratic or quirky feature and execute the correct shot to get the correct result. Nothing lucky about it at all, just recognition and proper course management. I think that's why many hereon like quirk. It's not straightforward design, it makes you think, and skill and smarts--not luck--are required.

From the dictionary: quirk. a : an abrupt twist or curve b : a peculiar trait : IDIOSYNCRASY

[NAF]

I agree with Doug Wright's definition. Matt, lets look at our beloved Kingsley Club. People would describe the 5th hole where you can bank it off the left to kick back towards the hole as a "quirky" feature. Hit the right spot and boom you have 2 feet for birdie, miss it by a little and you are in the back of the green.  It is quirky and as Doug maintains an idiosyncrasy you learn to play.  Doesn't golf always have an element of luck it in?  If golf mirrors life, which is a metaphor many people choose to talk about, then isnt luck part of the game.  How many lucky breaks have professionals got, a funny bounce etc?  Thats why blind shots are fun to me, I don't know the outcome.  I want that thrill.   A rewarded shot is a rewarded shot and I of course want that most of the time in golf, but when quirk might add to the experience whether one deems it a lucky bounce or knowledge of a minute feature, well that makes golf inspiring and thrilling.  If I get a bad break well just like life, I have to deal with it.  Now I fully understand that there are times where there are mickey mouse type features in golf courses and that kind of quirk I don't like, but that usually is man made and not natural (i.e. ex. DeVries used the contours of the land to make that kick in feature on #5).  Natural quirk or idiosyncrasies are what make the game fun.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I don't throw the word quirk in because too many people -- sorry Noel, but have to include you -- think that situations that are based on a preponderance of luck make for good golf -- I just don't buy that type of approach.

Thats right Matt, you know it all, and we should all take your word as strong as oak.

In that one quoted sentence you do a ignorant disservice to anything Bernard Darwin, Horace Hutchinson, and many others who ever wrote timeless works about golf on the links of Great Britain.

Your right and their wrong. You are the typical American everybody outside of the United States loves to hate, because your better golfer then they are therfore your opinions are much knowledgable and precise. All based off of POWER, STRENGTH, ME. It's all about YOU!

You go guy! Take them by storm and show them what its all about.

(It's no wonder your spending all of your time abroad on Golf Club Atlas--no one there will talk to you!)

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy:

For a guy who barks from the left coast and has sooooooooooooooooo many courses worldwide please understand that I do enjoy places like Pennard and have even stated how a number of holes there should be studied and even copies by a number of modern designers today.

My opinions are mine oh mighty Emperor -- if you don't like'm shove it. But please spare me this idea that only the chosen few (Rat Pack) here on GCA understand golf and all its magic moments. It's really old and a bit much. The annointed ones (aka Emperor and his minions) come off with this "we know better" approach and then when someone (me and others) say otherwise it's frowned upon as how can someone disagree with us? What BS plain and simple.

Tommy -- you're the guy who waxes on about "the look" but rarely, if ever speaks about how a hole / course plays. Why is that I wonder? Tommy -- wake up and smell the coffee -- golf is about the playing of shots and how those shots are tied together. You'd much rather see how the bunker is shaped and designed and go and on and on about how other architects -- namely TF and Rees Jones -- don't get it but yet you have only played a small percentage of courses they have designed.

Speaking about "typical American" you personify the person who plays or does something once and then broad brushes it to the extreme. Nothing like doing one's homework, huh?

P.S. Tommy -- I have had many fine and superb conversations with a wide range of people in Ireland and Wales and if you took the time to take your head out of your a** you'd know that about me. But -- hey -- nothing like throwing bombs -- right?

I enjoyed Pennard, Tenby and Pyle & Kenwig, to name just three courses that are clearly beyond the usual American design. I've said so but the "pure" minded types (i.e. you) can never come up for air long enough before heaving another silly and inane bomblast. Tommy -- we see the game from different perspectives but leaping forward with name calling is something best left for those playing in the sandbox. I left that locale a long time ago. Maybe you should too.