Questions You Can't Answer!

[Kyle Harris]

I struggle with certain opinions about golf courses when I'm asked. I have no idea which I consider to be the hardest golf course I've played, for instance. This is perhaps because I've had such variability of skill level in my golf career and my experiences were often the result of my skillset and experience.

My favorite course change daily and there are likely a dozen in my "top 5."

Similarly, I struggle mightily with a list of best conditioned courses.

All of my answers are tied to one specific round or sentimental attachment.

I thought a good discussion could come from this as we all have strong opinions - but perhaps struggle to actually categorize them!

Which common questions about your tastes in golf architecture CAN'T you answer?

[Michael Whitaker]

Kyle,
I struggle with the "BEST" of anything related to golf courses.

My friends often ask what is the "Best" course I have played and I struggle mightily to answer. I usually give them a short list of courses that are my most "favorite," but they are not necessarily the ones the rankers consider the "Best."
We all have preferences and prejudices relating to course design and presentation. For example, I prefer firm and bouncy courses to soft ones... and, I have a prejudice against holes that have cart paths which interfere with play.

[Peter Pallotta]

K -
I don’t think I could answer someone who asked me to assign a number (ie a 10 or 9 etc) to *two or more* courses. I mean: I can imagine playing Course X and exclaiming ‘OMG - this course is a 10!’....but I can’t imagine then going on to *compare* that course with Courses Y and Z, numerically speaking. How the heck would I know? Course X is one kind of course, *its* kind of course, and Courses Y and Z are different kinds of courses, *their* kinds of courses. So how would I know whether they are a 10, a 9 and an 8 respectively, or instead simply *different*?
Luckily, no one is asking for my opinion/answer on this, so it’s a moot point.
P

[Tom_Doak]

I get asked all the time which is my favorite of my own courses.


As y'all know, I'm not the most politically correct person, so I do not respond to this question with a variation of the Tom Fazio answer that I love all my children equally.  But that doesn't mean I can answer the question to anyone's satisfaction.


The problem is that I have such different experiences with my courses.  There are a couple of them [Pacific Dunes and High Pointe] that I've played 100 times, with a wide range of other golfers of different abilities.  For those, I have seen for myself how they play, and I judge them as I do all other courses . . . as a golfer.


But I can't do the same for most of my other courses.  It takes a while to get over the fact that you designed the course and you had your reasons for every decision you made, and not be defensive about those decisions.  And it takes even longer to do that when you go back to a course and the client and the golf pro and the superintendent and your friends all want your opinion of x, y and z and whether it is working the way it's supposed to work, or they want to change the 18th hole, or whatever.


So all I can say is that Pacific Dunes is my best work, based on playing it, but that I think I've done several courses that I would like just as much or more, if I ever get a chance to play them enough.


Likewise, any way you ask me what I think is my favorite course or the best course or the most fun course or the course I'd like to play before I die, I am probably going to give you a different answer, depending on several factors including how recently I was there. 


But, on the other hand, having published all my opinions on the subject tends to keep my thoughts relatively in line.

[Sean_A]

Like Whitty, I find answering the best courses played as very difficult and largely not a question which interests me. Shit, I don't know if #2 is better than Oakland Hills and at the end of the day both are too good to worry about it. Part of my problem is I don't think there are styles or elements of design which are inherently better than others. They are all good in the right measure and the right measure is purely subjective. Plus, things like the walk and the integration of house and course are very important to me, but these are elements which are divorced from hitting shots. I would happily have a few lesser holes for a superior walk, but would equally be okay with an awkward walk for that one showcase hole.

Ciao

[Ira Fishman]

Very few people care what I think so I do not get a lot of questions.  That of course does not stop me from offering my opinions to them.  Often wrong, never in doubt is my motto. 


The issue I have the most difficult time explaining is why not to overvalue setting, aesthetics, and conditioning.  On my first trip to Ireland, we played the classic American tour:  Ballybunion, Lahinch, Waterville, Old Head, and Doonbeg.  Six out of the Eight golfers said the Old Head was the "best" course.  And it was not just about the views.  It was a dry summer, and Ballybunion, Lahinch, and Waterville were browned out which they found off-putting. 


It is difficult for me to counter their views because like over 90% of golfers they play the game for enjoyment.  Setting and conditioning factor into their enjoyment and therefore how they assess the quality of courses.


Ira

[JESII]

Which common questions about your tastes in golf architecture CAN'T you answer?

Why is Muirfield a better course than Dunbar...




I say this half tongue in cheek, so hoping Peter doesn't call me pithy...again...


My early answer to that thread touched on my belief that Pine Valley is the best golf course in the world and I cannot picture a better one...but I doubt that is true for more than 10% of all golfers.


Opinions of golf courses have to be subjective and it's just not possible for a 22 handicap to enjoy a round of golf on a course they simply cannot play. They can enjoy the day, the walk and certainly the company...and very likely enjoy a couple of their shots. They can even appreciate the architecture, what was used/created as a playing field. For their own golf, there must be a thousand courses they would prefer for all the right reasons.

[Mike_Young]

Kyle,I think it is healthy not to be able to answer most of those questions.  If one takes much of his time trying to answer such he becomes frustrated and cynical about so much of the smoke and mirrors around "best course" status.  Also 99% of the people asked can't determine if they like the maintenance or the design. 

I am a cynic when it comes to golf design and I don't say that as a negative.  TD is one of the few that will give a straight answer and not worry the outcome.  American design is hampered by club politics, resort marketing agencies and committees that don't know what they don't know. 

Since RTJ the main thing needed to be successful on a national level is to be the "nice guy".  So often the more talented cannot get past the entrance barrier because he might not be the salesperson needed to close the owner.  For close to 30 years I have seen mediocrity triumph because of back scratching.  For example a State Supt association will take turns naming each other "supt of the year".  you can bet that will come form the more prominent clubs in a state and from guys who have either been on the board or have been at clubs for years. And rarely is the guy that good; he just had the politics covered. And you will often see a contractor or an architect blaze thru a region doing renovations because owner refers to owner.  they don't know if he is good or not bu they know they have plenty of others to blame if he isn't.    I know more than a few very good architects who can't get past that door. 
The last few years I have found it refreshing and fun to just do what comes your way and not try and enter the rat race of presenting to committees etc.  It's all one big smoke show.
The one question I can answer is that people will never tell you a course is their " favorite or best" if the greens are not in good condition.  For me that tells me a lot about where design stand in the order of "best clubs" being weighed.

[MCirba]

I can't begin to answer the question of what happened to all of the copies of the Merion Cricket Club's golf course plan distributed to Board Members that was recommended by the committee for adoption iand approved n the spring of 1911.


How do all of those copies distributed to wealthy, prominent individuals living in the cradle of liberty just vanish?  There was no clubhouse fire.


That's the Holy Grail of architectural research to me. 

[Lou_Duran]

Very few people care what I think so I do not get a lot of questions.  That of course does not stop me from offering my opinions to them.  Often wrong, never in doubt is my motto. 

A lot of self-awareness demonstrated above.


Unlike Mr. Whitaker, I can easily answer what course I consider to be the best.  It might change on occasion as I play new ones, but the needle is seldom moved by much (still waiting for an invite to Pine Valley and be blown away).


The question/mystery which most vexes me is how UK/Commonwealth golfers come up with their handicaps (straight-faced and without vanity).


Another one is the slope rating calculated for any number of courses.  I would love to see much more peer review (at least two teams with no access to each other's data or prior history).  Members of the travelling team at my home club claim that our course and slope ratings are way too high, resulting in uncompetitive handicaps.  Usually playing between a 4 to a 6, I can't qualify as most of the guys on the team play to between 10-16, but can beat me straight up as needed (I seem to inspire a lot of "best ever rounds").  Apparently they have found a way to overcome the over-rating of our home course.