News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2002, 03:25:57 PM »
Nathan_Huffhines,

Thats a good story about your name.  So I guess the fact that your email address [unpaintedarizona@hotmail.com] is also the name of the furniture store in "Raising Arizona" is just another coincidence. Right?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2002, 03:50:05 PM »
Nathan H:

You need to read what people have written -- not what you think they have written. Please specify, with a degree of accuracy, the comments you believe are hubris on my part.

I believe my previous post, and that of David Wigler's, more than explained, in somewhat greater detail, the context and  nature of the comments made regarding Rustic Canyon and Barona Creek. I believe those comments were done in an evenhanded manner.

I can't speak for David, but I believe it's fair to say that both of us, and that includes an array of others, have a huge respect for both layouts and have said so. The comments put forward have been offered by people who have ACTUALLY played the courses in question. You candidly admit you've never played either thus far. Therefore, you really don't know the context of how those comments have been arrived at.

I have tried to put forward analysis based on my experiences at the courses in question. I have never stated anything remotely connected to somehow promoting myself to be a "tour wannabe."

Your last sentence regarding equipment is inane. I only use what is legal period. No less than anyone else. When the clock is rolled back, as you suggest, I will be happy to use whatever the rules permit.

 

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2002, 08:16:54 PM »
Nathan,

Matt somes up my feelings well.  If you are a frequent lurker, you would know that I am all in favor of rolling back technology.  As long as it is legal, I will use what the USGA tells me I can use.  RC and Barona were both built in the last 3 years.  They were built understanding the technology that is available.  Neither is Merion, where technology did not exist during construction.  

I have a good idea for you.  Arizona is only a $99 flight from LA.  Go play RC.  The green complexes are magic and even at the $50 green fee plus the $99 flight plus the rental car, it will be cheaper for you than Troon North.  If you feel that the course cannot be overpowered, then reply, explain and disagree.  Until that point, your criticisms are pointless.  I reread both Matt and My criticisms.  They read to me like thoughful critques of one percieved shortcoming on an ortherwise stellar golf course.  They do not read at all like two tour wannabes.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

Tim Weiman

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2002, 09:10:58 PM »
Matt Ward:

I wonder if you are too quick to dismiss the suggestion of using older equipment. A friend of mine played Muirfield with Tom Watson using old hickory sticks. He said Watson described the experience as much more fun than using modern equipment.

What makes you think using modern equipment is more fun? Wouldn't the challenge of a course like Rustic Canyon be greater if you approached it with the same spirit Watson did Muirfield?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2002, 09:36:05 AM »
Tim:

It's very special to some to wax on about nostaglia. My brother drives a '62 corvette and claims there's nothing like it today. I salute him -- but I prefer what's available now.

When you ask me about usuing old time clubs my answer is simple -- yes, I'd give it a try one time. But let's place it in some form of context. Tim, I used to mow my parent's lawn with a manual mower which was quite hilly. It was great work to understand the nature of pushing such a huge contraption on a 90+ degree day. ::) Then they invented the power mower. I don't need to go back and "feel" the kind of "fun" your advocating. ;)

I don't doubt there's a challenge in using the old time sticks and balls. But, let's remember this -- it's relative. If the strongest players of today switched to the clubs you mentioned ALONG WITH EVERYONE ELSE, the differences would still be apparent. It always amuses me that many people advocating the joys of the game past are the first ones leaping into the pro shop and inquiring about the latest tech improvements.

Like I said nostaglia is wonderful and we should not forget where the game has been, but until the rules change I'm using what's permitted.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2002, 10:05:37 AM »
Matt Ward:

The way the story was told Tom Watson never claimed he would use hickory sticks in competition. He just said playing with them was more fun for casual rounds. As you play casual rather than competitive golf, you might come to the same conclusion Watson did.

So far as I know, the rules place limits on equipment but don't say you can't use the older stuff. One advantage older equipment presents is that it tends to make courses longer, perfect it would seem, for a guy who likes playing from the tips.

Really, it's not about nostalgia. It's about the balance between technology, playing ability and course difficulty. If a course like Rustic Canyon doesn't provide sufficient challenge, why not use equipment that provides a better balance?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2002, 11:30:19 AM »
Tim:

You can also suggest that I use no more than "x" number of clubs per round and have one hand tied behind my back too! ;D

All kidding aside -- I'll give it a try in '03 as part of my New Year's resolutions. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2002, 11:41:41 AM »
Matt Ward:

Several weeks ago I wrote that I took out my Powerbilts for a round at Sand Ridge. Distance wise it made a big difference. I was 30-40 yards shorter. If you are bored with driver and nine iron, you might find it surprising fun.

I also love the feel of persimmon, especially with a ball like the Maxfli Noodle.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #33 on: December 15, 2002, 01:53:48 PM »
It's really great to see how an area such as SoCal now has at least two superb daily fee courses that don't require a second mortgage to play.

I enjoy both courses and although I did say I personally favor Rustic Canyon the differences between them are really quite small.

Pete, hit the nail on the head regarding the understanding of the greens at RC That does take some time and for that reason although you are presented with a few more birdie opportunities than Barona -- you must be conscious of the local knowledge in playing RC to a bit more degree than Barona. Thank heavens I played with Tommy N, David M and David K during my round. The aspect of down-canyon putts can be very vexing to any player and it's something I can away with in hopefully being a bit wiser the next time around.

Either way SoCal has two courses that will keep a player's interest for many years to come. I might also add that I also believe the Sky Course at LC and PGA West / Stadium are also must plays for any player visiting the area. I recognize that few on GCA see Sky the same way I do. So be it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »