Does the club make the man...

[DMoriarty]

Bob and George...

If I know for a fact the following is not true...what does that make it..How many people that join and or enjoy Fazio courses do you think actually do so because the trickery of the architecture makes them feel good about themselves.  How many great courses does Fazio need to build before he and the members who join are not seen as architectural simpletons...

MacKenzie wrote about incorporating features which look hard but play easy, so the golfers get a thrill without ever being in as much danger as they thought they were.  Does this make his fans "Architectural Simpletons."  Is designing courses which make people feel good about themselves inherently unworthy?  

This type of thing is what I have never understood about your Fazio posturing, John.   You apparently believe that Fazio's stated design principles are flawed and unworthy, so you refuse to accept his courses for what Fazio himself says they are.  If Bob Crosby is a liar, then isnt Fazio himself also a  liar (or at least a "misinformationer.")   Do you really think you understand what Fazio is doing more than Fazio himself?  

 

[John Kavanaugh]

I do think it's somewhat comical that you are placing so much stock in one of Tommy's rants.

Tommy is one of the leading and most respected architectual critics of our day.  How can I not put stock in his opinions.  Do you think Tommy doesn't take his own opinions seriously.  Tommy recently set up an outing for a bunch of strangers and friends at three very exclusive private courses...Tommy has the ear of powerful people.  Don't you think we all have an obligation to point out when we think Tommy is wrong...Don't we owe as much to the game.  

[John Kavanaugh]

David,

I think Fazio is a lousy book writer and his courses prove it...either that or most guys on this board are lousy readers.  Do you believe every architect that says he uses classic strategic design values in a book..or do you believe what you see in the ground.  Architects who write how good they are are a dime a dozen.

[John Kavanaugh]

This has been fun but I've got to go play a lousy Killian course where I am also a member....I have to admit I would like the place better if I knew Brauer had a hand in it.  Maybe if I have a good day I'll come back a Killian apologist...This board could use one of those.

btw for Jeff...Quail Creek in Robinson, IL

[George Pazin]

When Tommy sticks to architectural analysis, he is excellent.

When he starts ranting about capitalism and golf, well, that's another story.

 

Love that last post, btw. Almost makes it sound like his courses are excellent by accident.

I personally can't evaluate his courses on a general level, I've only played 4. I enjoyed all, though not quite as much as some other courses I've played. The first 2 I played were in my first year of golf, and I can't say I understood much of anything at that point.

Of course, you might argue that I still don't understand much of anything.

But I can confidently say I understand calculus fairly well.

[DMoriarty]

David,

I think Fazio is a lousy book writer and his courses prove it...either that or most guys on this board are lousy readers.  

Judging by your "lousy reader" comment, I take it you still havent read Fazio's book.  IM me your address and I'll donate a copy to the library of that Faziopologist group of yours.  

So you contend that either. . .
. . . 1) Fazio (because he is a lousy writer) not only fails to accurately convey his own design approach, but he also fails to accurately describe his own courses; or
. . . 2)  Fazio's book says something entirely different than some of us think it does (because we are lousy readers.)

Is it purely coincidence that 'mistaken' viewpoints like Bob Crosby's so closely resemble Fazio's own 'mistaken' viewpoint?  Are you the only one who truly understands Fazio's work?  

If you have read the book (or when you do) it might help our collective understanding f you actually point out where Fazio is wrong about his own work.  

Do you believe every architect that says he uses classic strategic design values in a book..or do you believe what you see in the ground.  Architects who write how good they are are a dime a dozen.

When architects puff themselves up, they they try to write positive things about their work.  The irony here is that you think that the things Fazio says about his work are actually negative.  You and Mr. Fazio just must not agree with how to define quality golf course architecture.  

But to answer your question I not only believe what I see in the ground, but I also think much less of an architect who falsely puffs himself up.   Do you think less of Fazio for falsely portraying his work?   Why do you suppose he would do such a thing?

[ed_getka]

In spite of my expectation that this would be another JakaB attention seeking ploy, I found some interesting responses in there from Bob, David W, Gib, et al.
   
John,
   Of the 14 Fazio courses that are in the ranking you cite, how many have you played? How many do you think belong in that ranking?
   I think you are a little sensitive about the Fazio bashing that goes on here. The reason I say that is that rarely, if ever, have I read that Fazio built a bad course. It is almost always the case that the opinion is that the course could have been even better. However, I suppose that the 14 courses you cite could be proof that Fazio builds good courses that fit the tastes of most golfers. I have seen some very good holes on the Fazio courses I have played so I happen to think he could build courses more to GCA tastes, but we are a very small minority and he seems to be going for the larger audience.
    Nothing that I have talked about has anything to do with the club making the man, which was a silly question in the first place since the answer was so obviously NO. However, your question did generate some excellent responses.