Peter Kostis on Rees's Work at Oakland Hills

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

I don't remember Birkdale all that well, as it's been quite a long time since I was there, but it didn't seem that they were mowing the whole valley on several of the holes.  The hole which I found most confounding was #6 ... even when they moved the tee up, guys would drive it past / over the bunker on the right only to watch it go into deep rough on the left (often on the flat) ... it seemed like the only play the set-up allowed was to lay up right to the corner, leaving you 240 to the green.

[George Pazin]

This will probably sound "off the wall" -- and definitely impossible -- to many, but Oakland Hills would have been more interesting if they removed all the bunkers, cut all the trees down, and mowed the entire property fairway height. Especially with the high winds there over the weekend, and the impressive firmness of the approaches into the greens.

Sounds like what I've been saying about Oakmont.

[Jeff Goldman]

Jeff:

Weren't you one of the main driving forces behind turning Olympia Fields South into a much tougher course, or am I confusing you with someone else?

Tom,

Not from the White Tees.     Come out and take a look.

As for putting in a set of Brigadoon tees (which we did), who cares?  Steve and Patrick didn't screw with any greens or holes to put them in, and we've got a lot of good players who use them (more than once every 100 years). 

Jeff

[Matt_Cohn]

Kostis just went off again on the Wyndham telecast!

First he posed the question of whether Ross would design courses the same way today, followed by a good discussion.

Then the discussion turned to Pinehurst. He referenced that the USGA "destroyed" the setup during the 2005 US Open, as many of the ideal angles and landing areas were covered in "2 feet of rough".

Finally he suggested that very often on a Donald Ross course, the worst place you can be is the middle of the fairway - except that's all that there is now because the fairways have been narrowed to 20 or 25 yards.

Interesting!

[Matt_Cohn]

Geeze, you guys cared about this last week...

 

[Chuck Brown]

What happened to Peter Kostis?  He used to be Titleist's mouthpiece -- 'There's nothing wrong with the ball; it's just that players are so much better, we need to give them harder courses to play...'

Where is he getting this new insight from?  Is he no longer working for Titleist?

[Lester George]

Gentlemen,

Please don't fall into the notion that Peter Kostis "gets it". 

I know many of you don't cotton to Rees' work but if you start siding with Kostis or any of those other wannabees on architecture, you're making a mistake. 

Rees has forgotten more about golf architecture than most of the talking heads will ever know.  Of this I am sure.  Knowing a little about both of them, Kostis could not fill a thimble with his knowledge of architecture.

Lester