[Tim_Weiman]

On another thread Pat Mucci referred to a comment by CB Macdonald on Page 295 of “Scotland’s Gift – Golf”.  The Macdonald comment is:

“I do not believe anyone is qualified to pass on the merits of any one hole, let alone eighteen holes, unless he has played them under all varying conditions possible – varying winds, rain, heat, etc.”

So, I got to thinking about how many courses I was qualified to comment on based on the CB Mac standard and came up with a very short list, including:

The Course I Grew Up Playing: Pelham Country Club, (Pelham Manor, NY)
A Place I Owned Property: Wild Dunes (Charleston, SC)
My Home Club: Sand Ridge Golf Club (Chardon, OH)
My Local Muni:  Big Met (Rocky River, OH)
A Muni Where I lived In California: Recreation Park (Long Beach, CA)
My Favorite Place In The World: Ballybunion (Old & New), Ireland

That may be it, less than ten courses and only one of the top rated venues in the world.

I’ve played more courses than I can probably remember, including many of the elite venues.  But, meeting the CB Mac standard is pretty tough unless you live near the course or have a close personal tie.
  
What is your experience?  How many venues have you met the CB Mac standard?

[RJ_Daley]

For that matter and by his own standards, how many courses (besides his own designs) was C.B. himself competent to pass on the merits of?  I'm sure he'd find the task of commentating on merits of courses in our modern era of 40000+ courses world wide a daunting one.  

Heck, he might be relegated to examining pictures and aerials!

[John_McMillan]

Tim,

For me it's also a pretty short list -

Crystal Lake - a muni course on the opposite side of the lake from Crystal Downs
High Pointe - Doak's course outside of TC
Veenker Memorial - the ISU golf course
Westpark - a muni in Leesburg VA.

I think, though, I'd take contention with Macdonald's proposition.  I've played enough golf so that I know how a dry day in August differs from a soggy spring day - or how a 20 mph wind differs from a calm day - or how closely mown greens differ from longer ones - or the difference between a playing a hole downwind or in a crosswind.  I will admit that my experience does not make my judgment infallible (and maybe that's the point of Macdonald's quote), so I am open to interpretations of a hole I may have missed (and GCA is a good source for that).  Besides, don't we lose most of the fun of golf architecture if we limit passing the merits on holes to Macdonald's criteria?

[Patrick_Mucci]

John McMillan,

No, just our credibility, the fun's still there.

[John_McMillan]

If you really want to test how strongly you believe Macdonald's proposition -

I've played High Pointe perhaps more times than Tom Doak, and if I haven't, with Tom's "divorce" from the course, at our current rates of play, I'll pass him at some point.  

If you take Macdonald's proposition seriously, then am I better qualified than Tom to pass on the merits of holes at High Pointe?

I don't think I am - but then you have to argue that knowledge about a golf hole comes from somewhere else than the mere repetition of playing it.

[redanman]

How many courses available to us today and with today's equipment are eligible to withstand the scrutiny that C.B. suggested?  Hmmmmmmmmmm?

[Patrick_Mucci]

John McMillan,

How would you compare your ability to evaluate High Pointe with someone who had never set foot on it ?

[TEPaul]

Why don't you start arguing for the floating ball as a must for golf Pat? It was one of C.B. MacDonald's strongest suggestions. How about Geo. Thomas's advocacy for half strokes on the putting green? Want to advocate that? Some of those old guys were great adventurous architects and they were good but they weren't perfect although you seem to think so as you hide behind p. 295!

The stymie, the floating ball, the Pat Mucci/MacDonald golf architecture evaluaton method! Anything else you'd like to add for an absolute requirment for golf or architecture?

[Gib_Papazian]

Old C.B. had a tendency towards stating absolutes - even if he did not exactly live by them himself. So goes the perks of the monarchy.

If you think about it for a second, travel was far more difficult in his era and perhaps he was referring more to the average club player and the tendency to praise or dismiss a given hole without really posessing enough experience to visualize how it plays in variable conditions.

I like to think I can pick apart a golf hole fairly quickly and envision how the strategies would change in different conditions and tee/pin placements because I've closely studied so many courses in so many different environments.

That said, C.B is right in some sense. Unless you really consider a golf hole from many different angles and perspectives, your opinion is little more than a visceral reaction of one day's play.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

You're a genius !        Why didn't I see it ??

The floating ball !  The answer to the distance problem.

Of course, it is all so clear now.

And..... think of the dual purpose.

No wonder the manufacturers hid this from us.
  
If a ball floats, it can easily be retrieved, depriving them of new sales.

And...if a ball floats (forget its displacing its weight or volume)
It won't go as far.  
You, have solved the distance problem that has been burdening all of us, with your astute observation.

I will deny authorship of the idea, despite your attempts to credit me with same, but, if you insist, I will share in the royalties.

Good work old boy, send the checks to my office.

[Tim_Weiman]

John McMillan:

We would lose much of the fun if we limited discussion to where we met the CB Mac standard.  My experience at Pebble Beach, for instance, is limited to five or six rounds.  By the Mac standard, I should just never comment on the place.

But, if Pat Mucci meant to suggest that we sometimes take the liberty of commenting on things we are really not familiar with, then I'd tend to agree with Pat.

For that reason, I usually stay away from discussions about Rees Jones because I've only seen a few examples of his work.  Besides, what more is there to say about the mounding at the Atlantic?

Also, playing a course repeatedly CAN give one insight that a one time visitor just might miss.  For example, I've heard people comment that Ballybunion's New Course doesn't offer much in terms of recovery shots around the greens.  But, let me take you out there for a day and I'll show you numerous examples to disprove that notion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim Weiman,

I don't believe CBM meant that one had to play a hole and/or course in an INFINITE number of varying conditions.

I believe he was taking a practical approach and saying that an evaluator owed it to the credibility of the evaluation to build a broader data base.  Who could argue with the need to build a broader data base, on any study ?

Now my good friend TEPaul thinks that encompasses 3,000 differing wind conditions, under temperatures ranging from ten below zero to 120 degrees, starting at noon, through the day, into the night, not stopping for breakfast and finishing at noon the following day, for 365 consecutive days.
I know that can't be right because Charles Blair MacDonald always stopped for beverages, food, and more beverages.

Building a broader data base helps us make a more thorough analysis.  It's that simple.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
You really should be ashamed of yourself. You press on in several threads about this quote from CB. You chide, berate and agitate others for no good reason and what do we hear coming from your keyboard as an explanation? --"Building a broader data base helps us make a more thorough analysis. It's that simple"  
Why go through all the ridiculous gyrations? Why not come to the damn point and save the time. Don't you think it might help others to better understand some of the issues you continually argue about if you were more succinct in explaining them? I know you can do this, you just did it in the quote above!

[Rick Shefchik]

I am 100 percent in favor of building a broader database, so that my comments on courses discussed here will be more qualified and informed.

That being said, I still don't know the exact (or even approximate) number of times I am supposed to have played a given course before I can offer a qualified opinion.

I am reminded of an episode of "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" in which Lou Grant tells Mary he doesn't want to go out with a lounge singer because he suspects she's "that kind of woman."

Mary asks, "Mr. Grant, how many men does a woman have to be with before she becomes 'that kind of woman?'"

Lou thinks for a while and then says, "Six."

Is that the answer, Patrick? Six?

[TEPaul]

Jim Kennedy:

I think you have a brilliant suggestion there--Pat Mucci should be far more succinct and come to the point immediately. And I promise to try to be more succinct than Pat!

I'm even prepared to live by the Mucci evaluation method that the larger the data base the better the evaluation. This of course restricts all cameras from golf courses and photography cannot be cited as examples of golf hole or course evaluation as Pat may not be able to see things in photographs like large whole hole containment mounds so mentioning such things is biased against Pat at least.

Additionally, if Pat has played a course and you haven't, just agree with him automatically. If he's played a course more than you have absobutely never question his opinions.

Pat's architectural evaluation methods requires complete knowledge of all the facts of any situation and when he's part of the discussion we can consider his caveat "That's my opinion, but I could be wrong" but in reality we should realize it's not bloody likely!

I can live by this, if Pat can. So Pat, would you mind ceasing any more comments on Merion or whose to blame for anythng there and also on MacDonald & Co since you haven't seen the bunkers, haven't played the course since the bunker project and you say you don't know MacDonald & Co. from a hole in the wall? That goes for Pine Valley too--Ernie Ransome is a wonderful guy, and was a wonderful President but he doesn't run Pine Valley, athough he did, and he's definitely never owned the place. Of course he does live in John Arthur Brown's house and that fact alone should be heeded at all times.

I'm confident in the future we're going to have extremely valid discussions on golf architecture here on Golfclubatlas using this new architectural evaluation method. We may not have many of them but when we do they will be extremely valid,  accurate and unbiased, nontheless!

[Ed_Baker]

O.k. Enough. C.B.'s quote is faulty and arrogant, taken literally. His intent may be far different,but he isn't around to offer an interpretation.

Taken literally, there is no vehicle for conclusion, it is simply a never ending gathering of data, the eternal conundrum.

Furthur to Rick's point, there is no finite answer to the number of rounds neccesarry to offer a "qualified opinion." It depends on the individual,his powers of observation, and knowledge of the subject, as well as the skill to articulate the reasons that support the opinion.

Take a cross-section of GCAers,casual golfers,and professional architects, have them all play a certain course 10 times on the same days.Which groups opinion is more likely to be fact based?

I think ol' C.B. was just saying that casual criticism is irrelevent, that the course must be played several times under different conditions before a fair analysis can be reached.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I think it is best to take this quote in context of the entire chapter enitiled 'Architecture', I wouldn't put too much weight in this single sentence. He uses the sentence to introduce the different factors that need to be considered when evaluating a hole - especially wind - which he describes in detail.

The chapter is very interesting and ironically begins with Macdonald commeting about modern golf courses that are a 'travesty on Nature', he goes on critique the courses that he sees motoring to Southampton. He also comments that it is thankless to criticize a man's home course because its only natural to love your home course, 'he knows it, and with golf holes familarity does not breed contempt, but quite the reverse'....'Where ignorance is bliss tis folly to be wise.'  This excellent chapter gives you very good idea of Macdonald's philosophies.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Kennedy,

Those that should be ashamed of themselves are those who have evaluated a golf course without ever having seen it.

For some time I have taken issue with others who have evaluated golf courses WITHOUT EVER having seen or played them.

I came across the CBM quote and posted it, not crediting CBM.   Some objected, saying I was wrong.

I then revealed the author, an accomplished fellow, familiar with architecture.

I didn't create this thread, nor did I make up the quote.
I thought CBM made a common sense point.
Only when asked by Tim Weiman did I offer my opinion of the context in which I believe CBM uttered these words.
I'm under no obligation to interpret everything  for everyone, am I ?

I thought CBM spoke, VERY CLEARLY.

Rick Shefchik,

You'll have to ask CBM to clarify his words, to ascertain how many times he thought one should play a hole/course in order to evaluate it.

One must build a sufficient data base from which to draw prudent conclusions.  CBM told you how he felt, and who am I to disagree with him.

TEPaul,

I never made a critical comment on the look of bunkers at Merion.

My comments were directed toward defending the contractor who was criticized for building the bunkers.  From day one on this topic I questioned the mission statement, the directive or bid specs given to the contractor, and asked whether or not he had lived up to his contractual obligations.

I was the one seeking a broader data base of facts, not the one criticizing the contractor without the facts.

Why do you imply that complete knowledge of all the facts is a bad thing?

Ed Baker,

It is such a common sense statement that I'm befuddled by the objections to it, unless individuals feel that CBM's pronouncement undermines their ability to evaluate a golf course without ever having played it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()