A million posts later...what have we learned?

[Jim Colton]

The title says it all. What have we learned over these 15+ years and 1,000,000+ posts about the game, the architecture and ourselves?

I don't know how to say this eloquently, but I fell in love with the game long before I ever stumbled on this site. But GCA has fueled an ever deeper appreciation for the game through the sharing of opinions, expert insights and meeting others with the same passion.  Can't thank Ran enough for that.

[ChipRoyce]

There's a large group of folks who think the course (and club) and even the setting (ex: Pebble beach) is an important part of the golfing experience.

Kudos to Ran and the collective treehouse for understanding that many folks have differing levels of passion for GCA as well as varying opinions and fostering a great forum for all to learn from.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jim

That architecture on GCA.com just means the top listings/ranking of the best 100, 25 or 10 courses in the world, we still jump around the real issues for fear of upsetting some. However, we all value freedom of speech, yet some want to silence or have those removed who do not agree with them. So the outcome is that we do not debate all that is wrong or right with the game which limits the conversation a little.

That is not due to Ran or Ben but imposed by some of the Members who seem to feel that they are more equal than others

The site has and will continue to have great potential but we must be more tolerant of opinions and thoughts of others to get the best out of this site and its members.

Melvyn.

[Tyler Kearns]

Jim,

I'm continually amazed at the great variety of our golf courses in general, and of the unique features each course possesses. It truly is what helps golf stand apart from many other sports, with no standard to adhere to besides 18 holes in the ground, this game allows us to step foot onto some of the most beautiful spots on earth, and attempt some wonderfully enjoyable shots. Golfclubatlas has allowed me to peer into some of these lesser-known corners of the golfing world, and my architectural education is richer for it.

I've learned to take a much more light-hearted approach to the game, recognizing that unlucky bounces, balls that fail to end up where they should, quirky design features, wild green undulations and "impossible" shots are part of the charm of the game.

TK

[Dan Kelly]

I've learned -- among innumerable other things, I'm sure:

-- that there are a bunch of very decent, smart, well-meaning guys, all over the world, who love true golf as much as I do, or more, and that true golf will live on as long as we do.

-- that I care about golf course architecture -- but not so much as some others ... and not enough to get bent out of shape about it.

-- that golf course architects rarely get to build the courses they'd build if the owners gave them carte blanche.

-- that maintenance is an essential element of design.

-- that the "ground game" -- or the potential for it -- is a beautiful thing.

-- that the time-length of a shot is more vital than the yardage-length.

-- that "par" is a more interesting concept than I had previously seen.

-- that "Merion" and "NGLA" and "Fazio" are fightin' words!

-- that I intensely dislike golf-course "rankings."

-- that photographs (even those as beautiful as Aidan Bradley's) are no substitute for walking the ground and seeing in three dimensions.

-- that I enjoy playing with guys I've met through gca.com -- who care more about the golf course than about the cart girl.

-- that Jeff Brauer, on a golf cart, is a menace to rodents.

-- that if I look for threads labeled "OT," I'm likely to find a discussion of something interesting, and well worth my time -- and unlikely to find the bitterness that sends me away from here from time to time.

Thanks, everyone.

Dan

[Peter Pallotta]

That monkeys have a better chance of typing out "Hamlet" than we do.

Nice post, Dan.

Jim - I think I've learned that gca in general and golf courses in particular have precisely as much nuance and depth as we are capable of recognizing.

Peter

[Mark Saltzman]

Dan,

Perhaps I am showing my 'newbie-ness,' but could you briefly explain " that the time-length of a shot is more vital than the yardage-length"?

[Dan Kelly]

Dan,

Perhaps I am showing my 'newbie-ness,' but could you briefly explain " that the time-length of a shot is more vital than the yardage-length"?

It's the John Kirk theorem -- and I must paraphrase:

The pleasure of a golf shot is directly proportional to its length, in time.

Simply: Shots that fly, land, bounce and roll (in various directions -- some predictable; some not) are more interesting than shots that fly, land, and stop.

[Ian Andrew]

Jim,

I’ve been on here since 1999

I know a lot more about the architects themselves. Even with some of the larger names where I had read a great deal of their writings and studied their work, someone has consistently stepped in and added to my knowledge base on a regular basis. It’s the number one reason that I’m here.

I have been exposed to a lot more architecture through other people’s travels and have made a number of trips to see things that I’m not quite sure I would have. I find the depth and sweep of what this site astounds me and keeps me coming back. I will make a trip to so called “second tier England” (not my label) based solely upon the writings I enjoy here.
 
I particularly enjoyed dipping into the “grayness” of decision making. I found it helpful for me as an architect. Those days are long gone due to the evolution of the site.

[Adam Clayman]

That the quality of a golf course should not supersede the potential humanism, unless you're a single.

[Bill_McBride]

I learned that I was really bored with golf, and that GCA.com has changed my golfing life.  Most of my traveling and being able to play wonderful courses here and abroad has largely been through my GolfClubAtlas experience.

Thanks, Ran.

[Ben Sims]

Nice question Jim.  I've learned...

1)  I am not as weird as I thought I was, after meeting the hobbyists (guys not in the business)

2)  I am much weirder than I thought I was, after meeting the guys in the business (they aren't nearly as geeky about this stuff as us hobby people)

3)  This is why I decided to get my education in this stuff and maybe get into it one day.

4)  Some arguments just aren't worth it and some people are worth ignoring.

5)  Others are salt of the earth and I'd travel great distances to play golf or talk about courses with them.

6)  I think that there's nothing sexy about traveling away from your family 6 months a year and getting into the minutiae that our architect friends deal with at times.

7)  There's something very sexy about putting your ideas and vision into the ground for people to play a game on it, I would think.

  History can tell us only so much, though it's probably the best place to start.

9) Sometimes, it's about hitting the ball and shutting the hell up.  But beard pulling is allowed and necessary. 

10) Never thought I'd meet as fine a group of people as the ones I serve with.  I was wrong.

[Jason Topp]

1.  Someone on this board has played nearly every golf course on earth

2.  It is very difficult to describe the difference between a good course and a bad course.

3.  Course design is an art and a science.

4.  Imperfection is critical to the highest quality course.  Human imagination is not as interesting as nature's whims. 

5.  I do not believe there is such a thing as the "best" form of golf.  I like the fact that golf courses range from dead flat, bermuda and water filled Florida courses to the purest links.  I would rather play all forms of golf than be limited to just one type.

6.  Despite not believing there is a best form of golf, I do not think that all golf courses are equal.  There is a scale of quality that is difficult to define but is real.

7.  The most important aspects of golf course design are not interesting to me unless someone screws it up - safety, drainage, maintenence concerns, construction techniques, financing, cart paths, business viability, and on and on. 

8.  The stuff I am interested in (routing, placement of hazards, green contours, shot demands on the player, etc.) are not very difficult to do adequately, but very difficult to do extremely well.

9.  Those who are absolutely certain are absolutely blind.   

[Jason Topp]

10.  Also - I do think that these discussions and commentaries have had a positive impact on the quality of golf courses that are built today and may be having an impact on how courses are maintained.

[Anthony Gray]

  I've learned the most about the history of GCA.

[john_stiles]

I have learned about the great group of golfers posting on GCA,  thanks Ran.

Learned more about GCA, thanks Ran.

To wonder why more of the numerous posters have not donated.  No excuses allowed, please.

Learned much more about early history of GCA.

Learned more about the wonderful courses of England.

Learned about the great courses of AU and NZ and put the photos 'down under' my mattress.
( finally stirred by something as good as those first Playboys )

[Malcolm Mckinnon]

I'm relatively a newcomer to these parts. (GCA)

I have learned that there are a lot of great people out there as equally fanatical about the minutiae and history as well as the nuts and bolts of what makes great golf courses.

I have learned that I have a lot to learn and am awed at the depth of knowledge within this group.

I am learning more and more about individual members as we abandon the cyber world and get together and play in the real world together.

So far it has been a great experience!

[Steve Lang]

 professional students rule!

[Sean_A]

-- that there are a bunch of very decent, smart, well-meaning guys, all over the world, who love true golf more than I do and that true golf will live on as long as they do.

-- that I care about golf course architecture -- but not so much as some others ... and not enough to get bent out of shape about it.

-- that golf course architects rarely get to build the courses they'd build if the owners gave them carte blanche.

-- that maintenance is an essential element of design.

-- that the "ground game" -- or the potential for it -- is a beautiful thing.

-- that the time-length of a shot is more vital than the yardage-length.

-- that I enjoy playing with guys I've met through gca.com -- who care more about the golf course than about the cart girl.

- I think I've learned that gca in general and golf courses in particular have precisely as much nuance and depth as we are willing to recognize.

-I have been exposed to a lot more architecture through other people’s travels and have made some trips to see things that I’m not quite sure I would have. I find the depth and sweep of what this site astounds me and keeps me coming back.

-Course design is an art and a science.

-Some of the most important aspects of golf course design are not interesting to me unless someone screws it up - safety, drainage, maintenence concerns, construction techniques, financing, cart paths, business viability, and on and on. 

- I have learned there are loads of wonderful courses out there which don't carry a heavy brand name. 

Ciao

[JMEvensky]

From just now reading the "Fazio's Push" thread,I re-learned that armchair architects on this site are very fortunate to be able to read the interplay of the professionals.Stuff like that always makes me appreciate just how difficult it must be to walk out onto a piece of ground and see any golf course--much less a good/great one.

To the architects,and also the superintendents,thanks for taking the time to explain how you do your jobs.Some of these discussions should be required reading for all golfers.