Matt,

I think anyone's analysis from photos may be worthy, particularly if they show some integrity and intelligence in field of architecture in general.  I certainly do not think it should be censored or dismissed.  It is a part of the conversation.  However, in the interest of abiding by GCA rules I have removed all my comments from this thread since I have not played the course, or seen it firsthand.  This place is not as much fun now, I hope you don't make the 1000 posters cut!

Kelly:

Woooooooooooooo -- I never said they should be censored or dismissed. Nice try Kelly -- but don't stuff words into my mouth. I'll be glad to do that myself.

What I said is that people are making pronouncements on the quality of the hole simply from pictures and NOT from a personal observation through a playing of the hole. That's a big time difference -- I know some people don't like to make visits because it requires some time and energy. It's just too E-Z to throw comments forward.

I never said comments can't come from people -- but you as an architect should know better that a personal visit is where you actually take "outside" comments and provide an insider perspective. I never said insider comments are 100%
correct -- but when people start throwing comments only from the comfort of their home bound counch that's a big time stretch for me. Maybe for you that's OK.

Just for curiosity Kelly -- when you decide upon restaurants do you simply look at an ad in a magazine / newspaper and simply assume the food is good or bad? Geeeeze, forgive me --I actually thought personal research -- the playing kind -- is what really adds to the discussion. Not conjecture or left field analysis. But then again -- I must be wrong to believe that first hand investigative research is meaningful. Forgive me for believing that.

 

What's so novel in saying that someone who has played the place might have a better sense than someone who is simply reviewing pictures.

I now understand and will temper my approach accordingly;

Let me try anew...

WOW!!  What cool rocks!!  

For those of you who have actually played the course, I have a few questions about them;

1) Are they hard?
2) Do golf balls carom meaninglessly in every direction when struck against them?
3) Are they tall?  I can't tell.
4) Are they really in the way of the hole as they appear...like...in the middle of the fairway?
5) How wide are they?
6) Do you have to call your shots for them to count?

 

Jim:

You're quite observant ... the rocks are simply native to that particular site. They weren't shipped in to be some sort of Great Adventure type hole!

When I played the hole there is plenty of leeway given the player to avoid them and I see them no differently than water hazards, OB and the like.

Clearly, the features would not work everywhere and given the site's historic purpose the rocks do fit in for Fossil Trace.

Mike:

There you go ...

P.S. Mike, I've always wondered how one of the greatest "engineered" courses in all the world gets all the fanfare as being a great course -- I'm speaking about Shadow Creek! I give them high marks for creating something from nothing but where are the holes that make up such a lofty assessment?

Mr. Moran -

TCC stands for "The Country Club", as in their little sign that reads

The Country Club
A.D. 1882

I am on an anti-abbreviation crusade for this site, so keep questioning this practice!

Mr. Moran -

A.D.  Stands for "After Death".

Just trying to do my part in keeping with your theme Mr. Moore

Tommy:

I wasn't smoking anything partner when I played Fossil Trace. Truth be told -- the layout is well done because the back side is really on a compact piece of property and I believe Jim Engh did quite well overall.

The hole in question -- the 12th -- needs to be played to be fully appreciated. If one were to look at the stones / rocks simply on photos alone I can fully understand how people might draw the conclusions that they do.

Hats off to Engh and the town of Golden for bringing forward a very interesting and fun layout -- P.S. -- when I finished the round I ordered a Manhattan "on the rocks."

Daryl - I was referring to your definition of A.D., which is an acronym for anno Domini (latin - year of our lord).  Had never heard of After Death, and I'm not certain what "A[fter] D[eath] 1882" would signify - after whose death?

Acronymically yours,

SPDB  

Daryl,

You need to look up A.D. in your dictionary...

Brian

I think Jim Engh should be given encouragement. This maybe the first time he has left something natural (and not molded it like one huge ball playdo) within the playing confines of his design.

Tommy- I mentioned I had yet to visit this course.

Tom Macwood- I believe Mr. Engh used a wonderful cader on his favorite hole at Redlands Mesa.

Pete:

The reality is that people who are not long off the tee and are say 10-20 handicaps will find the hole quite entertaining and fun to play. You clearly can't hook the ball because the rocks to come into play then -- it would be no different if the rocks were OB posts or a H20 hazard.

The second shot is really less of a problem as long you make sure you keep it to the right so that your approach angle is maximized.

The demanding thing about the hole is that long hitters can get home in two but the second shot must be swung around the rocks on th eleft with a slight draw and still be able to clear a few bunkers that guard the left front.

Here's a case where the picture of a hole doesn't speak to the playing dynamics. People who lob grenades against Jim Engh should do so AFTER they have played his design -- not before.