How do you turn back the Clock ?

[A.G._Crockett]

Patrick, if you win the bet, and get to pick the ball (cost aside) what is your favorite of the balls currently on the market?  Feel free to be honest about this!

[A.G._Crockett]

Patrick, if you win the bet, and get to pick the ball (cost aside) what is your favorite of the balls currently on the market?  Feel free to be honest about this!

[Patrick_Mucci]

AG Crockett,

I went from the Titleist Professional to the ProVI and am now hitting Calloway Reds that were given to me at a member guest.  When I run out of them, I'll go back to the ProVI until I get another offer.

[Tom G]

Pat, another throw back item at Friar's Head is that there are no rakes.  You must play the ball where it lies.  Also, given how much sand there is on the course, one might spend a considerable time raking.

[ChipOat]

Patrick:

Eliminate committees and put a benevolent dictator in charge
(e.g. Bakst, Brown, Ransome, Roberts/Harden/Stephens/Johnson, and a couple others you know).  Until then, change comes glacially and a camel is a horse that was designed by committee.

This is also why there are so many Stupid Trees on older golf courses.  

[SPDB]

Chip - what about the little matter of the bet Pat and I have. care to resolve it for us?

[Rick Shefchik]

America is the land of competing brands, and it seems to me that there's plenty of room for golf courses of at least two types -- those with yardages on sprinkler heads and colored flags, and those without. I like yardages on sprinkler heads and colored flags (I believe they save me a bit of indecision in club selection) but I also believe I would very much enjoy a quality course that had neither (or rakes, for that matter.)

Seems to me we can achieve what we want in less than a decade if our ideal of a totally natural, undecorated golf experience is presented by a couple of prestigious courses -- Friar's Head is a good start, but there ought to be some public courses in the mix, as well. If it's good, it will catch on. Look at beer sales in America; 20 years ago, who would have thought a Sam Adams could succeed, or that microbreweries and imports would make any significant dent in our nation's supposed taste for watery domestic suds?

A few highly-praised natural courses could have the same impact. They won't change golf as we know it (Budweiser still does pretty well), but they certainly could provide a popular alternative.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom G,

Thanks, I overlooked that.

I like the fact that bunkers will be more of a hazard and not a prefered lie.

Chipoat,

I agree, but I don't see a movement toward dictators once membership governance takes hold.

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

Why bring up Southern Hills? I've never seen the place. You're the one who brought up Friar's Head not me, and I just pointed out to you that you're wrong when you later stated that the culture of Friar's Head has nothing whatsoever to do with the architecture and with C&C! The culture may not have everything to do with the architecture certainly but it has enough to do with it!

But Ken Bakst would be the one to answer that unless you feel you know more about the culture of Friar's Head (and the architecture and C&C) than he does!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

If Ken Bakst sold FH tomorrow and the new owner put yardage on sprinklers, colored flags on the pins, and hole diagrams on the tees, tell me how the architecture of the golf course would prevent that.

It's the will of the owner/membership, not the architecture.

Southern Hills new nine is a C&C golf course.
Why aren't cultural things identical if the architectural style is similar ?

[Doug Wright]

Patrick,

Who makes the call on these matters? The Greens Committees? If so, isn't it a matter of convincing a majority of that committee that it's in the best interest of the club to do so? If you're asking how you convince the Greens Committee, then I'd say it has a lot to do with who's on the Committee. Pack that sucker with aficionados and away you go...

Seriously, isn't it the same issue one faces in looking at a restoration but on a smaller scale? Education, politics, education and a lot more politics.

All The Best,

[RJ_Daley]

Sometimes I wonder just how duplicitous we all can be in our notions about turning back the clock.  We get all worked up about a remote and non-public golf course's throwback to traditional practices like Pat mentions, i.e., no yardage markers in fairway or on sprinkler heads, no colored flag pin placement system, and various olden age course set-up styles.  Then we lament about the disappearance of good caddie programs where the caddie just tells you the information you would seek on the yardage markers or books, and tells you how a putt breaks, etc.  Then we go on to lament about the pace of play being too slow, yet would have people that never played a high profile showpiece course as is the only offerings Rees and Faz design, wandering around a fairway wondering how far out they are, where the pin is, where to park the cart, yada yada yada.  These things don't jive.  You can't have it both ways and support the kind of design styles of these new high profile big concept architects.  

Now, we are singing the praises of C&C intimating that they call the shots in how Friar's Head is set up with no playing aids.  Yet, their other masterpiece in the Sand Hills has yardage markers... (Jeez I am not 100% sure of that even though I was there twice this year, and have given good ammunition to those who are going to jump all over me to say I don't know what the heck I'm taking about) :-/

Finally Pat, it is sort of upper class arrogant to suggest that we need folks to see what a great set-up it is out there at Friar's Head so they can spread the word.  Rick Shefchik hits on this above.  Just how many people do you think are ever going to get in to look at FH or SH to experience the culture you are hoping will get reinstituted in golf, let alone become apostles for these concepts?  

We would do better to have the high profile courses everyone is clammering to play, adopt some of these ideas, that I think are basically good and more in line with the "spirit of the game" we talked about in another thread, even though I don't know what, where, or whose spirit...

But, an example that demonstrates this is all pie-in-the-sky thinking is Whistling Straits.  They have caddies to tell you yardages, and how the putts break and where to try to hit it to, yet we normally see 5 hour+ rounds there.  If these high spender trophy course players didn't at least have the caddies shepherding them around with no yardage indicators, it would be 6+ hours!  

The only venues where these concepts work is at private clubs or home courses where you play them all the time and know all this stuff, and can then beat up on the outside guest or new player...

[ChipOat]

Patrick and Sean:

Did not have time to read all posts earlier - home now and getting caught up.

Patrick, if there's yardage markers on the East Course's sprinkler heads, they put them in after 7/2/2002.  I'll call the golf shop if you like but I believe you're out 24 1.68" spheroids.

This, by the way, is one issue where the FACTS do matter.

I don't see benevolent dictators emerging from by-laws that preclude same, either.

[TEPaul]

"If Ken Bakst sold Friar's Head tomorrow and the new owner put in.....blah, blah, blah."
Pat Mucci

Pat:

You might know as well as I do the potential of any owner/membership to SCREW UP any golf course or its culture no matter how good the culture or the architecture may have been!!

I certainly think we've seen enough evidence of that over the years--or haven't you noticed?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug Wright,

When you have someone who is the green committee, board and President, life is easier.

RJDaley,

The slow pace of play that we dislike didn't happen over night.
It took years and years to change the way golfers obtained information on which they based their club selection and executed their shot.

It probably started with Gene Andrews, gained approval with Jack Nicklaus and was spread to the masses by television over a 25 year period.

In the old days, before yardage markers, you learned to play by feel.  That skill has become extinct in all but a minute number of players.  Medal play may have been an accomplice in the extinction of feel.

The advent of golf carts and the demise of caddies probably contributed as well.

Golfers thirst to play Pine Valley, NGLA, GCGC and so they will thirst for Friar's Head.  While the number of golfers who are exposed to FH may be small, it doesn't mean that its influence can't be significant.  It certainly seems to be a positive first step that no one else has taken, and I applaud Ken on his initiative.

I think you're correct, in that private clubs would be the first to adopt some or all of the FH culture, but that doesn't mean that resort and public facilities can't fall into line at a later date.

I grew up playing public courses with my golfing friends, the Cestone brothers, in the fifties, and if a round of golf took four hours, something was wrong.  And there were NO CARTS, there were no yardage markers, no colored flags, no diagrams of holes, no pin sheets. No halfway houses or cart girls.
There was Nothing but you and the golf course, and you were taught from the very begining to play at a crisp pace.

It seems to me that the length of play is not golf or architecture related, it's cultural, and any attempt to change that culture in an effort to return to........the fifties,
seems highly admirable to me.

But, that's just my opinion, TEPaul is still wrong.

[TEPaul]

Unbelievable!

Did you all see what Pat Mucci said in that last post about Gene Andrews and Jack Nicklaus?

As amazing as it is to conceive of Pat Mucci is actually completely correct about that!!

He's not often right but that just shows it's still possible that he can be!

Actually, Pat does know exactly what he speaks of on the subject of pace of play. He plays at a very crisp pace himself!

If only his pace on this bias issue was as crisp!

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Pat
What do you make of The Golf Club - it was created in 1967? Does it fit your ideal?

[TEPaul]

"How do you turn back the clock?"

The way I was always told to do it is to stop the clock first! Then turn the hands forward (clockwise) to that point or time you want to be at! If you don't stop the clock or you turn the hands backward (counter clockwise) you might injure the clock!

Of course, as you all know, with these modern clocks you can turn the hands anyway you want to and it won't hurt them. But that's not true with some of the older and classic clocks!

Could that apply to how we should look at golf and it's architecture too?

How might that all apply to Merion's new restoration buzzword--"backward into the future"?

Should it have been--"Forward into the past"?

[Sal from South Shore]

Hey Pat are you on the payroll at Friars Head ? Next we will hear some sort of Donald Trumpism that it is "The Greatest Course in New York, better than Shinnecock or National".

[TEPaul]

Sal:

Better than whatever doesn't matter! What's good, what's interesting about the place does!

I don't think we want to get back into something like that "Bridge" thread when someone stated "The Bridge" is unquestionably in the top five in New York!

But it would be pretty funny if Pat Mucci started to act the Donald Trump for Ken Bakst's Friar's Head!

Would that be the same Pat Mucci who howled for about two years that some of us were giving Coore & Crenshaw the "most favored son status"? And that that constituted some kind of "bias" towards other architects? All we were doing is mentioning our opinions about what we were seeing coming into being!

That apparently upset Pat no end and he said in no uncertain terms that no one had the right to say things like that. But now that Pat has apparenty played the golf course he acts like he discovered it!

Pretty funny really!

But if Pat has gotten that high on Friar's Head, it's culture, Coore & Crenshaw, whatever, by his own rules it sounds to me as if he's getting dangerously close to being "biased" against Rees and TomF!

[Doug Wright]

Hey maybe there's hope yet. I was driving in to work today and on the local sports talk radio there's a 3 minute prerecorded spot "Butch Harmon on Golf" that I think is carried nationally. Well, Butch says something like "Do you ever get frustrated when you see people looking for sprinkler heads or stepping off yardage at your course, slowing down play? You don't have to do that! Just look at trees and other features between you and the green and figure, 'well I can hit a wedge to that tree' and then look closer to the green for another feature and figure out how much club it would take to hit to that feature. Pretty soon you'll know what club to hit to the green, you'll play faster and enjoy the game more!"

It ain't much, but it's a start. Running a marathon starts with a single step.  

All The Best,

[Dan Kelly]

America is the land of competing brands, and it seems to me that there's plenty of room for golf courses of at least two types -- those with yardages on sprinkler heads and colored flags, and those without. I like yardages on sprinkler heads and colored flags (I believe they save me a bit of indecision in club selection) but I also believe I would very much enjoy a quality course that had neither (or rakes, for that matter.)

Seems to me we can achieve what we want in less than a decade if our ideal of a totally natural, undecorated golf experience is presented by a couple of prestigious courses -- Friar's Head is a good start, but there ought to be some public courses in the mix, as well. If it's good, it will catch on. Look at beer sales in America; 20 years ago, who would have thought a Sam Adams could succeed, or that microbreweries and imports would make any significant dent in our nation's supposed taste for watery domestic suds?

A few highly-praised natural courses could have the same impact. They won't change golf as we know it (Budweiser still does pretty well), but they certainly could provide a popular alternative.

Rick --

As usual, friend, you've hit the nail square on the head, with economy and precision -- and have been, as usual (?), largely ignored as the thread proceeded (except by Dick Daley, who -- not just coincidentally, I think -- is, like us, [a] Midwestern, and not rich).

Too bad you don't belong to some fancy club (even one with yardage markers), so this flattery could get me somewhere!

****************

All --

Let's talk about money. Are we allowed to talk about money, in this country (and on this Web site), or do we have to dance all around it, pretending it isn't right there in the center of everything?

Maybe the following (somewhat echoing Dave Schmidt's "entrance test" post, above) hits the nail square on the head, too (though without Rick's economy) -- spoken by a man who, like Mr. Shefchik, loves everything pure and true about this game, and who, like Mr. Shefchik, can't afford to join most of the clubs where the architecture is worth worrying about (and who, yes, I admit it -- can't speak for Rick in this -- envies, occasionally dyspeptically, those with better access to those clubs):

(1) The values many here hold dear have no chance of taking root in any private golf club where the bottom-line requirement for membership is affluence, rather than the love of everything pure and true about the game.

So long as those with more taste than money need not apply, most clubs will be dominated by those who have more money than taste. Let's call that sort of person, in the tradition of Joe Sixpack, Joe McMansion. (Of course, it is entirely possible to have both money and taste, as some of this site's contributors daily demonstrate. But out in the big world, beyond the rarefied confines of gca.com, money is far more common than taste -- and far more persuasive and impressive to Joe McMansion. Look around! Expensive bad taste is everywhere!)

Joe McMansion has no interest in anyone's views about what is pure and true in golf -- not mine, certainly, but not Tom Paul's or Patrick Mucci's, either. Joe McMansion wants his golf course to have all the grace and style of his hulking suburban McMansion with the Lincoln Navigator out on the brick driveway!

Here's what I think: A club that wants to honor golf's classic values, permanently, must admit its members on the basis of their portfolios of values, not the values of their portfolios. (Almost Jesse Jacksonish, eh?) Let me daydream a bit:

In a perfect world (i.e., the world designed by me!), people like Mr. Shefchik and me (and many others like us) would be on the Greens Committee at Interlachen, fighting to preserve (or reinstate) the best traditions of the game, rather than blathering on about it at www.golfclubatlas.com.
    
The best universities pay no attention to applicants' ability to pay the freight. They admit the most interesting, most promising applicants -- and then figure out some way (scholarships, grants, jobs) to get those applicants on campus. They know that a diverse student body (read: not just rich Preppies -- no offense intended; I was one, before I applied to become a member of the Evil Media ... and they let me in, the bastards!) is, in the immortal words of that rich Preppy Martha Stewart, a Good Thing. Perhaps it's time for the best golf clubs to think the same way.

From each according to his (or, of course, her) ability? To each according to his (or, of course, her) needs? Heresy, you say? Maybe so. But there's certainly something to be said for that view, if what you want is a fraternity of values, rather than a fraternity of money.
 
(2) The values many here hold dear have no chance of spreading across the country, the way Sam Adams has (available for public consumption! imagine that!), without a group of daring, clear-headed entrepreneurs (or possibly even a single daring, clear-headed entrepreneur -- an entrepreneur with the energy of Johnny Appleseed and the bankroll of John Jacob Astor) who love everything pure and true about the game and are willing to risk their fortunes on that Field of Dreams proposition: If you build it, they (enough of them, at any rate) will come.

Where are those guys? Out playing Friar's Head? I hope so -- and getting some ideas.

[RJ_Daley]

To pick up on Dan's train of thought,  I find it very uncomfortable to tell other people what to do with  - or how to spend their money.  But, I've felt uncomfortable many times before, and got through it, so here goes again

Golf needs big money people.  Guys like Keiser, Bakst, Kohler, and you all know many other suspects in this league that fit the description.  In the case of Bakst, and Youngscapp, we might be able to say that they are the visonaries who have given the same great golf architects the job of designing something very meaningful and influential in the modern arena, and they are promoting golf club culture (in so far as the golf course is concerned) in what many of us would agree are the higher ideals of the game.  

But, they have chosen to go the exclusive private route.  Not only their prerogative, but probably a good organizational decision for the type of course and club they envisioned  (I'm not sure if they are 501(c) "not for profits" or not.  But, assuming they are, even if they wanted to open it up to more general public, they can't seem to get around the tightening noose of the IRS rules.  Sand Hills used to take requests and judge if they thought the requesting party was sincere to enjoy the game at that unique venue.  But, not anymore.  Probably due to the IRS thing.  So, first I blame that IRS rule. There are (as a number of us GCAers know) certain members of those clubs that have been very generous to invite whom they have judged to be true golf design afficianados, I think because they really want to see the culture of the game and course they love spread around.  But again, understandably by that system, a very few will ever get to experience what are those unique experiences.

If the IRS rule thing could be revised, I think we would see some of these important golf clubs (in an architectural and pure golf culture sense) open their doors in off peak times.  And, if they could do so, I think it would help them in augmenting the maintenance and club dues assesments when they have bad operating years due to dwindling memberships in bad economies or unusual weather damage costs, etc.  It could be a win-win if that rule was relaxed.

Perhaps ANGC would never offer these off-peak season deals to a select public, but Crystal Downs did so, and Sand Hills was doing so.  I don't think that just because the memberships at those places like CD and SH are generally very wealthy entered into the decisions not to share the joys of their course at some of those clubs.  I think they were forced to abide by the IRS laws.  Yet, the wealth and exclusivity thing seems obvious and inbred cultural at ANGC.  So, like anything else, it is case by case dependent.  

As for the Keiser and Kohler models of upscale and open to the public, they both do run off-season specials.  And again, that allows not only the very wealthy or corporate perk player to experience them, but the less affluent folk that will put up with a little harsh off-season weather.  (Kohler isn't all that cheap even off-peak by most peoples standards, however)  

Here is the part about being so audacious as to suggest what other folks do with their money or invested membership interests.  Realise that if they want to have a real impact on the golf culture, and if your particular club is doing it the "right" way, lobby to change the IRS laws, and also encourage the managment/membership to participate in programs that will have a future impact, like first tee, or just getting some high school teams out there or whatever can be done to share with the future golfers who will be most likely to change the culture back to the way you would like to see it, by letting them share in your example.  

[TEPaul]

Dan Kelly (tm):

You said you and some others you mentioned are:

(1) Midwesterners

and,

(2) not rich

My God man, I had no idea! I'm so sorry! How can you bear it? What can we do to help?

[Dan Kelly]

Dan Kelly (tm):

You said you and some others you mentioned are:

(1) Midwesterners

and,

(2) not rich

My God man, I had no idea! I'm so sorry! How can you bear it? What can we do to help?

Tom I --

Just allow us to stay here in this Discussion Group (known around my house -- a humble, straight-talking Midwestern household -- as "Golf Chat"), and allow us to rub cyber-elbows with you.

That'll be more than enough to make our lives complete!

Dan