News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Pages: [1]

Abe Summers

Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« on: February 19, 2009, 06:28:37 AM »
They are in the Hall of Fame, but they took performance enhancers. Add the asterisk next to the names of several baseball players... (IMHO any guys who get in with that taint on their record should be expelled ala Pete Rose, but probably a few of them will get in and stay in... anyway, OT)

Dustin Johnson wins the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am.  Tiger is not in the field.  Add the asterisk.

Padraig wins British Open and PGA Championship last year.  Tiger is not in the field.  Add the asterisk.

What course designs would have an asterisk added?  For example, Mr. ___ is listed as the designer, but he probably never even went to the site; alternatively, Mr. ____ did build it, but it has been redesigned so much that name is totally misleading...

PS) According to Merriam Webster, the proper order is *, †, ‡ , § , ||, I, #.  † is called a dagger, ‡ is called daggers, § is called the section sign... || is a double vertical line...
Logged

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2009, 07:03:41 AM »
So anyone who wins on a week that Tiger doesn't play gets an asterisk?! Even if Tiger hasn't played that tourny for years? Strange logic.

Mother Nature would have to get an asterisk for TOC, no? I'm sure that is who the course gets credited to in most of the review lists I've seen.
Logged

Abe Summers

Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2009, 07:43:45 AM »
Yes, if a significant number of the top players in the world do not attend, and certainly if Tiger is not there, it's just a victory.  If the competition/field is the top of the line, it is a Victory. 

The PGA Tour is marketed using the concept that the best players in the world are there for every event.  Unfortunately, it is simply not true.  And I think there must be some way to distinguish that for the fans who are fed statistics constantly. 

I hardly watch the Tour and the reason is because to me, with names I have never heard of constantly on the leaderboard, it often feels like a glorified Nationwide Tour event.  In a few years when the viewer is told so and so won at Pebble Beach, the broadcasters may make it sound impressive, but those of us who know the field that week will know that that victory wasn't as impressive as it could have been.  And when that is the case for 60-70% of the events, it becomes very irritating.
Logged

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2009, 08:02:00 AM »
I say ban the asterisk. It makes for lazy historians and others who give a crap.

 :)
Logged
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Anthony Gray

Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2009, 08:05:58 AM »


   Agreed.


  Every thread that Tom Paul does not post in should have an asterisk.

          KP 2009*

  Anthony

Logged

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2009, 08:10:28 AM »
Good God, what are you talking about, Abe?  Since Donald Ross didn't seek the commission, does it get an asterisk?  Since Obama ran for Senate instead of House of Reps, does it get an asterisk?  Thanks, Anthony, for putting this in the proper perspective.
Logged
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2009, 08:16:11 AM »
I'm not too sure this makes sense.

If it was the case you could * half of the Donald Ross courses in Chicago.
Logged
H.P.S.

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2009, 08:16:51 AM »
Abe-

Was your point more for the modern GCA's?
Logged
H.P.S.

TEPaul

Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2009, 11:08:04 AM »
"Every thread that Tom Paul does not post in should have an asterisk."


Anthony:

Hmmm, well I'll be.....

I have no idea how I stack up in the general curve of competitiveness but that idea just might be the one thing that could make me post a whole lot less. I don't think I'd want to compete against the Almighty ASTERISK! I'm afraid I'd be destined to lose about eleven times out of ten.
Logged

Abe Summers

Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2009, 11:20:14 AM »
Okay, there, we have one answer.  Which courses are you referring to in Chicago, Mr. Craig? 
Logged

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2009, 11:37:08 AM »
These are just on the North Shore of Chicago;

Indian Hill
Exmoor
Northmoor
Evanston
Skokie CC (redesign)
Lake Shore

I know he was actually at Old Elm Club though after Colt actually designed it.
Logged
H.P.S.

Philippe Binette

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2009, 04:00:54 PM »
This might be really controversial and I'm not saying that out of respect for the course or the Architect but:

Should Royal Melbourne get an* as a Mackenzie course...
if maybe not RMGC since he spend more time there
the other Melbourne courses where Mackenzie might have showed up a day or two, should they get an *

As I'm saying though, I'm not necessarily right or wrong here, just asking the question.
Logged

BVince

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2009, 10:33:06 PM »
If I make a post under the influence of alcohol, does that require an asterisk?
Logged
If profanity had an influence on the flight of the ball, the game of golf would be played far better than it is. - Horace Hutchinson

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2009, 10:53:51 PM »
Quote from: Bryon Vincent on February 19, 2009, 10:33:06 PM
If I make a post under the influence of alcohol, does that require an asterisk?

My guess is it makes you part of the majority.

 ;D
Logged
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2009, 02:50:16 AM »
Quote from: Philippe Binette on February 19, 2009, 04:00:54 PM
The other Melbourne courses where Mackenzie might have showed up a day or two, should they get an *

As I'm saying though, I'm not necessarily right or wrong here, just asking the question.

Which courses are you referring to.

I'm not saying Mackenzie deserves an asterisk for NSWGC, but it really should be referred to as a MacKenzie and Apperley course. Especially since Apperley gave us the two most amazing holes on the course (at least that's what my latest bedtime reading has suggested, which backed up what I was told by someone here).
Logged

Philippe Binette

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2009, 07:50:44 AM »
What is the official list of Mackenzie Melbourne courses...

Should it be only Kingston Heath and RMGC.
Logged

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Must Add An Asterisk (*) To That Course Design
« Reply #16 on: February 20, 2009, 08:13:17 AM »
Did Dan Soutar not design KH with merely some guidance on bunkering from Dr Mac?
Logged
Pages: [1]
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back