An Old Mark Bourgeois thread

[Mac Plumart]

I continue to be blown away by the knowledge base inherent in this site.

I am wrapping up Scotland’s Gift and I am somewhat bummed that it is concluding.  It was just what I needed at this point in time.  In light of this book being finished, I decided to try to dig deeper into the website to find something to help build on my “Courses to Learn from” thread and “Groundbreaking/Revolutionary Courses” thread.  When I stumbled across Mark Bourgeois’ thread “Lists to Learn From”.  Let me say this to begin with “WOW!!!”  Mark, what an idea, what a thread, what a concept!  Truly magnificent, at least for where I am and what I am trying to learn/accomplish.

Near its conclusion Mark says the following…

“The thing about a lot of lists out there is, what's the point?  What's the intrinsic value to playing the list of courses on Golf Magazine's world top 100?  You might learn about architecture, as an incidental thing, or you might not.  You could miss some things, while learning some things over and over.  Additionally, a list is just a list, there's no meaning in it or lessons to be learned (unless it's a narrow list, like "best use of strategic bunkering").

 In contrast, a syllabus of courses who have distinct architectural lessons to recommend themselves sounds like a quest worth pursuing”

This is exactly the quest that I am on, that is why I ask all these questions, make all these statements…I want to learn about architecture…truly learn and understand.  You see, this game has a magical hold on me…as I have shared before it has transformed my life in a positive manner ever since I picked it up.  The challenges, the twists, the frustration, the exhilaration, etc.  I think these feelings and, therefore, this magic, is only enhanced by terrific architecture.  That is why I want to learn.

Also in Mark’s thread, Philippe Binette say the following regarding playing monumental/educational courses…

“if you spend 10 days on each of these courses and you get it, you should be able to translate your knowledge into form...

The get it part is important... Some have played those courses 100s of times and still don't get it”

That is so true!!!  How many people want to play course “XYZ” because of its name, it history, or its cache?  But how many people want to play it and learn from it?  That is why I mentioned on one of my threads that I was thinking of simply playing The Old Course day in and day out over and over again when I go to Scotland…to learn from this remarkable golf course.  But I was, and still am, a little worried that people would think I was a nut job.  But reading this thread has made me think…maybe I am not a nut job…maybe I should do that.

Also, PPallotta (I apologize for not knowing his full name), stated that someone who embarks on this task is embarking on “not a fool's errand, but a momumental one”

How true that is!!!  Because at the end of the journey instead of seeing questions, clouds, and darkness…the person who truly embarks on this learning mission will know the history of this
great game, what makes it great, and why people love it so.  In short, he will know the truth and will be in the position to share it with anyone he feels can appreciate it.

OH!!!!  How amazing.

Mark, and all the posters from that thread and everyone who has tolerate my seemingly insane ramblings, THANKS!!!!  Truly, THANKS!!!!


FYI…this post really requires no follow ups or add ons…so don’t feel required to placate the “quack” from Atlanta.  But if you feel compelled, please do.  But more importantly, if you feel like I do…let’s link up and play some golf, travel the world, and appreciate this wonderful game!!!

[Mac Plumart]

My apologies to Peter Pallotta.  I didn't know your first name prior to my posting this thread.  I thought your comments on the thread were vitally important, so I simpy used your name as it is listed on your posts.  No offense was meant, I hope you don't take it that way.  In fact, it was actually a comment on how important your thoughts were.

Anyway, my apologies for my ignorance.

Furthermore, I know I at least alluded to it in my prior post...but I will state it more clearly now...

I feel it is important to study golf course architecture because if a course can be laid out in a quality manner then all the "magic" that is imbeded in the game will more likely be revealed to the participants of the game during a round on one of these quality courses.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Mac:

I couldn't agree more with what you and others have said. If one confines themselves to the top 100 courses, they'll miss out on some classic quirky gems such as North Berwick for example, and many many more.

My advice would be to just play what you can, and try not to cherry pick. In your other thread on courses to learn from, someone advised you to play some clunkers as well (but not too many). I agree. You will learn why they are poor courses, and what seperates the good from the bad. Even average courses have a hole or two that is interesting.

Why not play the Old Course, but also play the Eden and the New course and the others if you have time. Alister MacKenzie said in "The Spirit of St. Andrews" that the Eden would probably be regarded as one of the best courses in Britain, were it not for the fact that it's over-shadowed by the Old Course. The New course is on the same links land as the Old, so you could ask yourself, why isn't it better? Was an opportunity lost here? How could it be made better? This is something I've wondered.

Just keep playing courses. You might discover a course that you find amazing and others find quite ordinary, but who cares?

Dónal.

 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Guys

I have never been one to list the best 10 courses, or designers, as I feel it is just a waste of time. The exercise is just pointless and is only good for the Marketing Men. Why pointless - simple many courses have the ability of changing, of displaying a different face depending upon the weather at the time. You can play the same course twice in the day yet believe you are playing a totally different course, even more so on a links course. As for the designers, unless you know their brief from the client, how can you comment upon the design? 

The next point relates to the older courses, designed originally for the old Hickory shafted clubs with the Gutty or Haskell by the early 20th Century. Have any of you played these courses with the equipment used at the time of their conception and if so what was your experience. Of course, modifications have been made, many due to the Haskell itself, but if you insist in judging give them, you must make it a fair to experience their souls. You may even be in for a surprise or two.

Melvyn

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Guys

I have never been one to list the best 10 courses, or designers, as I feel it is just a waste of time. The exercise is just pointless and is only good for the Marketing Men. Why pointless - simple many courses have the ability of changing, of displaying a different face depending upon the weather at the time. You can play the same course twice in the day yet believe you are playing a totally different course, even more so on a links course. As for the designers, unless you know their brief from the client, how can you comment upon the design? 

The next point relates to the older courses, designed originally for the old Hickory shafted clubs with the Gutty or Haskell by the early 20th Century. Have any of you played these courses with the equipment used at the time of their conception and if so what was your experience. Of course, modifications have been made, many due to the Haskell itself, but if you insist in judging give them, you must make it a fair to experience their souls. You may even be in for a surprise or two.

Melvyn

Melvyn:

I agree. These courses shouldn't be judged harshly. In most cases we are not playing them as they were intended to be played.

There are many Hickory players at my home club and while I understand their love for this activity, it has never appealed to me. One reason why it doesn't appeal to me is that it's a bit false in my opinion. It's only half the experience I believe. At my club, the greens run at about 9.5 in the Summer and playing Hickory clubs (but not the old balls) on these manicured greens and fairways doesn't appeal to me. You might say that playing with old clubs is better than not playing with them at all. I can agree with those that say that, but it's all or nothing for me.

When I was a young boy, we were not allowed on our local course (Gweedore) during Open Week. The greenkeeper cut a few rough greens in the dunes behind the clubhouse and we played a small pitch and putt course. It was great fun for us to decide where to place the tees and hole locations. It was rough country and the lies were bad at times, and little did we know that our experience was similar to those golfers of the 19th and early 20thC.

Dónal.

[Mac Plumart]

bump

[Pete_Pittock]

Link to Mark Bourgeois' thread http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,37800.0.html