[Ed Oden]

I recommend that everyone check out entrant 12, Ed Oden's entry. Make sure to read his write up!
 

Thanks Garland.  Of course, there are no winners at The Recession Club.  Only survivors.

Ed

I heard the members who were short on the place did quite well.

True.  Seems like there are always a few a**holes smarter than everyone else.  They're all on the Green Committee now.

Ed

Now, are they a**holes because they are smarter than everyone else or a**holes because they are on the Green Committee.  Or, do they become a**holes after they become members of the Green Committee.  Are you saying that power corrupts at the Recession Club?

Chicken?  Egg?  Tough call.  Power only corrupts at The Recession Club when the electricity bill has been paid.

Ed

PS - I am on my club's Green Committee.  Before anyone there gets any idea I am taking a shot at anyone else, I should be clear that my remarks are just a weak attempt at self-deprecating humor.  The events depicted in The Recession Club are fictitious.  Any similarity to any person living or dead is merely coincidental.

[Jim Colton]

Ed,

 Well done.  Bonus points for the Jose Oquendo reference.

[Tim Nugent]

As I have stated earlier, the toughest part of judging is to come up with an arbritrary set of criteria that relatively all-encompassing.
Because their were so many entries to plow through and I wanted to get the rankings back ASAP (I know how frustrating it can be waitng for a response to an RFP). I tried to come up with a set that would spread the weight around to things that have been the focus (or problematic) in past projects. So, to provide some feedback to all, not just Nick,  I'm posting what those criteria are and who were the top point getters in each. As you can see, I didn't rate the submittals against one another (ie 1-13) rather against a 10 point scale. You will have to cross-reference names with #'s.

Just to get it off the table, although we were asked to not be overly swayed by presentatiion, I felt some points needed to be awarded here as part of GCA is the ability to convey your ideas. This also allowed me to completely disregard it when assesssing the other criteria.

Therefore:
*Presentation - 1,10
*Use of Land -  8
*Routing Variety - 8,12
*Continuity/Playabliity - 8,9
*Walk in the Park - 11
*Ease of Construction - 1,5,8,10,12
*Auxillary Elements - 9, (followed closely by 4 & 7)
*Circulation - 1,6,7,13
*Strategic Options - 1
*Clubhouse Location - 5,6
*Maintenance ($$$) - 6,8
*Irrigation Source - 1,8

So, as you can see, all but 2 submittals managed to garner a top score in one or more of the criteria.

[Gary_K]

Ally,
Surprise.
Why would you think I'm #2?
There are some  significant differences of opinion on Jim & Gary's entries between judges 1&2.

Cheers

I noticed that difference too and the 3rd judge had us 2nd & 3rd.  I'm curious as to why there's such a big swing in opinion.

Nick, great job and exceptional presentation.  That looked like a lot of work.

My first glance through the entries, I liked Daryn's layout alot and the addition of the short course.

I know there was a request for the judges to identify their favorite holes.  I'm curioius as to which 1-2 holes were each entry's favorite?  What couple holes would you most look forward to playing on your routing?

Gary

[Garland Bayley]

...
Garland
I didn't put Will next to last.
...

OK then, Why did you put me next to last Judge #1?

[Jim Colton]

Gary,

  You and I should take solace as the most polarizing entries out there.  I think polarizing is good.

  I'm not sure how I got nicked on ease of construction when my design was intended for virtually no earth moving.  Just mow it and go.  Certainly that has to be easier than Nick's design carved through rock and forest.

[Nick Campanelli]

Certainly that has to be easier than Nick's design carved through rock and forest.

Jim, I had the same reaction.  I'm not sure how I met that category either.  A golf course built in New England is guaranteed to have two things....alot of blasting and stone walls.

Where was yours set?  I noticed you had planned for a "treeless site with sand-based soils."  Somewhere in NE?  Sounds like the ideal site (does such a thing exist?)

[Garland Bayley]

Jim,

Thanks for the routing compliment. Must mean I got the connectors fairly well done, at least for you. But NOT for judge #1.

[Michael Dugger]

I liked Rustlers Crest

[Ally Mcintosh]

Gary,

I'm just having a look at yours... I was interested also why it was so polarising...

First impression was good and then I started looking in to the topo... You've a lot of blind tee-shots (5 or 6 on the lakes nine alone) unless you knock the edges off some ridges... Some need little work but some would need quite a lot...

That's second impressions... Now for third....

[Mike Hendren]

Standard golf course architecture criticisms on this side include:

1. Long green to tee walks.  I see a few death marches, notably on the front.
2. The "Augusta Effect."  The course looks extremely green.
3. Fairway width.  Several fairways appear pinched in the landing zone and fairways appear to be relatively  narrow.
4. Greenside playing options.  Very little green surrounds maintained as fairway.
5. Centerline hazards.  Missing.
6. Carry bunkers.  Missing.

I submit many here have fallen victim to the greatest common criticism of the uninformed masses - falling for eye-candy.

Mike  

[Charlie Goerges]

I talked to Tommy last night and I don't believe his choices would have changed the outcome, at least at the top. So I personally take some comfort in that fact.

Secondly, in his opinion, many of you used too many bunkers (even among his favorites). I won't try to convey too much more because my memory is always suspect and time is a bit short at the moment.

[Tim Nugent]

Standard golf course architecture criticisms on this side include:

1. Long green to tee walks.  I see a few death marches, notably on the front.
2. The "Augusta Effect."  The course looks extremely green.
3. Fairway width.  Several fairways appear pinched in the landing zone and fairways appear to be relatively  narrow.
4. Greenside playing options.  Very little green surrounds maintained as fairway.
5. Centerline hazards.  Missing.
6. Carry bunkers.  Missing.

I submit many here have fallen victim to the greatest common criticism of the uninformed masses - falling for eye-candy.

Mike  

If you are referring to Nick's, you've pretty much hit the high points. (with the exception of #2 - it would be relatively green in the wooded NE - and if that's his vision - he succeeded)  5 & 6 seem to be related and I factored that into both routing variety and strategic options.  I felt the course was a bit too one dimentional inthat regard (bowling alley golf).

[Tim Nugent]

I talked to Tommy last night and I don't believe his choices would have changed the outcome, at least at the top. So I personally take some comfort in that fact.

Secondly, in his opinion, many of you used too many bunkers (even among his favorites). I won't try to convey too much more because my memory is always suspect and time is a bit short at the moment.

I found this interesting after reading so many post decrying the use of bunkers.  I was actually excited seeing Garland's submittal as at first it had no bunkers, then further on - out came the bunker pen.  Look at his 1st hole (coincidently the same ground I used for my 1st hole).  He has the landing area on a hump-back ridge that falls away from the dogleg and swinging around a more pronounced part of the ridge on the right.  Evidently, the shot is to clear the ridge.  This was evident from the bunkerless routing. but then he plunked a bunker in the face of it. Why?  What more did this bring to the table?  How does this add to the strategy of the tee shot?.  I'm just using this as an example - I'm sure I could find 12 others, not to pick on Garland.  And just so you know, I only had 2 areas that he came up short and one was in the presentation.  He ended up solidly in the middle of the pack. And believe me, no eye candy there!

[Garland Bayley]

Tim,

I put bunkers in, because I expected the judges to prefer them. Being a proponent of Bill Diddel, I would have left a lot of them out. Last year I had many holes with no bunkers, and some holes with one bunker, and then a few holes with lots of bunkers on what I called bunker hill. I finished last. Apparently, adding a few more bunkers this year moved me up. Maybe next year I will add as many bunkers as the bunker sluts in this contest and win.

[Ben Sims]

I think Bogey hits the nail on the head.  Eye-candy and "presentation factor" may have been a player here.  

Nick's course--though very polished--seemed a bit obvious.  I feel like I've played his course already.  And I don't mean that in a good way.  he did however kick everybody's asses with his skills on the computer.  But I wish he would've provided more personality and depth to his layout.  His "18..experiences" look to be just that.  Separate.  Great wooded courses like Yale and Pine Valley find a way to make the seperate holes seem whole.  

I do question the statistical outliers in the grading of Jim Colton and Gary Kurth's courses.  I thought they were far and away the most inspired and dynamic of the courses.  Jim's course in particular grabbed my attention with his collection of tees and greens on southeastern part of the site.  That's a cool concept for a member's course.   I wonder why they recieve 1, 3, 9 and 2, 2, 10 respectively.  That's awfully weird.

[Mike Nuzzo]

So, as you can see, all but 2 submittals managed to garner a top score in one or more of the criteria.

It appears as if one of those 2 was one that Philip and I thought was one of the best.


Will
I wasn't a fan of Garland's illustration.
I thought it needed more work to be able to compare in detail.
The walks were too long for me and I couldn't tell from the individual sheets the relationship to the next hole.
Playability suffers on your main sheet - that hurt your chances.

For those interested bunker tramps - bunkers and placement hurt the scores more than helped.

[Mike Nuzzo]

In general I assumed that Don Mahaffey would build and maintain the course - through his eyes they all looked easy to build and maintain.
I wasn't moving any dirt to build them.

Thanks Ben...   
As I'm the outlier on Gary's:
27 holes didn't help - it detracted.
I wanted his best 18.
I thought the red and blue 9s were his best so I judged them - and the transitions between them.
5-6 Blue transition really hurt him with me.
I liked the dunes nine best.
I do not like distinct nines - especially with a middle clubhouse location.
Gary did a really nice job - and certainly more professional than where I graded him - I'd hire him above several of the others.
This was a routing contest, it was a little sterile, engineered or formulaic and it fell during my evaluations - it started higher.
(it was a struggle to read - the topo stood out so much more than the golf)

[Mike Nuzzo]

And another thing Ben...

Nick's graphics hurt his chances with me - as stunning as they were.
I was surprised by the trees....
My perfect property wouldn't have that many - too much $$$$ to clear.
And the trees covered the topo lines - it looked like he didn't utilized the topo as much as he could have.
While I did have him a distant third (for me there was a gap between 2-3)
Nick's grew on me as I looked at it closer - there were many positives on his routing.

[Jim Colton]

And another thing Ben...

Nick's graphics hurt his chances with me - as stunning as they were.
I was surprised by the trees....
My perfect property wouldn't have that many - too much $$$$ to clear.
And the trees covered the topo lines - it looked like he didn't utilized the topo as much as he could have.
While I did have him a distant third (for me there was a gap between 2-3)
Nick's grew on me as I looked at it closer - there were many positives on his routing.

I think that 5th-6th hole transition was a deal breaker for Gary.  The 5th green ends near the landing area, has you walking 250 yards or so back to the tee box and hitting back to where you just came.

[Ben Sims]

In general I assumed that Don Mahaffey would build and maintain the course - through his eyes they all looked easy to build and maintain.
I wasn't moving any dirt to build them.

Thanks Ben...   
As I'm the outlier on Gary's:

My bad, not calling you out.

5-6 Blue transition really hurt him with me.
I liked the dunes nine best.

Best observation you've made I think.  I agree whole heartedly.

This was a routing contest, it was a little sterile, engineered or formulaic and it fell during my evaluations - it started higher.
(it was a struggle to read - the topo stood out so much more than the golf)

That's why I had Gary and Jim's at the top.

While I did have him a distant third (for me there was a gap between 2-3)
Nick's grew on me as I looked at it closer - there were many positives on his routing.

Again, spot on.  This is where I had him too.  And it was a good course.  I just didn't see a lot of room for great

[Charlie Goerges]

One of the things that I noticed was that those who designed more than 18 holes tended to do worse overall (except for Daryn, whose extra 9 was a kids' course - an idea I think is wonderful).

Does that assessment seem accurate? Is it a good thing or a bad thing?

[Tim Nugent]

I think Bogey hits the nail on the head.  Eye-candy and "presentation factor" may have been a player here.  

Nick's course--though very polished--seemed a bit obvious.  I feel like I've played his course already.  And I don't mean that in a good way.  he did however kick everybody's asses with his skills on the computer.  But I wish he would've provided more personality and depth to his layout.  His "18..experiences" look to be just that.  Separate.  Great wooded courses like Yale and Pine Valley find a way to make the seperate holes seem whole.  

I do question the statistical outliers in the grading of Jim Colton and Gary Kurth's courses.  I thought they were far and away the most inspired and dynamic of the courses.  Jim's course in particular grabbed my attention with his collection of tees and greens on southeastern part of the site.  That's a cool concept for a member's course.   I wonder why they recieve 1, 3, 9 and 2, 2, 10 respectively.  That's awfully weird.

I guess what hurt Jim's with me was I had a hard time with what he was asking the golfer to do.  Many holes appeared to have multiple paths but upon further investigation, the risk for the challenge wasn't rewarded, therefore I felt that after a golfer played the course, he would realize that it was more one-dimensional than it appeared.  Maybe that was his goal, to lead the golfer down the wrong path.  It seems that there is a lot of fairway that will end up with very little play - unless someone mishits.  2 and 9 were too similar as were 5 and 11,  The range was on a difficult piece and pretty small and some of the circulation green to tee in the SE was problematic - something that should not be on such a huge piece of property.  Jim did have a good collection of greensites and I really liked his clubhouse overlooking the 9th and the vista beyond and 14 is one of the best holes of the contest.

[Tim Nugent]

And another thing Ben...

Nick's graphics hurt his chances with me - as stunning as they were.
I was surprised by the trees....
My perfect property wouldn't have that many - too much $$$$ to clear.
And the trees covered the topo lines - it looked like he didn't utilized the topo as much as he could have.
While I did have him a distant third (for me there was a gap between 2-3)
Nick's grew on me as I looked at it closer - there were many positives on his routing.

I think that 5th-6th hole transition was a deal breaker for Gary.  The 5th green ends near the landing area, has you walking 250 yards or so back to the tee box and hitting back to where you just came.

Yea, that 5-6 thing was problematic. Definately a weak hole too as the green falls away towards the creek.  Luckily, there are ample opportunities to rectify it.

Like Mike, I too coupled the red and blue and pretty much disregarded the lakes course.  But his ability to use the Dunes as he did held up his score with me.  Simply relocating his 5th so that it paralleled the creek would solve his long walk problem and probably yield a better hole.

[Alex Miller]

Thanks to the judges for taking the time to look at so many great submissions!

I'm honestly shocked that Tim Nugent thought mine was one of the best presentations because I didn't think I made a great case for my course compared to the other guys on here. Personally, besides my own  , I liked Jim's course the best. We had somewhat similar styles but I think he did the best job of understanding the visuals from fairway level. There are some classic looks where I immediately thought of other famous holes and realized that my own course, and probably many others, just didn't pull it off quite as nicely. I'm also blown away by Nick's presentation. Very well done, the time he put into it really shows through.

If anyone wishes to ask a question about my own course I would love to answer any questions they may have. Criticism is always welcome.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()