[Alex Miller]

I have not been on this site for long however I'm about to express my opinion, which I guess is the whole point of controversy to begin with. 

I think both parties descended to far into personal attacks of one another, whether that be alleged allegations of "stalking" or otherwise. No matter the context or content of a post there is no reason that we as GCAers who share a passion for golf and golf course architecture need to act derisively toward another.

I think Mr. Warren's posts contains some interesting points which warrant discussion. He gave the reasons and evidence he formed his opinion from and while Mr. Ruddy responded to them, perhaps explaining why he opposes Mr. Warren's opinions would be more constructive than explaining why his opinions are not credible in the first place.

Finally, I think that the worst offense committed here is something that goes on far too often on here: thread highjacking. I've had it happen to me and I'm sure many of you have had it happen to you. If a point of contention arises which doesn't relate to the thread and cannot be resolved in a reasonable number of posts (4?) then the parties involved should solve it on their own or publicly in a new discussion. Isn't that the point of this form after all?

Thanks for taking the time to read my opinions, and even if you disagree with them I appreciate what each individual brings to this website which we all love.

Alex

[Andrew Summerell]

I don’t understand why Pat Ruddy didn’t answer the original questions. Being part of this forum is having an opinion & proving it. I would have preferred to see Pat answer Scott’s questions to allow us all to see what was behind the design.

[Mark_F]

Pat,

I would GLADLY play here anytime, without regard to anyone's reviews just based upon this ONE picture!

But would you enjoy it, and would you return?

That seems to be Scott's point of view, that, despite the breathtaking canvas, it is more of a stern test of precision and control as opposed to being a little more forgiving, due to the often ferocious nature of links golf.

He is correct about one other element, at least - that pimple to the right of the 8th green is terrible.

Although this image from Ran's review of Pacific Dunes doesn't fully show it, this pimple to the left side of the 15th green doesn't look too flash either.  Maybe architects should just stay away from pimples, and go for the botox look instead.

                                     

[Niall C]

I don’t understand why Pat Ruddy didn’t answer the original questions. Being part of this forum is having an opinion & proving it. I would have preferred to see Pat answer Scott’s questions to allow us all to see what was behind the design.

Quite. Even if Pat chose to ignore Scotts comments all together it would be interesting to hear what Pat has to say about the original concept behind his design, what might have changed since it was first built etc. From Tony M's open letter it would appear that Pat has some formed opinions that it would be good to discuss and share. So far I haven't read anything from Pat that really addresses anything about the design other than questioning Scotts credentials to pass comment.

Having read Scotts comments from his blog, they do seem well articulated if a little bluntly put, but then he is an aussie  While his overall opinion is to generally mark the course down he doesn't shy away from giving credit where he thinks it is due. It certainly doesn't seem like a hatchet job to me.

I suppose he could have decided, no this course isn't for me and left it at that, and not bothered to pass comment but then thats not what this site is about. Its about discussing things that you are think are wrong as well as things that in your opinion are good. That is how the free flow of ideas works IMHO.

Niall

[Ben Stephens]

Dear Pat,

Having designed and built 2 x 18 hole courses in my area and have received comments on opposite ends of the spectrum. I understand that you are very passionate about the European Golf Course as it is your 'baby' and you seem to be the 'protective parent'. We don't live in a perfect world and in the early days I had been defensive about my work from what I thought were silly sarcastic comments from people that I knew. I have learned from this experience and the best thing is to just smile (and a nice pint of Lager/Guinness).

From the images posted on GCA of the European Club most of it looks fabulous (Especially the Aidan Bradley ones). There are a few things that I would do differently such as make the bunkers more natural / fitting in with the landscape (Like the ones at RCD) and make the fairways wider to give players more options of the tee and less watered so that allows for a running game. This is my personal opinion and I respect your view that you want to make it a tough golf course aimed at the top 10 percent of world golfers and I would definitely take on the challenge if I had the opportunity.

You have designed some cracking holes such as the 2nd at Portsalon which the majority of GCA'ers would definitely love to play. We on GCA would welcome how you design golf courses, your approach, your influences, mentors (Eddie Hackett?) and what you most love in designing/constructing a golf course.  

I have briefly met Scott Warren at Swinley Forest, he is one of the most keenest people to get on a golf course anywhere despite being the archetypal Aussie journalist who also loves to take the mickey about the Poms any day!! Hey didnt Ireland beat the Aussies at their hallowed game of Aussie Rules? (that would hurt Mr Warren!!) I am sure Scott, if he had the time, would play the European again and buy you a pint in the club bar anytime.

Scott will understand your position better when he has designed and built a golf course in his backyard how much work, time and passion is put into this kind of project.

Cheers
Ben

[JNC Lyon]

Perhaps Scott you will learn a lesson, because you do love your little comments.

I’m totally with Pat on this one.

Melvyn

Melvyn,

Care to back up your opinion rather than scolding someone like you're a nun at a 1960s Catholic school?


I sure hope frank commentary is not dead.  I really respect the folks on here you are willing to question your opinion without calling you a moron or resorting to litigation.

[Melvyn Morrow]

JNC

Not being a Catholic or a Nun, sorry wrong sex.
 
You really do believe and honour the idea of freedom of speech don't you with comments like "I really respect the folks on here you are willing to question your opinion without calling you a moron or resorting to litigation."
 
But then that your way, grow a brain and get real its a DG on a internet site where comments and opinions are thrown into the pot. Is this what you are taught in school these days, not to respect freedom of thought and the right to voice it - or does that only apply to you and your friends.

You are the sick ones who want to strip or limit the rights of others. We don't agree wow big deal, but you seem to want to send in the Marines or Lawyers.

As for the topic, as I said I am with Pat

Melvyn

[Scott Warren]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "I'm with Pat" please, Melvyn?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Scott

My original comment was to Pats reply #7

Melvyn

[George Pazin]

I read Scott's blog post. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I'm a little fuzzy on how that constitutes stalking, or really anything other than frank commentary. Heck, I've said worse things about many courses on here, and I'm pretty mild in comparison to many on here.

[Mike Wagner]

.

[Scott Warren]

But then that your way, grow a brain and get real its a DG on a internet site where comments and opinions are thrown into the pot. Is this what you are taught in school these days, not to respect freedom of thought and the right to voice it - or does that only apply to you and your friends.

You are the sick ones who want to strip or limit the rights of others. We don't agree wow big deal, but you seem to want to send in the Marines or Lawyers.

As for the topic, as I said I am with Pat

Melvyn

Melvyn,

Here's where I am struggling.

You say you're with Pat, but you're also defending the right to free speech.

Pat's posts on this site have been almost exclusively based on trying to restrict people posting honestly and openly about TEC. His emails behind the scenes are aimed at trying to scare people into not posting their honest opinions if those opinions are not what he wants to read.

Like Mike Whitaker, I think Pat Ruddy's lifetime of knowledge about all things golf would be a great asset to GCA, but Pat has made it clear through his decision to read posts on here and reply abusively in private rather than constructively on the site that he doesn't wish to do so.

I would be riveted - as would all of us, I  bet - to a post from Pat addressing the points I and others have made about TEC, or replying to Tony Muldoon's fantastic questions about his approach to design, but I will be very surprised if that ever happens, based on my previous experience with Pat.

IMO, it boils down to this: Anyone on this website should be free to post honestly and frankly about a golf course they've played. Provided they do so constructively, they should be treated with respect by those who reply. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I think that's a fair exapectation, and one most GCA members post in line with.

Scott will understand your position better when he has designed and built a golf course in his backyard how much work, time and passion is put into this kind of project.

I'm not sure what to make of that, Ben.

Are you saying The European Club should be treated differently by those who play it when it comes to discussing its merits because the designer owns it?

I've spent the past decade working in a creative job where I have received negative feedback from readers - both constructive and destructive - on a regular basis. I realise what goes into creating, that you put a lot of yourself into your work and expose yourself to your audeince in doing so and you feel it personally when someone says they didn't like it, but there is no excuse for the way Pat has reacted.

When my newspaper shut last year the readers on the Guardian site took great joy in its demise and spent days celebrating the closure of "London Shite (Lite)" in web comments and saying everything under the sun about the staff, who were out of a job a month before Christmas. It hurt to read that, but it's their right to have not liked the publication.

So yes, I understand that it hurts him to see TEC criticised, but I will never understand or respect the way he has handled himself.

[Ben Stephens]

Scott will understand your position better when he has designed and built a golf course in his backyard how much work, time and passion is put into this kind of project.

I'm not sure what to make of that, Ben.

Are you saying The European Club should be treated differently by those who play it when it comes to discussing its merits because the designer owns it?

No it should not be treated differently we are entitled to free speech and voice our opinion whether we like a particular golf course or not.

I've spent the past decade working in a creative job where I have received negative feedback from readers - both constructive and destructive - on a regular basis. I realise what goes into creating, that you put a lot of yourself into your work and expose yourself to your audeince in doing so and you feel it personally when someone says they didn't like it, but there is no excuse for the way Pat has reacted.

When my newspaper shut last year the readers on the Guardian site took great joy in its demise and spent days celebrating the closure of "London Shite (Lite)" in web comments and saying everything under the sun about the staff, who were out of a job a month before Christmas. It hurt to read that, but it's their right to have not liked the publication.

So yes, I understand that it hurts him to see TEC criticised, but I will never understand or respect the way he has handled himself.
[/quote]

I also work in a creative job designing buildings which can be heaped with praise or criticised in a ungentlemanly manner from all sorts of people but hey thats life in the world we live in. I love doing architecture which is my day to day job like journalism is yours but designing + creating a golf course to me is different it is more like creating a field of dreams and you watch people play it and listen to their comments etc. My golf course got praised by the opposing captain in a scratch league match and that they were coming back over for a social game. On the other hand someone savaged it in the pub damning the greens as unplayable to which I smiled to.

How often you get the chance of building a golf course in which golf course design is a huge passion of ours I have been lucky to have this opportunity and I hope you will one day and then you will understand where I am coming from. It’s a different feeling and sense of pride in achieving something that very few people are able to do in their lifetime. How many articles do you write in a week and how many buildings do I design in a year compared to 1 golf course in probably every 10 years to a lifetime. I hope you understand where I am coming from. Pat to me is a very proud Irishman and has an emotional attachment to his ‘baby’ – TEC which he has nurtured over the years so I can understand his reaction to your comments but I believe it should have been kept private in some respects.

Cheers
Ben

[Scott Warren]

Thanks for explaining, Ben.

So you think outright abuse was a fair response to constructive criticism in this case?

Also, don't you think all golf course architects would be entitled to feel the same way when they see criticism of a course they have designed? We have many GCAs on here who reply constructively and respectfully to criticism of their designs.

[mike_malone]

  Most of the commentary on this site comes from a player's first play of the course. I believe the feel and perception received that first time provide ample information to have a worthwhile opinion. However, one does not have the specificity of the long time player or the architect.  In fact, I believe courses are designed with that first time player in mind.

   The first time I played Rolling Green I came away with a feeling that it was a special place , that it used the land in a wonderful way, and that the approaches to the greens were its most important feature. After extensive play and analysis I still feel the same way. I even thought the evergreens, particularly on #7, were out of place and likely not the architect's wish on that first visit.

   When I joined and began to advocate tree removal several members suggested that as a new member I could not know what I was talking about.

  Frank commentary needs the input from that powerful first time impression.  This needs to be encouraged.

   When Sean Arble came away from RG thinking there were too many uphill holes  and that that lessened his opinion of the course I was a little taken a back. But then I decided it was too many for him but not for me.

[Ben Stephens]

Thanks for explaining, Ben.

So you think outright abuse was a fair response to constructive criticism in this case?

Also, don't you think all golf course architects would be entitled to feel the same way when they see criticism of a course they have designed? We have many GCAs on here who reply constructively and respectfully to criticism of their designs.

My reply to the first question is thats its between you and Pat whether it was abuse or a passionate/protective/threatened attitude kind of reply. Any abusive behaviour is not acceptable to me.

Golf Course Architects are also individuals who are entitled to their opinion whether it is right or wrong. Some don't take advice on board and others do. I have taken on board comments from people and my next design would be slightly different - in some respects as I have learned what to do and what not to do but most of it is positive. Also we have cut back the thick rough and shotened the course at Rutland Water to make it more playable and keep the members happy this is what Mackenzie did at Augusta and Cypress Point - no one likes losing a golf ball. I know if I have the opportunity to play the TEC I will have to take at least 20 balls just in case!

GCA is a great forum which allows different individuals to put forward their opinion whether others like it or not.

[Ben Sims]

I believe in what Bob Huntley said.  I don't like X because of Y.  I am as guilty as anyone for engaging in emotional, unenlightening and--worst of all--unentertaining conversation here.   The trick is to be entertaining while being honest, with constructive comments.

I have been the target of poor comments by passerby's in such towns at Berkeley and Davis, CA while in uniform that made my blood boil.  But I was usually very receptive to good conversation with those same folks if they said, "I don't agree with your job because of Y."

I still believe frank commentary is alive here at GCA.  Though it is frequently more watered down.  Due in part I think because many folks are afraid to comment negatively--even if warranted--for fear of access loss. 

[Charlie Goerges]

The ONLY kind of comments Scott has made regarding The European Club are those focused on the course, its execution, and the design decisions it's architect made. He's never made personal comments or attacks on Mr. Ruddy that I have seen. If questioning the decisions of the architect is off limits then what's the point of this site?

Mr. Ruddy was able to dig up a comment by Scott regarding a footballer on another website that may or may not have been ill-advised. Unfortunately it's an example of irrelevancy raised to the second power. The comment had nothing to do with Mr. Ruddy (or golf) and it was not even made on this website.

Scott was obviously not enamored with every aspect of what Mr. Ruddy did in designing TEC. That's perfectly fine.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Who is Frank Commentary ?  And, why is he at risk ?

Pat Ruddy,

A number of friends and acquiantances of mine don't like NGLA.

No amount of explanation and reasoning will change their opinion.

I see the genius, they don't.

Your disadvantage is that this is a website that discusses GCA.
I understand your dissatisfaction with the criticisms that have been leveled at your work, especially given the broad exposure a website gets versus personal conversations.

I agree with Bob Huntley's suggestion.

I think that confines the assessment to a personal opinion rather than a blanket categorization.

Hope this helps

[Sean_A]

I'm concerned about the reaction to Scott Warren's EC comments. I myself have heard that certain people have taken personal offense at comments I have made on here about some highly rated courses.  In my opinion the purpose of this site is to be very critical of the most highly regarded courses to narrow that peak of excellence,

Frank commentary is the best sort.  There are those on this site who engage in this sort of commentary on courses and those who won't. That is the way it has always been and that is the way it will continue to be.  I just look at reading posts like reading any other sort of material.  Some writers I skip because I know their angle and some writers I make point to read because they usually have something interesting to write.  I don't see why I should treat the posters on this site any differently.  So no, frank commentary isn't at risk so long as the rules of group dynamics hold true.

So far as any fallout from Scott's opinions are concerned - it will blow over.  We saw P Ruddy chase down Tiger with the same sort vigor.  Pat is very protective of TEC and who can blame him?  However, I can't possibly see how Pat can have issue with comments about TEC being narrow, with lush grass and many raised greens.  I get the impression that the course was purposely designed this way and to play very tough - which TEC does. It isn't my cup of tea, but on the other hand I like Donegal (a course which Pat had more than a passing hand in I believe) an awful lot.  Live and let live.

Ciao

[JC Jones]

Who is Frank Commentary ?  And, why is he at risk ?

When I saw the thread title I wondered why a) we were discussing hot dogs; and b) why the discussion of hot dogs would be at risk.

[David_Elvins]

Nice thread Mike,

I do suspect though, that on this occasaion, we are looking at a very effective marketing campaign being generated by Messers Warren and Ruddy. 

I know my interest in the course has definitely increased. 

[Andrew Mitchell]

In response to Mike's opening post I think anything that is available for public consumption and enjoyment is also available for critique - whether it be a play, book, film, music or golf course. If you want your course to be reviewed and ranked you have to expect the rater with a bit of criticism.

As long as the critique is fair and well presented I don't see why anyone should object. Scott's review on his website seems well thought out and reasonable with regard to both what he liked and what he didn't.  Scott's has a good eye for golf course archirecture and an easy writing style.  Having read his write up of Silloth he certainly spots more than I do and puts it across better.

I'm aware Pat is very proud of what he has achieved at TEC.  I enjoyed my solitary round there a few years ago and would happily go back.

At the very least Scott's review has raised the profile of TEC on GCA and may encourage more visitors 

[Joe Hancock]

Who is Frank Commentary ?  And, why is he at risk ?

When I saw the thread title I wondered why a) we were discussing hot dogs; and b) why the discussion of hot dogs would be at risk.

Surely, you can't be serious......

You two guys are too well respected here for this kind of shenanigans. It's best to leave this type of humor for those best known for it.

Joseph the Serious

[Anthony Gray]

Who is Frank Commentary ?  And, why is he at risk ?

When I saw the thread title I wondered why a) we were discussing hot dogs; and b) why the discussion of hot dogs would be at risk.

Surely, you can't be serious......

You two guys are too well respected here for this kind of shenanigans. It's best to leave this type of humor for those best known for it.

Joseph the Serious

  Joe,

  Do you know Frank's brother Jimmy Commentary?

  Anthony

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()