News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #75 on: April 18, 2011, 06:49:59 AM »
As usual, we have strayed far afield.  The issue is one of balance and I think Pat did a fine job of approaching it.  As I noted in my earlier post, if we want to discuss architecture then negative comments are sometimes required.  The manner and forum matter.

Now if one does not care about what others say, then this conversation is irrelevant.  But there are those who do and unless we choose to ignore their feelings as being less important than our ability to say anything we wish at any time or place, we shouild take those into account.

Which brings us to Matt's "PC" comments.  I understand the frustration at the "PC" police who can go overboard in an effort to protect groups from perceived offensive behaviour engendered by unacceptable motives.  But not every effort to restrain behaviour is  politically motivated.  Sometimes it is just good manners which predate the PC movement by hundreds of years.  Polite behaviour used to be viewed as the mark of an educated, caring person.  It only takes a little effort to try and consider the other person's feelings when deciding how to phrase a remark.  This does not require dishonesty, only tact.  Nor is it required in all circumstances, some situations require the unvarnished truth.  But if one saves the tougher approach for times when it matters, it is far more effective because the listener knows the topic is important.  Moreover, mannered discourse often prevents the deterioration of an argument which allows a more nuanced discussion of the matter at hand.  Based on the tone of many of our recent discussions, we could use a little more of that.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2011, 07:26:50 PM by SL_Solow »

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #76 on: April 18, 2011, 06:56:14 AM »
"You can shear a sheep many times, but skin him only once. "
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #77 on: April 18, 2011, 01:49:04 PM »
I think this thread says more about private golf in the USA than anything else.  I'm pleased to see an adopted son of the empire in Mr Arble bring some sense to it.  If we can't speak honestly (without being unpleasant or rude) about courses we are invited to play then what is the value of our praise? 

Interestingly I have a date in my diary to play an Open rota course this summer wherethe invite came about because I had expressed a view that it rated lower on my to play list than most.  I take it from this thread that that wouldn't happen in the States?  As Sean says, How thin skinned can you be over a golf course.  Actually, forget that question, I saw the Merion thread.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #78 on: April 18, 2011, 02:59:22 PM »
It could be said that Yale was saved by nothing less than rude commentary and insults by an ex-member of this site.  My grandmother always told me that it takes an asshole to get rid of the crap.

jim_lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #79 on: April 18, 2011, 03:27:31 PM »
John:

I may be wrong, but wasn't the critic of Yale a Yale man himself who was criticising his own course? That seems to be different from publically criticising your host's course.
"Crusty"  Jim
Freelance Curmudgeon

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #80 on: April 18, 2011, 03:50:01 PM »
John:

I may be wrong, but wasn't the critic of Yale a Yale man himself who was criticising his own course? That seems to be different from publically criticising your host's course.

Different, yes.  Worse, maybe.  I could write Yale a check today and become a member, I doubt that buys me the right to be rude.  My only point is that perhaps the ends does justify the means.

Recently my friend Anthony Pioppi had his blog pulled from Connecticut Golfer because of a post he made about Hunter GC where he is a member.  It made me question if this type of journalism does have a place.  I'm torn because I personally see no worth in it myself.  A link to Anthony's offending post.  Yes, he must be my friend as many hits as I am directing to his blog.

http://anthonypioppi.blogspot.com/2011/01/layout-where-i-am-mens-club-member.html

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #81 on: April 18, 2011, 03:54:13 PM »
...nice weather, law-abiding behavior and enduring peace isn't news.

Maybe they aren't, yet -- but they're gettin' there!

Particularly nice weather.

Particularly around here.
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Peter Pallotta

Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #82 on: April 18, 2011, 04:02:36 PM »
Imagine if this thread was instead entitled "Enlightened Self-Interest vs Not Lying".

Peter   

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #83 on: April 18, 2011, 04:09:19 PM »
John:

I may be wrong, but wasn't the critic of Yale a Yale man himself who was criticising his own course? That seems to be different from publically criticising your host's course.

Different, yes.  Worse, maybe.  I could write Yale a check today and become a member, I doubt that buys me the right to be rude.  My only point is that perhaps the ends does justify the means.

Recently my friend Anthony Pioppi had his blog pulled from Connecticut Golfer because of a post he made about Hunter GC where he is a member.  It made me question if this type of journalism does have a place.  I'm torn because I personally see no worth in it myself.  A link to Anthony's offending post.  Yes, he must be my friend as many hits as I am directing to his blog.

http://anthonypioppi.blogspot.com/2011/01/layout-where-i-am-mens-club-member.html

If the ex GCA member was the catalyst for Yale`s about face then the end may justify the means in this case as it`s greatness has been restored.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #84 on: April 18, 2011, 04:23:13 PM »
If the ex GCA member was the catalyst for Yale`s about face then the end may justify the means in this case as it`s greatness has been restored.

Tim, John's post assumes a lot of things that aren't necessarily in evidence, at least not to anyone without knowledge of the inner workings of the club/course. The poster in question is a very thoughtful, passionate man who was motivated by a desire to save the course from what he thought were major significant mistakes. Hindsight would seem to bear him out, but that is for each of us to decide.

This is a tough topic, I don't know really where I stand with it. I'd like to think people can understand the difference between thoughtful criticism and posting information that could prove harmful to a club's existence, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Mark P, it's not a problem unique to the States, at least I'd guess it isn't. It's a problem unique to the parties involved. For every person who posts a strong opinion and is disdained for it, there are others who shared strong feelings and have seen others attempt to change that opinion. It depends on the critic and the one criticised!
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #85 on: April 18, 2011, 04:55:08 PM »


Tim, John's post assumes a lot of things that aren't necessarily in evidence, at least not to anyone without knowledge of the inner workings of the club/course. The poster in question is a very thoughtful, passionate man who was motivated by a desire to save the course from what he thought were major significant mistakes. Hindsight would seem to bear him out, but that is for each of us to decide.


George,

Please tell me one thing that my post assumes that aren't necessarily in evidence.  You were here.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #86 on: April 18, 2011, 05:19:18 PM »
John, I chose my words carefully. I don't know what influence the poster in question had, as I don't know the thought process behind those making the decisions. It wasn't meant as a slam on you, merely that I think you may be assuming more than is readily apparent. If you know more than me, that's great, I am wrong in being circumspect. I think you often assume those sharing opinions have more influence than may be the case, but that's merely my opinion, not based on any inside information.

To put it more simply, if I criticised something at some famous course - let's say Cherry Hills, since I don't know anyone there - and they made changes, that doesn't necessarily mean they listened to me. They might have listened to someone else.

EDIT: I'll add that you may well be correct in your read. I just don't think it's in evidence on this public discussion site.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2011, 05:29:05 PM by George Pazin »
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #87 on: April 18, 2011, 05:30:28 PM »
I can't believe that in eight days the following thread will on be five years old.  It seems a lifetime ago but answers the question of this thread very well.  I guess I'm on a five year cycle.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,23238.0.html

In defense of the good Dr., I pretty much deserved any names he called me.  Please do not take his language out of context of the time frame itself was framed.

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #88 on: April 18, 2011, 05:48:52 PM »
Barney;  George is suggesting that we don't know everything that influenced Yale.  He is correct.  But let us assume you are correct in your surmise, a likely assumption in my view.  You have now turned your initial post entirely on its ear.  The post was phrased as posing the dilemma of balancing the duties of a thoughtful guest against the desire to provide an honest critique of architecture.  Your latest post suggests that nobody should be permitted to critique the architecture, maintenance or revisions to a course; not even the members.  Perhaps I am being too aggressive; maybe you are suggesting that criticism should not be public.  But then a member could never challenge the insiders at a club, even if they were misguided.  I hope this post was not dictated by the identity of the individual involved, an individual with whom you have clashed in the past.  If it is designed as a contrast to the treatment of Anthony, I find it difficult to believe that any serious golf related magazine invites articles on architectural criticism but refuses articles that are less than positive.  Perhaps the magazine is intended only to provide fluff pieces to promote its area clubs.  If Anthony knew that and continued to write for the magazine, then he accepted their model and risked the consequences.  If they changed the rules , shame on them.

The difficult problem posed by all of these discussions is in striking a balance between good manners and honest criticism.  I suggest that in writing a column, one can be more aggressive because one is assumed to be acting as a critic.  A guest need not be dishonest when asked his opinion, but tact is appropriate and one's opinion is not always required.  Finally, a member is entitled to voice his opinion.  How and where depends on the mores of the club and how deeply he holds his opinions.  There are always social consequences for speaking out and each individual weighs those consequences when making decisions.  Sometimes speaking out on an unpopular topic leads to good results.  It can even be courageous.  Other times it can be deemed foolish.

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #89 on: April 18, 2011, 06:19:25 PM »
The professional journalists and bloggers who regularly post things are probably immune to the criticism of their criticism of golf courses.  It's like being a movie critic.  People might not like everything that an individual movie critic says, but the more influential the critic is, the more deference she will get from the professionals.  I'm guessing that the same is true hereabouts.  Brad Klein has the gravitas to write about golf course architecture based upon his body of work.  Doesn't mean he won't get some flak from offended architects.  One need only recall the recent Ballyhack back-and-forth for proof of that.  The rank amateurs among us, and there are plenty, should be well aware that people who host you at their club will be none to happy if you are uncharitable in your "review" or "rating" of their treasured track.  That's why the amateur critics here should be careful in posting their very negative thoughts, especially if somebody went out of their way to accommodate them at the club/course.  Club members and club managers and club professional are a hypersensitive lot, after all.  I was once asked to serve as a Roastmaster for the "Man of the Year" at a prestigious club here in Chicago.  I love this place.  I revere it.  I used to aspire to membership.  But, years after the Roast, I still run into members who are pissed at me for what I said in my ten minute Roast.  "It was a ROAST, not a coffee klatsch," I always protest.  But I can assure you that I will be forever blackballed at that club because of that attempt at humoring a humorless crowd on a subject that they apparently think is beyond satirical reproach.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #90 on: April 18, 2011, 07:53:20 PM »
Terry Lavin:

Quote
The rank amateurs among us, and there are plenty, should be well aware that people who host you at their club will be none to happy if you are uncharitable in your "review" or "rating" of their treasured track.  That's why the amateur critics here should be careful in posting their very negative thoughts, especially if somebody went out of their way to accommodate them at the club/course.

Bingo!

If it's clear the person criticising something hasn't a clue what they're talking about, their willingness to be critical could easily cause offence.

On the other hand, when you invite - for example - Sean Arble to your club and he has some criticisms afterwards that open up a dialogue and are clearly the product of insight, analysis and experience then to me that's exactly what we should be shooting for on this site and everyone can learn something.

The authority of the critic matters a lot. As does the tone of his criticism.

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #91 on: April 18, 2011, 08:13:14 PM »
Mac P:

Quote
Let's be frank, if we are going to be intellectually honest then very few of us will know a golf course initmately.  Perhaps we will know one or two courses intimately, but the bulk of these courses we will see once or twice and can make some observations based on those few plays.  But to be honest, that is all we will have: basic observations... If we are indeed going to be intellectually honest, we need to accept this fact and simply offer our basic observations regarding courses where we haven't played under enough differing circumstances to make appropriate evaluations.

Anything less than that is hubris.

I disagree, in part. I think it depends on the person.

There are a good number of people I have met and played with who see a huge amount in one or two plays of a course and can make valued and insightful judgements on the strength of those one or two plays.

There are plenty who see nothing beyond the shots they were faced with because they either didn't look or didn't understand what they were looking at. For some of them, 100 plays wouldn't yield an insight.

Funnily enough, it's usually the first group who are more willing to admit when there was something they didn't understand and need to play more before judging, rather than just criticising it.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2011, 08:40:24 PM by Scott Warren »

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #92 on: April 18, 2011, 08:17:21 PM »
Fair point Scott.  Your last statement is important, I think. 

Funnily enough, it's usually the fist group who are more willing to admit when there was something they didn't understand and need to play more before judging, rather than just criticising it.

And to me people with this attitude can take analysis to the next level.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #93 on: April 18, 2011, 09:13:00 PM »
Nicely put, Terry -- but I'm surprised: do clubs like the one that blackballed you actually still exist, even in Chicago (hog butcher for the world, city of big shoulders)?!  

If so, it is indeed as one of your playwrights has said "It's not a world of men! It's a world of clock-watchers, office holders...."

Though I still think most of us should keep quiet if we can't find something positive to say. We lose nothing by our silence  

  

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #94 on: April 18, 2011, 09:22:46 PM »
The authority of the critic matters a lot. As does the tone of his criticism.

Scott --

I think you're half-right.

Only the tone matters, really.

Most critics who deserve any "authority" will have learned that, along the way.

Dan

P.S. to Terry Lavin: I've always thought the opposite of the Groucho Marx line Woody Allen borrowed.

I wouldn't belong to any club that wouldn't have me for a member. I was glad to read "used to aspire" to membership, in your post. The hell with them!
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #95 on: April 18, 2011, 09:36:33 PM »
Bette Midler comes to mind Shel. F'em if they can't take a joke. I sure hope it was Butler Nat'l. BTW
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Kirk Gill

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty and Intellectual Honesty
« Reply #96 on: April 18, 2011, 11:23:05 PM »
John, thanks for the link to that Yale discussion. Lots of passion on that thread. Lots of honest, frank opinion. It's been a long time since I read it, and unfortunately most of the photographs aren't there any more. I can't imagine making the kind of criticisms that Geoffrey Childs was leveling at Roger Rulewich on the basis of a rater visit or a single play enjoying the company of my host. His was a different level of criticism based on a different level of personal involvement and a deeper knowledge of the course. Loyalty and Intellectual honesty, both.

For what it's worth, the links that Mr. Childs provided no longer work because of changes at GCA. Here are links that work:


hole 1
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,6624.0.html

hole2
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,6867.0.html

Hole 4
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,6952.0.html

hole5
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7001.0.html

hole6
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7082.0.html

hole7
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7159.0.html

hole 17
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7977.0.html
"After all, we're not communists."
                             -Don Barzini

Tim_Cronin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #97 on: April 19, 2011, 01:24:11 AM »
John:

I may be wrong, but wasn't the critic of Yale a Yale man himself who was criticising his own course? That seems to be different from publically criticising your host's course.

Different, yes.  Worse, maybe.  I could write Yale a check today and become a member, I doubt that buys me the right to be rude.  My only point is that perhaps the ends does justify the means.

Recently my friend Anthony Pioppi had his blog pulled from Connecticut Golfer because of a post he made about Hunter GC where he is a member.  It made me question if this type of journalism does have a place.  I'm torn because I personally see no worth in it myself.  A link to Anthony's offending post.  Yes, he must be my friend as many hits as I am directing to his blog.

http://anthonypioppi.blogspot.com/2011/01/layout-where-i-am-mens-club-member.html
If Pioppi's post offended the boss of Connecticut Golfer, then I'm all for similarly offensive posts. It's a lively, reasoned argument for a better golf course, which is what any legitimate site or publication covering golf should be eager to have. I looked briefly at the CG website. It says last year's comments on golf courses have been wiped out. What, every golf course is completely different this year, and old comments no longer apply? What a lame concept.
The website: www.illinoisgolfer.net
On Twitter: @illinoisgolfer

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #98 on: April 19, 2011, 04:01:26 AM »
Scott

I try to make comments in tone that the host or whatever can understand as not a personal attack
For sure I get it wrong sometimes but in a very important way the discussion is nearly as important as the game. This conversation can help me in many ways which is why like a lively debate. It gets me thinking for few days

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Loyalty vs Intelectual Honesty
« Reply #99 on: April 19, 2011, 04:22:28 AM »
we are merely talking about a field of play not holy shrines


One man's holy shrine is another man's target practice. Just ask the sphinx.


Not trying to be overly flip, but some folks do take this stuff pretty seriously. Probably too seriously.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back