Trump International Golf Links

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brian,

If Mike Keiser had developed this course, the rave reviews from those who've never played it would be legion.

Several fellows whose opinions about golf courses I respect had nothing but praise for the course.
And, they're not known for giving such high praise.

I'm fairly content with Brad Klein's opinion on courses I haven't seen.
I respect his intellect, experience and architectural knowledge.
If he says it's good, I'd be inclined to want to play it.
If he said it was bad, I'd be inclined to avoid playing it.

The bashers of this golf course, especially the experts who have never played it, would villify Cindy Crawford for her mole, ignoring all of her other redeeming qualities.  Me, I'll take Cindy, mole and all.  Ditto Trump Scotland.

[Brian_Ewen]

Pat
Who gives a f*ck what you think anymore ?

Will you ever play the course, so you will then have your own opinion based on what you have seen ?

I guess not, so in the meantime you act like a retard and thread f*ck every attempt at a proper discussion on this course.

There is nobody killing ""frank commentary on golf course architecture"" more than you IMHO

GROW UP !

[Jon Wiggett]

Brian,

If Mike Keiser had developed this course, the rave reviews from those who've never played it would be legion.

Patrick,

if Mike Keiser had developed this site he would probably have done it in a totally different manner. The fact that Mark Parnisen looked at the site and rejected it says a lot though.

My views about this project are well known but now that it is here I hope that it is a success. I would imagine that in the next few years certain alterations might happen to improve upon the course as with most new builds

Jon

[Mark_F]

It's amusing people are being criticised for commenting on a course they have only witnessed through photographs.  This website was founded on pictorial course reviews of golf courses most people had probably never heard of, let alone seen. 

[Mark Pearce]

Mark,

People are being criticised for the way they comment, not what they comment on.  This site would be so much better if certain people were able to engage in discussion or debate without rancour.  The fact that some wrongly believe their unpleasantness is humorous is no excuse.

[Mark_F]

Mark,

I reckon it is a bit of both - people are being criticised in this thread for negatively commenting on a course they haven't played - much like they comment on many other photo threads of courses they haven't played.  I will be in the UK later this year - part of me wants to see the course out of curiosity.  But the other part of me can't stomach the thought of handing over money to a man who describes the local residents as living like pigs. 

Why such an uncouth creature inspires such slavish devotion is difficult to fathom.

 

[George Pazin]

I guess even the golf carts have been Trumped up.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat
Who gives a f*ck what you think anymore ?

Lot's of people

Will you ever play the course, so you will then have your own opinion based on what you have seen ?

I certainly hope so

I guess not, so in the meantime you act like a retard and thread f*ck every attempt at a proper discussion on this course.
That's an interesting perspective, you want "proper discussion on this course", but don't take offense to criticism of the course from people who have NEVER seen it.  Is that how you define "proper discussion" ?  "Discussion by totally uninformed individuals ?   In your feeble mind "Proper discussion" equals commentary from people who have never seen the course ?  That's one of the most asinine, uneducated responses I've seen on this site.  But coming from you it doesn't surprise me.

Does Anyone else Who's never seen the course want to evaluate it ?  ?  ?
What a joke


There is nobody killing ""frank commentary on golf course architecture"" more than you IMHO

To coin a phrase, I don't give a fuck about your opinions, humble or otherwise.[

But, go ahead and solicit opinions and evaluations from other morons such as yourself, morons who have NEVER SEEN THE COURSE.
then you can have what you consider, "proper discussion"/b]

GROW UP !

WHY ?  I'm having too much fun.

And don't forget, you can't cure "dumb", so go have your "proper discussions" with people who have never seen the golf course, people who formulate their critical evaluation and analysis of the course based upon who the developer is. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

It's amusing people are being criticised for commenting on a course they have only witnessed through photographs.

Mark,

Now, now, that's a little disingenuous of you.

Your not casually "commenting" on the golf course, you and others are attempting to bash it for reasons unrelated to it's architecture.

Try being honest for a change

 This website was founded on pictorial course reviews of golf courses most people had probably never heard of, let alone seen. 

No it wasn't.

Who told you that ?

Or is that just another uninformed personal opinion ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brian,

If Mike Keiser had developed this course, the rave reviews from those who've never played it would be legion.

Patrick,

if Mike Keiser had developed this site he would probably have done it in a totally different manner.

We'll never know, but I have my doubts that Mike Keiser would have been able to bring the project to fruition.

 The fact that Mark Parnisen looked at the site and rejected it says a lot though.

It might be an indication that they thought that they could never be successful in creating a golf course.
And in that case, more praise/credit should be given to Trump.

My views about this project are well known but now that it is here I hope that it is a success.

I don't see how anyone who claims to love golf wouldn't feel the same.

 I would imagine that in the next few years certain alterations might happen to improve upon the course as with most new builds
Donald Ross spent 26 years doing so at # 2, CBM about 30 years at NGLA, Ken Bakst and Roger Hansen continue to fine tune their great courses, so I can't imagine that this course wouldn't experience ongoing fine tuning to improve it.

Golf courses should be viewed as assets, with some requiring fine tuning in order to pursue the goal of becoming "precious" assets.

From what I've heard from people who played it a number of times, Trump Scotland is well on it's way to being in the latter category.

Jon

[Mark Pearce]

Pat Mucci,

You are an intelligent man.  You have strong and interesting opinions.  You are a smart analyst of arguments.

Why do you always ruin debate on this site by being an arsehole?

[Jon Wiggett]

Brian,

If Mike Keiser had developed this course, the rave reviews from those who've never played it would be legion.

Patrick,

if Mike Keiser had developed this site he would probably have done it in a totally different manner.

We'll never know, but I have my doubts that Mike Keiser would have been able to bring the project to fruition.

 The fact that Mark Parnisen looked at the site and rejected it says a lot though.

It might be an indication that they thought that they could never be successful in creating a golf course.
And in that case, more praise/credit should be given to Trump.

My views about this project are well known but now that it is here I hope that it is a success.

I don't see how anyone who claims to love golf wouldn't feel the same.

 I would imagine that in the next few years certain alterations might happen to improve upon the course as with most new builds
Donald Ross spent 26 years doing so at # 2, CBM about 30 years at NGLA, Ken Bakst and Roger Hansen continue to fine tune their great courses, so I can't imagine that this course wouldn't experience ongoing fine tuning to improve it.

Golf courses should be viewed as assets, with some requiring fine tuning in order to pursue the goal of becoming "precious" assets.

From what I've heard from people who played it a number of times, Trump Scotland is well on it's way to being in the latter category.

Jon

Patrick,

the reasons that Mark Parnisen did not construct here had nothing to do with his GCA ability but rather all the reasons that Donald Trump's opponents had. The difference between them is not their ability but rather style and personality.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat Mucci,

You are an intelligent man.  You have strong and interesting opinions.  You are a smart analyst of arguments.

Why do you always ruin debate on this site by being an arsehole?

Mark,

If I'm intelligent, have strong and interesting opinions and am a smart analyst, did it ever cross your mind that the debate that I'm "ruining" might not be an honest debate, not an intellectually honest debate ?

If you had told me that you played the course and found what you consider to be five flaws, I'd have to respect your opinion.

Had I played the course, we could debate those five flaws on the merits of our respective experiences and evaluations and we could debate how to best remedy those flaws.

But, to bash the course, it's architecture and construction, without ever having stepped foot on it, primarily because of who the developer is and what he's alleged to have said, is intellectually dishonest.

The "debate" has become contaminated by a bias against the developer, not the architect, and the debate has been compromised because one of the parties engaged in the debate has NEVER set foot on the property, NEVER played the golf course.

So, how can you have an intellectually honest debate when one of those attempting to debate has never seen the course, never played the course and has a built in predisposed bias/hate of the developer, a bias/hate that permeates every aspect of that person's participation in the debate.

I can only report on that which was stated to me by people who have played the course a good number of times, given the limited window of opportunity.  I cannot offer my own critical evaluation, thus i can't legitimately join the debate when it centers on architectural features and playability, that would be fraudulent on my part, but, I can join the debate to challenge the basis for opinions offered by others who have never seen and/or played the course.  Those opinions are fraudulent, especially when you understand the motives behind those opinions.

So, you should be asking yourself, who really wants to engage in intellectually honest, interesting debate and who's the arsehole ?

Hope that helps

[Michael Whitaker]

I'm planning to play the course on Thursday. I have no bias (plus or minus) toward Trump, don't care who owns the course, and could give a rat's ass about the politics that colored it's construction. I just want to see the course and compare it to the others I have played in the UK. I'll gladly post my honest opinions and some pictures when I can.

Pat - you have appeared to blindly champion Trump ever since you reported the positive experience you had with him befriending your son. I'm not saying that is good or bad, but you do appear to cheerlead for him at all cost. It comes across a bit too much as a "man crush."

Mark Ferguson - I found you to be a very pleasant and cheerful person when we met in Australia... much more fun, thoughtful and reserved than you often appear on this site. I must say, however, that your loathing of all things American has worn thin. I have no idea why you have a major chip on your shoulder about the USA and American personalities, but something has obviously turned you bitter. Let it go and move on... you're a better person than that.

[Mark_F]

Mark,

Now, now, that's a little disingenuous of you.  You're not casually "commenting" on the golf course, you and others are attempting to bash it for reasons unrelated to it's architecture.

That isn't true Patrick.  I commented that the course looked to have a couple of interesting holes along with artificial earthmoving, a minefield of bunkers and exaggerated green contours.  It was you who jumped down my throat for having that opinion, even though those elements are easy to discern from images. I would have said the same thing even if Matthew Mollica developed it.

Those images are enough to determine that I really have no interest in playing it - apart from a once only curiosity factor.  But you are right in one other aspect - Trump's stomach-churning personality makes me loathe to hand over any money to the man.  That, and the fact that Martin Hawtree's work in Australia has been beyond crap.

Try being honest for a change.

Much like you, I am never anything but. 

No it wasn't.

Who told you that ? Or is that just another uninformed personal opinion ?

Straight from the horse's mouth:
 
"The credit for this web site belongs to Chris Sutton and David Baxter, who quit their jobs to launch Sitesuite in Australia in 1998  I knew them through work and they approached me about sticking anything into their web hosting software in order to help them show corporations how well it worked.

My brother John and I had written a couple dozen course profiles at that point, mailing them to friends at Christmas. We had always taken photographs of courses, so I said, ‘What about a site on golf architecture? We have about sixty pages of text and dozens of photos – would that work?’

My brother John was familiar with a discussion group called Bravenet in the United States. He asked me to ask Chris and Dave if they could add a Discussion Group feature."

Michael - I am sorry you appear to believe I loathe all things American.  I loathe Paris Hilton, but I assume that is a universal reaction.  I am merely winding Patrick up because he constantly accuses me of being anti-American merely because I have the temerity to question his grasp of history and economics.  Hopefully I will meet Lou Duran one day - that should prove I am anything but anti-American. 

[Brian_Ewen]

There is nobody killing ""frank commentary on golf course architecture"" more than you IMHO

To coin a phrase, I don't give a fuck about your opinions (or Rans) , humble or otherwise.[

Nuff Said !

[Mark Chaplin]

It amazes me people get into debate with someone who can behave in such an ungentlemanly manner. Such behaviour/language in open forum linking me to my club would soon draw a letter from the club chairman. Agree or disagree but there is no place for "playground" insults in an adult environment.

[Patrick_Mucci]

There is nobody killing ""frank commentary on golf course architecture"" more than you IMHO

To coin a phrase, I don't give a fuck about your opinions (or Rans) , humble or otherwise.[

Nuff Said !

Brian,

You've done better.

You've proven your lack of integrity and lack of honesty by deliberately editing my quote in reply # 202 and trying to pass it off as my written word.

It doesn't get sleazier than that.

Glad you showed your true colors and lack of character for everyone to see.

You did a far better job at revealing your sleazy nature than I could ever hope to do.

Thanks

[Patrick_Mucci]

It amazes me people get into debate with someone who can behave in such an ungentlemanly manner. Such behaviour/language in open forum linking me to my club would soon draw a letter from the club chairman. Agree or disagree but there is no place for "playground" insults in an adult environment.

Mark Chaplin,

I was merely quoting Brian Ewen.

[Jason Thurman]

We all have to use whatever information we can get to choose what courses we will and won't play. I don't have the time or budget to play every course in the world, and so I'm thankful for photos and firsthand accounts to help me decide what courses to prioritize.

I'm sure that I miss some very good courses because they don't look great in photos. I've never found Lawsonia particularly photogenic, but I'm sure glad I've played it and I think it plays wonderfully in ways that I could never have discerned from a still shot.

I'm sure that I've missed some very good courses because I got a firsthand account from someone who didn't accurately reflect what I would have thought. I know I've played some awful courses after getting endorsements from people who had been there firsthand.

It's fine and even necessary to guess how a course might play from photos, or to decide after looking at some photos that you won't prioritize a course for yourself. But Pat's right about one thing: if you make a value judgment about a course's architecture simply from looking at photos, your opinion is uninformed and counts for very little. It counts for even less when you're holding a bias against the land developer.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark Ferguson,

Read it again, your's is a convenient, not necessarily an accurate interpretation.

[Niall C]

I played Donald's pitch and putt recently and very much enjoyed the seeing the course even if the condition of it was poor. Hopefully someone like Ally who is familar with its construction can chip in here but it would appear to me that they seeded the greens and approaches and turfed the rest of the fairways. It would appear also (backed up by comments from the caddies) that they have returfed a fair bit of fairways and liberally sanded the remainder such that playing a typical links shot is near impossible. I suspect that it will be a number of years before this course approaches its true potential but its still possible meantime to get a feel for what it will be like.

Condition aside, it should be a (very ?) good course in 5 to 10 years time with some very good holes. That said there are a couple of clunkers, namely the 10th and the 18th. The 10th is the hole that zigzags round a salt marsh and betweeen huge dunes with a split fairway for the tee shot, the right handside part of which is largely redundant. In terms of shot values its two straight shots to the gap between the dunes followed by an approach to a push up tiered green surrounded by more huge dunes. A clear example of more (as in the case of the dunes) not necessarily meaning more if you know what I mean.

The 18th is even more odd as it has 18 bunkers just because its the 18th hole. Enough to make Sean Arble pull his hair out  Its a straight away hole with the bunkers scattered seemily haphazardly with no discernable strategy evident. I reckon you could make it twice the hole by simply filling in a dozen of those bunkers.

Anyone else who's played feel the same ?

Niall

[Adam Lawrence]

Niall - other way round: turfed greens and approaches, seeded fairways. Fairways need to mature, but they have stored up pretty long term troubles by overseeing in on or two places (eg ninth fairway) with perennial ryegrass, presumably because they were desperate for coverage before opening day.

I agree the tenth doesn't work - I can see no reason why anyone would ever play for the right fairway, and the bottleneck on the left fairway basically forces you not to hit driver off the tee, odd for a par five.

I don't mind the last, except that tee is much too elevated. You have a 650 yard hole with 18 bunkers, and yet it looks small and insignificant from the tee, because you're so far up.

Lots of good holes though - first green excellent, second hole super, etc. Will be really good when it matures

[Patrick_Mucci]

Niall,

Do you think he opened it prematurely in order to catch the end of this year's summer season ?

Co-incidently, I ran into Donald at a wedding we attended last Saturday night.
We were seated next to each other during the ceremony.
After the ceremony and during the reception we discussed the course, and the permitting processes that he had to go through or get around in order to bring the course to fruition.

I sensed a strong committment on his part to do whatever it takes to improve and elevate the course to it's fullest potential.
Whether that takes a few months or a few years didn't seem to matter.
He's committed to improving that course.

I believe that there's a good chance that it will be awarded the Scottish Open and a future Ryder Cup.

As beautiful as Melania looks in photos, she's far more stunning in person.
The terms "Breath taking" and "Riveting" come to mind.
She's both elegant and gorgeous and I would prefer talking to and about her.

I told Donald that I thought alot of the criticism of the course would never have reared it's head had his name been Mike Keiser.
I believe that he agreed.

 

[Stephen Davis]

Patrick,

Thanks for sharing this anecdote. That had to have been pretty neat to get to talk to him about this course. It looks like it has a ton of potential and I hope it reaches that potential and beyond. I do agree that Trump is a polarizing character. It is unlikely and unfortunate that much of the stuff he does cannot be judged on its merits alone.