The BIAS against multiple tees

[Mike Vegis @ Kiawah]

The Ocean Course has five sets of tees.  We have the back tees.  They are never meant to be played the entire round as the course plays 7,937 yards from them.  They are there to give options during tournament play.  Our Gold tees are 7,296 yards and are for the absolute best golfers with good length off the tees.  The Blues at 6,552 yards are for the better than average golfers with some substantial carries off the tee.  The Whites at 6,031 yards are for the typical resort male players and better women players with limited carries off the tees.  The Red tees have no long carries off the tees and play to 5,372 yards.  Carries off the tee tournament set-ups are the reason we have multiple tees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

Where did I say that you unabashedly heaped praise on Bandon Dunes ?  Could you cite the quote for me ?

There was more than one thread on the subject.

Are you denying that posters made blanket, negative statements regarding multiple sets of tees on a golf course ?

The point of the thread was that people shouldn't be so quick to universally condemn a feature and expand their disapproval of that feature to the entire golf course and the architecture.

I thought Bandon Dunes was a perfect example,
a perfect example of a golf course that provides five (5) sets of tees very successfully.

Sherri Kuhn,

Once words pass from your lips they can't be retracted.
You can edit your post to cover up your initial remark and your character as much as you want, it doesn't erase the words you wrote.

[CJ72]

Agreed,
There are definitely good designs with both single tees and multiple tees.  It all depends on the land and the purpose of the golf course.
In a perfect pure world were every golfer is fairly proficient at the game one single tee box may be ideal.  The modern game does not seem to allow courses to be built with only one tee box.
Personally I do feel as though an architect should not determine what kind of tee boxes or how many until they see the piece of property.
What about the runnaway tee?  That is only one tee box, but it gives you a wide variety of options as far as distance.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob Huntley,

You have to understand, that it's easier for them to attack me then to attack the falacious assertion that multiple tees are bad.

Golf has become popular to a broad band of golfers, from:
Juniors learning the game to
Seniors losing their game to
Scratch or plus handicaps to
one to thirteen handicaps to
fourteen to twenty four handicaps to
twenty five to 36 or more handicaps to
the same range of women golfers and their handicaps

I don't believe that one size fits all.

I believe that each hole and each course must be looked at individually, and not merely comingled with every other hole and every other golf course to form a single standard.

Have you noticed that this site doesn't handle scrutiny or questions regarding certain Icons or Deities very well ?

CJ72,

I was referencing tee markers rather than seperate physical tees, although, that too, is dependent upon each hole and each golf course.

[sheri kuhn]

I don't take back my words...I meant what I said...I was sorry I offended this lovely group, not you.  

[HamiltonBHearst]

Mr. Mucci is a gentleman.  It would be nice if you would apologize Sheri.  Were it not for his posts this website would be led by the Rees bashers who are incapable of seeing their own biases.  

[sheri kuhn]

Sorry Mr.Hearst....and to all on this site who I offended. They say a person's internet personality can be much different than their true personality. I'm sure you are correct that Mr. Mucci is a gentleman....do you know him personally? On the internet frankly he comes across as an A....Hole, to be honest a gigantic A...hole. I pray the members of this site are not anti-Rees....I haven't observed it as yet....I love Talamore, Haig Point and Ocean Forest. I might add Rees is very thoughtful when considering the forward tee (ladies)....all three courses are lovely examples of multi tee golf.  

[DMoriarty]

Are you denying that posters made blanket, negative statements regarding multiple sets of tees on a golf course ?"

Patrick.  I don't presume to speak for "posters." However, I do note that you are presumptuous enough to speak against them without naming them and without making any attempt to accurately portray their actual positions on the issue.  Talk about  "blanket, negative statements."

Just who are these "posters" and what was is it that they said, exactly?

The point of the thread was that people shouldn't be so quick to universally condemn a feature and expand their disapproval of that feature to the entire golf course and the architecture."

Patrick, I understand the point you wish to make; it is the always the same point with you.  The problem is that this time you presume that the facts back up your point yet you refuse to support your presumptions by identifying any such facts.  

Again, who are these "posters," and what did they say regarding multiple tees, and what did they say regarding Bandon?  

Can we not have a discussion regarding of the pros and cons of multiple tees without being called BIASed?  

Bob Huntley,

You have to understand, that it's easier for them to attack me then to attack the falacious assertion that multiple tees are bad
. . .
Have you noticed that this site doesn't handle scrutiny or questions regarding certain Icons or Deities very well ?

Please tell me who made the falacious assertion that  multiple tees are bad?  Did they offer any reasoning for their assertion?  Did they say that this was a guidepost for their view of golf architecture?  I'd be interested in speaking to this person, as I have found very few on this board who think less of multiple tee boxes than me.  

And who or what are these certain Icons or Dieties that you are scrutinizing and questioning?   Please do explain so we can get some clue as to what you are talking about.  Otherwise, I for one am at a loss.  

[HamiltonBHearst]

Surely you don't expect Mr. Mucci to go back threw 5400 topics to find the posts do you.  it is well documented(thank you pat) that there is a bias on this site by some that favor the MFA who can do no wrong.  Other architects are left to fend off the arrows from the biased masses.  Geez, when C&C add tees it is genius because of the added flexibility.  When others do it, it is laziness and not a mark of a good course.

[Michael Dugger]

Sheri Kuhn,

Welcome to GCA.com!  Nevermind the rude Mr. Mucci, he can't help himself.  Oh, and yes, he does always act like that.

HBHearst,

Dude, you still haven't offered up an original thought in what now, like five months?  What's up, are you lobbying for a caddy scholarship at Mucci's club?  

Why do you guys care so much about bias anyways?  Are you the honorary bias police, ensuring justice and fairplay at GCA.com?

Way to educate us, Patrick Mucci, once again.  I've relearned the one thing you've always taught, that you are right and we are wrong. WRONG WRONG WRONG

[HamiltonBHearst]

Hey mdugger, I am here to learn what i can about architecture.  The most insightful on this sight is Mr. Mucci, so I pay close attention to his posts.  i also know he has no agenda like many others.  Geez were it not for him i would have believed those Oregon pictures you tried to pass off as surrounding Sandpines.  

[Forrest Richardson]

Tom,

For the 114th time you have made perfect sense. Bravo! to you.

[CJ72]

Why is everyone taking sides.  Should not everyone just be defending there own opinion.  
It is easy to agree on one topic and disagree on another.  Every single person on this websight thinks that they are right . . . and they all are because it is pure opinion.  

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Patrick,

I don't "oppose" mutiple sets of tees.  Rather, I believe that it is possible to design a golf hole (and course) that would be fun, interesting and challenging for all levels of golfers, from the same tee.  

Like I said in my first post.  "A properly designed course doesn't need more than one set of tee marker".

I didn't say "shouldn't have" more than one set of tee marker.

As far as Bandon Dunes is concerned, I've never played is, so according to your theory, I can't comment on it.

But thankfully, I don't subscribe to that theory, so I'll comment that it sure looks like a great course.  Multiple tees don't add or take away from that greatness.  Or more precisely, they don't add or take away from what I like about it.

Forrest,

I'm sure they moved the holes around at TOC, and I'm sure they must have more the "starting point" as well.

But I don't think they had five sets of "starting points"...

As far as the "perfect" design of TOC, I have no idea what you're talking about.  No one ever said anything about "perfect" or "ideal", now, 100 years ago, or 175 years from now.

I look at a hole like the 14th at TOC.  It's a hole that strikes me as interesting to play no matter your ability.  Everyone basically plays from the Medal tee anyway right?   The Championship tees are closed, and the ladies tees are... well, ladies don't play.  

That's all I'm trying to say.  TOC doesn't need multiple tee sets.

[Forrest Richardson]

Actually, TOC would be very fun to play from various points and angles. I'm not suggesting that tees be added, but I can envision some of the great scholars who shaped the layout as feeling this might be a truly interesting and maddening addition. Especially in a world when the course sees 60,000 players.

I was hoping you might comment more on your opinion that a course well designed would/does need multiple tees. I find this a fascinating position, but not one I agree with. Golf is about change and varying conditions and angles — exponential opportunities. Your "one tee" theory goes against a mathematical variable which is essential: Varying points at which players will have to get used to different angles, distances, carries and hazards. Multiple is not all about length and ability, although these aspects are increasingly important. By the way, my wife says that women do, in fact, play TOC.

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

I chose not to name individuals in order to avoid any posts that I made being deemed a personal attack on the person referenced.

If you recall some of the threads about multiple tees/tee markers there was a good deal of blanket criticism with respect to their use, and an implication of inferiority with respect to the golf courses that used them.

I was wondering how individuals who supported that position overlooked referencing Bandon Dunes, a spectacular golf course that uses five (5) sets of tees ?

But, I will go through last 50 or so pages and bring up the specifics, so that you'll be satisfied when it turns into a personal argument rather than a non-personal debate on the issue of multiple tee markers and Bandon Dunes.

Jeremy Glenn,

You are aware that TOC has multiple sets of tees, aren't you ?

[T_MacWood]

Why do so many GCAers defend Course X? The course is is not only a poor design, but it is dangerous and a blight on the landscape and designed by Satan's seed. There are a large number of GCAers whose taste is so bad that I am embarrased to be asscociated with this site. You know who you are and you know this Course X. Most of you are obviously godless racists, cheats, ditchers and wife beaters. *

* I chose not to name individuals in order to avoid any posts that I made being deemed a personal attack on the person referenced.

[Steve Wilson]

For a second or so there, MacWood, I thought you'd sniffed out all my dirty little secrets and then I realized I'm not married, so once again I've escaped detection and will live to post another day.  It's at times like this that I wish there was an emoticon for a sinister laugh.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Isn't this just another course that you've never seen or played

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sheri Kuhn,

You're just another coward.

Why don't you tell the site that you posted under a false name and false email address ?   No BALLS  ?  

MDugger,

I can see why you and Sheri (aka ?) would gravitate to each other.

You post fraudulent pictures and she posts a fraudulent name and email address.  It's a match made in heaven.  Enjoy each other's company.

[DMoriarty]

Patrick,

We are all here to engage in an open and frank discussion.  I am sure if anyone has unfairly and unjustly maligned multiple tees they would expect to be called out by name.  In fact, I am sure they would like the opportunity to address their accuser.  You are doing us all a disservice by hiding your accusation behind vague and meaningless terms such as "posters" and "some people."  It is as if you have decided to conduct a trial but have failed to give the defendant notice of the procedings.  How can we be expected to respond to your inquisition if you dont even identify the target of your inquiry.  Just because you refrained from naming names doesnt mean it isnt personal.  

And, no, I dont recall "a great deal of blanket criticism" with respect to the use of multiple tees or an implication or explication of inferiority of courses using multiple tees-- Unless of course you were referring to my comments on the thread I started.   If you are referring to me, I invite you to reread all of my comments and then tell me if your initial accusation really holds true.

Going back through the last 50 pages should be no problem.  Go to advanced search an put in "multiple tees" and search for phrase.  I did it and it didnt take long at all.  

I was wondering how individuals who supported that position overlooked referencing Bandon Dunes, a spectacular golf course that uses five (5) sets of tees ?

 
Patrick, I get the feeling that you dont get out much.  Multiple hundreds of modern courses have been built with multiple tees.  Some of these courses are very good and rated highly, some are terrible, some are in the middle.  Isn't it a little unreasonable to expect those of us who have anything to say about multiple tees to "reference" the one course you happened to play and like with multiple tees?  

I'll tell you what. . . I will comment on the multiple tees at Bandon and explain what I like and dont like about them if you go out and play 75 modern courses with multiple tees and then report back to us on whether they have been a positive or negative development in golf architecture.  After all, by your understanding of "BIAS," I have to assume BIAS because you have stated your pro-multiple tee opinion without referencing at least one of the disasters out there with multiple tees.  

Or . . . if you really want to have a discussion about the multiple tees at Bandon, I suggest you start a new thread.  After all, you have already stated that the point of this thread wasnt to discuss Bandon but to continue your Mccarthyan BIAS inquisition:  

"The point of the thread was that people shouldn't be so quick to universally condemn a feature and expand their disapproval of that feature to the entire golf course and the architecture."  

A few suggestions for a new thread:  Avoid directing accusations at unnamed bogeymen; avoid directing accusations at anyone else;  avoid accusing people of BIAS just because they [supposedly] failed to address the one of thousands of courses that you want to talk about.  Wouldnt it be more productive to simply explain why you think the multiple tees make Bandon a better course, and ask for comments, opinions, etc?  

[TEPaul]

Pat:

You asked me on another thread to post on this one. Do you mind if I don't read this one and just call you up and get you to brief me?

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

You are free to start threads in any manner or form you choose.  And you are free to put forth your opinion in any manner or form you chose.

If you want to be in denial with respect to a site perspective, that's okay with me.  I don't think it's critical to name a specific individual versus a general point of view supported by some on this site.  Some would have us believe that certain archhitectural principles or features are universals.  
By referencing Bandon Dunes, a golf course acknowledged as wonderful by many on this site, as a golf course with five (5) sets of tees, places into conflict, the idea that a golf course can't be architecturally worthy if it has multiple sets of tees, a position advocated by some.

Again, if you want to deny that some postured along those lines, it's okay with me, but, my reading comprehension skills remain fairly sound.

You may recall that many condemned containment mounding, universally, but containment mounding can serve a valueable and practical purpose.  Should I not have provided examples where containment mounding made sense because it offended you that I didn't reference the names of those individuals who were blanketly critical of containment mounding ?

When Tom MacWood stated that Rees Jones left his distinctive marks on Baltusrol, a course that he has never seen or played, should I not have questioned him about exactly what were those distinctive marks and where do they appear on the golf course ?

He stated that Rees Jones worked on some elements of the golf course, like the 9th, 10th and 14th green, but when asked what distinctive marks Rees left on those greens, he has failed to provide an answer.

If you were consistent in your position, I would think that you would have admonished Tom to put forth the specific facts, allowing him to support his position and not get away with vague, unsupported references.

So, is your objection really issue related or driven by personality ?

Lastly, are you familiar with Wrestling on TV  ?
And, haven't you figured it out yet ?

TEPaul,

I'm confused, on what other thread did I ask you to post on this thread ?

[Bob_Huntley]

Perhaps it is bcause of my advancing years and a certain dodderiness, but I don't understand why Patrick Mucci's threads produce such animus.

He raises certain points with cogency and interest and there seems to be a feeding frenzy to chew him apart. Would someone tell me what I am missing. I hear the term A**hole from a new contributor yet I find no reason from which to denigrate an intelligent contributor.


Someone, please tell me what I have missed.

[ForkaB]

Bob

I think that Pat raises more points of legitimate architectural interest than any other 5 contributors on this website combined.  He is indefatigable in trying to get people to stick to the issues at hand which can be very uncomfortable to many contributors who prefer to score points rather than rationally discuss the points at hand.  He demands standards of accuracy and honesty which are perhaps not feasible for (or attractive in) a free-wheeling medium such as this.  He deserves much better than the mindless opprobrium which is often laid upon him, usually by those who have little of substance to contribute to our conversations.