Sorry for the redaction of some of your comments for the sake of simplicity.
You are right about the courses that draw universal praise here. Such is not the case about architects who are not held in such high regard here (reference the Hills thread and the comment about Fazio's dogs). Perhaps I am overly sensitive about this type of criticism having played well over 500 courses, a good majority which are probably not candidates in anyone of the more credible lists. I am trying to think of the worst Fazio I've played, maybe Bluewater Bay or Osprey Point, and if I was relegated to play most of my golf at either one of the two, I'd be barking with little remorse each time. The common complaint here is that Fazio courses have the same characteristics and resemble each other. It is curious that C & C and Doak courses aren't subjected to the same criticism though the architects do follow their own styles and preferences consistently. Of course, this tendency is not unique to golf as the current political situation so clearly demonstrates.
There is group-think here in spades. One of the favored architects once told me that giving certain VIPs on the site "the time of day" played no small part. Fazio, Nicklaus, the Jones brothers, and Weiskopf apparently don't feel the need to be as ingratiating. I am guilty of liking golf courses because I like to play golf, but insincere praise is not a good thing.
Your comment about conditioning is a bit elitist, don't you think? Here I thought that we were all Paulians today (maintenance meld, golf is a big world).
Lastly, the role of the critic is an interesting one. By nature he has to be somewhat of an idealist, and, therefore, a malcontent. Having seen how much of the world works and experienced a bit of tragedy in my own life, I scratch my head when I read some of the stuff we bitch about. I have a 3:14 tee time today on a course that would rate somewhat below Fazio's biggest dog. Can't wait.
No problem with redaction, you can redact me anytime...
My point re: Fazio and Jones vs. Doak and C&C was not to compare courses, but rather the attitudes that posters seem to show on here. Jeff specifically said we take things differently with Doak et al, and I am calling BS on that, mostly because no one ever just says, I loved Pac Dunes or wherever - they always cites reasons and things they loved, almost to the point of going overboard. And if called out by someone, they usually respond with actual logic, not just cries of bias and lack of experience (the Matt Ward defense
).
I've actually played Osprey Point, can't remember much of it. I remember Black Mesa hole by hole, and I am one of the few on the site that didn't even love it. I don't remember much of the other Fazios I've played (I think 3 others?), but I did think the one out in Cali near Vegas was the most playable desert course I've played, and that means a lot to me. I've also praised Mirasol, where they briefly held one of the Florida stops - I'd rather play there than many other options, just going by the televised images. Since I don't think I'm much different than most on here, I don't think it's bias that results in different feelings, more just actual experiences on actual golf courses.
There may be groupthink here, but it may also just be that Pac Dunes and Sand Hills are better than Shadow Creek and the Atlantic Club, at least as regarded by architecture buffs. My point re: this site is that, even if there is groupthink here, there is less here than any other internet discussion board I've come across. There's always people on both sides of damn near every issue, and they aren't shy about voicing those opinions. That's the opposite of "spiral of silence", imho.
My point re: conditioning was certainly not elitist, merely an observation born of experience. And I'm quite certain I'm not alone in that regard. Ask most people about a course, and that's the first thing mentioned, and often the last - the conditions, particularly of the greens. You rarely hear anyone praise bunker placement, strategic holes or even the naturalness of a course. That doesn't mean one side is right and the other wrong, merely that different people have different values. If that's what gets someone fired up, fine by me, doesn't bother me at all - that is the Big Wide World of Golf theory in practice, not just in type.
My point re: critics is just that I'm sick of every nickel and dime philosopher having an explanation for why "we" do things.
Life is rarely so simple that it can be condensed into something some nimrod can waste 10 years "researching" and then write for a worthless doctoral degree in some worthless social science...
Now THAT was elitist, at least in some anti-elitist sense of the term.
-----
"Conservative victimhood" - now that made me laugh. Thanks, JC.