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.


Will Lozier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #50 on: February 25, 2015, 04:02:35 PM »
You could always give it a 1: A very basic golf course with clear architectral malpractice and/or poor maintenance. Avoid playing even if you are desperate for a game.

or a 2: A mediocre golf course with little or no architectural interest, but nothing really horrible. A friend summed one up "play it in a scramble, and drink a lot of beer."


I have played the Castle Course...and will never play it again.  While not a a "0" in my book, I would not go above 2 for sure.

To the OP's item, there is a course here in Atlanta that guys rave about.  I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what they see.  It is very well maintained, costs a lot to join, in an "exclusive neighborhood", etc. etc.  However, I think I would rather do anything else than play that course again.  Funny thing, I respect the designer but have no idea what he could have been thinking on multiple holes.

Carson,

Spit it out man.

As an ATL guy, I'd ask you to be frank in your claims.


Gib_Papazian

Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #51 on: February 25, 2015, 04:57:16 PM »
Gentlemen,

Truly awful golf courses, like movies, present themselves in many different shades - between aggravatingly bad and so fucking putrid you actually enjoy them in a twisted sort of way.  Plan Nine From Outer Space spent little money and the result was something incredibly bad, but amusing in its glorious badosity. On the Doak grid, I think we need a series of letters to attach next to numbers.

On the other hand, Tommy Wiseau spent six million of his own fortune (from mysterious sources) to make The Room - considered to be the “Citizen Kane of Bad Movies.” Can we give it a true, no bullshit “Doak Zero?” Of course not, because - like Plan Nine From Outer Space - it occupies its own category of horribleness. The Ranch GC is similar - something so completely beyond the valley of ham-handed incompetence it manages to somehow leap from the bottom of a two-dimensional chart to a mysterious point that requires a three dimensional formula to find on the grid.

Tom gave the original Stone Harbor an unqualified Zero, but I vehemently disagree, Des Muirhead created a bizarre curiosity - but an absolute must-see. Therefore, whatever your opinion, something so far afield of the mainstream that it cannot be missed MUST have some merit - even as a cautionary tale. I was fortunate to be amongst the only audiences to see the original 4-hour cut of Heaven’s Gate. The critics destroyed it - it brought down United Artists and Cimino is still a Hollywood pariah to this day. You know what? It is worth seeing once - and has withstood the test of time. Whatever your opinion, it has not been forgotten.

And like Stone Harbor, once a series of revisions were forced on Heaven’s Gate (even a name change), the result is a chopped up, watered down piece of shit. In both cases, something unique that defied conventional analysis was eventually turned into unqualified Doak Zeros. By contrast, Steven Sommers obviously intended Van Helsing to be a noisy, overblown, steaming pile of exploitive excrement - a Doak Zero that spent 36 million dollars (72X what our feature film cost) to create a senseless mess, specifically aimed only at low-vibratory imbeciles.  

There is so bad, its fun (Rocky Horror) - and so bad, you leave the theater aggravated and with a pounding head. I’ll put Atlantic CC in that category - if we had not been playing with a member, we would have gotten in the car and left after that silly par-5 that ends with a trek across the driveway to the next tee. I wasted an hour of my life on Van Helsing and the Redhead and I walked out in disgust.  

I’ve not thought through how we might assemble a table of clarifying footnotes, but there are so many micro-levels at the bottom of the chart, we might start with dividing up the “Zero” ratings. Any suggestions?
                      

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #52 on: February 25, 2015, 05:03:50 PM »
Gib,

You have such a high ability with our native tongue that I have to wonder why you feel compelled to use expletives.

I have a barely comprehensible ability with the language, but I find a way to avoid them.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tom Yost

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #53 on: February 25, 2015, 05:09:37 PM »
Gib,

You have such a high ability with our native tongue that I have to wonder why you feel compelled to use expletives.

I have a barely comprehensible ability with the language, but I find a way to avoid them.


The end result is still barely comprehensible.

Josh Tarble

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #54 on: February 25, 2015, 05:13:38 PM »
Gib,
Fantastic post as usual.  Let me start with 3 suggestions on potential 0s:

Design 0 - strictly based on design decisions
Land 0 - a course on land so ridiculous it probably shouldn't have been built
Bizarro 0 - a course so bad that it must be seen to be believed


One thing has left me puzzled in the thread...for those saying such and such course is 1 or 2, not a 0.  What is it that is making you say a course is a 1 or 2?  

To me, a 0 is an experience so bad it defies normal ratings.  There are things that are over the top bad...it's trying hard to be something it's not.  To me a 0 is probably a 5 or 6 to those who value such things.  A 1 is simply a bad course, a local muni.  Something that is not trying to put on a front.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #55 on: February 25, 2015, 06:02:45 PM »
Gib,

You have such a high ability with our native tongue that I have to wonder why you feel compelled to use expletives.

I have a barely comprehensible ability with the language, but I find a way to avoid them.


The end result is still barely comprehensible.

What I'm saying is that he should not be so appallingly lazy and write that excrement. He should elevate the tenor of his prose.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tom Yost

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #56 on: February 25, 2015, 06:19:01 PM »
Gib,

You have such a high ability with our native tongue that I have to wonder why you feel compelled to use expletives.

I have a barely comprehensible ability with the language, but I find a way to avoid them.


The end result is still barely comprehensible.

What I'm saying is that he should not be so appallingly lazy and write that excrement. He should elevate the tenor of his prose.


You forgot to use the smiley face.

David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #57 on: February 25, 2015, 06:36:15 PM »
You mean Quintero is gilding the lily when they write on their website, "Rees Jones has taken a pristine piece of lush Arizona desert and created Quintero Golf Club, often described as the “Purest Golf Experience” in the Southwest."
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

Gib_Papazian

Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #58 on: February 25, 2015, 06:50:23 PM »
Garland,

Terribly sorry to have expelled my mephitic potty mouth in your sewing circle. I thought all the ladies had excused themselves to the powder their noses and it was just us boys here in the Treehouse. Mea culpa.

However, in order to avoid offending your delicate sensibilities, I suggest you refrain from playing in my foursome or by chance sit at my table in the grillroom. I've been known to let fly the occasional streak of cobalt blue oaths when laying the sod over a 40 yard wedge - and can conjugate the street euphemism for intercourse in unimaginable ways.  

I was not aware that middle-aged altar boys were susceptible to the vapors, so please accept my heartfelt apologies.

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #59 on: February 25, 2015, 06:58:51 PM »

I was going to guess Rees Jones as the designer of the Doak 0 and that was before I knew the name of the course.

Rees can't say no to a course that should not be built.

Rees sometimes get some of the course right.

I wonder how many of Rees' courses would be a Doak 0?  I have one, Hells Point in Virginia Beach, as it was built in a swamp with crowned fairways, and duplicate, template holes.
Scott, I do wonder how many here or Ran or Tom would bother to drive to Va Beach and drive still further to get Hell's Point.  Yes it is bad.  Haven't played there in at least 15 years.  The flower patch in front of the 8th green is hopeless, I wonder if it is still there?

Is the Doak 0 really all that mysterious when you look at the examples?
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #60 on: February 25, 2015, 07:16:28 PM »
Scott, I do wonder how many here or Ran or Tom would bother to drive to Va Beach and drive still further to get Hell's Point.  Yes it is bad.  Haven't played there in at least 15 years.  The flower patch in front of the 8th green is hopeless, I wonder if it is still there?

Is the Doak 0 really all that mysterious when you look at the examples?

I believe I rated Hell's Point in the last book ... I saw it when we were working on Riverfront, but maybe that was just after the last edition was written.  I didn't give it a 0, anyway.

From Gib's post, I wonder if he is just attracted to seeing the train wrecks that make me want to give a course a 0.  Stone Harbor is a great example ... it was in some ways a highlight to see, for how bad it was.  But what other number could you possibly assign to that?

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #61 on: February 25, 2015, 07:33:28 PM »
Garland,

Terribly sorry to have expelled my mephitic potty mouth in your sewing circle. I thought all the ladies had excused themselves to the powder their noses and it was just us boys here in the Treehouse. Mea culpa.

However, in order to avoid offending your delicate sensibilities, I suggest you refrain from playing in my foursome or by chance sit at my table in the grillroom. I've been known to let fly the occasional streak of cobalt blue oaths when laying the sod over a 40 yard wedge - and can conjugate the street euphemism for intercourse in unimaginable ways.  

I was not aware that middle-aged altar boys were susceptible to the vapors, so please accept my heartfelt apologies.

Gib,

It's not about me. Ran has repeatedly pointed out that this is a public forum, and that we should restrain ourselves from short cuts to expressing strong feelings such as you have used.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Peter Pallotta

Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #62 on: February 25, 2015, 07:35:37 PM »
As creators of their own scales, Tom and Sean A have given themselves permission to be arbritary and/or quixotic. So, for example, there is an almost insurmountable gap between an Arble *1 and an Arble *2, so much so that they almost seem to reflect two *different* scales. (My poor old Notts is forever destined to be rated the former.) Similarly, a Doak 0 is easy enough to understand, as it is reserved for/reflects courses that should never have been built; but, since such courses are or can be so different than (and in some ways *better* than) a Doak 1, the ratings seem to come from two entirely different scales. In truth, I think the 0s are actually from Tom's lesser known but more deeply felt "This really offends and pisses me off" scale.

Peter
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 08:25:03 PM by PPallotta »

Gib_Papazian

Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #63 on: February 25, 2015, 09:12:07 PM »
Tom,

Your post reminds me of my old friend Sonny Casca, who once opined in his southern twang (not drawl, twang): "Son, if you're lookin' for an argument, you gonna have to change the subject."

That, my friend, is EXACTLY why I specifically sought out that golf course - because a longtime friend whose opinion I respect (uh, you) thought it was a strategic and ocular offense. In point of fact, I went to great lengths and went far out of my way to actually play it - but oddly, the entrails of what had been left pissed me off far beyond what was there originally. But what I could see was Dadaism of the highest order. Just so you know, they still teach it in film school.

I got a snarky email comparing Stone Harbor to Clockwork Orange - from an asshole (oh, sorry to offend Garland) who thought it amusing to provoke me by pissing on Stanley -as if there was some sort of equivalency between a gigantic swing and miss (Stone Harbor) and one of the primary reasons I studied film production.

"Zero" deserves a category in and of itself. I tried to articulate that concept using movies as an example, but it clearly did not stick. Again, some gigantic swings that miss by a mile - but still sought to reach a new epoch - are perfectly valid in my view. We all ought to see them and celebrate the guts and determination to muster up the vision (and insanity) to try and break through that wall.

So, let's perhaps rethink ZERO. Zero is a mysterious number - as opposed to "1."

You cannot throw everything that fails into the same trash bin.   

 

Carson Pilcher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #64 on: February 25, 2015, 09:40:15 PM »
You could always give it a 1: A very basic golf course with clear architectral malpractice and/or poor maintenance. Avoid playing even if you are desperate for a game.

or a 2: A mediocre golf course with little or no architectural interest, but nothing really horrible. A friend summed one up "play it in a scramble, and drink a lot of beer."


I have played the Castle Course...and will never play it again.  While not a a "0" in my book, I would not go above 2 for sure.

To the OP's item, there is a course here in Atlanta that guys rave about.  I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what they see.  It is very well maintained, costs a lot to join, in an "exclusive neighborhood", etc. etc.  However, I think I would rather do anything else than play that course again.  Funny thing, I respect the designer but have no idea what he could have been thinking on multiple holes.

Carson,

Spit it out man.

As an ATL guy, I'd ask you to be frank in your claims.



PM sent

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #65 on: February 26, 2015, 12:12:48 PM »
C'mon Josh, the first and 15th holes weren't bad.


I think 17 is a nice hole, too. And the first half of 14 is OK. Although the second half ... yeesh.

Matthew Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #66 on: February 26, 2015, 12:19:40 PM »

I probably exaggerated the drives a bit, but the one between hole 5 and 6 was pretty close to 5 minutes straight up a mountain. 


Josh,

Looking at a google earth image, the 5 minute cart ride you claim to have taken would have been about a 135 yard journey - I guess my Atlanta "snow" day is my sad excuse for taking the 2 minutes to do this.  I can't believe, no matter how steep the climb or how slow the cart, that it took anywhere near this exaggerated amount of time.  Your real name isn't Bill O-Reilly is it?! ;D

Yeah, it's steeply uphill from the fifth green and then the sixth tee (the first tee box anyway) sits basically at the top of the other side of the hill. But it wouldn't take five minutes to walk, let alone cart.

Josh got pretty much everything else right, though, so I feel bad picking on him.

God that place spent a lot of money. This isn't all to do with the course, but the development in general. There are retaining walls that must have cost 5 figures, where no house was ever built. Paved roads snaking their way up mountains, but leading nowhere. Stop signs where no cars will ever drive. It's an unusual place to visit.

Josh Tarble

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #67 on: February 26, 2015, 12:27:12 PM »

I probably exaggerated the drives a bit, but the one between hole 5 and 6 was pretty close to 5 minutes straight up a mountain. 


Josh,

Looking at a google earth image, the 5 minute cart ride you claim to have taken would have been about a 135 yard journey - I guess my Atlanta "snow" day is my sad excuse for taking the 2 minutes to do this.  I can't believe, no matter how steep the climb or how slow the cart, that it took anywhere near this exaggerated amount of time.  Your real name isn't Bill O-Reilly is it?! ;D

Yeah, it's steeply uphill from the fifth green and then the sixth tee (the first tee box anyway) sits basically at the top of the other side of the hill. But it wouldn't take five minutes to walk, let alone cart.

Josh got pretty much everything else right, though, so I feel bad picking on him.

God that place spent a lot of money. This isn't all to do with the course, but the development in general. There are retaining walls that must have cost 5 figures, where no house was ever built. Paved roads snaking their way up mountains, but leading nowhere. Stop signs where no cars will ever drive. It's an unusual place to visit.

Come on guys, it was easily 5 minutes.  Brian Williams was with me.   ;D


Matthew,  thats a really good point too.  Besides the course being awful, it certainly is a pretty weird atmosphere.  It's almost like a golf course routed through a ghost town.  I think some of the views would have been better had there not been massive clearings and flattened lots with no houses everywhere.

Not to mention...it must be the maintenance shed or some sort of pump house, but what's up with the giant facility between hole 12 and 13?  Talk about jarring as well.  All in all a very strange place as you noted.

Tom Yost

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #68 on: February 26, 2015, 01:10:37 PM »

I probably exaggerated the drives a bit, but the one between hole 5 and 6 was pretty close to 5 minutes straight up a mountain. 


Josh,

Looking at a google earth image, the 5 minute cart ride you claim to have taken would have been about a 135 yard journey - I guess my Atlanta "snow" day is my sad excuse for taking the 2 minutes to do this.  I can't believe, no matter how steep the climb or how slow the cart, that it took anywhere near this exaggerated amount of time.  Your real name isn't Bill O-Reilly is it?! ;D

Yeah, it's steeply uphill from the fifth green and then the sixth tee (the first tee box anyway) sits basically at the top of the other side of the hill. But it wouldn't take five minutes to walk, let alone cart.


While one's mind is being poisoned, it may seem as if time is slowing to a near standstill.


Michael Felton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #69 on: February 26, 2015, 02:23:10 PM »
I got to play Quintero with Mr Fedeli a few years back. I'd second the ghost town feel. Pretty sure they ran out of money part way through and that's how we got on it. I didn't find it that offensive, although I played tolerably well, which always helps.

On Doak 0s, I know that Tom has been posting in here and far be it from me to second guess how his scale works, but I had got the impression that a 0 might very well be and indeed probably is a "better" course than a 1 or a 2. It's quite hard I would think to create a 1, but it's very cheap. The only way to get a zero is to spend several millions of dollars on the building of the course, but then mess it up so badly that it's offensive. It doesn't necessarily mean that the course is terrible. Rather that it is a terrible waste of money or space or opportunity (I guess). That's why you end up with a course that Tom rates a zero, while the others rate it a 5.

On that basis, Quintero is definitely a contender for a 0, given how much it must have cost. It's much better than some courses I've seen that would be 1s or 2s. But it can still be a 0 for that. IMO anyway.

Gary Sato

Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #70 on: February 26, 2015, 03:10:29 PM »
Gary,
What would you consider Quintero's redeeming qualities?

Very little in terms of architecture.  Its been over 15 years so my memory fails me. 

I do like Michael description that its not "offensive" unlike Cascata and the above mention San Jose course called The Ranch.  Both are courses that I wanted to walk off which someone else uses as their benchmark for a 0.

Mark Fedeli

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #71 on: February 26, 2015, 05:59:52 PM »
I didn't find it that offensive, although I played tolerably well, which always helps.

Don't be so modest. Didn't you reach #5 in two with a driver off the deck? Most impressive non-professional shot I've ever seen. Launched as high and as far as if it were tee'd up.
South Jersey to Brooklyn. @marrrkfedeli

Michael Felton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #72 on: February 26, 2015, 08:46:06 PM »
I didn't find it that offensive, although I played tolerably well, which always helps.

Don't be so modest. Didn't you reach #5 in two with a driver off the deck? Most impressive non-professional shot I've ever seen. Launched as high and as far as if it were tee'd up.

I'm English! That's about as effusive as it's possible to be about myself! ;)

Josh Tarble

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #73 on: February 27, 2015, 08:49:07 AM »
Gary,
What would you consider Quintero's redeeming qualities?

Very little in terms of architecture.  Its been over 15 years so my memory fails me. 

I do like Michael description that its not "offensive" unlike Cascata and the above mention San Jose course called The Ranch.  Both are courses that I wanted to walk off which someone else uses as their benchmark for a 0.

Wow, I'm glad I didn't shell out the money to play Cascata the last time I was in Vegas.  If I wanted views I'd go hiking  :)

Robert Mercer Deruntz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Mysterious Doak 0
« Reply #74 on: February 27, 2015, 06:34:54 PM »
I played Cascata for the first time yesterday.  Anyone who gives it a 0 is simply projecting a combination of Rees hate and an inability to get the ball airborne.  I have been on record in this form for ripping apart Rees, but in this case he delivered a very good course that has to be an excellent answer and rival to Shadow Creek.  The framing features are overdone, and many bunkers are way too big, but the course should get great marks for creating strategic option and emphasizing angle of attack.