Jim McCabe gets it

[Dave_Miller]

To the TreeHouse:

Last week the PGA Tour played the inaugral DeutscheBank Championship at the TPC-Boston.

Several players were very critical of the design of this Arnold Palmer course.  Complaining about Greens that sloped away, etc, etc.

Jim McCabe, the outstanding golf writer for the Boston Globe, took these players to task in his article of Thursday Sept. 4, 2003.

Jim basically asks what makes someone who can play the game well think they know what they are talking about when it comes to the architecture and design of a golf course.  It appears they are complaining about things that just don't suit their individual game.

Check it out.
www.boston.com/sports/golf/  

Scroll down to the More Golf News section and click on the "On Golf" article titled "A Criticism of the Critiques"

If this link doesn't work go to www.boston.com
click on boston globe
click on sports
scroll down to golf
click on golf
go to Jim's article called A Criticism of the Critiques.

It is a very good treatise on the game today and the architecture.
What does everyone think?

Best,
Dave

[buffett_guy]

I was hoping TPC Boston would come up. I watched a bit on tv, and although it's hard to tell without being there in person I thought the course looked interesting. In particular there seemed to be some chipping areas that were a little more challenging than average. Also, a lot of players seemed to wind up in fairway bunkers. The fairway bunkers looked like they were a little harder than average, and yet I saw lots of good shots hit out of them. Finally, the course was long and yet the scores were quite low. It made be think that the only thing that really dictates score is how tough it is set up. I know that's not true, but the trend seems to be that you can make any course difficult by making the fairways narrow and the rough impossible. I think high rough around the chipping areas is a huge dissapointment.

I'm starting to wonder if new types of challenges are needed in golf design. Not just length, or rough.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Dave,

1. The biggest thing I got out of it is i really want to play Highland Links. I am thinking that maybe I can talk the wife into a Cape Cod family vacation next summer !!

2. TPC and Arnold Palmer are two Biases that I have, so I am not surprised to hear them complain. I have been told that TPC Boston is very good by a mutual friend, but I am suspicious.

3. I think it is good for the players to voice their opinions, who needs to hear "Makes you play all the shots, legitimate top 100 contender" again.

4. The USGA does not appear to do it, so The Tour needs a regulated Tournament ball same as Wimbledon and US Open Tennis.

[George Pazin]

The biggest thing I got out of it is i really want to play Highland Links. I am thinking that maybe I can talk the wife into a Cape Cod family vacation next summer !!

I highly recommend both of these. And if you're on the Cape, figure out a way to get on Eastward Ho!

[Rick Shefchik]

Jim McCabe writes: "Liking or disliking a golf course remains as subjective and personal as ever, and there are so many factors involved that it's ludicrous to be critical of another's opinion or to constantly seek viewpoints as if this is a search for everlasting truth. Raise your hand, for instance, if you are sleeping better knowing that Pine Valley has regained its No. 1 spot on those pompous "Best" magazine lists."

Yes, he gets it, if "it" is not ranking courses or discussing what we like and don't like in golf course design. I certainly wouldn't expect McCabe to spend much time lurking on this site.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rick, I couldn't agree more. And while it is probably fun to take the PGA Tour Pro to task for complaining about a new course that may be a bit too provocative for the PGA Tour Player mindset, I think it shows how far PGA Tour course set-ups have set back the art of design. I can't help but think of PGA West Stadium when reading all of his article.

But he brings up a really good point regarding the rankings, and especialy since he pretty much singles out the Golfweek ranking by naming its categories--modern and classical, and then incorrectly relating it to Golf Digest's ranking which recently brought Pine Valley back to #1. If you merely just glance at the ratings, then how are you supposed to understand them and why a certain or paticular golf course is revered in the ratings for being GREAT or amongst the best in the land?

Mr. McCabe's opinion is just that--an opinion, and that is where he saves himself, but it is clear he has no idea nor cares to know what makes a golf course GREAT or revered. Hence the Highlands vs. Pine Valley comment, but that he doesn't care. It's his point, and that is all that matters to him. But this is what the point of the ratings and rankings should be--a solid study by those who study golf architecture and are willing to sacrafice time and money to come to a somewhat reasonable conclusion through a diversity of opinions and hopefully, strong principles.

The cream eventually rises to the top, and while some flotsam or jetsom may float for a bit, it does the opposite, it falls away or breaks apart in obscurity.

[hpembroke]

It appears that the article has gone from that page (or my old eyes can't find it).  I searched for it but you now have to pay for it, does anyone have the story that they can post it, I would love to read it, thanks.

[TomSteenstrup]

http://www.boston.com/sports/golf/articles/2003/09/04/a_criticism_of_critiques/

[ginger1]

 I was at the TPC Boston and I must say I was quite impressed with the layout.  I've been around golf course construction since the 1960's and I will say this is a modern golf course without slope and surface drainage. The collection areas are omnipresent and do cause a collection of divots in these areas but it looks like the environmental restrictions necessitated this drainage pattern.
 The scale of the course is large, with wide fairways, large yawning bunkers and plenty of length. The chipping areas were quite interesting because they were mostly convex and not concave.  The greens are huge and they appeared to be rolling fairly well considering the age of the course.
 The tournament was very well run and other than a few glitches it was a great take. Tiger was relaxed and was teasing big Steve Williams occasionally. Next year they should put more signage on the front nine( I read golf course plans for a living and I got flat out got lost at #2 green) and bring back the sign boys and girls who tell you how each group is doing.I will be back next year but hey don't let the PGA Tour sneak this event out the back door to California.
  Jim McCabe is excellent, much better than Paul Harber who sounds like the sales manager for a local golf design firm.
 

[Bye]

I was at the TPC Boston and I must say I was quite impressed with the layout.  I've been around golf course construction since the 1960's and I will say this is a modern golf course without slope and surface drainage. The collection areas are omnipresent and do cause a collection of divots in these areas but it looks like the environmental restrictions necessitated this drainage pattern.
 The scale of the course is large, with wide fairways, large yawning bunkers and plenty of length. The chipping areas were quite interesting because they were mostly convex and not concave.  The greens are huge and they appeared to be rolling fairly well considering the age of the course.
 The tournament was very well run and other than a few glitches it was a great take. Tiger was relaxed and was teasing big Steve Williams occasionally. Next year they should put more signage on the front nine( I read golf course plans for a living and I got flat out got lost at #2 green) and bring back the sign boys and girls who tell you how each group is doing.I will be back next year but hey don't let the PGA Tour sneak this event out the back door to California.
  Jim McCabe is excellent, much better than Paul Harber who sounds like the sales manager for a local golf design firm.
 

McCabe sounds like a sales manager for both national and local design firms. If Rees Jones or Brad Faxon stop short, Jim will be in a major accident.

[Dave_Miller]

  Jim McCabe is excellent, much better than Paul Harber who sounds like the sales manager for a local golf design firm.
 

McCabe sounds like a sales manager for both national and local design firms. If Rees Jones or Brad Faxon stop short, Jim will be in a major accident.

If you know anything about Jim McCabe you would understand he is a traditionalist.  He loves the classic architetcts and while he is always a gentlemen I seriously doubt he is a proponent of Rees or Brad as Architects.  He does love Brad as a player.
Knowing Jim as I do he is definitely one of us.
Fairways and Greens
Dave

[Bye]

Dave,
He may be a traditionalist, but I was responding to the point on his objectivity while being compared to Paul Harber. It's true that Harber was Silva's shill, but McCabe does the same for Rees and Faxon.

[ForkaB]

I think McCabe gets "it" (regardless of what one thinks "it" means.......).  I like his take on the Pine Valley vs. Highland Links conundrum, particularly that he recognizes that it IS a condundrum.  I say this having never played either course, but understanding well the pros and cons of playing courses which are acclaimed to be GREAT vs. those which have little acclaim but may in fact be as good as it gets.