[Sean_A]

Drew,   stick around.  This is nothing

But it does seem to me that, in a present day context, Dr. Mac has gained more from Tom D than Tom D. has gained from Dr. Mac.

I don't think so, not unless you can prove Dr Mac is alive.

Ciao

[Steve Lang]

   yeh, one specific example...

[Ken Fry]

JakaB, I love this.

I'll go back to the Australian example and site Royal Melbourne.  He designs the West Course, a brilliant place, but also teaches his philosophies to Alex Russell and Mick Morcom to then build the East Course.  It follows the philosophy of, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day.  Teach a man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime."  MacKenzie's influence can be seen in many places across the sandbelt, as was mentioned before.

I would say MacKenzie was gifted in finding talented people to carry out his philosophies.
Are you basing your thread title on the fact he died in poverty?

Ken

[John Kavanaugh]

Didn’t know he died in poverty. I’m just asking for one example of a brilliant hole. Something he didn’t stub his toe on.

[Joe Bausch]

I still remember the day at the fall festival when looking down at the ground I found $17. It was the late 60's and that was a lot of money.

Did you then spend that newly found cash on some elephant ears and maybe a brain sandwich?


Yum.

[Peter Pallotta]

Arbs - for his contemporaries in the 13th century it was Aquinas' analysis and interpretation of Aristotle's writings that led to a new interest in/appreciation for that great philosopher; and for his contemporaries in the 15th century it was Michelangelo's David that opened their eyes to the glorious artistry (and humanistic ethos) of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

It was the students' reverence for the past masters that brought the latter back to life -- and indeed with greater/more widespread fame and respect than they originally had in their own lifetimes; and it was the students' refashioning of the masters' ideas and talents for modern/current times that brought those ideas and talents back to the forefront of public consciousness and caused them to be celebrated once again.

The analogies aren't perfect, of course -- but should be enough for those who know much more about Tom D's work and writings and long-term impact on rankings/ratings (eg Crystal Downs) than I do to get a better understanding of what I was trying to say in my first post:

Tom D has had many teachers; while Dr. Mac has had no better advocate. He's not alive, but his reputation is -- and that reputation has been much enhanced (perhaps, as per JK's subject line, too enhanced) during this second golden age-renaissance.

[Tom_Doak]

John:  A fun thread on a lonely evening in the middle of Nebraska.


I have been called smart ever since I skipped the first grade, but the word has been so abused in recent years that when I see it now I think it's being used to hide something.  If you're really smart you just do the right thing and let that speak for itself.


Dr MacKenzie was by some accounts a lousy medical student, or maybe he just didn't have his heart in it since it was what his dad had done.


His descriptions of army tactics during the Boer War and how they led to slaughter showed a keen sense of observation and also a willingness to speak against conventional wisdom - some would call those attributes smart, although he did not have the skills to convince his superior officers to change their practice.


For a golf hole, I will offer the examples of the 11th and 18th at Royal Melbourne West.  Both of those were holes from the previous course that were transformed by putting a new tee on the diagonal and building fairway hazards around that, which no one else had envisioned doing. 


Of course, I don't believe that "stubbing your toe" on a great hole is as easy as you make it out to be, because on raw land nobody takes you right to where the tee should be - you've gotta find it yourself, and most people are not so great at that.


Mostly, though, I think MacKenzie was pretty smart to identify that lots of golfers played the game for enjoyment, and was maybe the first designer to build golf holes with enjoyment (rather than skill testing) as the primary goal.

[John Kavanaugh]

Tom,


I’m not familiar with RMW but trust your description of the work. Thanks.


I was just looking for something more than building a green next to a water hazard.


Did MacKenzie always start and finish his courses next to the most obvious location for the clubhouse?

[Sean_A]

The reputation or legacy of a person is a far cry from the person. I have no idea if Dr Mac was intelligent. His legacy is a conflicted record. I certainly don't believe Dr Mac was the first to designer to build courses for pleasure. I don't even know if he was the first to write about the subject. Nothing in life is clear cut as we tend to believe. We choose who gets placed on the pedestal and often ignore or minimize the events and people which made the recognized success possible.

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

The reputation or legacy of a person is a far cry from the person. I have no idea if Dr Mac was intelligent. His legacy is a conflicted record. I certainly don't believe Dr Mac was the first to designer to build courses for pleasure. I don't even know if he was the first to write about the subject. Nothing in life is clear cut as we tend to believe. We choose who gets placed on the pedestal and often ignore or minimize the events and people which made the recognized success possible.

Ciao

MacKenzie has become a mythical creature. This thread was born in a bad golfer telling me my opinion was wrong because MacKenzie was a bad golfer and I'm not as smart as he was.


It's my personal opinion, only after one play, that the greens at the Valley Club are the finest greens I have ever played. Don't block me on social media for saying the credit for their structure should go to Hunter.

[Peter Flory]

When AM listed the qualities that make a great golf architect, he didn't include intelligence.  It is more about hard work and study + some artistic qualities + some practical sense.

- Must possess a vivid imagination
- intimate knowledge of the game (though not necessary to be a great player)
- must be familiar with great courses and holes- must have studied and analyzed them.
- Must have a sense of proportion above all else
- Shrewd judgment when it comes to cost/benefit of producing various features (i.e. can't be a money waster). 
- Must be able to determine what is essential and what is non-essential when it comes to what makes holes great
- Must have a "sporting instinct" and understand what makes things exciting in general.
- Should be able to view things from an impersonal perspective and remove thoughts about his own game
- Needs to be able to view things from the perspective of the best player who ever lived and also be sympathetic to the beginner/ long handicap player
- Should not be unduly influenced by hostile criticism (i.e. needs thick skin)
- But should give most sympathetic consideration to criticism of a constructive nature (can't be insular/ stubborn).  For this he gives an example that even a long handicap player can make a brilliant suggestion and that even if not brilliant overall, sometimes bits of it can be used. 
- He should have made a study from a golfing point of view of agricultural chemistry, botany, and geology.
- He should have some knowledge of map reading, surveying, and interpretation of aerials photographs.
- AM doesn't list this as a required attribute, but he credits his knowledge of psychology that he picked up in his medical training as beneficial b/c it allowed him to sense what would be enjoyable to the greatest number of players. 

Still, his breakdown of what makes a great architect seems like it could only have been composed by a smart person, or at least a thoughtful and observant one. 

[Alex Miller]

The reputation or legacy of a person is a far cry from the person. I have no idea if Dr Mac was intelligent. His legacy is a conflicted record. I certainly don't believe Dr Mac was the first to designer to build courses for pleasure. I don't even know if he was the first to write about the subject. Nothing in life is clear cut as we tend to believe. We choose who gets placed on the pedestal and often ignore or minimize the events and people which made the recognized success possible.

Ciao

MacKenzie has become a mythical creature. This thread was born in a bad golfer telling me my opinion was wrong because MacKenzie was a bad golfer and I'm not as smart as he was.


It's my personal opinion, only after one play, that the greens at the Valley Club are the finest greens I have ever played. Don't block me on social media for saying the credit for their structure should go to Hunter.

John,


Can you provide one piece of evidence, just one, that credit for their structure should go to Hunter?




The Valley Club's greens are fantastic, agreed, and have as many signature Mackenzie traits as any other course he's designed. I am happy to dive into this, but old photos of Hunter's greens at Pebble Beach do not bear nearly the resemblance to Valley Club's that Pasatiempo, Cypress, Augusta, and most of his others do.


To save time a short list of green features that can be attributed to Mackenzie and his intelligence:

• net slope of greens (back to front or front to back) which match the overall slope of the property
• internal green contours that create for short game options to work around greenside hazards
• internal green contours that dictate optimal approach angles depending on hole location
• setting greens into the base of hills to create natural and aesthetically pleasing sloped greens

If any of these were switched to the negative, would the course be better or worse? To me and it would seem many many golfers these are all smart and rather distinctly Mackenzie features.

[John Kavanaugh]

I would present the article on this site under courses by country.


https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/valleyclubatmontecito/

[Alex Miller]

I would present the article on this site under courses by country.


https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/valleyclubatmontecito/

What are you referring to in that piece that is evidence? An author's contention is not a piece of evidence, especially in the absence of evidence. I am not saying Hunter is not deserving of credit for his role in a partnership we don't have tons of detail about, but I did provide evidence to Mackenzie's work in concert with and in the absence of Hunter and pointed to features that remained consistent throughout. Similar to a multivariable analysis in mathematics, this would point to Mackenzie being the key factor the green features I cited at the Valley Club, as well as the other courses I mentioned.

[John Kavanaugh]

Wake up and check the calendar, it’s 2020 my friend. Evidence smevidence.


I hope you’re right. Greatest set of greens I ever played.

[John Kavanaugh]

Does anyone believe that MacKenzie could build greens as subtle over the course of 18 holes as what is found at the Valley Club? Not one whoop de doo hey look the Good Dr. was here signature complex.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()