News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #50 on: December 18, 2014, 04:20:02 PM »
I recall it being admitted on another recent thread that the original Confidential Guide and the Doak scale itself have, shall we say, an element of 'tongue-in-cheek' to them.
Atb

Mark Pavy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #51 on: December 18, 2014, 04:21:57 PM »
Hang on a sec...

First you say that you're aware of the problems with writing, now you want to have a whinge about criticism and blame it on the way of the world.
If you think I'm defending Greg Norman, you're dreaming...my comments are directly aimed at you- as an author. I have no idea why you continue to deflect the criticism and then profess that the supposed defended parties are "perfectly capable of defending themselves if they feel it is warranted".

You problem is this: you are 3 people, 1. Forum participant 2. Author and 3. Architect

Two of the three are fair game for criticism on on a golf architectural forum, wouldn't you agree?

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #52 on: December 18, 2014, 04:27:30 PM »
Mark,
I'm not defending Tom as he is in the room.

When you think of Norman, do you not think of "what might have been?"

I think there are a lot of people who acknowledge GN's great golfing talent, but also because of that great talent think he should have won more.

Same with his architecture. He is world famous and earned many commissions. But did he ever reach the same level as other designers?

All this talk about Tom being critical of Norman, why no talk about what he actually wrote. I think it rings true with many.

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #53 on: December 18, 2014, 04:33:47 PM »
IMO there is a lot of compliment in what TD said about GN. There is also a jibe that he had a great bit of land but cacked it. Everyone reads things differently though.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Mark Pavy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #54 on: December 18, 2014, 04:57:52 PM »
Don,

It doesn't matter, my criticism relates to the author comparing a golf course to a persons sporting career. Should we now all start using personal analogies when giving our opinion on golf course architecture?






Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #55 on: December 18, 2014, 05:07:57 PM »
I understand that TD needs to vary his comments, and for whatever its worth this quotable jibe at Norman livens up what would be a dull by the numbers read without some personality.

I got to thinking what other architects would really be offended by.  I may not be the guy to wonder this, because from what I can see, I am generally a little harder to offend.  I mean, hey, I participate here, where you treat architects not named Doak, Hanse or CC, about like a baby treats its diaper.

We probably want a fair review, and we probably think our work, flaws and all, deserves something more than a one PP sound bite, along with an number.  In reality, most here would think the same, but the general public probably doesn't agree. This is still not aimed at this audience as much as a guy who wants to know in ten seconds whether veering off to see some lesser known course is worthwhile.

From an architects POV, if Tom gave some depth, like "The routing is good, except for holes XXX, but the feature design looks modern and the site calls for traditional" or something to that effect, most would probably accept a critique of certain features pretty well.  (thinking of a course like Torrey Pines here)  Hard to get mad at calling out the best holes, the lesser holes, etc.  All courses have them.  Perhaps covering basics like "it is a low budget country course" so you aren't comparing directly to Augusta would help both travelers and architect junkies.

And, for the most part, TD did that in the second edition. I also suspect an older wiser TD would do even more of the same now. I recall being surprised at how balanced it was, given all the press it had gotten.  But I do recall some architects just thought (and even in the new media world, think) that no criticisms should be leveled by fellow architects, even if wearing a reviewers hat.

For the record, he only mentioned a few of my courses in the first one (only had a few to mention at that point) and I wasn't offended by his comments.  Next year, of course, that might change...... ;D

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #56 on: December 18, 2014, 05:19:00 PM »
What no one has said is that when you join the Architects association you agree to abide by a number of rules, one being you do not bad mouth another architect. TD is not a member so is at will to say what he wants. Others have to keep stumm. I would only say what I thought of another's work over a beer. TDs route of Author and Architect can do nothing but infringe the 'shut up' area if he is going to be honest. If the book is going to be good it has to have some chuckle. Chuckle means upset for someone.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #57 on: December 18, 2014, 06:07:34 PM »
A book originally written for just a small number of friends and family obtained cult status because of its wit and lack of concern for the establishment. Fast forward a few decades and that same guy has been rewarded for his placing conviction above easy money by finding himself at the top of the tree. Occasionally, just occasionally, authenticity still wins out in the long run. Would any of you be changing that winning formula now?
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #58 on: December 18, 2014, 07:43:55 PM »
You problem is this: you are 3 people, 1. Forum participant 2. Author and 3. Architect

Two of the three are fair game for criticism on on a golf architectural forum, wouldn't you agree?

Mark:

You're welcome to criticize any of the three people you want.

Am I mistaken in thinking your critique of me as Author is that I should never be pithy toward another architect or course?  If so, there would really be no book there that anybody would want to read.  Plus, I would be pilloried for having gotten politically correct in order to protect my image, having set a different standard twenty years ago.

I was talking about it with Ran just this morning.  He was amazed that so many people talked about "scathing reviews" when the vast majority of the write-ups are positive.  I don't think the coverage shows the same balance as the book does, but I am quite used to that by now.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #59 on: December 18, 2014, 07:52:15 PM »
From an architects POV, if Tom gave some depth, like "The routing is good, except for holes XXX, but the feature design looks modern and the site calls for traditional" or something to that effect, most would probably accept a critique of certain features pretty well.  (thinking of a course like Torrey Pines here)  Hard to get mad at calling out the best holes, the lesser holes, etc.  All courses have them.  Perhaps covering basics like "it is a low budget country course" so you aren't comparing directly to Augusta would help both travelers and architect junkies.

And, for the most part, TD did that in the second edition. I also suspect an older wiser TD would do even more of the same now. I recall being surprised at how balanced it was, given all the press it had gotten.  


Jeff:

I actually refrained from critiquing courses the way you suggest because to me the worst thing you could do is tell somebody what you would have done differently ... as if you know it all.  Most of my reviews are based first on my emotional reaction to the work [which is what art requires] and second on details that I thought were really cool or really bad. 

I think it's the emotional reaction that throws off so many architects; many think of themselves more as technicians than artists.  [Especially the golf pros who judge the whole of architecture by what golf shots are asked for.  They seem not to understand that they are asking different shots of different players ... I'm forty yards further out with a hybrid in my hand instead of an 8-iron.] 

But it's the emotional reaction that resonates so deeply with most golfers.  There are lots of perfectly sensible courses that I would never want to play, much less travel to see.  I think that was behind the reaction from some of the old-guard architects who came into the profession from L.A. backgrounds; they thought they should be graded on technical merit only.

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #60 on: December 18, 2014, 08:45:48 PM »

Don,

It doesn't matter, my criticism relates to the author comparing a golf course to a persons sporting career. Should we now all start using personal analogies when giving our opinion on golf course architecture?



Greg Norman's designs can't be separated from his playing career--his commissions are 100% dependent on it.

IMO,any former player would have the same issues.They're only "architects" because they could play. Not all former players are equally involved in the design,but none of them has his name on a golf course because he finished first in his landscape architecture class.

What if TD had said "the Bear's Club is a really OK course but,given Jack Nicklaus' career,it should've been great"?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #61 on: December 19, 2014, 08:33:54 AM »

What if TD had said "the Bear's Club is a really OK course but,given Jack Nicklaus' career,it should've been great"?

Can I use that?  It would certainly be less controversial than my first draft.

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #62 on: December 19, 2014, 09:09:00 AM »

What if TD had said "the Bear's Club is a really OK course but,given Jack Nicklaus' career,it should've been great"?

Can I use that?  It would certainly be less controversial than my first draft.

Absolutely. I'll send you my mailing address for the royalty checks ;D.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #63 on: December 19, 2014, 11:35:37 AM »
Don,

It doesn't matter, my criticism relates to the author comparing a golf course to a persons sporting career. Should we now all start using personal analogies when giving our opinion on golf course architecture?

If it accurately conveys your opinion of something, I'd be shocked if anyone on here would have a problem with it. They might disagree with it, but I don't think they'd be nearly as offended as you seem to be.

I guess the standard you're proposing is any personal criticism is an attack and any response to your comment is whinging?
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Matt Kardash

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #64 on: December 20, 2014, 11:00:01 AM »
I am blown away how people get offended by mundane shit.
the interviewer asked beck how he felt "being the bob dylan of the 90's" and beck quitely responded "i actually feel more like the bon jovi of the 60's"

Tom Dunne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #65 on: December 21, 2014, 09:26:47 AM »

I was talking about it with Ran just this morning.  He was amazed that so many people talked about "scathing reviews" when the vast majority of the write-ups are positive.  I don't think the coverage shows the same balance as the book does, but I am quite used to that by now.


Tom, as one who used the phrase "scathing reviews", I think the thing you and/or Ran might be missing is that by breaking your project out into several volumes, some reviewers are more or less forced to make a part stand for the whole. The reason (for me at least) is that I know my editors will not be interested in my reviewing Vols. 2-5. Even if the GB&I volume is positive relative to others to come, I still know I only get one bite of the apple (at a limited word count, too), so I have to point out what makes this series different. The stock in trade of the CG is candor, and reviewers have to cover the basics. If I knew I'd get to review all the volumes as they came out, I'm sure my approach would be different.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #66 on: December 21, 2014, 10:51:09 AM »

Tom, as one who used the phrase "scathing reviews", I think the thing you and/or Ran might be missing is that by breaking your project out into several volumes, some reviewers are more or less forced to make a part stand for the whole. The reason (for me at least) is that I know my editors will not be interested in my reviewing Vols. 2-5. Even if the GB&I volume is positive relative to others to come, I still know I only get one bite of the apple (at a limited word count, too), so I have to point out what makes this series different. The stock in trade of the CG is candor, and reviewers have to cover the basics. If I knew I'd get to review all the volumes as they came out, I'm sure my approach would be different.


Tom:  thanks for responding.  I understand your point of view ... but you do understand that you are projecting what the subsequent books will be like, before they've been written?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #67 on: December 21, 2014, 10:52:38 AM »
I am blown away how people get offended by mundane shit.

Thank you for defending my writing as mundane shit.   ;)

Tom Dunne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #68 on: December 21, 2014, 11:11:09 AM »

Tom, as one who used the phrase "scathing reviews", I think the thing you and/or Ran might be missing is that by breaking your project out into several volumes, some reviewers are more or less forced to make a part stand for the whole. The reason (for me at least) is that I know my editors will not be interested in my reviewing Vols. 2-5. Even if the GB&I volume is positive relative to others to come, I still know I only get one bite of the apple (at a limited word count, too), so I have to point out what makes this series different. The stock in trade of the CG is candor, and reviewers have to cover the basics. If I knew I'd get to review all the volumes as they came out, I'm sure my approach would be different.


Tom:  thanks for responding.  I understand your point of view ... but you do understand that you are projecting what the subsequent books will be like, before they've been written?

Tom, I guess, but your introduction to Vol. 1 is largely focused on highlighting the value of dead honest course reviews. When you write, "Volume 1 will be the least controversial of the set..." I'm inclined to take you at your word.

Pat Burke

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #69 on: December 21, 2014, 03:33:40 PM »
Some of the reactions to Tom's reviews may actually reflect the struggles in the game today.

We've become too sensitive and are pu$$ies about someone giving an honest thought.

Look forward to reading it.

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #70 on: December 21, 2014, 04:10:51 PM »
Was it a calculated decision to release the "Great Britain and Ireland" volume first because the majority of reviews favored more of a positive tone?  The courses in this part of the world, even in the most basic form, lean toward what many on this site would prefer to see.

There will certainly be more opportunities in the US for courses to get a 0 or 1 rating based on the excess demonstrated during our most recent course boom.

Ken

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #71 on: December 21, 2014, 04:38:17 PM »
I really enjoyed the first book and this new edition. I like the style of writing, but lowly marked courses are bound to be offended. Negative comments obviously hurt if TD gave one of my courses a zero it would be like the end of the world. I don't know if Tom and David Kidd were friends or are still friends or even if Tom felt he could plant the zero because they were friends but I think the zero should be an asterisk or something as a doak 1 is a probably better course than a doak zero and I think its a bit confusing. Overall a great book.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #72 on: December 21, 2014, 05:01:14 PM »
I am blown away how people get offended by mundane shit.

Thank you for defending my writing as mundane shit.   ;)

This is pretty funny, author/architect/Forum Guy.
Coming in August 2023
~Manakiki
~OSU Scarlet
~OSU Grey
~NCR South
~Springfield
~Columbus
~Lake Forest (OH)
~Sleepy Hollow (OH)

Mark Bourgeois

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #73 on: December 21, 2014, 06:36:01 PM »
Surprised Doak is complaining about the press for describing the book's "candor" and "scathing reviews." If I wrote a book and was able to control the content of its reviews in the press? Not sure I could do a better job of enticing people to purchase.
Charlotte. Daniel. Olivia. Josephine. Ana. Dylan. Madeleine. Catherine. Chase. Jesse. James. Grace. Emilie. Jack. Noah. Caroline. Jessica. Benjamin. Avielle. Allison.

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: John Huggan Reviews The Confidential Guide
« Reply #74 on: December 21, 2014, 06:56:24 PM »
Is he complaining, Mark? I didn't notice.
Coming in August 2023
~Manakiki
~OSU Scarlet
~OSU Grey
~NCR South
~Springfield
~Columbus
~Lake Forest (OH)
~Sleepy Hollow (OH)

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back