[Michael Whitaker]

For those who have not seen it here is a link to Gary Player's rant:

http://youtu.be/Ha59iKfjTxw

It's hard to watch.

[Phil Young]

Tom,

Since you don't believe that the GPCC is a fair example due to altitude, lets take another example from his resume of courses, Blair Atholl.

This is what GP wrote in describing the course and is taken directly from the website: "The design, both challenging and rewarding, will allow for the testing of scratch players, yet still ensuring enjoyment for handicapped golfers. The course length is in excess of 7,700 meters (8,500 yards) from the back tees, making it the longest course in South Africa at present." 

So this "award winning design" that is some 800 yards longer than CB is not overly long and provides a proper test for the "scratch player" (note scratch not professional which is an interesting choice of words) yet can still ensure enjoyment for handicapped golfers (obviously from different tees) while CB can't? So why have so many on this site written that they enjoyed the rounds that they played there?

My problem with what GP stated was that everything that he went on about he has also done on some of his designs. For example, take a look at the Thracian Cliffs website. Its a wonderfully fun looking course that certainly isn't overly long by any means. But the photographs of several holes show what a few fairways that have a severe can't to them from one side to the other which would certainly create very small areas for some shots to end up regardless of how they are played, which is quite similar to those at CB. 

I have no problem with criticisms being leveled at the design or the course set-up, but when he calls it the worst course he has ever seen in his more than 6 decades of play and design and then specifically criticizes it for features that he himself has done, then I feel he should be called out on it.

Mike, I think that addresses your comment in that I'm not challenging his opinion but simply what he based it on.

As for the design I have never been there but from what I've seen of the course on TV I would love to go and play there. That said I believe that the telecast did reveal areas that need softening in the finished product, in particular the fairway entrances and greenside mounding on the holes used as drivable par-4s and reachable in two par-fives as it appeared that one had to hit a perfect shot to get on the green and even then they were unable to get close to the hole for a reasonable chance at eagle. Unfortunately I couldn't decide if that was caused by the set-up, the design or a combination of both.

[Michael G. Miller]

Player is entitled to criticize whatever he chooses (after all, we all criticize one thing or another about golf architecture, equipment, maintenance, etc. right here on this site). And being an architect himself should not disqualify him. On the other hand, there is such a thing as full disclosure and "taste. It should have been made clear that, apparently, he was not selected at Chambers Bay. And that he might have used a constructive tone instead of a condemnatory one. As a "painter," there is plenty of work by "artists" that I find completely insulting to one's intelligence. Up to and including some contemporary 'art" found in the world's finest museums. Many times the average visitor feels immediately compelled to think that they, themselves or even their 5 year old, could easily do the same thing without any trouble. My answer to that is, "they probably could, either one of them."  But if I use ridicule and hyperbole in my criticism of another so-called "artist" (regardless of how outrageous his product may be)I look bad as it appears to come from ego instead of objective opinion. I think Player has crossed into that terirtory.   

[Jim Franklin]

Players hit the ball so far these days, the only real defense a golf course has are its greens. So what if someone is aiming 20 feet left or right when they putt. Next time use a wedge and get closer to the hole.

[Adam Lawrence]

Player is entitled to criticize whatever he chooses (after all, we all criticize one thing or another about golf architecture, equipment, maintenance, etc. right here on this site). And being an architect himself should not disqualify him. On the other hand, there is such a thing as full disclosure and "taste. It should have been made clear that, apparently, he was not selected at Chambers Bay.

During the various Twitter exchanges, it was stated by the GP Design Twitter account that they did not bid for Chambers Bay.

[Steve Okula]

Like Sun City, Blair Atholl's length is mitigated somewhat by elevation, at 1700+ meters or about a mile high. Besides that, neither Sun City nor Blair Atholl were ever intended as public courses. BA is private and SC is a resort for the well heeled.

[Michael G. Miller]

I had read in prior posts on this discussion that it appeared that GP had a bid. I am glad to learn that GP did not. It makes things better.

On the other hand, as many here are aware, the condition of Chambers Bay was more of a factor than the design, but in the general public mind, the course will probably receive the harshest criticism.

[Phil Young]

Steve,

Regardless of altitude, a 7,700 meter course is beyond reasonably long whether it is available for public play or not. The point is that, in my opinion, GP loses the ability to criticize RTJ for the length of the course as being and being bad for the game if he is also designing courses of a similar magnitude.

I can't say that white is an ugly color for a wall and none should be painted that color if I do it myself...

[Mike_Young]

IMHO when it comes to GP and JJ , they are both facilitators and have gotten to the point where the design of a project reflects more on who is working for them than they themselves.  It happens with all of the signatures. I like the  overall design of CB.  I do consider it more manufactured than a Bandon course but  I question whether the principal of either firm would have come up with that design.  It's not what they do.  Michael Miller speaks of painters above and GCA is different from that in this aspect.  Painters paint their own paintings.  GCA's styles change as associates change.  Today Player has a good young guy working for him and naturally he will accept any praise from those projects as will JJ who I understand had JB doing CB.   It's all a marketing game with those guys and it's all done trying to catch up with the Oregon, Nebraska and Nova Scotia styles.  I would think either of the associates working these projects would be enjoyable to talk with about their projects but a discussion with either principal would not interest me at all.

[Bill Brightly]

For those who have not seen it here is a link to Gary Player's rant:

http://youtu.be/Ha59iKfjTxw

It's hard to watch.

Thanks for posting this, Mike. It was very hard to watch. Gary Player should be ashamed of himself. Utter nonsense to comment on the length that the pros played the course and make it sound like those were the only tee markers available for the average golfer. Sounded like the ravings of a madman, or an old guy who escaped from "the home." Or a golf course desingener who was not selected for the Olympic course in Brazil and has no clue why. I

[Michael G. Miller]

Mike, good point about the difference between individual painters versus working with associates.

[Niall C]

I've just watched the video of Players rant. Two things he repeatedly states is how awful it is for a ball to land 1 yard from the right spot but end up 50 yards away, and the other thing is how bad this is for average golfers. Now if the alternative is to miss by 1 yard and end up knee deep in bundi then I suspect joe public would rather be 50 yards away on short grass. I suspect that joe public would also rather watch the pros attempting to scramble from short grass rather than hacking out of deep rough.


Niall

[paul cowley]

...or water Niall. Hit it one yard short on 13 at ANGC and you're reloading with an added stroke. Golf's relative.

[Jason Way]

I resisted the urge to watch this for a while, but Michael made it so easy to just click the link.  I threw up in my mouth.  If I have to listen to another one of golf's greats lament the game's woes while actively contributing to the problems, I am going to throw my laptop out the window.  The hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.


Beyond that, and whatever axes he may have to grind, this was an even bigger stunner to me:


He says that the USGA is getting the US Open right at public facilities like Pebble Beach ($500 and 5+ hours to play) and Bethpage Black (a course so hard it has a warning sign), but somehow Chambers Bay is going to send the game over the cliff into the abyss?  In what universe does that make sense?

[Mike_Young]

A friend who works for the Golf Channel and has played in a couple of Opens sent me a text re this thread....he had two questions  !.  Do most guys on that site live in their  Mom and Dad's basement?  and 2.  Do they realize all this is just golf?   I can't give him an answer right now...    but good questions...

[Jason Way]

Mike, is your friend Ogre from Revenge of the Nerds?  I know their creative tanks are probably running on empty over there after coming up with gems like Altered Course, but c'mon dude.  You can do better than the old "golf dorks taking things too seriously" slam.  There's nary a thread on this site that doesn't meet that threshold.  It's kind of the point.

[Mike_Young]

Jason,
I just relayed his question.  As for this particular thread:  I view it as no more than two figureheads swordfighting.    I'm sure the associates that designed and built the course would be much more interesting to talk with.  And could probably shed much light on the subject. 

As for other threads, if you view them as anything more than entertainment then you are taking it to seriously. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()