[RJ_Daley]

Dan, was he wrong before the extensive remodelling.  Originally, reportedly a dog leg par 3 among other questionable design decisions?  I didn't see the course in the early, post RTJSr days.  So, I gotta go with the always affable Mr. Hill!

[George Pazin]

Mostly I'll just second what Shel said (no real surprise there!), but I would also add that the beauty of a statement like "All so-and-so's courses are crap" is that it is effectively self-policing; it's so over the top in generalizing that it almost invalidates the critic's opinion. It usually says enough about the poster to make his opinion not worth reading, at least in regards to that particular person/course/issue.

And, please, don't anyone ever recommend anyone "do the heavy lifting" again. That phrase has been used more to shout down others' opinions than anything else.

[Tom Huckaby]

George - of course you are correct, although in terms of overused phrases, I'd submit "where the rubber meets the road."

 

On this topic, didn't Tom Doak just say all that needs to be said?  Sure one could try to critique an architect's body of work, but unless you are a developer trying to hire him, why does it matter?

TH

ps - I miss Matt Ward.  Where the heck is he?

[ed_getka]

Gary,
   No, that is not a logical next step unless you have played all of the architect's golf courses. There are exceptions to this of course. For example, you could go on a computer and look at course routings for a given architect and find that the majority of holes dogleg left for every course you looked at. So that could be brought up as a criticism. However, mostly you are going to have to do the "heavy lifting" by being at the course itself ("where the rubber meets the road"). Couldn't resist Tom and RJ.

[George Pazin]

On this topic, didn't Tom Doak just say all that needs to be said?  Sure one could try to critique an architect's body of work, but unless you are a developer trying to hire him, why does it matter?

Why does any of this matter?

[Dan Kelly]

Dan, was he wrong before the extensive remodelling.

Yes (in my opinion, of course). I liked the old Hazeltine better. It was ... way more adventurous.

[Gary Daughters]

Ed,

I may be missing something, but I just flat-out disagree.  

Why not take it a step further and say that to criticize any given architect you would not only have to play each of his courses but also play them in every season and under every conceivable condition?  There's no end to the terms you could attatch.

Are you talking about being able to form a reasoned opinion, or of taking the next step of expressing said opinion within the confines of an internet discussion?

I do agree with you and Tom, well maybe, that analyzing and discussing golf courses, golf holes and features is more worthwhile than de-constructing the tendencies of the people behind them.

But I'm not understanding what is so apparently singular about the art/science of golf course design that makes criticism of its purveyors worthless.

[Tim Pitner]

On this topic, didn't Tom Doak just say all that needs to be said?  Sure one could try to critique an architect's body of work, but unless you are a developer trying to hire him, why does it matter?

Why does any of this matter?

No kidding--if you believe Al Gore, we all (or at least some of our favorite seaside courses) might be underwater someday soon anyway.  

[BCrosby]

Exactly Gary.

We all form opinions about all sorts of things on very scant evidence. Absent that facility, we wouldn't be able to make the little choices that allow us to navigate through the world.

We do it with golf architects too. We all hold opinions about the talents of golf architects. Sometimes on very scant evidence. That's how I allocate the limited time I have to play golf.  

Nor is there anything wrong with making those opinions public. But if you do, you had better be prepared to defend your views. And lots of empirical evidence is always helpful with that.

But having opinions is inescapable. To pretend otherwise is nuts.

Bob

[Gary Daughters]

What matters?

Audible shudders.

Are you kidding?

[Sean_A]

Bob C is right.  We are all forced to make judgements and form opinions on very limited knowledge virtually on a daily basis.  We may rest easy with ourselves with the opinion, but that doesn't make the process any more scientific.  I don't try to form opinions about archies because I don't think it is necessary given my involvement with game and I am not too bothered by a name.  However, I still have generalizations of different archies (professionally) based on my limited experience of their work.  I find it impossible not to arrange info in my head without being able to categorize.  Still, I am much more influenced by the reputation of a club than its designer.  Mind you, in some cases the rep of a club is intrinsically tied to the designer of the course!  How is that for Double Dutch?

Ciao

[A.G._Crockett]

A fascinating and thoughtful thread; thanks, guys.  As is so often true here, a lot to think about.

For myself, I can't quite imagine not saying that I enjoy the courses of so-and-so, or don't really like the courses of so-and-so until I've reached some arbitrary critical mass of play.  Others will have to decide what weight to assign to my opinion, and it may well not be very much.  This is the case with other art forms; I am not a jazz fan, though I have not heard ALL jazz and like some.  

There is, however, a line that I probably shouldn't cross in calling someone's work crap or the like.  HOW I express my opinion of a body of work here is what Mike was talking about in the first place, I think.  I think there is wisdom in NOT saying a lot things that you are thinking, whether face to face or here in cyber world.

[George Pazin]

Well said, both AG & Bob.

[TEPaul]

Architect bashing on this site??

Art Hills was bashed on here??

Gracious!

I'm afraid I missed the entire Art Hills bashing thread or whatever architect bashing thread it was so what can I say but "Golf and Architecture is a great big thing and there's room in it for everyone" (The Big World Theory).  

[Scott Stearns]

never seen an arch. bashed here.  jack nicklaus is loved.  Fazio-he's a musical genius.  

[Scott Stearns]

did i mention that the 10th at Riviera might NOT be the best short par 4 on the planet?

Sand Hills might NOT be worth the two days of your life to get to,

that resort golf might actually be enjoyable, if you are freezing cold in your home in February?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()