News:

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


Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #50 on: August 01, 2014, 01:14:22 PM »
Before



After

"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #51 on: August 01, 2014, 01:19:24 PM »
What hole are the pictures of?  Before and after what?

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #52 on: August 01, 2014, 01:24:21 PM »
The pictures are from the Jackson Kahn Co. website. The before picture is the current 11th hole, the after is what the Fazio team would transform the hole to.
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #53 on: August 01, 2014, 01:46:17 PM »
Pete,

That is the tenth hole and the proposed hole looks like an abortion.

Bob

Derek_Duncan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #54 on: August 01, 2014, 01:48:45 PM »
Before



After



I can't believe Fazio would rip up that Raynor bunker in front of that green. He really must not give a s*^t about Seth!
www.feedtheball.com -- a podcast about golf architecture and design
@feedtheball

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #55 on: August 01, 2014, 01:53:42 PM »
Looks great to me, but I am Fazionista of sorts.  If he solves the drainage issues- something he is very good doing- I think the members will enjoy their new course.

Can Mr. Huntley provide some background on the choice of architects and his thoughts on what will be accomplished?

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #56 on: August 01, 2014, 01:59:00 PM »
Oops!  Should have waited for Mr. Huntley- or has Gib Papazian hacked Bob's gca.com account- to express his displeasure before posting.   Goes to show how applicable TEPaul's "Golf Is A Big World" theory is. 

Rich Goodale

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #57 on: August 01, 2014, 02:03:44 PM »
Before



After



I can't believe Fazio would rip up that Raynor bunker in front of that green. He really must not give a s*^t about Seth!

Was that not a Rees Jones bunker, c. 2000?
Life is good.

Any afterlife is unlikely and/or dodgy.

Jean-Paul Parodi

Charlie Gallagher

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #58 on: August 01, 2014, 02:05:19 PM »
   I would like to hear more perspective on this and what drove the decision making.
   I will echo one posters point, Pinehurst #4 was a big disappointment when I played it and the bunkering was ridiculously busy. It abuts Number 2 in places, but couldn't be more different. The last couple of holes are pretty good, but the bulk of the course has zero Ross feel.
   I note that Keith Foster, Gil Hanse, and Brian Silva seem to be able to restore and respect the original character of the design. Fazio didn't display that ability at #4.
   Raynor's designs present sound and interesting golf time and again. I want to know why his work is not worthy of restoration at this particular venue.

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #59 on: August 01, 2014, 02:39:13 PM »
Nothing new here.  Fazio told us that he didn't care about the old-time architects at a retreat at Pinehurst in 2003.  I bet you can still find threads that talk about this....
He said pretty much the same thing at Brad's event at Pinehurst last fall.
TF can hand out as many back handed swipes against whomever as he wants, but can he do better?

In my own field Frank Lloyd Wright thought the history of Architecture was bunk. ... but he delivered!
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #60 on: August 01, 2014, 03:43:12 PM »
Carl,

In mentioning Frank Lloyd Wright I am reminded of a comment  he made that is a classic.

"Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance and have seen no occasion to change."
« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 01:43:41 PM by Bob_Huntley »

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #61 on: August 01, 2014, 04:46:51 PM »
Nothing new here.  Fazio told us that he didn't care about the old-time architects at a retreat at Pinehurst in 2003.  I bet you can still find threads that talk about this....

He said pretty much the same thing at Brad's event at Pinehurst last fall.

He said pretty much the same thing in his book published several years ago. If nothing else, the man is consistent.

Bob

Really?  Can you please refer me to the page (s) where he said this (that "he didn't care about the old-time architects")?  He does say that "... we never want to get away from the old tenets of course design, but we're dealing with entirely different capabilities than the 'classic' architects were." (page 77).  In fact, he is referring to the 100 years of learning- developing the craft, the science- with emphasis on technology and equipment which aid the designer and builder.  He also notes the change in client and consumer expectations as golf became mainstream and more money was made available to meet these.

I suspect that when most us go to the doctor with a complication, we prefer to take advantage of all the learning, advances, new therapies and procedures gained over the last 100 years to a good-old bleeding.   I know that when it comes to golf, contrary to protestations on the DG about how technology is ruining the game, my fellow GCAers utilize the newest clubs and balls with very few exceptions.  Like most of us, Fazio plays the cards he is dealt with, perhaps, "honest arrogance", though the couple of times I've been around him he comes across as being rather humble.

Nothing new here.  Fazio told us that he didn't care about the old-time architects at a retreat at Pinehurst in 2003.  I bet you can still find threads that talk about this....
He said pretty much the same thing at Brad's event at Pinehurst last fall.
TF can hand out as many back handed swipes against whomever as he wants, but can he do better?

In my own field Frank Lloyd Wright thought the history of Architecture was bunk. ... but he delivered!

If my math is right, Fazio has 15 courses in GD's U.S. Top 100 list.  Only one other designer is in double figures (Dye, 10.5).  Of the ODGs, only Tillie and Ross have more than a handful (eight each).  I get it, what does GD know, right? ::)  In my book, Fazio has "delivered" in spades.  His positions should not be mischaracterized because one disagrees with his style.

I wonder what the reaction to the picture of the proposed #10 would have been if Hanse or Coore had been awarded the MPCC renovation.  What is the objection to recapturing what appears to have been lost green surface on both sides and reshaping the bunkers to meld with the surrounding dunes?  With the Pacific as background, the existing hole with those very ordinary bunkers seems deserving of much more.  It would be interesting if Gil and Bill would be so bold as to post their vision for #10 here.  Since they wouldn't, maybe Fazio critic Gib Papazian would take a shot at it.  

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #62 on: August 01, 2014, 04:55:57 PM »
Just as an aside: I'd be curious to know how much Tom Fazio values any concept/expression of a 'personal vision', and how he understands and articulates his own approach in this regard.

Personally speaking, and the workings of ego aside, it's hard for me to understand how an artist-craftsman who seems to so little value the personal visions/approaches of the past can feel all that differently about such visions/approaches in the present, including his own.

Maybe TF sees his own approach/style as being 'outside' the concept of vision, or 'above' the merely personal, or 'beyond' style, and so feels no deep kinship for or obligation to the past or to these ideas/ideals. 

Do you remember many years ago when Hollywood started colourizing some of the black and white movies of past filmakers like Howard Hawks and Frank Capra? I don't think it was a coincidence that one of the most inteterested and urgent voices to argue against this was Martin Scorcese's -- a personal filmaker of vision who, not surprisngly, valued the unique and personal styles of the great filmakers of the past.

Any insight you gents have into this?

Peter





From my reading of Tom's book, he mostly values pretty. So, if the members want pretty, that's what they will get. In a sense, what I read about the Strantz work indicated that one of the things he improved was the beauty and the members approved. So perhaps that's an indication of what the members want. After all, they are spending money on their favorite charity, themselves.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #63 on: August 01, 2014, 05:42:18 PM »

If my math is right, Fazio has 15 courses in GD's U.S. Top 100 list.  Only one other designer is in double figures (Dye, 10.5).  Of the ODGs, only Tillie and Ross have more than a handful (eight each).  I get it, what does GD know, right? Roll Eyes  In my book, Fazio has "delivered" in spades.  His positions should not be mischaracterized because one disagrees with his style.

I think you make a good point.  I for one don't give a hoot what the Golf Digest rankings say.  They are far different than how I would rank a course, so it doesn't matter to me if there are 15 or 50 courses by Fazio on their list.

Secondly, I don't think anyone is trying to say that modern technology and methods should not be used in design and construction.  I do think Fazio has indicated in the past that he has little regard for keeping with the design characteristics of the ODGs.  It has served him well to take the position that today's game necessitates a contemporary look.  I just think for the most part his courses are vanilla out of a desire to avoid controversy, but I give me credit for selling himself and his particular style.  Is just isn't my preference.
It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #64 on: August 01, 2014, 05:48:06 PM »
...
If my math is right, Fazio has 15 courses in GD's U.S. Top 100 list.  Only one other designer is in double figures (Dye, 10.5).  Of the ODGs, only Tillie and Ross have more than a handful (eight each).  I get it, what does GD know, right? ::)  In my book, Fazio has "delivered" in spades.  His positions should not be mischaracterized because one disagrees with his style.
...

Remember Lou,

Anyone can make a difficult golf course. Very few can make a great golf course to be enjoyed by all.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #65 on: August 01, 2014, 06:01:29 PM »
Before



After



Just poor form to remove the divot sand box on a short par three. Not only does he not give a s$#t about Raynor he obviously doesn't give a s#%t about maintenance either.  ;)

Seriously though I find his version more appealing if not a bit over the top whereas I find the current iteration rather boring, at least to the eye if that is possible in such a setting. I might tone down the bunkering concept a bit though I must admit I like creating two bunkers that serve the same purpose as the single cookie cutter kidney bunker there now. 

This certainly adds to the "eye candy" label many give to Fazio as the hole doesn't change much at all from a playing standpoint but considerable time and money will be spent "dressing it up".

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #66 on: August 01, 2014, 06:17:19 PM »
17 Mile Drive is directly behind this green, so the Ocean is very close by. I know which version I would rather play on a rather blustery day. Sometimes you need to give the player enough rope to want to try and hang himself!
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #67 on: August 01, 2014, 06:31:22 PM »
Dear Lord, as I bow my head and pray tonight, I want to thank you for this thread. Here are my reasons:

Gib went ape-skat in fewer than eight paragraphs.

Bob H. DOES have a potty mouth.

Tallman rips me apart with his "divot sand box" comment...Sterling Archer saying "Classic" again echos in my  head.


Now, on to business. How does Raynor the precise, technical engineer, fit into the wild and wooly dunesland of the west. I don't think that he does. I don't see how he could. That little Raynor bunker looks terrible when contrasted with the ocean and the roaring dunes.

It seems to me that the two sketches on the Kahn website share DNA with the Cypress Point club. As long as they aren't hiding containment mounds outside the sketch, I can't imagine it could turn out like this rorshach: http://www.jacksonkahndesign.com/estate.html

Forgive me that departure.
Coming in August 2023
~Manakiki
~OSU Scarlet
~OSU Grey
~NCR South
~Springfield
~Columbus
~Lake Forest (OH)
~Sleepy Hollow (OH)

Tom Bacsanyi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #68 on: August 01, 2014, 11:47:43 PM »
Before



After



I can't believe Fazio would rip up that Raynor bunker in front of that green. He really must not give a s*^t about Seth!

Was that not a Rees Jones bunker, c. 2000?

Honestly, what if the new hole concept was said to be a C&C design?  Would howling and gnashing of teeth be the response still?  I think not.  Whether the hole as it stands now is Rees or Raynor, it is a hideously boring looking hole in an incredible setting.  I am not in any way a Fazio apologist, but he's good at what he's good at and you know what you are getting.
Don't play too much golf. Two rounds a day are plenty.

--Harry Vardon

John Chilver-Stainer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #69 on: August 02, 2014, 07:38:03 AM »
A quick google search found this early photo of the Monterey Peninsular Country Club on the USGA Site - it looks suspiciously like the 10th.

Needless to say it captures the style of classic golf architecture far better than either the current version or the planned version.



http://www.usga.org/news/2010/January/Golf%E2%80%99s-Golden-Coast--The-Monterey-Bay-Peninsula/

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #70 on: August 02, 2014, 01:47:35 PM »
Before



After



Tom,

Have you ever hit a shot off of that hole or ever stood on the tee?

Bob

I can't believe Fazio would rip up that Raynor bunker in front of that green. He really must not give a s*^t about Seth!

Was that not a Rees Jones bunker, c. 2000?

Honestly, what if the new hole concept was said to be a C&C design?  Would howling and gnashing of teeth be the response still?  I think not.  Whether the hole as it stands now is Rees or Raynor, it is a hideously boring looking hole in an incredible setting.  I am not in any way a Fazio apologist, but he's good at what he's good at and you know what you are getting.

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #71 on: August 02, 2014, 01:59:17 PM »
A quick google search found this early photo of the Monterey Peninsular Country Club on the USGA Site - it looks suspiciously like the 10th.

Needless to say it captures the style of classic golf architecture far better than either the current version or the planned version.



http://www.usga.org/news/2010/January/Golf%E2%80%99s-Golden-Coast--The-Monterey-Bay-Peninsula/


John,

I am not sure when you last played the 10th but the archived photo that you produced was used to eliminate the cart path down to the green.

In fact there is very little difference between then and now. The putative configuration takes away from the scenic wonder of the hole. 

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #72 on: August 02, 2014, 02:03:25 PM »
A quick google search found this early photo of the Monterey Peninsular Country Club on the USGA Site - it looks suspiciously like the 10th.

Needless to say it captures the style of classic golf architecture far better than either the current version or the planned version.



http://www.usga.org/news/2010/January/Golf%E2%80%99s-Golden-Coast--The-Monterey-Bay-Peninsula/

so I was about to ask...
Is there something somewhere in the middle between the BUSY, flashy eye candy look(the Fazio rendition reminds me of the bunker work at Cork)
and Torrey Pines looking cookie cutter work(looks like no Raynor I've seen)

and John posts that gem.
Simple, yet at home in its setting (looks a bit like Maidstone)
but who pays 9 million for simple ::) ::)

That said, I'd be fine with doing nothing, and given the 2 choices of Fazio rendition or nothing, I'd leave as is
« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 02:25:14 PM by jeffwarne »
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Tom Bacsanyi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #73 on: August 02, 2014, 02:06:19 PM »
Bob you win, I have not played the hole.  I do love the look of the hole in the black and white photo, but it could just be the raw, ungrassed surroundings and the babes in the foreground...
Don't play too much golf. Two rounds a day are plenty.

--Harry Vardon

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tom Fazio doesn't give a s*^t about Seth Raynor
« Reply #74 on: August 02, 2014, 03:59:36 PM »
Before



After



I can't believe Fazio would rip up that Raynor bunker in front of that green. He really must not give a s*^t about Seth!

Was that not a Rees Jones bunker, c. 2000?

Honestly, what if the new hole concept was said to be a C&C design?  Would howling and gnashing of teeth be the response still?  I think not.  Whether the hole as it stands now is Rees or Raynor, it is a hideously boring looking hole in an incredible setting.  I am not in any way a Fazio apologist, but he's good at what he's good at and you know what you are getting.

First of all, I don't think C&C would design something that looks that way, so the question is moot.

Second, the original looks better than the mockup to me.  The proposed design is too ornate for my tastes, especially the curvaceous grass surfaces.  It looks like a spaceship.

Third, if you were lucky enough to get the contract to renovate a Fazio design, would you give a damn about Fazio?

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back