[Jon Cavalier]

Thanks for the comments, guys. Glad you're enjoying.

Gib and Dave:
No filter. Minimal post processing beyond cropping. I do all edits on my iPad and I do very little - it takes too long. The dark blue water is both a result of the day and the light as well the way I had the camera set up (on that day, I think I had the contrast notched up a little along with some other tweaks).

John:
The greens were perfect. Firm but not crazy, and fast without being ridiculous. Being out of position could cause trouble, but the greens were very receptive to good shots.

[Alan Ritchie]

that is sensational golf porn! I had a friend work there on a student exchange one summer and getting many a game. having never heard of it at that time I was not as impressed as I should have been! great tour.

[David_Elvins]

Thanks for the tour, Jon. Fantastic stuff.

[Josh Stevens]

So please explain
Lovely views to be sure, and some nice ground movement.  But I look at these pics and google earth and I see a bunch of straight holes, with straight mowing lines, playing into rather square greens flanked symmetrically by straight bunkers?

On the surface then, which I concede is as far as my knowledge of the place goes, I fail to get excited about it.

Clearly there is something going on, but damned if I can see it as it clearly lacks the visual impact of RM,  NGLA or Cypress, and yet it seems to get mentioned in the same breath.

Is it really that good and if so, how is it demonstrated as I suspect it is a course that very few people have ever actually played

[jeffwarne]

So please explain
Lovely views to be sure, and some nice ground movement.  But I look at these pics and google earth and I see a bunch of straight holes, with straight mowing lines, playing into rather square greens flanked symmetrically by straight bunkers?

On the surface then, which I concede is as far as my knowledge of the place goes, I fail to get excited about it.

While I will always agree that pictures often don't capture the spirit or full scale of a place,
I am STUNNED that anyone could look at these incredible pictures and not get excited.

Turn off your google earth(2 D overhead lends nothing to this course or any other for that matter) and soak in the pictures.
Great terrain fully utilized in the design, great texture, ultra firm and fast, fascinating greens, many of a template nature but completely unique to the site.
I've played the course quite a few times and I've never thought of any of the holes as "straight"
The 6th hole may look "straight" from an overhead, but the hole is a virtual pinball machine that is played anything but Straight.

Look at the picture of #10 (or almost any other hole) and try to tell me that's not exciting-yet from overhead probably looks like no big deal.

Plenty of people play it, though I'm not sure that has anything to do with the discussion

[Ed Brzezowski]

These are some of the best pics of a course I have ever looked at on GCA. You and Doc Joe have the gift. Brightens up a dreary morning.

Thank you.

[Josh Stevens]

I fear it is a course I will never be able to appreciate unless I play it, and that is unlikely to ever happen.

Perhaps I am simple minded and cannot get past the geometrical symmetry of so many of the features.  I see these identical long narrow bunkers symmetrically either side of so many greens, parallel to the lines of play,  and I just think that was lazy architecture.  Where are the great angles?  Perhaps they are there but don't translate well to pictures. 

[Bill Brightly]

Jon,

WOW! Thank you so much for posting such a great photo tour of a great course!

Josh,

Wow. Google Earth analysis?

There are plenty of Raynor bashers on gca.com. But even they are blushing now.

[Josh Stevens]

Now don't be a prat Bill.  I am simply voicing an opinion on the basis of the information that is available to me, which is all anyone can do.

Not being American I do not feel the need to gush and fawn over this place because of its exclusiveness or history.  I see what I am able to see and comment accordingly without bias.  And I see lots of dead straight holes that seem to favour straight on approaches from the middle of the fairway.  I happily concede that may not actually be the case as aerial analysis is far from ideal and certainly not the whole package, but its still part of the package.  Would Mackenzie, if given this lovely piece of sandy country, designed such unnatural geometric features - possibly not.

I am not suggesting the course is not worthy of its high regard, I am saying that these pics and google do not allow me to make an assessment.  It is a course that is utterly closed to the public so playing it out of the question, and it seemingly lacks the artistic sculpturing that we would consider a requirement on such a fine site.

Perhaps Raynor is a genius, in hiding his light under a bushel, but I happen to like lights.

[jeffwarne]

Now don't be a prat Bill.  I am simply voicing an opinion on the basis of the information that is available to me, which is all anyone can do.

Not being American I do not feel the need to gush and fawn over this place because of its exclusiveness or history.  I see what I am able to see and comment accordingly without bias.  And I see lots of dead straight holes that seem to favour straight on approaches from the middle of the fairway.  I happily concede that may not actually be the case as aerial analysis is far from ideal and certainly not the whole package, but its still part of the package.  Would Mackenzie, if given this lovely piece of sandy country, designed such unnatural geometric features - possibly not.

I am not suggesting the course is not worthy of its high regard, I am saying that these pics and google do not allow me to make an assessment.  It is a course that is utterly closed to the public so playing it out of the question, and it seemingly lacks the artistic sculpturing that we would consider a requirement on such a fine site.

Perhaps Raynor is a genius, in hiding his light under a bushel, but I happen to like lights.

What in the world does being an American have to do with gushing and fawning over this course?
Jon provided pictures to evaluate it-normally i would say pictures don't do any course justice, but in this case he has captured the place quite nicely.
I completely fail to see the geometry , straight lines,and unnatural features you keep describing.
If the images of Google earth paint a negative image of the course for you, I say don't look at them.
Why evaluate a course from the air?-nobody plays it from there>

I'll probably never play Royal Melbourne because of its great distance from me, but that doesn't mean I couldn't appreciate outstanding pictures depicting its greatness.
I keep relooking at the pictures to see what you're talking about but I simply can't find one image Jon posted that paints anything but a positive image of the course.

[Josh Stevens]

It is perhaps a good example of the extreme subjectivity of it all

It is my personal aesthetic that I find it too hard edged and abrupt.  Table top greens with sharp drop offs rather than flowing contours.

It is not a criticism of how the course plays, but rather of how it does not appeal to my eye.  But that's my eye, and it clearly differs from yours.

[jeffwarne]

Fair enough Josh.
I love the look of Royal Melbourne, and I love the look of Fisher's.(especially in these fabulous pics)

The water you see around there is all solid ice at the moment and yet another winter storm is pounding the area (about the 10th since mid January)
Stranded in Florida for another day

[Bill Brightly]

Josh,

Royal Melbourne is superb; perhaps the finest example of using width and playing angles to create a great golf course. But that is not the only way. In your Google Earth study of FI and RM, try zooming out a bit. Note that while RM is landlocked, FI sits on the tip of an island in the middle of the Long Island Sound. Try to imagine the near-constant wind. Then go back and carefully study the photos that Jon posted and try to tell us that Fishers Island is not one of the most compelling places in the world to play golf.

[Curtis Woods]

Purely by happenstance, I met Jon on the very ferry to Fishers Island pictured above the morning we played the course and he took these fabulous photos.  We all can hopefully look forward to another of his remarkable photo tours when he accompanies me as my guest at an Outpost Club event in May at another Raynor gem, Fox Chapel.

[Josh Stevens]

Takes more than pics to impress me I'm afraid.

I am more than willing to reassess and then if necessary apologise profusely, if they were to let me on for a game so I can form an educated opinion.

[Tim_Weiman]

These are some of the best pics of a course I have ever looked at on GCA. You and Doc Joe have the gift. Brightens up a dreary morning.

Thank you.

Ed,

I don't recall ever seeing a better collection of pictures of a course on GCA.

[Joe Hancock]

Takes more than pics to impress me I'm afraid.

But you can be unimpressed by pics. As Peter Pallotta would say...interesting.

Joe

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Marvelous tour and if I ever needed reminding of how special a place Fishers Island is....now I am indeed reminded.
Super golf course, maintained to perfection and one of the most enjoyable golf courses with regard to fun I have ever had the pleasure of competing upon.
One of the few tournaments I have ever played where I truly wasnt too conecerned with my score and enjotyed the surroundings.
thank you Michael Sagner for the invite many moons ago.

[Jason Thurman]

Josh claims that his fundamental issue is that he doesn't see many angles in play. Just tabletop greens with parallel bunkers running alongside them. Photos and aerials make it hard to grasp angles, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Can someone who has played the course describe the angles and strategies in play on two or three holes and explain to him why his secondhand impression is incorrect?

Josh, have you ever played a Raynor or MacDonald course? I don't ask so that I can lambast you when you reply that you haven't. I ask so that I can understand your perspective a little better.

[Patrick_Mucci]

So please explain
Lovely views to be sure, and some nice ground movement. 

But I look at these pics and google earth and I see a bunch of straight holes, with straight mowing lines, playing into rather square greens flanked symmetrically by straight bunkers?

Josh,

Do you feel that the most thorough, intelligent evaluations of golf courses are those made solely through an assessment based upon Google Earth.

Or, do you feel that the assessment of a golf hole/course is better accomplished by adhering to the recommendation on page 295 of "Scotland's Gift".
 

On the surface then, which I concede is as far as my knowledge of the place goes, I fail to get excited about it.

Clearly there is something going on, but damned if I can see it as it clearly lacks the visual impact of RM,  NGLA or Cypress, and yet it seems to get mentioned in the same breath.

Is it really that good and if so, how is it demonstrated as I suspect it is a course that very few people have ever actually played.

Do you feel that the degree of access determines the merits of the architecture ?

Of the limited number of people who have played FI, what are their opinions ?

Where does CPC stand in your assessment.

Has Ran ceased administering the AMRT in conjunction with the GIQ test ?.

[Tim Martin]

I find it hard to believe that someone who has never seen the course in person has caused others to feel that they need to defend FI. Truly one of the great iconic courses in the game can stand on it's own without anyone feeling the need to come to it's rescue. I recall another thread where Josh acted as the lone outlier and his provocative stance seemed solely for the purpose of ruffling feathers.

[Josh Stevens]

Feathers are there to be ruffled are they not?  Surely having to explain this place to someone who has never seen it is rather fun. 

I confess the lack of access to many of Americas top courses does tend to make me mark them down.  I know that is just envy and  so a bit intellectually feeble on my part, but on the other hand in an attempt to defend the indefensible, is the ranking of say TOC more valid after millions of rounds of golf by possibly a million different golfers, than that of FI where maybe only a few thousand different individuals have been around it in recent times. Perhaps

I think the regular posters here have outgrown the natural tendency to be gushing in praise of some place that is all but impossible to get on so I wont try that one, but I am not about to apologise for not blindly accepting other people's opinion.

Let me ask you  (again this is from genuine ignorance, not fishing for a response here) - could those of you old enough, think back 30 years to the 80's, in the dark days before internet or GCA.  Had you ever heard of FI, and if so, what was your view?  Did you think it great, or just some strange WASP bolthole upstate that never saw the light of day, and not a patch on the great championship venues like Congressional and all the great cutting edge stuff being built in Florida? 
When was it "rediscovered"

[Sven Nilsen]

Fishers Island is "upstate?"  When did it move?

Sven

[Josh Stevens]

Sorry, forgive my geographic ignorance, its "up there" somewhere isn't it?

[Tim Martin]

Sorry, forgive my geographic ignorance, its "up there" somewhere isn't it?

Are you sure you have a current edition of Google Earth?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()