Brendan Porath
of course! The moment golf split into two timelines - Before Blockie BB and AB.
Link to commentStephanie Martone
Thanks for flagging the show - will definitely have to check him out! And that sounds great - I’ll plan to reach out then. I don’t think we have Portsea on the list, fair to say I should look into switching things around to get it added?
Link to commentMatthew Schoolfield
Yea, of course! Always happy to hash it out on golf topics. My only connection to the TPC network is through Harding Park that is managed by PGA TOUR Golf Course Properties (to the best of my knowledge), so definitely flubbed that one, but I feel like you took my point fairly, which I appreciate.
Link to commentBrian Decker
Well, good thing Tour players don't chase angles anyway, as well all know ;)
Man do I wish I could go back and see how Salinda hit that shot. I am confident he used the slope at the back of the green to funnel it back towards the left side, which is pretty courageous given the OB just a few steps behind the green. Would be cool to see!
And yes, even this (admittedly cherry-picked) example of an angle mattering is probably overstated. I too wish it mattered more than it probably does. Perhaps it would in a non-Fargiveness universe.
Re: the soft conditions, I should add, not only was there a slow spring and heavy rain on Wednesday, the first three rounds were windless and very humid - a terrible combination if you like seeing the ball move on the ground. People who have spent time in Ontario know that June has these bizarre days where, somehow, it's cold and muggy at the same time. Our old head pro moved here from British Columbia and would constantly complain about it. The reason I bring that up is, not only does make for soft conditions, it makes the turf itself almost sticky. I am hopeful we don't get that again for at least one round this year, which I think would make for a much more proper evaluation.
Link to commentBrian Decker
Fair points, and I can't argue with your perspectives and tastes. I appreciate the thoughtful reply. A couple of points to push back on, though!
> It's very obvious that most people don't want a course to be one that PGA Tour players like
- Perhaps to members of this forum, and I'd certainly say so for myself, but I'm not sure about the broader golf public. It's worth considering that TPC Toronto is the only publicly-accessible course to host the Canadian Open in the Glen Abbey era. That is a key strategic consideration for us - it means we can offer something that no one else in the market can. It also meant that we needed to produce a course that the Tour would be comfortable returning to again and again.
> any venue that is operated by the Tournament Players Club will likely not be one preferred by golf enthusiasts.
- TPC Toronto is not owned and operated by the TPC Network; it's family-owned and has a licensing agreement to use the TPC brand. When Osprey Valley joined the network in 2018, it was very poorly known by even golf enthusiasts in the Toronto area, and it was a strategic move to break through to the public golf market - one I'd argue has been extremely successful (though I can't and not trying to take credit for it). That certainly doesn't invalidate your point, but I feel compelled to point it out because it's not like we're *only* trying to create a course with the Tour player in mind. We're just trying to create the best public golf experience we can. Regardless, I find the line of critique compelling, because threading the needle between 'TPC course designed to host a tour event' and 'interesting golf at a multi-course resort' is not an easy task! It makes for interesting questions. Would we have been better off going in a different direction than the TPC Network, say by imitating the branding and style of other multi-course resorts? If I put my Director of Marketing hat on, I'd have a hard time making that case, but it's nonetheless an interesting one.
Thanks again. This discussion has been very fun!
Link to commentBrian Decker
Fair points, and I can't argue with your perspectives and tastes. I appreciate the thoughtful reply. A couple of points to push back on, though!
> It's very obvious that most people don't want a course to be one that PGA Tour players like
- Perhaps to members of this forum, and I'd certainly say so for myself, but I'm not sure about the broader golf public. It's worth considering that TPC Toronto is the only publicly-accessible course to host the Canadian Open in the Glen Abbey era. That is a key strategic consideration for us - it means we can offer something that no one else in the market can. It also meant that we needed to produce a course that the Tour would be comfortable returning to again and again.
> any venue that is operated by the Tournament Players Club will likely not be one preferred by golf enthusiasts.
- TPC Toronto is not owned and operated by the TPC Network; it's family-owned and has a licensing agreement to use the TPC brand. When Osprey Valley joined the network in 2018, it was very poorly known by even golf enthusiasts in the Toronto area, and it was a strategic move to break through to the public golf market - one I'd argue has been extremely successful (though I can't and not trying to take credit for it). That certainly doesn't invalidate your point, but I feel compelled to point it out because it's not like we're trying to create a course with the Tour player in mind. We're just trying to create the best public golf experience we can. Regardless, I find the line of critique compelling, because threading the needle between 'TPC course designed to host a tour event' and 'interesting golf at a multi-course resort' is not an easy task! It makes for interesting questions. Would we have been better off going in a different direction than the TPC Network, say by imitating the branding and style of other multi-course resorts? If I put my Director of Marketing hat on, I'd have a hard time making that case, but it's nonetheless an interesting one.
Thanks again. This discussion has been very fun!
Link to commentBrian Decker
Fair points, and I can't argue with your perspectives and tastes. I appreciate the thoughtful reply. A couple of points to push back on, though!
> It's very obvious that most people don't want a course to be one that PGA Tour players like
- Perhaps to members of this forum, and I'd certainly say so for myself, but I'm not sure about the broader golf public. It's worth considering that TPC Toronto is the only publicly-accessible course to host the Canadian Open in the Glen Abbey era. That is a key strategic consideration for us - it means we can offer something that no one else in the market can. It also meant that we needed to produce a course that the Tour would be comfortable returning to again and again.
> any venue that is operated by the Tournament Players Club will likely not be one preferred by golf enthusiasts.
- TPC Toronto is not owned and operated by the TPC Network; it's family-owned and has a licensing agreement to use the TPC brand. When Osprey Valley joined the network in 2018, it was very poorly known by even golf enthusiasts in the Toronto area, and it was a strategic move to break through to the public golf market - one I'd argue has been extremely successful (though I can't and not trying to take credit for it). That certainly doesn't invalidate your point, but I feel compelled to point it out because outside of one week a year, it's not like we operate the course with creating a 'fair, Tour player-focused' course in mind. We're just trying to create the best public golf experience we can. Regardless, I find the line of critique compelling, because threading the needle between 'TPC course designed to host a tour event' and 'interesting golf at a multi-course resort' is not an easy task! It makes for interesting questions. Would we have been better off going in a different direction than the TPC Network, say by imitating the branding and style of other multi-course resorts? If I put my Director of Marketing hat on, I'd have a hard time making that case, but it's nonetheless an interesting one.
Thanks again. This discussion has been very fun!
Link to commentTyler Waugh
Big shot bobs shot into the green on the 18th at the Scottish open to make a birdie only to have Rory top him with an eagle to claim the trophy
Link to commentJustin McCarthy
My immediate thought was Costantino Rocca holing the putt from the Valley of Sin to force the playoff with Daly at the '95 Open.
Link to commentWill Knights
As soon as I have a signed contract. Long Island, New York on 6/23
Link to commentBrian Decker
My favourite in this genre is Cabrera stuffing it on the 72nd hole at Augusta in 2013, only to be matched and eventually lose in the playoff to Adam Scott. The pelting rain, the walk after it, the hug with his son after making birdie. If I’m not mistaken he also backed off the shot and chastised a cameraman before stepping back into it, pulling the trigger in about four seconds and hitting it to four feet.
Link to commentDavid Salle
DJ at chambers after dropping shots to start the back 9 makes birdie on 17 (a hole speith doubled), then pipes one down the middle on 18 and gets home in two. If he sinks the eagle putt or forces a playoff it's remembered a lot differently
Link to commentDavid Salle
When is the location of the summer member guest being put out? Or at least a region of the counrtry for travel planning
Link to commentBrendan Popson
Hi all,
30, married, no kids, no interest in fighting. Live in UES and play at sims over the winter but hoping to play more outdoors this upcoming season. Unfortunately no car at the moment (though I'm considering getting one and would be happy to pick people up to play). Would love to meet and play with some NYC FEGC members!
Link to commentMatthew Schoolfield
> If you're going to put a course in that kind of category, it's pretty unsatisfying not to have a thoughtful justification alongside it.
Look, I've tried to go out of my way to appreciate the position that, in certain frameworks, any course can be considered good by people who prefer that kind of golf. Where I'd strongly push back against you here is that, it's very obvious that most people don't want a course to be one that PGA Tour players like. The relationship between the PGA Tour and the average golfer has never been father apart. Equipment gains have separated the way courses play to the point where it's hard for an everyday golfer to appreciate any 2+ shot hole that tour players play, because the way distances scale, you'll either lose the reasons why the tee shot or the approach is interesting.
When you add on top of that the fact that "fairness"-style of golf that professionals seem to prefer, any venue that is operated by the Tournament Players Club will likely not be one preferred by golf enthusiasts. That seems like a fairly straightforward justification, even if it wasn't said out loud. It makes sense that FEG, an outlet that consistently advocates for interesting golf for most players, don't particularly care about a course that is optimizing to test equipment they don't think is good for the game. I suspect that is why the bottom of this list is where the TPC courses mostly sit.
I can really appreciate the technical designs that make a course like this interesting. I really like golf architecture focused on game design, even though that's not the current zeitgeist in golf (and they applications here don't actually apply to me). At the same time, it seem very obvious to me why TPC courses get criticized by the general public. I can only speak for myself, but my experiences with courses that the Tour visits are that they are often designed to test things I don't care about, and to remove the kinds of tests I would like to see. I'm admittedly not much of a sports fan, but I basically only watch the Open Championship and really only when the weather is sub-optimal. The tour players want architecture to maximize their control over the outcome the receive, as though it were an applied driving range. I don't really want to watch that, I don't think most people want that either.
Link to commentJoseph LaMagna
Fair points! The specific critique (on top of the bunkers) would be that there's very little intrigue off the tee. I would even argue against the point you've made about the angle in the first round on No. 16 and believe you're overstating the importance of that angle. One of the closest approach shots of the first round (for which you've included the ShotLink plot above) came from the left-hand rough(!). Salinda hit it to 9 feet and just didn't make the putt. So I'd contend that the "Green light if you find the right side of the fairway, grind for par if you don't" concept doesn't work as well in practice as in theory, even if I wish it did.
So overall, imo some of the design decisions misunderstood what challenges a modern Tour pro. But then again, soft conditions doesn't do the golf course any favors.
Link to comment
