Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Thomas MacWood on July 01, 2008, 10:21:01 PM
-
What were the best courses in California in 1930?
I wanted to look at the development of California golf architecture but I wasn't sure what date to choose. I chose 1930 because I thought that would be the highpoint but I'm willing to change it.
-
The obvious one would be Pebble.
Not sure if CPC, Pasa, and Riv existed yet!!
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1897?, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Ojai Valley - 1923 Thomas/Bell
Meadow Club - 1926 Mackenzie
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Sonoma - 1925 ?
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - ? Raynor, ? Hunter/MacKenzie
San Francisco - 1918 Tillinghast
Olympic (Lake) - ?
Montebello - ? Behr
Lakeside - ? Behr
Rancho Santa Fe - 1928 Behr
San Diego - 1922 Watson?
-
Also from the Thomas/Bell stable
Ojai - 1923
Bel-Air - 1927
Palos Verdes - 1924
LACC North - 1897
It would seem that 1930 is a good year if you want to include the lion's share of the Thomas portfolio, and 1920 would be a good mark if you want to exclude that group.
-
Tom,
I believe Meadow Club in Fairfax was Mackenzie's first design in the USA, opening c. 1926.
TK
-
Valley Club of Montecito (Santa Barbara) 1929.
One of my personal faves, Sonoma Golf Club, 1925 I think.
-
Stanford (Bell/Thomas) 1930
-
When the 1929 U.S. Amateur was played at Pebble Beach, O.B. Keeler played Pebble, Cypress, MPCC, San Francisco, Olympic-Lake, Lakeside, LACC, Montebello, Ojay, and the grand opening of Pasatiempo. He might have also played Palos Verde and Riviera, I'll have to check on this later when I'm home with my books.
Chances are O.B. Keeler would play the best courses of a new area. One of Mackenzie's books lists what he thought were the best courses in California in that era.
There were also a number of private courses in the L.A. area, such as Chaplin's private course, that might be worth considering.
Cheers,
Dan King
I have always wanted to live where one could practice shots in one's pyjamas before breakfast, and at Santa Cruz the climate is so delightful that one can play golf every day in the year, where it's never to hot and never too cold, and if it should rain it usually does it at night.
--Dr. Alister MacKenzie
-
I don't know what year it opened but what about Rancho Santa Fe.
-
San Diego CC 1922
Rancho Santa Fe CC 1928
-
Some missing notables, in no order:
La Cumbre (GCTJ/Bell)
Red Hill (GCTJ solo, 9 holes)
La Jolla (Bell)
Royal Palms :'( (Bell)
Lake Norconian (Dunn)
Montecito CC (Behr)
Lake Merced (Mac renovation)
Cal Club (Mac renovation)
Harold Lloyd estate (Bell)
Olympic Ocean (Watson)
Griffith Park (GCTJ/Bell)
Fox Hills (GCTJ/Bell)
El Caballero (Bell)
-
Ryan and Tom MacWood,
I think the 1897 date for LACC refers to their old course at Wilshire and Western (I think.) There is a photo in the clubhouse of some of the founders inspecting the current site around 1910 or 1911 (if memory serves.) I don't have the sources handy, and others know it better, but I think the course was built, then redesigned by Fowler and rebuilt by Thomas (somewhat to Fowler's plans) then redesigned by Thomas and rebuilt by Thomas and Bell all before 1930.
Brookside (WP Bell 1928) hosted some early pro tournaments and was a good early (for Southern California) true municipal course.
Rancho Park (Fowler? 1921) (Remodeled by Bell (?) to soften course in the late 40's)
Wilshire (1919) should be on any list, especially because of its relatively early (for California) date.
Again, I think it is all laid out in Thomas book and elsewhere.
Jon
I too would consider El Cab, if it was indeed before 1930 (I don't remember.) The course is long gone, but photographs look very interesting.
I am not sure Bell was actually involved in the Griffith Park courses. My recollection was that they were designed by Thomas and built by the city.
There was an early course on Coronado Island that got some press. I think redone by Bell Sr. at some point but I am not sure.
Unfortunately, many courses bit the dust due to Depression, War, and expansion before they had a chance to establish their reputation.
-
So basically all the same courses that are still the best courses in California today...
-
So basically all the same courses that are still the best courses in California today...
Minus some modern notables, this is mostly true...but name any major city with great golden age golf where this wouldn't be true? Post-depression/Pre-Dye doesn't have strong representation on a national level, let alone within one state.
But the more interesting thing to me here is what courses were once some of the best that are no longer - whether due to changes, technology, wear/tear (Brookside, Ojai, Rancho, Griffith, Wilshire, Bel-Air to an extent)
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1911?, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Ojai Valley - 1923 Thomas/Bell
Meadow Club - 1926 Mackenzie
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Sonoma - 1925 ?
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - ? Raynor, ? Hunter/MacKenzie
San Francisco - 1918 Tillinghast
Olympic (Lake) - ?
Olympic (Ocean) - ?
Montebello - ? Behr
Lakeside - ? Behr
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
San Diego - 1922 Watson
La Cumbre - ? Bendelow, ? Thomas
Royal Palms - Bell
Lake Norconian - Dunn
Montecito - Behr
Lake Merced - ? Locke, 1927 Mackenzie
Califronia C of SF - 1922? Macan, Mackenzie
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Griffith Park - ? Thomas
Fox Hills - ? Thomas/Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Brookside - ? Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - ? Macbeth
-
RSFGC is 1929.
The course DM is thinking of that Bell did I believe was Bayside, but it actually was on Mission Bay. There was a course on Coronado called Coronado CC that was first done in 1901 but was redone by AWT in 1937. I would add Victoria GC in Riverside to the list (Behr). Watson did indeed do San Diego CC originally with a redo by Bell some years later. The 1922 date is correct on that one. I'll add a few others shortly....
-
Tom,
What about the Virginia CC? Tilly & Bell did a major renovation on it in 1938-39, but I know next to nothing about it's earlier history or quality of the course.
David, Tilly recommeded the foloowing work at Coronado on his visit ther in December of 1936. He only examined holes 1-11 and not the rest of the course (this was the choice of the club. Many times during his PGA Tour he only examined limited areas of courses thius enabling him to visit up to 6 clubs in a single day.). As a result, he suggested that they lengthen the 1st by creating a new green, redesign of the 7th and shortened the 2nd holes.
-
Definites:
Orinda - 1927 Watson
Claremont - 1929 Mackenzie
Del Paso - Fowler
Annandale CC - 1919 Watson/Bell
Maybe
Burlingame CC
Seqouyah - Fowler
Agua Caliente/Tijuana CC - 1929 Mackenzie
-
Redlands CC - 1927 - Mackenzie influence
-
What about the old old course on Santa Catalina island? Do we know if it was ever any good?
I thought Annandale was MacBeth?
Tom, Tommy probably has a more complete list. Geoff Shackelford as well. Plus, Lynn Shackelford probably was playing before 1930, wasn't he?
-
Also, how was Ross' Peninsula regarded?
-
David:
I had thought that it was Watson and Bell later redesigned it after serving as the club's caddiemaster.
-
An amazing list. Can anyone venture a guess as to what (if anything) separated/differentiated those courses that didn't survive into the modern era (in whole or in part) from those that did?
I'd guess that there was no such 'common denominator', but just thought I'd ask.
Peter
-
What about the old old course on Santa Catalina island? Do we know if it was ever any good?
I thought Annandale was MacBeth?
Tom, Tommy probably has a more complete list. Geoff Shackelford as well. Plus, Lynn Shackelford probably was playing before 1930, wasn't he?
Ed Tufts designed the old course on Catalina. There are a couple of photos in the LACC history and it looks rather uninteresting.
On your other post, you are correct as to the 1897 course. Then over to Pico & Western for a couple years, ultimately to today's property which featured a bland 18-hole Tufts design prior to the 1921 Fowler/Thomas effort(s). You are right on Griffith; too much copy & paste on my end.
Wilshire = 1919
Peninsula = a fairly weak Ross design which I think was called Beresford. I would put it light years behind the other courses mentioned thus far, save 3-4 holes which are quite good.
I neglected Union League Club of SF, which today is Green Hills CC (MacKenzie).
Tom, you should consider Red Hill CC (Thomas, 1921). Pictoral information is slim, but the written hole-by-hole description by GCTJ in Pacific Golf & Motor, combined with what's left lead me to believe it was damn good in 1930.
-
I thought Red Hills was a nine-hole course.
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1911 Bendelow?, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Sonoma - 1927 Watson/Whiting
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie
San Francisco - 1918 Tillinghast
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson
Montebello - 1928 Behr
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
San Diego - 1922 Watson
La Cumbre - 1916 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Lake Merced - ? Locke, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Macan, 1929 Mackenzie
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Orinda - 1926 Watson
Claremont - ? Watson, 1929 Mackenzie
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Add Sharp Park (MacKenzie 1929?), although it was mostly destroyed by a storm shortly after it opened and there's little MacKenzie left. If I recall correctly, Daniel Wexler lists it as NLE in "Missing Links."
-
Red Hills was a nine holer by GT with BB sr adding an addtional nine.
Some others:
Lake Elsinore- Dunn (featured in GTJ's book) I'm unsure on the date ('25?) but it didn't last long.
Oakmont-Behr, 1924
Midwick-Macbeth, but heavily redone by Bell
Sunset Fields- (36) by Billy Bell, 1927
Montecito CC- Behr, 1919
Palos Verdes- Bell, 1924
Here's a link to RSFGC's club history showing that the course did not open unitl 1929
http://www.rsfgolfclub.com/club/scripts/library/view_document.asp?GRP=6227&NS=PUBLIC&APP=80&DN=HISTORY
-
where was Lake Norconian? I have never heard of that one. Is Norco too obvious?
-
where was Lake Norconian? I have never heard of that one. Is Norco too obvious?
Not at all. That's exactly where it was.
-
I would love to hear what anyone thinks some of the distinguishing style characteristics were of the best of the California architecture up to this time. Or what some of the significant architectural ideas and philosophies were out there up to this time. It seems like there was a group of real freethinkers out there then who pretty much knew each other and maybe bounced things off one another to perhaps take things to another level in the future.
Something like the idea of "artificial sand dunes" is perhaps a good example, or creating bunkers in the shapes of passing clouds. ;) Even something like Thomas' idea of "courses within a course" or the ideas for architecture behind half strokes for putts.
-
I don't think Red Hills was 18 in 1930, but I could be wrong. It was listed in the golf course guide of 1930 as 9-holes.
How good were LACC-South, Oakmont, Montecito, Montebello, Palos Verdes, Catalina, Union League, Berkeley, Hillcrest, Flintridge, Parkridge, Ft. Washington and Del Paso?
Are there any courses I've included that are of questionable merit, comparatively speaking?
When did Bell alter the bunkering at SFGC?
-
I think there was a discussion of Union League (Green Hills now) on the board a year or two ago. It has a relatively extensive listing on Wikipedia - Union League CC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Union_League_Golf_and_Country_Club).
A board member architect I think was doing some work at Mira Vista (Berkeley), but I might be mistaken. I recall a discussion of Berkeley on this board as well.
It would be interesting to know the extent of Watson's involvement at Claremont, as mentioned on the Orinda CC site.
-
I don't think Red Hills was 18 in 1930, but I could be wrong. It was listed in the golf course guide of 1930 as 9-holes.
How good were LACC-South, Oakmont, Montecito, Montebello, Palos Verdes, Catalina, Union League, Berkeley, Hillcrest, Flintridge, Parkridge, Ft. Washington and Del Paso?
Are there any courses I've included that are of questionable merit, comparatively speaking?
When did Bell alter the bunkering at SFGC?
Red Hill was definitely a 9-holer in 1930; a likely a damn good one, featuring templates from courses such as Pine Valley and The Old Course. Thomas also trapped it after play commenced in 1921.
Catalina was not very good based on the photos I have seen.
Montecito would have been quite good given the holes I understand to currently be originals, the architect's other work, and the property that was lost to highway 101.
-
Tom,
You asked, "When did Bell alter the bunkering at SFGC?"
In the December 1934 issue of Golf Illustrated, Scotty Chisholm wrote, “The San Francisco Golf and Country Club course, one of the country’s finest, abounds with such testing two-shotters and it says much for the skill of A.W. Tillinghast, the designer, that few if any changes have been made anywhere on this splendid course since he did his work many years ago…”
The year 1924 was among the few occasions when it was touched, some 6 years after it had officially opened for play. Golf Illustrated in April 1925 states, “This fine testing course, remodeled by A.W. Tillinghast a year ago [this would be in 1924], in the pink of condition…”
So up until this time very little if any substantive changes had been made to the course.
In that same December 1934 issue of Golf Illustrated, Tilly himself writes that, “The editor will be on his way to revisit California after an absence of some years.” Among the things that Tilly did on this visit is mentioned in his March 5th, 1936 letter to George Jacobus from his San Francisco stop while on his PGA Course Consultation tour. Note what he wrote:
“It must be mentioned that Greenkeeper George Paulson accompanied us throughout the day, and must compliment this man especially for the able manner in which all of my plans have been carried through, particularly the new first and second holes, as well as the new twelfth, which I designed when I was here last winter. [This would be his Winter 1935 visit mentioned in December 1934’s GI article] Today I gave them a rearrangement of the trapping of the fairway of the fourteenth, which has been the only weakness of the course. The new plan will bring it up properly. While I made numerous suggestions for refinements on nearly every hole, they were of minor character and not at all expensive to accomplish.”
As a follow-up to this letter, Tilly revisited the club on February 6th, 1937, during his next California visit on his 2+ year PGA Course Consultation tour. Writing once again to George Jacobus, He stated, “This morning it was raining again and a telephone message from Dixwell Davenport advised me that it would be foolish to attempt the visit to the San Francisco Golf Club. Consequently this was postponed until tomorrow (Sunday). However at ten o’clock Davenport telephoned again as there were indications of clearing and asked me what I thought about it. I replied “let’s go” so I drove to the club. Of course it was very wet underfoot and sticky. Out here it is not the falling rain which hinders nearly so much as the bad footing, on the adobe (?) soil. However at the San Francisco Golf Club there is a somewhat different soil condition, more sand than usual in these parts, so it was possible to walk around… I checked on all work, which I recommended last March… However some of the construction work has not altogether pleased me and gradually this is being corrected… Today I additionally instructed them concerning the raising and contouring of the right side of the 3rd green; the left-front of the 5th and located a new site for the 10th green to the right of the present (one of their own making, which has left much to be desired.) All other opportunities for improvements were made note of on my last visit and definite records made at that time by the committee…”
It is most likely that Bell was at SFGC in the 1930’s at Tilly’s recommendation (I can’t find where I put the information on those dates… I’ll see if I can find them). Many times, especially during his PGA Tour years, he suggested other architects be used by clubs to carry out his recommended work. Most occasions he would leave detailed sketches for them to work from or send them at a later date. The work that Bell did was according to Tilly's recommendations to the club.
It is interesting to again note what Tilly wrote about locating "a new site for the 10th green to the right of the present (one of their own making, which has left much to be desired.)" Clearly work was done by an in-house committee that was immediately recognized as a mistake. They corrected it by following Tilly's instructions, not Bell's or any other architect.
That Tilly was pleased with the work that Bell did and showing that he believed that they could work well together and that he wasn't competing against Tilly, was that they became partners in September 1937 right after Tilly ended his PGA Tour.
-
How good were LACC-South, Oakmont, Montecito, Montebello, Palos Verdes, Catalina, Union League, Berkeley, Hillcrest, Flintridge, Parkridge, Ft. Washington and Del Paso?
Are there any courses I've included that are of questionable merit, comparatively speaking?
These are tough questions with many of the California courses because they were either substantially changed or became NLE before they could establish much of a reputation. So with many their quality remains a mystery. Also, there was a flood in 1938 and significantly altered a number of southern California courses.
I've never played it, but what about Balboa Park, 1921? I've heard it is fun.
Does anyone know anything about California Country Club (I think that was the name) in Los Angeles, just south of Hillcrest? Judging from the neighborhood around it, I assume it was built in the mid to late 20's.
-
Here is what D. Scott Chisholm says about California golf in an article titled "Care to Hear About California Golf?" in American Golfer, 1929, Vol.32:
"I have only to make mention of such outsanding courses in California as Ojai, La Cumbre, San Francisco Golf & Country, Meadows, Pebble Beach, Cypress Point (a brand new one and the most scenically blessed of all links in the world), Riviera, Los Angeles Country, Lakeside, Annandale, Wilshire, and numerous others, including the famed El Caballero, to bring into line the superlatives of the golfers' playgrounds in the Golden State.... Although I have the privilege, and the privilege still stands, I believe, of playing over nearly all the private courses of the State, I want to say right here that I would just as soon play such public layouts as Montebello, Westwood, Sunset Fields, Western Avenue and the Griffith Park courses in the Southern part of the State and Harding Park and Lincoln Park on the San Francisco district as almost any privately owned golf course I know."
Here is what he says about California architects:
"Golf course architecture has made rapid strides in California. To such eminently successful architects as George C. Thomas, Jr., Max Behr, William E. Bell, Dr. A. Mackenzie and others must go unlimited praise for the magnificence of their art. The entrance of Mackenzie into the California field of golf course designing has brought us many new innovations that have kept the California standard of architecture to the front in recent years."
Cheers,
Dan King
The growth of golf in California will dazzle the most imaginative mind of Eastern and Mid-West golfers. Its progress has been so startling and the standard of excellence both of play and playing facilities has been so improved that those travellers who were to visit the Golden State prior to 1922 with golf clubs and plus fours cannot comprehend at first glance the vastness of the change which has taken place.
--D. Scott Chisholm, 1929
-
""Golf course architecture has made rapid strides in California. To such eminently successful architects as George C. Thomas, Jr., Max Behr, William E. Bell, Dr. A. Mackenzie and others must go unlimited praise for the magnificence of their art. The entrance of Mackenzie into the California field of golf course designing has brought us many new innovations that have kept the California standard of architecture tp the front in recent years."
Dan:
I wonder what D. Scott Chisholm was referring to when he menitoned 'new innovations.'
-
Phil
The William Bell bunkers at the famous 7th were in place in 1936, so it had to happen some time prior to that.
It seems to me there was a lot going on a SFGC in its early years. Do you know when the club moved to its current site, and if Tilly laid out the original course or redesigned an existing golf course? My impression is his work was done in stages.
-
Wasn't the South course at LACC the original 1911 course?
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Sonoma - 1927 Watson/Whiting
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie
San Francisco - 1918 Lock?, 1920 & 24 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
San Diego - 1922 Watson
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Macan, 1929 Mackenzie
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Castlewood - 1923 Bell
Claremont - ? Watson, 1929 Mackenzie
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Tom,
Tilly visited SFGC and I believe the "Bell bunkers at the famous 7th" were as a result of this.
SFGC moved to it's current site and was open for play in January 1918. This same year they also opened their newly-constructed clubhouse. Tilly did the entire course. This information can be found in the 5oth anniversary book published in the early 70's.
Tilly may have actually been out there to discuss this project as early as late 1915 and without question in 1916. He was also there in 1920 refining the course, possibly in 1922 and again in 1924 as I put in the first post. It is because he was there again in 1920, 22 (?) & 24 that one would think the work was done in stages but this is misleading. These visits were making adjustments and minor changes to the course.
Among other reasons beside the natural one that the club itself says so that we know that the entire 18-hole course was complete and open for regular play in 1918, is the mention of a professional named Brady playing the course in January that can be found in the February 1919 (p. 372) issue of the American Golfer.
It states: "The last two rounds Brady played before coming East [Brady was stationed in San Francisco during WW I and his coming East was when he was released from active duty] were two of his best, for on the two-year old San Francisco Golf Club course..."
-
Phil
I thought I remembered reading a different story regarding who did what and when at SFGC. Here is an old thread from Sean Tully. Bell redid the bunkers in 1930 and they are beauties.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,22706.0.html
-
Wasn't the South course at LACC the original 1911 course?
Definitely not. I don't have the history handy in person or in memory, but can scan & email a few pages which detail the original layout if you're interested.
-
What about Mare Island Golf Course claims to be the oldest west of the Mississippi. From it site:
Established in 1892, Mare Island Golf Club is the oldest course west of the Mississippi. Originally built as a 9-hole course its first 30 years included sand greens and dry fairways. The course began near the former Marine Barracks and proceeded south to Lake Rodgers (built in 1876 and named after Rear Admiral Rodgers), then returned to the start
John
-
Jon
I should have phrased my question better. Wasn't the original 1911 course redesigned by Fowler in 1921 and renamed the South course? And wasn't the second course or North course a completely new design in 1921?
John
I've never heard Mare Island. Did it exist in 1930 and was it any good?
-
I've never played it, but what about Balboa Park, 1921? I've heard it is fun.
David,
Balboa Park had dirt fairways and oiled sand greens until a WPA project in 1938 added irrigation and grass. Obviously William Park Bell introduced these changes; which is probably why he gets the major credit for the course design. I know some suspect it was originally a Watson design.
-
What about Hacienda CC, (1922) Max Behr?
I have been playing most of these courses since inception as Moriarty suggested. However I play more frequently now since I have ample opportunity to win money from D. Kelly and D. Moriarty.
-
Jon
I should have phrased my question better. Wasn't the original 1911 course redesigned by Fowler in 1921 and renamed the South course? And wasn't the second course or North course a completely new design in 1921?
John
I've never heard Mare Island. Did it exist in 1930 and was it any good?
Fairly close; but the North did utilize portions of the "old" course.
-
TEPaul writes:
I wonder what D. Scott Chisholm was referring to when he menitoned 'new innovations.'
He doesn't say in that article. I'm looking around American Golfer for somewhere that might say. I might have more luck looking through Mr. Mackenzie's book, but looking through old American Golfers is mucho fun. In another article a different author mentions center-line irrigation starting in California, but I don't think anyone would credit that to Mr. Mackenzie. Another article mentions bermuda grass originating in California.
I found a few mentions of Santa Cruz Golf and Country Club in American Golfer. Apparently it was in Pogonip, and had cool views of the coast from everywhere on the course. Pogonip would be up at UC Santa Cruz. It closed in 1935.
Cheers,
Dan King
If you're not failing every now and again, it's a sign you're not doing anything very innovative.
--Woody Allen
-
Tom
From reading the web site I would suspect it did exist in 1930 but unclear what condition and such. It mentions that in 1933 the Women's Club was started
It appears that the course has been changed around quite a bit due to needs of the military.
Take a look at the site: www.mareislandgolfclub.com
John
-
Dan:
I'd ask you to look to find the mention of something that might corroborate some of the philosophical ideas for architecture and the future of architecture with some of the things we suspect were coming out of the freethinking or forward thinking minds of that west coast contingent of that time that most certainly includes Mackenzie and Behr.
What I'm particularly talking about is their ideas on not using rough in golf and architecture and going with maximum width (and they just may've meant really maximum width too) with the hazard features sprinkled within rather than on the flanks as so much architecture has always had. If their ideas were not just maximum fairway width it may've been trying to serioiusly extinguish the distinctions between fairway and rough.
Of course anyone can imagine the inherent obstacles and problems to this particular new architectural philosophy but one of the ways they may've envisioned pulling it off was to basically just meld together the fairways of contiguous holes at least in some sections.
One just cannot help but notice that some of Mackenzie's whole course drawings from around that time (late 1920s) did exactly that.
The other thing to take not of is that this is precisely the way they looked at TOC and both of them most certainly endorsed everything about TOC including its very hazy distinction between fairway and rough as well as its constant side by side contiguous hole melding!!
Was this part of their new architectural expression and philosophy? I, for one, think it probably was.
Dan:
As to a little more corroboration of the architectural philosophy explained above, I believe it was one of Mackenzie's and Behr's fellow philosphical travelers, Robert Hunter, who wrote in his excellent book (around 1926) something to the effect that isn't it interesting that architecture's historical prototype IS TOC but yet so few architects have every really used many of its architectural principles elsewhere?!? ;)
-
Dan:
For a number of years now I've felt there was some truly amazing philosophical ideas in architecture emanating out of that West Coast contingent of that time, but that for a few reasons perhaps to do with timing or just the coming together of other contributing events their ideas got sidetracked or waylaid into the realm of misunderstanding or lack of appreciation. But I don't think it was just theory as there are those totally interesting vestiges of it that may include the original architectural conception and philosophy behind the design of ANGC.
The philosophical and conceptual idea behind ANGC has always been said to be TOC, but it may've been that via the freethinking ideas out of California and of those California School architects of that time.
Maybe it was something like the evolution of wine and grapes and the interrelationship of vines between France and California! ;)
The philosophies and basic architectural principles of TOC AS filtered through the radical minds of a couple of truly freethinking Californian golf architects!!
How about that!?! Those guys and what they may've been thinking and what they may've been up to totally fascinates me.
Were some of them half crazy at that point? They probably were but in an ultra creative way. Did you know that Mackenzie wrote a letter to President Roosevelt telling him that if he could just come and see him and explain to him his ideas on how to perfectly camouflage military trenches it would very likely prevent all future wars and thereby save mankind!?!
Roosevelt apparently never answered him. When Oppenheimer actually came to the Oval office pleading with Roosevelt to consider the downside of nucleur physics if misapplied apparently Roosevelt virtually had him removed from the Oval Office as he didn't want to hear any more ramblings of some mad scientist! :'(
On the other hand, one of the presidents, perhaps Roosevelt or Truman, was lobbied by Curtis LeMay (head of the US Air Force) that a really neat idea would be to strap little highly explosive devices to bats and just airdrop them out of B-29s over Japan or whatever! So I guess presidents do have a lot of wild opinions to deal with from time to time. ;)
-
TEPaul, I think you might be right, but unfortunately I'm away from all my books. I seem to remember reading something from Hunter, Behr, Thomas or Mackenzie about eastern golf being dominated by the Pine Valley effect, with each course playing down its own corridor, and their desire to build inland courses with the openness of Scottish links. The good news is Hunter, Behr, Thomas and Mackenzie were all proficient writers, so it shouldn't be too hard to find this in their words. I remember reading something about Pasatiempo and Bobby Jones on opening day being impressed with the wide open combined first and ninth hole and how much it reminded him of TOC. Mackenzie said that was his inspiration for Pasatiempo. Hard to believe with its tree lined fairways now, that at one time it reminded someone of TOC.
Here is a very interesting article I found in American Golfer:
Plans for the Ideal Golf Course (http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1932/ag356p.pdf)(pdf) by Alister Mackenzie.
I'm including a long quote from this article below, because I enjoy this paragraph.
Cheers,
Dan King
The acid test for a golf course is its abiding popularity. And here we are up against a real difficulty. Does the average golfer know what he really likes himself? When he plays well he praises the course, but, if his score is a high one, the vigor of his language would put to shame a Regimental Sergeant Major. It is usually the best holes that are condemned most vehemently by those who fail to solve their strategy. Bob Jones realizes this so strngly that when asked his opinion about the design of Augusta National, he said the course would differ so markedly from others, that many of the members at first would have unpleasant things to say about the architects. A few years ago I would have agreed with Bob, but today, owing to his own teaching, the work and writings of C.B. Macdonad, Max Behr, Robert Hunter, and others, Americans appreciate real strategic golf to a greater extent than even in Scotland, the Home of Golf.
--Alister Mackenzie (writing about Augusta National during construction.)
-
But Dan, perhaps the most brilliant foreign policy idea of my entire life-time was when the US Government (probably the CIA) tried to enlist the US Mafia to knock off Castro and thereby overthrown Cuba.
The truth is the US governement would have let the mafia do that but that pigheaded Sam Giancana made them a deal they basically had to refuse. He said he and his cohort in New Orleans would take care of Castro and Cuba but the quid pro quo was they'd have to be guaranteed immunity from all future criminal prosecution! 8)
-
"The good news is Hunter, Behr, Thomas and Mackenzie were all proficient writers, so it shouldn't be too hard to find this in their words. I remember reading something about Pasatiempo and Bobby Jones on opening day being impressed with the wide open combined first and ninth hole and how much it reminded him of TOC. Mackenzie said that was his inspiration for Pasatiempo. Hard to believe with its tree lined fairways now, that at one time it reminded someone of TOC."
Dan:
It actually is in the words of Behr's articles, there is no escaping it if one simply looks to catch it. It isn't even nuancy---he pretty much just comes right out and says it and he also said Alister Mackenzie agreed.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Lock?, 1920 & 24 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Macan, 1929 Mackenzie
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Watson/Whiting
Castlewood - 1923 Bell
Claremont - ? Watson, 1929 Mackenzie
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson, ? Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
-----------------------Tom here are my additions to your list.
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1921? Fowler, 1927? Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
-----------------------Fowler was 1920 and and 1929 was Egan/Hunter/Lapham
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell
----------I have seen Jack Neville attached to it as well.
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Lock?, 1920 & 24 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
-------------------------I have new information on the early history of the course, but will contact the club before I share it with too many people. Lock is a good guess as he was brought in as the Pro and was involved in the construction of the course, but it was mostly done before he got there.-----------------------
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
----------------------Whiting was making changes as soon as he got to Olympic, mostly following the plans from Watson, but after a while there was no more mention of Watson just Whiting.-----------------------
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie
----------and Hunter too!-----------
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
-----------Mostly Bell, Thomas was sick and only looked at the Topos and assisted in locating green sites from LA.------------
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie
-------with some input from Egan---------
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
-------and Hunter too! 1928 though.---------
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Macan, 1929 Mackenzie
---------------Cal CLub was formed at the old SFG and CC after they moved to their current site. The current Cal Club course was first laid out by Willie Lock. Macan was brought in to finish it and MacKenzie and Hunter reworked the bunkers in 1927.
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
-----------Whiting was involved and took over for Watson when he resigned!!!!!
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Watson/Whiting
-----------------More Whiting than Watson. Have never seen Watson's name associated with the course.
Castlewood - 1923 Bell
-----------I don't have my info with me but that it not the right date.--------
Claremont - ? Watson, 1929 Mackenzie
----------Watson 1920 major reworking of the routing
MacKenzie was probably more like 1928--------------
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson, ? Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Dan
Interesting in the Mackenzie article how many of the par-4's he thought would be played most successfully with a run-up shot (e.g. 7, 14 and 17). In ~50 years of watching the Masters on TV I can't remember a single run-up shot to any hole played by any player. Did the maintenance prohibit this or was Mackenzie mistaken as to how the elite golfers played the game?
Rich
-
Also interesting in Mac's article about ANGC:
"The majority (of greens) will be mildly rolling, while a few will be decidedly so."
I don't think many people would say most of ANGC's greens are mildly rolling. Who made the greens what they are today, and why?
-
DanK:
I have not seen before those remarks of Mackenzie's you inluded in post #51. I think that adds a lot more corroboration and evidence to what those guys were thinking at that time.
To me, even more interesting are some of the things that Joshua Crane was thinking at this same time. It seems to me we can see (particularly from his article recently posted on The Lido) that there were many similarities in his philosophical thinking about architecture with the contingent of Behr/Mackenzie/Jones et al but there definitely were some very notable differences, perhaps the primary one being Crane's idea of maximum or perhaps total visibility in golf architecture. Also, this idea which Crane frequently refers to as "control" is most definitely a departure from the philosophies of Behr, Mackenzie and Jones. I think Crane's idea of "control" goes right to the heart of what "penalty" should be in golf and architecture and the fact is those others were very much of a vastly different opinion on that most important concept in golf and architecture.
-
Sean
What changes did Whiting make at Olympic?
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson, ? Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Looking at this California list are there any general observations?
I'll tell you what standouts to me, the prominence of Billy Bell.
-
I'll tell you what standouts to me, the prominence of Billy Bell.
A viewpoint long held by myself and others in So Cal, Tom. When one looks at the courses that BB worked on at one time or another, it really is quite impressive. I won't say Bell is unsung, but I'm not sure he is appreciated the way he should be.
An observation of mine. How many courses are NLE or radically different now.
-
Tom, I would add McComas' name to Pebble Beach for design credit. He is afterall responsible for the 14th as we know it today. And I believe AM performed his work in '26, if I'm not mistaken.
-
Part of the unsungness of Billy Bell comes from his close association with Thomas - in fact, one course I cited, Palos Verdes Golf Club, a sporty course that time and technology have been tough on (yardage 6200) gives, or at least gave design credit on the scorecard to Thomas when Bell did most or even all of the work.
Also I'd have to think, though this is speculative on my part, that Bell's son dilutes the Bell name a bit and people see many great courses with the name William Bell on them, but also many average courses.
-
How about Victoria Club in Riverside? Wasn't it one of the earliest in all of California, and wasn't Max Behr involved at some point?
-
How about Victoria Club in Riverside? Wasn't it one of the earliest in all of California, and wasn't Max Behr involved at some point?
Victoria has been mentioned earlier, but Tom has chosen not to include it in his list for some reason. Thomas thought enough of the 15th (Alps) there to include it in his book.
-
I considered Victoria but I had a hard time figuring out how could it was. I can find very little written about the course. I also had a hard time figuring out who was involved and how the course evolved over the years.
-
I considered Victoria but I had a hard time figuring out how could it was. I can find very little written about the course. I also had a hard time figuring out who was involved and how the course evolved over the years.
Victoria Club
1903: Original 9 holes laid out by member Fred Heath
1920: 18 hole course designed by Walter Fovarque opened. Two of the original green sites were retained.
1924: Major redesign by Max Behr
1964-68: William F Bell rebuilt 4 greens, added lake between 1 and 9 fairway, rebuilt first tee.
Victoria is one of the best remaining examples of Behr's work.
BTW, Hacienda was designed by Watson and William P Bell. Behr was not involved.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Tom MacWood:
Perhaps I've missed it but have you bothered to explain yet why you've started these threads about the best courses in various regions before a certain year?
-
I want to learn more about California golf architecure history.
-
When you see a list like this IMO it gives you a better perspective of who was doing what, especially in golf course rich California. It could be argued California in 1930 was the zenith of American golf architecture. And when you see how important little discussed Billy Bell or William Watson were to the California golf scene it gives you an appreciation for their importance in the history of golf architect.
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
I'm still not sure why Del Paso is being excluded. In a January 1927 survey of golf in California entitled "Interesting California Courses," Joseph Black said that the new Del Paso course should be included in the limited list of courses he referred to in his article.
At the very top, he names SFG&CC, Lake Merced, Ojai, El Caballero and Lakeside as "offering golfing opportunities supreme."
Other courses mentioned include Del Paso, La Cumbre, Rancho, Pebble Beach, Pasadena, Mount Diablo, Sequoyah, and the "five good courses at Del Monte (including Pebble Beach).
-
I do think that Peninsula (Beresford Country Club - 1922) as the only Ross design in California does belong on the list.
-
My impression is Beresford was not one of Ross's better courses and not one of the better courses in NorCal. What I've seen of old Del Paso was uninspiring.
-
Tom,
What is your methodology for determining what does and does not make your list?
Re: Del Paso, not that I know anything about it, but wasn't the point of your thread what was great in 1930, not what impressions might be now? SPDB's citation seems telling.
-
My impression is Beresford was not one of Ross's better courses and not one of the better courses in NorCal. What I've seen of old Del Paso was uninspiring.
Using similar rationale, both of these are candidates for removal from the list:
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
-
My impression is Beresford was not one of Ross's better courses and not one of the better courses in NorCal. What I've seen of old Del Paso was uninspiring.
I would bet that Del Paso was more highly regarded than 75% of the courses on your list. If it were a narrower list, its exclusion might be debateable, but you don't seem to exclude any courses, which is why its omission is dubious.
G.O. West and James Hartness wrote in Golf Illustrated in October 1926 that "Del Paso boasts as fine fairways as there are in the state," it also began hosting regular tournaments, including the NCGA Championships almost as soon as it debuted.
You might not have been been impressed, but those who were around at the time felt differently.
-
"I want to learn more about California golf architecure history."
Tom MacW:
Excellent. Capital idea indeed. Would you like to learn more about Merion and Max Behr and Joshua Crane too? How about the philosophies of J.H. Taylor on architecture? What about Joe Roseman and the history of golf agronomy and maintenance practices?
-
"It could be argued California in 1930 was the zenith of American golf architecture."
It sure could. It would also be extremely interesting to track why and how and when that remarkable and potentially "out of the box" California free-thinking amongst a select few got truncated and essentially misunderstood and under-appreciated or frankly just missed, as time went by.
In my opinion, that relatively loose-connected brain trust out there at that time just may've been the ultimate expression of the "horse leading the cart" in golf architecture. Somehow the horse got waylaid and the result for the next half a century or so became the "cart leading the horse" in golf architecture.
Who was the horse?
Who was the cart?
;)
-
My impression is Beresford was not one of Ross's better courses and not one of the better courses in NorCal. What I've seen of old Del Paso was uninspiring.
I would bet that Del Paso was more highly regarded than 75% of the courses on your list. If it were a narrower list, its exclusion might be debateable, but you don't seem to exclude any courses, which is why its omission is dubious.
G.O. West and James Hartness wrote in Golf Illustrated in October 1926 that "Del Paso boasts as fine fairways as there are in the state," it also began hosting regular tournaments, including the NCGA Championships almost as soon as it debuted.
You might not have been been impressed, but those who were around at the time felt differently.
Sean
I disagree. I don't think it was the highly rated. I've collected six or seven articles dedicated California golf from this period and Del Paso is only mentioned in one article, and I have my doubts the author played the course. Its major design feature was tree lined fairways. I've quite a bit of information on the course, and I'm not impressed. Fowler was called into redesign the course in the early 20s, but I have my doubts his ideas were ever carried out. The aerial I have of the course in 1930 shows less the twenty bunkers, that look like they belong on 1910 public course.
-
TE
William Watson was the most important golf architect in California for the first 20 to 25 years of the 20th C.
-
Tom,
A few random thoughts and questions.
I think the first course at Brookside was 1928.
The Griffith Park website lists Thomas as the designer of the Harding Course (1925) but lists Bendelow for the Wilson Course (1914.) I wonder if there was a Bendelow course there first? Geoff or someone else must have the correct information somewhere, but just thought I'd bring this to your attention for completeness sake.
In GAA George Thomas lists attributions for the holes pictured or drawn.
-- The holes pictured from LACC North are listed as "Thomas" as opposed to "Thomas and Bell" or "Bell and Thomas."
-- La Cumbre is mostly listed as "Thomas and Bell" but both a photograph and a diagram of the 16th are listed as by Peter Bryce.
Speaking of Willie Watson, there are a few intersting photos of Lake Arrowhead in CAA, but I am not sure whether it was 9 or 18 holes in 1930.
Here are a few newspaper articles discussing some of these courses, by Geoff Shackelford and Daniel Wexler. Thanks to these two gentlemen for bringing much of this nearly forgotten history forward.
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/09/sports/sp-design9 (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/09/sports/sp-design9)
http://www.latimes.com/sports/golf/la-sp-history9apr09,0,1740845.story (http://www.latimes.com/sports/golf/la-sp-history9apr09,0,1740845.story)
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/09/sports/sp-griffith9 (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/09/sports/sp-griffith9)
-
Can anyone tell me about El Caballero? I played a course with that name in 1986, located in Tarzana. But from what I read, RTJ designed it in 1957. Was there an earlier rendition there, or is the one listed in some of these posts an entirely different site?
-
Same club, different course. The old El Cab is now a neighborhood.
-
"TE
William Watson was the most important golf architect in California for the first 20 to 25 years of the 20th C."
Uh huh. :P How many courses did Watson design in the first 20 years of the 20th century in California and what were they? Depending on what in the world you think you mean by "important" by 1930 I sure doubt he was considered to be the most important architect in California any more than HH Barker was considered to be the second best architect in America in 1910. ::)
Perhaps Willie's greatest contribution to American architecture was helping the ultra interesting Robert Hunter get a start in architecture after a pretty interesting foundation in studying and familiarizing himself with architecture here and abroad in the first 20 years of the 20th century. ;)
I mean seriously, how interesting was Robert Hunter? Was he part of that freethinking conceptual brain trust in architecture consisting of Behr, Mackenzie et al? Probably.
Who can say his "The Links" in 1926 was not one of the most interesting and seminal books on golf course architecture ever done? Or was he just one of those "amateur novices" who had to call on somebody else to tell him what to do and what to think and what to write?
-
When you see a list like this IMO it gives you a better perspective of who was doing what, especially in golf course rich California. It could be argued California in 1930 was the zenith of American golf architecture. And when you see how important little discussed Billy Bell or William Watson were to the California golf scene it gives you an appreciation for their importance in the history of golf architect.
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1930 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
I find this discussion very interesting as I know nothing about California golf - especially the stuff about Billy Bell. There doesn't seem to have been any mention of Thomas's idea of a courses within a course. This strikes me as perhaps the most revolutionary design concept to come out of California even though it seems to have never really taken off.
I find it impossible to believe that all these courses were great and/or significant back in 1930. I think someone said that the list may as well include everything because it isn't nearly discriminating enough.
Ciao
-
What were the best courses in California in 1930?
I wanted to look at the development of California golf architecture but I wasn't sure what date to choose. I chose 1930 because I thought that would be the highpoint but I'm willing to change it.
Sean
This was the original question. I'm not necessarily looking for great, but good, very good and great. If the list is not discriminating enough I'll be glad to remove whatever courses that aren't in that league. If anything I think some would say I've been too discriminating. IMO California golf in 1930 was as good architecturally as any place in the world.
-
"TE
William Watson was the most important golf architect in California for the first 20 to 25 years of the 20th C."
Uh huh. :P How many courses did Watson design in the first 20 years of the 20th century in California and what were they? Depending on what in the world you think you mean by "important" by 1930 I sure doubt he was considered to be the most important architect in California any more than HH Barker was considered to be the second best architect in America in 1910. ::)
Perhaps Willie's greatest contribution to American architecture was helping the ultra interesting Robert Hunter get a start in architecture after a pretty interesting foundation in studying and familiarizing himself with architecture here and abroad in the first 20 years of the 20th century. ;)
I mean seriously, how interesting was Robert Hunter? Was he part of that freethinking conceptual brain trust in architecture consisting of Behr, Mackenzie et al? Probably.
Who can say his "The Links" in 1926 was not one of the most interesting and seminal books on golf course architecture ever done? Or was he just one of those "amateur novices" who had to call on somebody else to tell him what to do and what to think and what to write?
TE
You are an idiot.
I take it Watson won't be making your short list of men profiled by the USGA archive? I hope that is not a case of east coast bias.
In the first twenty-five years of the century I count 25 designs in the region, and I'm sure I've missed some. There were not a lot of golf courses in SoCal in the 1900s and 1910s.
I'm fascinated by the man; I believe he is one of the most interesting figures in American golf architecture history, not just California golf history, and one of the most important. I'm not sure why you feel the need to mock him. If he had been practicing in Philadlepha he'd be considered a god.
-
David
Your information jives with what I have read about Griffith Park. Course #1 was designed by Benedelow and course #2 by Thomas. The LA Times reported #2 opened in 1923. Thomas redesigned #1 in 1927.
Are you sure Bell wasn't involved at LACC? I changed the other attributions.
If had included nine hole courses Watson's Lake Arrowhead would have deffinitely made the list.
Its too bad Shackelford, Wexner and Naccarato could not lend their expertise to the list.
-
Tom MacWalnut:
Willie Watson was a fascinating guy as a lot of those early guys in varioius regions were who served as an important link in the evolution of architecture that came later.
No, he didn't make the initial USGA list of the fifteen most signficant architects in American history. There're probably fifteen others who are more sigificant than he was even if someone like you has recently become fascinated by him and may not agree with that. ;)
My God do you have a problem and a major league chip on your shoulder towards some regions and people from them. Now we have your "East Coast Bias" label to add to your "Philadelphia Syndrome" label. Interesting! ;)
If you're so interesting in these things why didn't you take me up on my offer to you to get involved in consulting on the archive? To me it's obvious, you just can't take any responsibility for anything---you've never been able to. Maybe you just can't stand the idea that some opinionated jerk out there somewhere may call you an idiot on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com for not seeing things exactly as he does. It seems the best you can do is sit out there in your little Ivory Tower and question and criticize others on this website.
By the way, it's Dan Wexler, not Dan Wexner. :P He's written some excellent books. Have you heard about that? He's also on the USGA Architecture Archive committee, so why don't you call him an idiot too for not promoting Willie Watson more on the first list of the fifteen most significant architects in American architectural history? ;)
You've become fascinated by HH Barker too, right? Is the whole USGA Architecture Archive committee all idiots because it hasn't identified HH Barker as the second best architect in America in 1910, an opinion that was apparently floated by you recently. ::)
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
David
Your information jives with what I have read about Griffith Park. Course #1 was designed by Benedelow and course #2 by Thomas. The LA Times reported #2 opened in 1923. Thomas redesigned #1 in 1927.
In his book Thomas wrote he designed one in 1923 and the other in 1925. He may be referring to the date he designed them, not when the opened. (I think the city built them.)
Are you sure Bell wasn't involved at LACC? I changed the other attributions.
I think he was involved, with the construction at least. I just find it odd the way Thomas lists it in the book.
Its too bad Shackelford, Wexner and Naccarato could not lend their expertise to the list.
I agree, but I can't say I blame them.
-
Del Paso was completely done over 2 years ago--should point that out.
But in its first incarnation, to not have it on this list would be a mistake--every california governor has been a member, it's the most prestigious club in the state capital, and was done in the "golden age" of california golf architecture. Hell, it hosted a USGA major championship for crissakes.
-
Del Paso was completely done over 2 years ago--should point that out.
But in its first incarnation, to not have it on this list would be a mistake--every california governor has been a member, it's the most prestigious club in the state capital, and was done in the "golden age" of california golf architecture. Hell, it hosted a USGA major championship for crissakes.
From what I have read, in it's day Del Paso was overshadowed by MacKenzie's original Haggin Oaks course, although you couldn't tell by what's left there now.
-
Jed & Tim
What were the architectural merits of Del Paso in 1930? Who originally designed the course in 1916?
-
Speaking of Willie Watson, there are a few intersting photos of Lake Arrowhead in CAA, but I am not sure whether it was 9 or 18 holes in 1930.
LA was a nine holer then. WFB added the addtional 9, but I'm not sure of the exact date.
Tom MW, I've posed the question your asking now before, that being whether or not the golden age reached it's zenith in California. I seem to remember not getting a favorable response from most of the east coasters. ;) Personally, upon reflection after asking that question myself, I reached the conclusion that it makes it's case better than anyone else.
Billy Bell and Willie Watson were major players during the golden age here in California and Bell continued right up until his death in 1953. And I agree, Watson was THE guy in the early 20th century.
-
From David Stamm:
Tom MW, I've posed the question your asking now before, that being whether or not the golden age reached it's zenith in California. I seem to remember not getting a favorable response from most of the east coasters. Personally, upon reflection after asking that question myself, I reached the conclusion that it makes it's case better than anyone else.
From post #79:
"It could be argued California in 1930 was the zenith of American golf architecture."
Tom MacWood
“It sure could. It would also be extremely interesting to track why and how and when that remarkable and potentially "out of the box" California free-thinking amongst a select few got truncated and essentially misunderstood and under-appreciated or frankly just missed, as time went by.
In my opinion, that relatively loose-connected brain trust out there at that time just may've been the ultimate expression of the "horse leading the cart" in golf architecture. Somehow the horse got waylaid and the result for the next half a century or so became the "cart leading the horse" in golf architecture.
TEPaul
-
David
Not only was Watson THE man in California in the early years, it could be argued he was the man in the Midwest around the same time, or at least one of main men. That is pretty remarkable.
I think one of the reasons for the lack of recognition today for the west in general is due to the fact that California golf architecture went from the heights in around 1930 to the pits in a very short period. They were not able to sustain that very high level of output; there was no one waiting in the wings (with much talent) after the main players died or retired. As a result a lot of those courses were altered by lesser architects. It seems to me, in other regions, the best courses, for whatever reason, were not nearly as prone to redesign. California exploded population wise, and that put additional pressure on things. In some ways California was its own worst enemy.
That being said, serious students of golf architecture have a lot of resources at their disposal today, which allows them uncover the major contribution of men like Billy Bell, William Watson and HH Barker....if they are truly interested. I think it is inexcusable to mock these guys just because you are ignorant of their accomplishments or ignorant of golf architecture at a particular period or place.
I think there is a bias. Following discusions on GCA is a good barometer of an eastern emphasis. I couldn't even hazard a guess how many words have been devoted to Hugh Wilson (there is another active thread going on right now). His greatest claim is redesigning Merion with the help of William Flynn, a very solid accomplishment no doubt, but after that there is not whole lot to write home about. Solid but nothing earth shattering. Compare his career accomplishments with William Watson or Billy Bell, who were involved in probably 100 courses in total. How many words have been devoted to these guys in comparision? 1/100th, 1/1000th, probably closer to 1/1000th.
-
"That being said, serious students of golf architecture have a lot of resources at their disposal today, which allows them uncover the major contribution of men like Billy Bell, William Watson and HH Barker....if they are truly interested. I think it is inexcusable to mock these guys just because you are ignorant of their accomplishments or ignorant of golf architecture at a particular period or place.
I think there is a bias. Following discusions on GCA is a good barometer of an eastern emphasis. I couldn't even hazard a guess how many words have been devoted to Hugh Wilson (there is another active thread going on right now). His greatest claim is redesigning Merion with the help of William Flynn, a very solid accomplishment no doubt, but after that there is not whole lot to write home about. Solid but nothing earth shattering. Compare his career accomplishments with William Watson or Billy Bell, who were involved in probably 100 courses in total. How many words have been devoted to these guys in comparision? 1/100th, 1/1000th, probably closer to 1/1000th."
Tom MacWood:
Is there really any question WHY there is continued antagonism towards you with the constant remarks you make on here like the one above?
First of all, Hugh Wilson was one of those unusual "amateur/sportsmen" architects of a particular era who concentrated on only a few projects, primarily Merion East for about fifteen years. The man had another day-job, you know? Due to that fact, it's ridiculous to compare him to someone like Watson who was a professional and did app. 100 courses. The only way to compare Wilson's architectural talent or Wilson's significance in American architecture to Watson's is not to compare how many courses either did but the quality of what they did.
I don't think anyone who knows anything about golf course architecture is going to seriously claim Watson produced a golf course or architecture of the quality and enduring fame of Merion East.
You wonder why there are so many threads on Merion which you claim is evidence of an East coast bias? Well, one reason is there are two on here---eg you and your sidekick Moriarty who have been questioning the accuracy of the architectural record of MERION and its architectural attribution for over five years. You were the one who began the thread: "Re Macdonald and Merion" and you are the one who began a thread questionng "legends" and the "status quo" that concentrated on the accuracy of the "legend" of Hugh Wilson and the "status quo" of MERION's architectural record!
We did not do that here in Philadelphia, you did that yourself. You, and then Moriarty are the ones who brought all that up, not us. The threads are on this website that prove that. You apparently do that to try to challenge clubs and their history and their architects that have those clubs attributed to them. There's no question in my mind the two of you do that to try to make a name for yourselves as researchers. The truth is you've made fools of yourselves as researchers and architectural and historical analysts. Your assumptions and conclusions in the process are pretty shocking inaccuracies and distortions---eg patent historical revisionism. You also try to do this kind of thing with an amazing lack of information.
It won't stand and you will be proven wrong.
Then you apparently attempt to promote other architects who history has probably treated accurately and make more out of them then they ever were. We know who Willie Watson was and what he did in the midwest and in California. We aren't mocking him simply because we don't make as much out of him as you're trying to do. History has a pretty interesting way of basically telling the truth about people and what they really did but obviously you don't look at it that way probably because the only one you're really trying to promote on here is yourself. The funny thing is you're not lecturing on here to some high school class, you're talking to a whole lot of people who know a whole lot about the history of architecture. It seems like you just can't help trying to make it look like you know more than anyone else---that you are the only real serious student and analyst of architecture on here. That's definitely a joke if I've ever seen one.
You call yourself a serious student of architecture? Maybe you're serious but you are also truly bad at some of the things you assume and conclude.
I'll take the words of a George Thomas who was there and who knew these men and what they did and how good any of them were over your musings any day. What did Thomas say about Wilson? If you don't know I'd be happy to tell you, even though a defensive and clearly insecure jerk like you will probably try to convince some of us that Thomas was engaging in some sort of hyperbole too in the interest of promoting the legend status of a Wilson. The constant responses of the two of you that all the words and records of the people who were involved must in some way be inaccurate or hypebole or eulogies or lies is preposterous. If that's your best response and defense it's truly pathetic. That's not research OR analysis. It's pettiness and defensiveness.
Wilson deserves credit mostly for redesigning Merion East with Flynn?? What kind of bullshit is that MacWood? Of course he deserves credit for that but he and his committee also routed and designed Merion East and to a man the members of his committee said Hugh Wilson was in the main responsible for the architecture of the East and West course. Your only response is they ALL must be mistaken somehow! ??? ::)
All really poor golf architecture analysts like you can come back with to that is everybody must have been lying or exaggerating for some reason or that all this is being perpetuated by the people from this region.
You're not a serious architecture analyst, you're a detriment to architectural analysis and the reason seems to be you have a massive and on-going chip on your shoulder towards entire regions and the people from them. Why is that Tom MacWood? Are you really that insecure?
-
Again, as I mentioned a couple of times on this very thread (and previously), I think some of what was going on in California, both in the minds of some from a particular contingent out there just before and around 1930, as well as on the ground just may have been the zenith of architecture in America.
Somehow that doesn't sound like a regional east coast bias to me.
-
How about Green Hills Country Club in Millbrae? I hope to play in a few months...
http://www.greenhillscc.com/club/scripts/section/section.asp?GRP=8456&NS=PG
Dr. Alister MacKenzie designed Green Hills (known then as the Union League Club of San Francisco) in 1929.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie
Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Tom MacWood,
I am curious as to whether Travis ever did anything in California. I know he put in for he job at Brookside but it was given to Bell, who was finishing up Riviera at the time with Thomas. I do no know of any job he did.
Also, I recall seeing and may have somewhere a plea from Hunter to Travis asking him to come out to California to help stop the general carnage that Fowler was inflicting upon the landscape.
__________________________________
TomPaul, I am not surprised but a little concerned that you fail to acknowledge any East Coast bias in how we look at golf course architecture. Almost all of the big tournaments were in the East, with an occasional trip to the Mid East (What you would call the Mid West) Almost all of the writers we turn to were in the East. Almost all of the Major Magazines were from the East. All there was in the West were golfers and golf courses, almost all of which came and passed unnoticed in the East.
But for the fine work of Shackelford and Wexler, one might think the only two architects that existed in the west were Thomas and Macdonald. One wonders whether many would even bother with Thomas but for his Philadelphia connections.
As for the multitude of Wilson threads, I think if you go back and look you will find that they generally consist of a mass of posters purportedly defending the honor of Wilson and other Philadelphians, and only one or two trying to look at who else might have had an influence. I have not started a single Merion thread since I posted my In My Opinion, and I don't intend to anytime soon. My role has been responding to the avalanche of hard feelings that my essay created. That in and of itself is pretty good evidence of bias.
Wilson was a great man and contributed greatly to gca and agronomy in particular, but there are other great stories out there, many of which never get told at all.
Take Norman MacBeth. Most here probably have no idea who he is. He too was heavily involved with the USGA's green section. He to was an amateur architect with a real job. He was an excellent Amateur golfer, many times the California Champion over a period of decades, and apparently heralded as the second coming of Harold Hilton. But he settled in Los Angeles and went to work building roads. Something tells me that if had been producing holes like the one below in New York or Philadelphia, we would know quite a bit more about him.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v249/dmoriarty/Golf%20Courses/Old%20Photos/50302c4a.jpg?t=1215624077)
Perhaps if more knew he spent some time in Pennsylvania before he moved to California he would get a bit more recognition.
-
Tom MacW -
Interesting about Watson. I had thought of him as more prolific than good, but maybe I've got it wrong. His big course - Olympic - I'm not much impressed with as architecture. A big, tough course with very pretty trees and a huge clubhouse but I'm not sure what more there is to say about it. I'm not familiar with the other courses Watson did in California. I would love to hear from the west coast guys about their quality.
I did play Belvedere in Michigan a couple of summers ago (a course Watson did late in his career) and was impressed.
As for the nor'eastern bias thing, don't get this Atlantan started.
Note that among the criteria for the first go-round of the USGA list (it is open to revision or expansion at any time, btw) was that names be generally known to the public. That was a criterion because of internal sign-off reasons at the time it was compiled. The list was limited to 15 architects. Watson and others missed out in part because there were better known designers out there. Getting Leeds in was difficult for that reason. But as we learn more, certainly Watson ought to be considered.
Bob
-
Let's not forget Watson's crown jewel was lost, The Ocean course at Olympic. Had it survived it no doubt would be considered one of the finest in the country.
(http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o179/dlk1992/OlympicOcean12th.jpg)
(http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o179/dlk1992/OlympicOcean11th.jpg)
(http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o179/dlk1992/OlympicOcean10th.jpg)
(http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o179/dlk1992/OlympicOcean9th.jpg)
-
David Moriarty:
It will never cease to amaze me what people like you and Tom MacWood say on here about what I know about architecture or any particular architect. Neither one of you have any idea what I know or don't know, what I've read, what I've done etc. I don't know either one of you and you don't know me. For either of you to state on here what I'm interested in and not interested in is preposterous.
You must be under some delusion that all I ever do with architecture is write on here. I'm afraid not. So do me a favor and try not to tell me or anyone else what I'm interested in or not interested in or what I know or don't know.
Furthermore, your essay on here about Merion created a stir not because of some east coast or Philadelphia bias but because it's assumptions and conclusion are just inaccurate. It's pretty much as simple as that. The attribution given to Macdonald and Whigam by Merion is accurate and the attribution given to Hugh Wilson and his committee by Merion is accurate.
The story of his trip abroad in 1910 is very likely inaccurate and probably did not come within a half century of the routing and design and creation of Merion East. The point is that has nothing to do with what Wilson and his committee did at Ardmore in 1911. Wilson and his committee routed and designed the East course with advice and suggestions from Macdonald and Whigam, just as the architectural record has said.
As far as California architects and its architecture particularly from the late 1920s and on, it has always completely fascinated me and I'm most certainly not anaware of any of it. It's certainly not as if I've never been to California and many of those courses.
So stop trying to tell me or this site what I know or don't know or what I'm interested in or not interested in. Neither of you have any idea, that's for sure.
-
Tom MacW -
Interesting about Watson. I had thought of him as more prolific than good, but maybe I've got it wrong. His big course - Olympic - I'm not much impressed with as architecture. A big, tough course with very pretty trees and a huge clubhouse but I'm not sure what more there is to say about it. I'm not familiar with the other courses Watson did in California. I would love to hear from the west coast guys about their quality.
I did play Belvedere in Michigan a couple of summers ago (a course Watson did late in his career) and was impressed.
As for the nor'eastern bias thing, don't get this Atlantan started.
Note that among the criteria for the first go-round of the USGA list (it is open to revision or expansion at any time, btw) was that names be generally known to the public. That was a criterion because of internal sign-off reasons at the time it was compiled. The list was limited to 15 architects. Watson and others missed out in part because there were better known designers out there. Getting Leeds in was difficult for that reason. But as we learn more, certainly Watson ought to be considered.
Bob
Bob
IMO Olympic Lake looked to be much more interesting in the early years before they planted the trees. The few pictures I've seen of the Ocean Links has always impressed me (thanks David).
I think you can divide Watson's career into two phases. An early phase in the 1890s and 1900s that was pretty crude. He made a trip abroad in 1911 to study modern golf architecture, which was a turning point and the period afterward produced some excellent courses, all over the midwest and in California. His other claim to fame is collaborating with Robert Hunter and Billy Bell in their first design experience...although I suspect they had as much an influence on him as he on them....nothing wrong with that in my book.
I don't get too caught up in the top or most influential 15 or 30 architects. I understand that USGA list must stay with American architects and has to look at all eras. I'm focused mostly on pre-WWII and try to look a little more globally.
DM
I have not found any design activity with Travis out west although I think he died in Colorado. I get the impression Travis was a major factor in Barker's success and popularity, and HH did some design work out west, however none in California that I know of.
-
Aside from Thomas and Mackenzie, will there be any golf architects who practiced in the West on in the list of 15 that the USGA is honoring?
Bob Crosby, I am curious as to why the USGA would go with only architects that were known to the public? If they are already well known to the public then what is the point? Wouldn't golf be better served if the USGA actually delved into the architects and courses that deserve recognition but haven't been recognized?
____________________________
TEPaul, I did not say what you know or don't know. I said most on here no nothing about Norman MacBeth or others like him. I stand by that. As for what you know and don't you, you wax and wane incessantly, and you constantly write about how much you know, but rarely do you ever offer anything new on here, except for Society gossip from the days of yore. Yawn.
Plus, whenever anything new comes up you backtrack immediately, either claiming you knew that all along, or that, despite past claims, it really wasnt your area of focus.
You really don't think that playing a few West Coast courses gives you an expertise on the history of golf architecture in the West do you?
-
Wasn't Dunn at one time a design associate of Travis'?
-
That is a very good point. If Travis did work in California JD Dunn would be the logical place to look.
-
David Moriarty:
The USGA Architecture Archive started with app fifty of the most significant courses and app fifteen of the most significant Architects of American architecture essentially because it has to start somewhere and that's as good a place to start as any. It involves a helluva lot of time and effort. I hope in some years it can cover most of everything about American architecture and those who worked here. Personally someday I would like to see it cover architecture and architects world-wide.
If some of you out there have what you think are some differences of opinion or if you have information on architecture or regions and their architects that you think is important enough to be treated differently then just try to make a cogent case as to why that is and then just make what you know available to us. We've posted a few times who to get in touch with. Don't just complain about what it's doing, get involved and try to help out if you really have the interest in some of what you're saying on here.
"TEPaul, I did not say what you know or don't know. I said most on here no nothing about Norman MacBeth or others like him. I stand by that. As for what you know and don't you, you wax and wane incessantly, and you constantly write about how much you know, but rarely do you ever offer anything new on here, except for Society gossip from the days of yore. Yawn.
Plus, whenever anything new comes up you backtrack immediately, either claiming you knew that all along, or that, despite past claims, it really wasnt your area of focus."
As far as I'm concerned you can take those remarks and others like it and shove them up your ass! :)
"You really don't think that playing a few West Coast courses gives you an expertise on the history of golf architecture in the West do you?"
Of course I don't think I'm an expert on the history of golf architecture in the West. To be able to do that I figure I'd probably have to live out there. It's only what is generally recognized as the most significant architecture out there that I've seen or tried to study. What I'm really interested in, however, is that contingent made up of the likes of Behr, Mackenzie, Hunter, Thomas and perhaps a few others who were out there and who I think were all in on some really fascinating and futuristic ideas and concepts for architecture. A lot of that revolves around Behr's writing, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm most definitely not unfamiliar with that.
But there sure are plenty of others I want to know more about including the heathland architects, especially Fowler. I know quite a bit about Park and sure want to know more, and certainly Emmet and some of the New England courses and architects I'm not that familiar with such as Stiles. I'm always looking for more on Travis too, and Langford and Moreau, Strong etc. The Fownses will probably be a new project too, what there is from them and about them. The Oakmont history book turned up one fascinating item. I'm sure not done on Leeds either, or even trying to find out more on Yale's Pryde---he may've been an important original architectural educator of a few of America's most imaginative architects.
But Willie Watson, William Bell, Norman MacBeth, Chandler Egan, Robert Hunter, and certainly Marion Hollins I always want to know more about. I might even have a tremendous lead on Hollins I'll be checking out hopefully shortly (maybe I'll even find Raynor's routing ;) ). Her Women's National was pretty amazing. Matter of fact, that entire push for dedicated women's courses back then is a fascinating subject that virtually petered out and not much is known about. Rand Jerris seems fascinated by that unique aspect. Even Crump was going to get into it if he hadn't died. He'd interviewed a couple of the top women amateurs on that. Can you imagine finding those notes or letters?
There's a lot to do and a lot to look into, so again, David Moriarty, try not to tell me what I know and don't know or what I'm interested in and not interested in---basically you have no idea. The only thing I don't ever want to get into is trumping up some revisionism on courses and architects I'm not totally familiar with as it seems both you and MacWood are prone to doing. And if what I write on here bores you then try not to read it. That way you won't feel you need to make insulting remarks like those above.
-
David Moriarty:
The USGA Architecture Archive started with app fifty of the most significant courses and app fifteen of the most significant Architects of American architecture essentially because it has to start somewhere and that's as good a place to start as any. It involves a helluva lot of time and effort. I hope in some years it can cover most of everything about American architecture and those who worked here. Personally someday I would like to see it cover architecture and architects world-wide.
If some of you out there have what you think are some differences of opinion or if you have information on architecture or regions and their architects that you think is important enough to be treated differently then just try to make a cogent case as to why that is and then just make what you know available to us. We've posted a few times who to get in touch with. Don't just complain about what it's doing, get involved and try to help out if you really have the interest in some of what you're saying on here.
Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you. As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project. Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?
As to the USGA's selection process, let me take a guess. . . of the 15 architects chosen, I'll guess that a full one-third of them are from the "Philadelphia School." I hope I am not correct, but if I am, wouldn't that seem to be a bit much from a metropolitan area that was notorious for its bad courses up until about 1912?
As far as I'm concerned you can take those remarks and others like it and shove them up your ass! :)
Why do you put a winking smiley face after telling me to stick my remarks up my ass? Do you think the smiley face makes your comment any less inappropriate or offensive? Is it yet another way for you to avoid responsibility for your own behavior?
Of course I don't think I'm an expert on the history of golf architecture in the West. To be able to do that I figure I'd probably have to live out there. It's only what is generally recognized as the most significant architecture out there that I've seen or tried to study. What I'm really interested in, however, is that contingent made up of the likes of Behr, Mackenzie, Hunter, Thomas and perhaps a few others who were out there and who I think were all in on some really fascinating and futuristic ideas and concepts for architecture. A lot of that revolves around Behr's writing, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm most definitely not unfamiliar with that.
But there sure are plenty of others I want to know more about including the heathland architects, especially Fowler. I know quite a bit about Park and sure want to know more, and certainly Emmet and some of the New England courses and architects I'm not that familiar with such as Stiles. I'm always looking for more on Travis too, and Langford and Moreau, Strong etc. The Fownses will probably be a new project too, what there is from them and about them. The Oakmont history book turned up one fascinating item. I'm sure not done on Leeds either, or even trying to find out more on Yale's Pryde---he may've been an important original architectural educator of a few of America's most imaginative architects.
But Willie Watson, William Bell, Norman MacBeth, Chandler Egan, Robert Hunter, and certainly Marion Hollins I always want to know more about. I might even have a tremendous lead on Hollins I'll be checking out hopefully shortly (maybe I'll even find Raynor's routing ;) ). Her Women's National was pretty amazing. Matter of fact, that entire push for dedicated women's courses back then is a fascinating subject that virtually petered out and not much is known about. Rand Jerris seems fascinated by that unique aspect. Even Crump was going to get into it if he hadn't died. He'd interviewed a couple of the top women amateurs on that. Can you imagine finding those notes or letters?
This post is a good example of what I am taking about. You go on and on, drop the names of a dozen designers and one USGA official, tell us what you have decided is important. But as far as I can tell you have offered absolutely nothing of substance the conversation. I've gone back through the entire thread and it is the same for every post. You insult Tom MacWood, me, a few designers who you don't know anything about. You tell others to research things that you are interested in. But you offer absolutely nothing of substance to the conversation. Nothing.
There's a lot to do and a lot to look into, so again, David Moriarty, try not to tell me what I know and don't know or what I'm interested in and not interested in---basically you have no idea. The only thing I don't ever want to get into is trumping up some revisionism on courses and architects I'm not totally familiar with as it seems both you and MacWood are prone to doing. And if what I write on here bores you then try not to read it. That way you won't feel you need to make insulting remarks like those above.
Don't worry, I rarely read your posts. But it is distracting and annoying when you stick your nose into conversations where you have nothing to offer. This detracts from those conversations. Bogs them down with unnecessary pomposity.
You often say there is much to do. You also often say what you find interesting and plan to look into. I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago. If you spent 1/2 the time researching that you spend pontificating on this site, you would be the most knowledgeable man in golf. Yet for a man with your resources, interests, and connections, your contributions are rather minuscule. Take away Wayne's coattails and there is even less. Since all you are apparently interested in is waxing philosophically, at least have the courtesy to quit polluting others' efforts with your pompous pontifications.
Thanks.
[If you'd like, you can insert one really big winking smiley face here.]
-
"Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you. As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project. Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?"
David Moriarty:
I don't care if you addressed questions to Bob Crosby. If you insist on putting a question on here about something both of us are involved in I feel free to answer it. If you want to direct a question only to Bob Crosby then IM or email him instead of putting it on this discussion forum. That's an option you're aparrently not willing to consider in your ongoing campaign to challenge clubs and people. You may have your ideas on how this website should work and I have mine. If you think it's unproductive to help out the USGA Architecture Archive that's fine with me. It probably is unproductive for someone like you. I'm no gatekeeper but I am involved in it. A month or so ago you put a post on here that was pretty insulting regarding it with me involved in it. I won't forget that! Frankly, judging from that preposterous essay on Merion you did I think it's wholly unproductive for you to get involved in anything to do with golf architecture research. You don't further the cause, rather you detract from it.
"I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago."
You've been around where for eight years? Around this website? So what? Apparently you think this website is the only thing happening in architectural research and that's apparently part of your confusion. It probably is for you but certainly not for some of the rest of us. Some of us get involved with clubs and projects but that's something you neither do nor seem to understand how to do properly. Perhaps you've tried and it wasn't possible. I don't think anyone should wonder why that is.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
California GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson/Whiting
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie
Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
"Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you. As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project. Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?"
David Moriarty:
I don't care if you addressed questions to Bob Crosby. If you insist on putting a question on here about something both of us are involved in I feel free to answer it. If you want to direct a question only to Bob Crosby then IM or email him instead of putting it on this discussion forum. That's an option you're aparrently not willing to consider in your ongoing campaign to challenge clubs and people. You may have your ideas on how this website should work and I have mine. If you think it's unproductive to help out the USGA Architecture Archive that's fine with me. It probably is unproductive for someone like you. I'm no gatekeeper but I am involved in it. A month or so ago you put a post on here that was pretty insulting regarding it with me involved in it. I won't forget that! Frankly, judging from that preposterous essay on Merion you did I think it's wholly unproductive for you to get involved in anything to do with golf architecture research. You don't further the cause, rather you detract from it.
The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him. In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them. Naturally.
Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website. Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea.
"I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago."
You've been around where for eight years? Around this website? So what? Apparently you think this website is the only thing happening in architectural research and that's apparently part of your confusion. It probably is for you but certainly not for some of the rest of us. Some of us get involved with clubs and projects but that's something you neither do nor seem to understand how to do properly. Perhaps you've tried and it wasn't possible. I don't think anyone should wonder why that is.
That's rich. You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums? You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine? I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay. How about you post it and we take a look at it?
___________________________________________
DM
I have not found any design activity with Travis out west although I think he died in Colorado. I get the impression Travis was a major factor in Barker's success and popularity, and HH did some design work out west, however none in California that I know of.
Wasn't Dunn at one time a design associate of Travis'?
That is a very good point. If Travis did work in California JD Dunn would be the logical place to look.
Tom and David Stamm,
I think there is reference to a John Duncan Dunn routing for Brookside, or reference to one, so he may have been invovled with Travis at the time. If either of you needs to know, I'll try to dig it up.
I also recall reading somewhere that John Duncan Dunn was commission to do two 9 hole courses on Catalina Island sometime in the 20s. I think they were to be separate 9 holes but designed and built at the same time. Not for the list, but it might be something Dunn done.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to say what he was working from but Whiting was making a number of changes to the courses there almost as soon as he got there. I have gone through a lot of newspaper articles 1920-1927 every sports page!, and whiting is almost always mentioned and Watson almost never except for his proposed changes. Fowler was there before him as well, but changes with property lines changed everything. In 1925-6 I can't say for sure Behr came up to Olympic to look at the proposed changes drawn up by Whiting and approved of them. Shortly afterward they would team up at Capuchino Behr as the Architect and Whiting as the Construction supt.
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1918 version was the old SFG &CC, and I have yet to track down the architect of that course. Lock was involved in the new course until he was let go and Macan came in and finished the job.
1925-6 Lock and Macan 1927 MacKenzie and Hunter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harding Park - 1925 Watson
A Watson design that was tweaked and finished by Whiting.
---------------------------------
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
I have an article that puts Egan there as well going over the proposed routing.
----------------------------------------------------
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?
No mention of Watson, just Whiting
------------------
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Seqouyah It looks like the original course was possibly done by committee that included Jack Neville
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie
Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
David and Tom
John D. Dunn was also slated to do a course at Caves Landing with Thomas and another architect I can't recall.
Travis came out to California to see Hunter's new course at Berkeley CC. Travis and Ross both played a large part in Hunter's early background of architecture. I believe that Hunter was instramental in getting Watson at BCC and to do some work at Claremont at around the same time that BCC was in construction.
It is interesting to note that Hunter brought Whiting to America. He had lessons from him on one of his trips to the UK and he must of left a lasting impression. During construction at BCC they had some strikes and were forced to stop some of the work. The club allowed Whiting to take work at Olympic and the rest is history.
Tully
-
Sean
Did Whiting ever became a full-time golf architect or did he just dabble in contruction and design on the side? Did he do any solo designs other than Sonoma?
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
California GC of SF - 1920 Macan/Lock , 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson/Whiting
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie
Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
"The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him. In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them. Naturally.
Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website. Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea."
David Moriarty:
I guess it's understandable that a guy like you would say things like that to someone who disproved the assumptions and conclusion of your ridiculous essay on Merion. If that's what you call an original idea I think golf course architect could very nicely do without it.
"That's rich. You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums? You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine? I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay. How about you post it and we take a look at it?"
Yes, you probably should've used it in your essay. There's a considerable amount of valuable research material you should've considered before writing your essay, but you didn't. Perhaps you thought you could cover yourself somehow by explaining in your essay there would be a Part Two. What a joke that is---eg "Oh, and now, because I didn't have important material available to me at the time, here's Part Two correcting all the factual inaccuracies and mistakes I made in Part One including all my premises and the essay's conclusion! ;)
The problem is if you'd actually seen most of it even you probably wouldn't have written an essay like that in the first place, and the rest of us wouldn't have been subjected to some of the inaccuracies of your on-going "learning process" or whatever the hell you call it with Merion. Your "learning process" with Merion should more appropriately have been on this DG rather than in a section where it might be passed off as an accurate history of Merion. You call yourself a researcher, right? Why don't you find those essays on the Philadelphia School of Architecture from the GAP Magazine and also in the US Amateur program? You've certainly never shared a thing with me, so why should I do your research for you? ???
The answer to your question to Bob Crosby of why the USGA Architecture Archive decided to do the better known architects first instead of lesser known architects is because they understand that even if the names may be more familiar to the public interested in using the archive the details of those men and what they did are not generally or universally known.
-
What ever became of Berkeley CC? Is that what is now Tilden Park?
-
"The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him. In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them. Naturally.
Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website. Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea."
David Moriarty:
I guess it's understandable that a guy like you would say things like that to someone who disproved the assumptions and conclusion of your ridiculous essay on Merion. If that's what you call an original idea I think golf course architect could very nicely do without it.
"That's rich. You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums? You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine? I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay. How about you post it and we take a look at it?"
Yes, you probably should've used it in your essay. There's a considerable amount of valuable research material you should've considered before writing your essay, but you didn't. Perhaps you thought you could cover yourself somehow by explaining in your essay there would be a Part Two. What a joke that is---eg "Oh, and now, because I didn't have important material available to me at the time, here's Part Two correcting all the factual inaccuracies and mistakes I made in Part One including all my premises and the essay's conclusion! ;)
The problem is if you'd actually seen most of it even you probably wouldn't have written an essay like that in the first place, and the rest of us wouldn't have been subjected to some of the inaccuracies of your on-going "learning process" or whatever the hell you call it with Merion. Your "learning process" with Merion should more appropriately have been on this DG rather than in a section where it might be passed off as an accurate history of Merion. You call yourself a researcher, right? Why don't you find those essays on the Philadelphia School of Architecture from the GAP Magazine and also in the US Amateur program? You've certainly never shared a thing with me, so why should I do your research for you? ???
More bombastic bullshit from the Prince of Pompous Proclamations.
YOU haven't disproved a single thing in my essay. So far Wayne has come up with one CBM letter which did not contain a description of a routing, as I thought it might. As usual your contribution has been to cheerlead and to post and post and post and post and post . . . and post. Nary a substantive contribution in site.
-
This war has many fronts . . .
-
Here is a photo of the 18th green at Castlewood from 1927. Looks like fun.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v249/dmoriarty/Golf%20Courses/Old%20Photos/22862384.jpg?t=1215805984)
-
Great photo, David!
-
Tim
Berkeley CC is known today as Mira Vista.
David
I have the same photo of the 18th. Too bad one would never guess that it is from the current course.
Tully
-
Sean
Did Whiting ever became a full-time golf architect or did he just dabble in contruction and design on the side? Did he do any solo designs other than Sonoma?
Whiting to my knowledge remained a golf pro and dabbled in golf course architecture and turfgrass maintenance. He was trying to grow bent grass at Olympic pretty early on and had a number of turf people look into what he was doing. I have him looking for work at a number of courses, doing some nine hole designs in the sticks, and Stockton was another course that he did solo. As I mentioned before, he oversaw most fo the work at Harding and was heavily involved in the changes at OClub from his first days there.
Very interesting person that I would love to learn about more.
Tully
-
David, the photo is from Golf Illustrated. June 27 I think.
I have the same photo of the 18th. Too bad one would never guess that it is from the current course.
Tully
Unfortunately this seems to be the case with just about all of Bell's work from this era.
-
"More bombastic bullshit from the Prince of Pompous Proclamations.
YOU haven't disproved a single thing in my essay. So far Wayne has come up with one CBM letter which did not contain a description of a routing, as I thought it might. As usual your contribution has been to cheerlead and to post and post and post and post and post . . . and post. Nary a substantive contribution in site."
David Moriarty:
Actually, both me and the others around here have disproved all your premises and the conclusion of your essay and most on this website realize that. Ever trying to get you to admit that, however, is definitely not synonymous with disproving it. We've disproved your essays premises and conclusions. If we found all the routing and design iterations from Wilson and committee including the one they went to the board with for approval there's no question in my mind you would NOT admit to the inaccuracies of your specious essay even then. So, whatever you say about it all doesn't really matter anymore. Your essay has been proved wholly inaccurate, it's as simple as that.
The fact is, David Moriarty, you're just a pipsqueak with the meat of this stuff to do with golf architecture, its architects and the collective histories of both---you're probably bright enough to know that but you're seemingly constitutionally inacapable of admiting it. That's clearly the reason you've always reacted the way you have and continue to react the way you are towards us here. ;)
Two to three months ago we took you seriously about what you claimed you had but when we saw it there was no reason to take it seriously---not even close. We've never seen the necessity of questioning the Merion history of Macdonald's contribution. But since you did question it we did dig deeper and we found conclusive proof there never was any reason to dig deeper----eg Macdonald's contribution was as Merion's history has always claimed it was.
Guys like you and MacWood can float all the half-cocked, half-researched "theories" or "ideas" you want to float out there but research and particularly their timelines will invariable catch you up and prove you wrong. Sorry, Pal, but that's just the way it goes in this business.
By the way, I just can't wait for your PART TWO!! THAT should be most interesting! You'll probably take everything and anything we've researched for you and claim you did it yourself and figured it out for yourself. ::)
Some of us have offered to help you---I've done that a number of times both online and offline but you didn't want to do it that way---even those refusals on your part are on this DG, thankfully. That option won't be on the table again with you. I doubt it will be for you with any club after this preposterous Merion charade you've been on. Fortunately GOLFCLUBATLAS.com has more visibility than you're probably aware of----thank God! ;)
-
TE
If you must go on about Merion would you please start another thread, this thread is about California golf, or better yet take a short break from the website and help Wayne write his Merion counter essay (that no one will be able to read). Afterall you are Philadelphia golf...and no city has had more effective advocate and protector (there probably would have never been this renewed interest in Crump & Wilson if had not been for you). NY, Boston, Chicago, Melbourne, London, Toronto, Edinburgh, San Francisco and LA all wish you were the face of their city.
-
MacWood:
Short response to your last post----NO I won't do that and certainly not as long as your buddy Moriarty makes the type of posts on any thread, including this one, he does regarding Philadelphia and Philadelphians. By the way, if you want me to stop talking about why I so strenuously disagree with the way you look at some aspects of the history of architecture and the history of some of the courses and architects around here, certainly including Merion and Pine Valley, you might consider refraining from calling me an idiot as you have on this thread and others recently. You keep that stuff up, MacWalnut, I doubt you'll ever get much satisfaction from me.
-
Sean
From what I gather Whiting was working in Yorkshire at the time he took the Berkeley job (recruited by Hunter). Have you been able to connect him to MacKenzie?
-
"From what I gather Whiting was working in Yorkshire at the time he took the Berkeley job (recruited by Hunter).
Tom MacWood:
What do you think that says about Hunter? Nothing? Anything? :P
Also, is there any way, any way at all that you (or Moriarty) could explain why either of you would imply that H.H. Barker was the second best architect in America right behind C.B. Macdonald in 1910??
Seriously, is there anything at all that you can point to that would indicate that would be remotely true?? Believe me, I'm definitely not trying to denigrate or mock the guy at all, as you accused me of doing with Willie Watson. I'd just like to know why anyone, even including highly speculative, self promoters like you and Moriarty would say something like that about Barker in 1910.
I mean if he was the second best architect in America, amateur or professional right behind C. B. Macdonald, can you at least give all of us some indication why that was even if it isn't true? ;) Otherwise, you just may be about the biggest name-dropper imaginable who refuses to substantiate why you drop names and say what you do about them----ie-- "H.H. Barker was the second best architect, amateur or professional, in America and the only reason to say that is because I say so." ::)
-
Hunter was interesting man. He came from relatively modest roots. Married into wealth, became one of the most outspoken voices on social issues. If I'm not mistaken at one point he was Socialist. One gets the impression he was conflicted. His physcial move from East to West seems to have coincided with a shift in his politics. One of many who traveled to the UK to study modern golf architecture right around 1910 (more than once).
On a personal note my grandfather (James Hagerty) was a contemporary of Hunter who was active and outspoken on social issues, and was also from Indiana (La Porte), I've often wondered if they had any contact.
Getting back to California, my father was a professor at Cal-Berkeley during WWII, the big one (it was in all the papers)...working on the Manhattan project. They say intelligence skips a generation...my kids are brilliant.
-
"Hunter was interesting man. He came from relatively modest roots. Married into wealth, became one of the most outspoken voices on social issues. If I'm not mistaken at one point he was Socialist. One gets the impression he was conflicted. His physcial move from East to West seems to have coincided with a shift in his politics. One of many who traveled to the UK to study modern golf architecture right around 1910 (more than once)."
MacChestnut:
For years I've known all that and more by a factor of about ten about Hunter. The Links has got to be one of the very best books ever written on golf architecture, and it's one of those I refer to reread all the time. Can't you tell me something I don't know about Hunter? It wouldn't seem so! Maybe you should begin to reconsider that noone knows anything except you. ;) That constant implication and response on here by you to some of us is getting really old.
-
"Getting back to California, my father was a professor at Cal-Berkeley during WWII, the big one (it was in all the papers)...working on the Manhattan project. They say intelligence skips a generation...my kids are brilliant."
Then if your father is still around ask him if he knew Arthur Weber a fine friend of mine from the Lesley Cup who worked very actively on the Manhattan Project. I think Arthur is about 94, and he's been on the USGA Green Section Committee for years because of his inventiveness. I think Arthur was the last word on moss on greens or something arcane like that. Some of these people are really something.
Yeah, atavism (things like generational intelligence or lack of it) can be some really tricky shit, can't it? :P
-
"More bombastic bullshit from the Prince of Pompous Proclamations.
YOU haven't disproved a single thing in my essay. So far Wayne has come up with one CBM letter which did not contain a description of a routing, as I thought it might. As usual your contribution has been to cheerlead and to post and post and post and post and post . . . and post. Nary a substantive contribution in site."
David Moriarty:
Actually, both me and the others around here have disproved all your premises and the conclusion of your essay and most on this website realize that. Ever trying to get you to admit that, however, is definitely not synonymous with disproving it. We've disproved your essays premises and conclusions. If we found all the routing and design iterations from Wilson and committee including the one they went to the board with for approval there's no question in my mind you would NOT admit to the inaccuracies of your specious essay even then. So, whatever you say about it all doesn't really matter anymore. Your essay has been proved wholly inaccurate, it's as simple as that.
The fact is, David Moriarty, you're just a pipsqueak with the meat of this stuff to do with golf architecture, its architects and the collective histories of both---you're probably bright enough to know that but you're seemingly constitutionally inacapable of admiting it. That's clearly the reason you've always reacted the way you have and continue to react the way you are towards us here. ;)
Two to three months ago we took you seriously about what you claimed you had but when we saw it there was no reason to take it seriously---not even close. We've never seen the necessity of questioning the Merion history of Macdonald's contribution. But since you did question it we did dig deeper and we found conclusive proof there never was any reason to dig deeper----eg Macdonald's contribution was as Merion's history has always claimed it was.
Guys like you and MacWood can float all the half-cocked, half-researched "theories" or "ideas" you want to float out there but research and particularly their timelines will invariable catch you up and prove you wrong. Sorry, Pal, but that's just the way it goes in this business.
By the way, I just can't wait for your PART TWO!! THAT should be most interesting! You'll probably take everything and anything we've researched for you and claim you did it yourself and figured it out for yourself. ::)
Some of us have offered to help you---I've done that a number of times both online and offline but you didn't want to do it that way---even those refusals on your part are on this DG, thankfully. That option won't be on the table again with you. I doubt it will be for you with any club after this preposterous Merion charade you've been on. Fortunately GOLFCLUBATLAS.com has more visibility than you're probably aware of----thank God! ;)
MacWood:
Short response to your last post----NO I won't do that and certainly not as long as your buddy Moriarty makes the type of posts on any thread, including this one, he does regarding Philadelphia and Philadelphians. By the way, if you want me to stop talking about why I so strenuously disagree with the way you look at some aspects of the history of architecture and the history of some of the courses and architects around here, certainly including Merion and Pine Valley, you might consider refraining from calling me an idiot as you have on this thread and others recently. You keep that stuff up, MacWalnut, I doubt you'll ever get much satisfaction from me.
"From what I gather Whiting was working in Yorkshire at the time he took the Berkeley job (recruited by Hunter).
Tom MacWood:
What do you think that says about Hunter? Nothing? Anything? :P
Also, is there any way, any way at all that you (or Moriarty) could explain why either of you would imply that H.H. Barker was the second best architect in America right behind C.B. Macdonald in 1910??
Seriously, is there anything at all that you can point to that would indicate that would be remotely true?? Believe me, I'm definitely not trying to denigrate or mock the guy at all, as you accused me of doing with Willie Watson. I'd just like to know why anyone, even including highly speculative, self promoters like you and Moriarty would say something like that about Barker in 1910.
I mean if he was the second best architect in America, amateur or professional right behind C. B. Macdonald, can you at least give all of us some indication why that was even if it isn't true? ;) Otherwise, you just may be about the biggest name-dropper imaginable who refuses to substantiate why you drop names and say what you do about them----ie-- "H.H. Barker was the second best architect, amateur or professional, in America and the only reason to say that is because I say so." ::)
"Hunter was interesting man. He came from relatively modest roots. Married into wealth, became one of the most outspoken voices on social issues. If I'm not mistaken at one point he was Socialist. One gets the impression he was conflicted. His physcial move from East to West seems to have coincided with a shift in his politics. One of many who traveled to the UK to study modern golf architecture right around 1910 (more than once)."
MacChestnut:
For years I've known all that and more by a factor of about ten about Hunter. The Links has got to be one of the very best books ever written on golf architecture, and it's one of those I refer to reread all the time. Can't you tell me something I don't know about Hunter? It wouldn't seem so! Maybe you should begin to reconsider that noone knows anything except you. ;) That constant implication and response on here by you to some of us is getting really old.
"Getting back to California, my father was a professor at Cal-Berkeley during WWII, the big one (it was in all the papers)...working on the Manhattan project. They say intelligence skips a generation...my kids are brilliant."
Then if your father is still around ask him if he knew Arthur Weber a fine friend of mine from the Lesley Cup who worked very actively on the Manhattan Project. I think Arthur is about 94, and he's been on the USGA Green Section Committee for years because of his inventiveness. I think Arthur was the last word on moss on greens or something arcane like that. Some of these people are really something.
Yeah, atavism (things like generational intelligence or lack of it) can be some really tricky shit, can't it? :P
. . . a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea . . .
-
Jeepers Tom Paul. You are gonna give yourself a heart attack. In the words of Sig Paliakoff - "Be nonchalant."
Ciao
-
This post is a good example of what I am taking about. You go on and on, drop the names of a dozen designers and one USGA official, tell us what you have decided is important. But as far as I can tell you have offered absolutely nothing of substance the conversation. I've gone back through the entire thread and it is the same for every post. You insult Tom MacWood, me, a few designers who you don't know anything about. You tell others to research things that you are interested in. But you offer absolutely nothing of substance to the conversation. Nothing.
David I think you've summed it up very succinctly. The same is true on recent threads about golf in Europe in 1937, the Heathlands and too many others so that I now skip his posts because they are so goddam BORING.
There is an overbearing pall of negativity on here of late and it's absolutely clear in my mind where it emanates from.
Tom Paul I challenge you. If you really have anything of value to add on this site, write up your attribution of who did what and when at Pine Valley. Several times you’ve addressed a couple of holes and countless times you said you were going to write the whole damn thing and then...you delete the posts you have made on the subject and just go back to attacking others and recycling old knowledge.
Just do it and then once again you will be contributing something useful on here.
-
Tom Mac/T. E. Paul:
Would you do us diggers Down Under a favour --- those of us who haven't had the pleasure of your company --- by clearing something up. But first, an analogy: in World Championship Wrestling (McMahon and Co) ... the deal is that the contracted wrestlers are great mates, pop the same pills, split the loot, pay the same Actors Equity subscriptions. You win this year, but McMahon's script says that I'll win next year. In the meantime, there is an agreement in place to hurl non-stop abuse at each other, stomp on each other's face, and extract blood-like "sauce" from each other's tissues. Uppermost, television ratings must be boosted, and they do so by orchestrating tension between opposing “camps”. But after the bout, they eat pasta together and swap stories of near-misses, coupled with: how we really fooled the audience tonight. They do more than that, but in case this is a family show, I’ll leave it there.
Forgive me for asking this, but are you enacting exactly the same scenario as Hulk Hogan and Mankind? With the amount of two-way abuse you’ve hurled over the past four years (and that’s just the online stuff we know about), you must surely be best buddies. Has Ran, like McMahon with his wrestlers, put you up to this long-running vaudevillian stunt? Please come clean.
Tom Mac:
You mentioned earlier in the thread: IMO California golf in 1930 was as good architecturally as any place in the world. Surely you were rushing and meant to write Melbourne, Australia? Take a peek: Victoria, Commonwealth, Kingston Heath, Woodlands, Metropolitan, Royal Melbourne (still 12 months from opening, but designed in 1926), Yarra Yarra. Not bad for starters.
-
PaulD:
The pro wrestling analogy is good stuff, funny. Pat Mucci and I have that deal on here but not me an MacWalnut, we pretty much generally just can't stand one another but I do think he has value as a researcher. It's what happens next that's always concerned me. ;) With Moriarty, I pretty much think he's just a complete waste of time who's actually detracted from the great body of golf architectural resarch rather than add to it and that's not easy to do if one really thinks about it. ::)
-
"Tom Paul I challenge you. If you really have anything of value to add on this site, write up your attribution of who did what and when at Pine Valley. Several times you’ve addressed a couple of holes and countless times you said you were going to write the whole damn thing and then...you delete the posts you have made on the subject and just go back to attacking others and recycling old knowledge."
TonyM:
Don't bother with that challenge. I have put a few things on here about the creation and evolution of a couple of holes down there and there is a good reason I deleted them. I'm about finished with the Pine Valley creation story and it will go to the club. It won't go on here unless the club is OK with that. Over here we actually try to pretty much work with the clubs we research not outside them. David Moriarty's Merion archive access entitlement charade has changed some things for this website with some of us. Wayne Morrison has pretty much left over it, and with good reason, and for me I actually get into asking permission first which is apparently something too many on this website don't get, don't understand or don't care about, and that's a shame. When this kind of thing happens the automatic response from the likes of MacWood and Moriarty always seems to be that the clubs themselves have something to hide which is ridiculous and just makes things worse. If either of them or anyone else wants to see what we write about clubs like that they should consider going to those clubs and asking, as we do. We've said that for years. It's the decent and commonsensical thing to do in our book. If others don't see it that way, I think that's their good right but it's also their problem.
-
T. E. P: Glad to read that the wrestling analogy struck a chord. :D
I consider myself "edjumicated" on your deal with Pat Mucci and thoughts towards David Moriaty and Tom MacWood. It's great stuff!
-
Paul
I take it you're joking about Melbourne vs California. With all due respect, Melbourne was fortunate to have MacKenzie spend a few weeks; he spent several years in California. And there were quite few other talented architects who came through during that period.
California is a big place, blessed with a wonderful climate and a variety of natural phenomona: idealic hills, tailor-made barrancas, dense forests, deep canyons, giant sequouyahs, sand dunes, mountains, and spectacular coast.
Its very difficult for any place in the world to compete with Cypress Point and Pebble Beach in their prime, and there was a hell of a lot more than that.
A better comparison would be Melbourne vs LA or Melbourne vs SF in 1930. Why don't you start a thread.
-
". . . a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea . . . "
David Moriarty:
You really must like that quotation, you sure have used it enough? ;)
No, I really am interested to know why you would say in your essay (apparently inspired by Tom MacWood) that H.H. Barker should be considered the second best architect in America in 1910, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald. That's a pretty heady remark on your part. Is there any particular reason why you haven't or can't explain why that would be? ???
Personally, I think it's probably because you are from the spaghetti school of research/writing----eg just throw any old thing at the wall and see if it sticks with others, and if it does you apparently think you're producing some valid history writing. Seems to me there's a ton of spaghetti on the floor from you.
But seriously, I would like to know why either of you think H.H. Barker was the second best architect in America in 1910, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald.
I realize there wasn't all that much expression of talent around in 1910 in America but if H.H. Barker was the second best architect in America, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald one really does wonder how he fit in his day job as the golf professional at Garden City G.C. ::)
Do you think there's a cogent answer to that question in our future?
-
Tom MacWood:
I'll be more than happy to get off your "list" threads.
But I will be checking in if there's any possibility that you might inform any of us exactly why Willie Watson should be included in the list of about fifteen of the most significant architects who worked in America. ???
I'm certainly not trying to mock him, I'd just like to know why someone with any credibility would say that. Is that really too much to ask? ;)
If you actually ever do come up with any reasons and someone like me challenges your answers with some questions am I to expect you'll just take that as a personal insult too?
How about H.H. Barker? Could you tell us why he should be considered the second best architect in America in 1910, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald? It seems like David Moriarty either won't or can't.
-
"I consider myself "edjumicated" on your deal with....."
Edjumicated??
Watch your mouth Mr. Daley, this is a family oriented website!!!
Small, impressionable and unstable children like David Moriarty login here all the time.
-
"Hunter was interesting man. He came from relatively modest roots. Married into wealth, became one of the most outspoken voices on social issues. If I'm not mistaken at one point he was Socialist. One gets the impression he was conflicted. His physcial move from East to West seems to have coincided with a shift in his politics. One of many who traveled to the UK to study modern golf architecture right around 1910 (more than once)."
MacChestnut:
For years I've known all that and more by a factor of about ten about Hunter. The Links has got to be one of the very best books ever written on golf architecture, and it's one of those I refer to reread all the time. Can't you tell me something I don't know about Hunter? It wouldn't seem so! Maybe you should begin to reconsider that noone knows anything except you. ;) That constant implication and response on here by you to some of us is getting really old.
TE
Thank you for telling us how much you know about Hunter. Most of what I know about his background and life comes from a couple of excellent articles written by John Strawn, and I've been fortunate to stumble upon a couple of letters WRH wrote. Since you are apparently one of the foremost experts on Hunter I seriously doubt I could tell you anything you don't know about the man, but what you and I know is not really important, what is important is sharing what we know with the many other contributors and interested bystanders, and they in return sharing what they know. That way we all learn.
Here are couple of interesting tid bits you may or may not know.
While residing in Berkeley Hunter lived in the former home of John Galen Howard, the famous Bay Area Arts & Crafts architect and one-time professor at Cal. The home designed by Howard was (and is) on Ridge Rd, the epicenter of the Bay area A&C movement and the Hillside Club.
Its well known Hunter retired to Montecito, but did you know that Max Behr and Joshua Crane also lived in Montecito in the 1940s?
PS: Unfortunately my father is not living, so unable to ask him about Mr. Weber.
-
Tom MacWood:
I'll be more than happy to get off your "list" threads.
But I will be checking in if there's any possibility that you might inform any of us exactly why Willie Watson should be included in the list of about fifteen of the most significant architects who worked in America. ???
I'm certainly not trying to mock him, I'd just like to know why someone with any credibility would say that. Is that really too much to ask? ;)
If you actually ever do come up with any reasons and someone like me challenges your answers with some questions am I to expect you'll just take that as a personal insult too?
How about H.H. Barker? Could you tell us why he should be considered the second best architect in America in 1910, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald? It seems like David Moriarty either won't or can't.
TE
I never said Watson should be considered one of your fifteen architects. To be honest I've never really thought about who should be on your list. As I said in a previous post my focus is prior to WWII and globally. Fifteen is a very limiting from my perspective, and potentially not very informative.
This thread is about California golf architecture. If you want to explore Barker and pre-WWI American golf architecture, start another thread in which you tell us who were the most prominet architects operating in the US in 1909-1911.
-
"Here are couple of interesting tid bits you may or may not know.
While residing in Berkeley Hunter lived in the former home of John Galen Howard, the famous Bay Area Arts & Crafts architect and one-time professor at Cal. The home was (and is) on Ridge Rd, the epicenter of the Bay area A&C movement and the Hillside Club.
Its well known Hunter retired to Montecito, but did you know that Max Behr and Joshua Crane also lived in Montecito in the 1940s?"
Tom MacWood:
No, I did not know any of that. It's always interesting to know about those little details of the lives of men like Hunter, Behr and Crane. I didn't say I was an expert on Hunter so why did you imply I said that? All I said is what you mentioned earlier about him I've known for years, and that it would be nice if you could tell me something I didn't know about him. Is it really possible that you could think that's in someway insulting?? ::)
It certainly has occured to me that some or many might consider Robert Hunter to be basically just one of those "amateur/sportsmen" who had money (by marriage) and just sort of dabbled in golf course architecture amongst other things. I don't buy that in the slightest. I don't believe anyone could consider Hunter something like that if they've bothered to really read and appreciate "The Links". It just might be the best put-together and clearest-thinking book on golf architecture and golf architectural philosophy out there.
I also don't buy a categorizing of a man like Hunter who was someone who was "conflicted" in some way, as you did above, simply because he changed his politics or philosophy about something like social engineering.
To me it just may be one of the clearest expressions of intelligence, honesty and clear thinking that he did something like that having seen life from both sides through his life and times. It has definitely not escaped my attention that you seem to think when someone really changes their tune on something that they must be selling out or compromising their principles or conflicted in some way. That seems to me to be just a bit of a myopic way of automatically looking at people.
"PS: Unfortunately my father is not living and unable to ask him about Mr. Weber."
I'm sorry to hear that. Either is mine. I don't know whether I can promise it but perhaps I could somehow arrange for you to speak to Arthur Weber even if he is in his nineties. That man and his mind is simply remarkable--just remarkable in the things he gets into and to think he was a physcist on the Manhattan Project.
By the way, have you ever actually seen Max Behr's house that's essentially across the street from Golf House? Of course Behr lived there some decades before the USGA moved to Far Hills which is pretty ironic if one thinks about it.
Again that kind of detail about the houses those people lived in and the details of their lives is interesting stuff and it certainly seems to be to you when you discover it. Max Behr married a gal whose father was very rich and apparently owned all that land around Golf House. Her maiden name was something like Schlie or Schlee. She died young and they say Max took off for the coast pretty depressed for a radical change of life's scenery.
I once asked my own mother if she hadn't married my dad if there was anyone else on the horizon, and she told me Van Schlie was dying to marry her but she didn't want to do it and she waited for my dad. I believe from a Google search that Van Schlie was Behr's wife's direct relative. Had my mom married him, just think, I'd be related to Max by marriage! :P
But when I tell you some details like that your automatic response is always I must be living in a Holiday Inn Express or something. The point is what works for one should work for all. It's about time you start to see things that way, don't you think? When you come up with some seemingly trivial detail about any of those people and their lives or houses or friends or relatives or whatever you tend to treat it as a big deal but when I come up with things like that you just dismiss it. That has always interested me about you and I think others on here feel the same way. But it looks like you've trained your "student" Moriarty even better as he's more dismissive of others than even you are! But together you two are quite the team! ;)
-
"TE
I never said Watson should be considered one of your fifteen architects. To be honest I've never really thought about who should be on your list. As I said in a previous post my focus is prior to WWII and globally. Fifteen is a very limiting from my perspective, and potentially not very informative."
Tom MacWood:
I realize that and so does the USGA. As I've said a number of times the reason for that is this has to start somewhere. We cannot do this all instantly particularly when some such as yourself aren't even willing to get involved. ;)
"This thread is about California golf architecture. If you want to explore Barker and pre-WWI American golf architecture, start another thread in which you tell us who were the most prominet architects operating in the US in 1909-1911."
I realize that but answering a simple question like why you (or Moriarty) think H.H. Barker should be considered the second best architect in America in 1910, amateur or professional, right behind C.B. Macdonald isn't exactly going to wreck this thread. My sense is you both feel you just can't answer that and that's why both of you continuously deflect the question.
-
By the way, have you ever actually seen Max Behr's house that's essentially across the street from Golf House? Of course Behr lived there some decades before the USGA moved to Far Hills which is pretty ironic if one thinks about it.
I have seen it from the front gate, not well though. The front gate was pretty spectacular in its own right. Geoff Shackelford has shared some vintage photos.
While your family anecdotes are charming they are not much help to the person trying to determine who did what, when and why. Your stories and quarter will get you a cup of coffee...scratch that...coffee is more fancy and expensive now-a-days. Make that $3.50.
-
Tom MacWood
You should add the Presidio Golf Club to your list. From my history book on the course:
1895 Army gives permission to a civilian group called “The San Francisco Golf Club” to build a 9-hole course on the grounds of Fort Winfield Scott at the Presidio. Five of the greens were sand.
1898 Tudor Style clubhouse built (has been expanded/remodeled several times)
1905 “Founding members left to form what became the San Francisco GC on land leased from the Spring Valley Water Co. south of town”
1905 Private Presidio Golf Club (PGC) formed by neighbors of the Presidio, led by Bernard Faymonville, then-President of the Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company
1908 Army approves expansion to 18 holes. No designer mentioned.
1920 Army grants permission for new expansion and redesign. Fowler and Simpson retained by PGC. Project completed September, 1921 at a cost of $96,000.
Fundamental design hasn’t changed much since, except that the management group brought in after the Presidio army base closed has rebuilt several greens.
-
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter
Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al
Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie
Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell
Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell
Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville
Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell
San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson/Whiting
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas
Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan
Lake Merced - 1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie
California GC of SF - 1920 Macan/Lock , 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter
Harding Park - 1925 Watson/Whiting
Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie
Orinda - 1925 Watson
Sonoma - 1927 Whiting
Castlewood - 1927 Bell
Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter
Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie
Presidio - 1895 ?, 1908 ?, 1921 Fowler/Simpson
Del Paso - 1916 Black, 1921 Fowler?
Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter
Lakeside - 1924 Behr
Montebello Park - 1928 Behr
La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell
Royal Palms - 1925 Bell
Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn
Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn
Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas
Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell
Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell
El Caballero - 1928 Bell
Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke
Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke
Brookside - 1928 Bell
Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell
Rancho - 1921 Fowler
Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth
Hillcrest - 1922 Watson
Hacienda - 1920 Watson
Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr
Flintridge - 1921 Watson
San Diego - 1922 Watson
Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr
Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
-
Tom MacWood, Del Paso was designed in 1916 by John Black. Black was runner up in the 1922 US Open at Glencoe, and head pro at Claremont CC.
Here's the article I found about him in the NY Times archives from 1922....
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9D02E6D61239EF3ABC4A53DFBE668389639EDE&oref=slogin
Further, there is mention of an Ingleside Golf Course "near" San Francisco.
Anyone know of this course's history?
-
Jed
Thats good information, thanks.
I believe Ingleside the site of SFGC prior to the move to Lake Merced.
-
"While your family anecdotes are charming they are not much help to the person trying to determine who did what, when and why. Your stories and quarter will get you a cup of coffee...scratch that...coffee is more fancy and expensive now-a-days. Make that $3.50."
Tom MacWood:
So what is your mentioning that Hunter and Behr and Crane may've lived in a house that was built by some nominal A/C style building architect got to do with who did what, when and why in golf course architecture in California in 1930?
Sorry you missed the point of the analogy, but it's not surprising.
-
"Tom Paul I challenge you. If you really have anything of value to add on this site, write up your attribution of who did what and when at Pine Valley. Several times you’ve addressed a couple of holes and countless times you said you were going to write the whole damn thing and then...you delete the posts you have made on the subject and just go back to attacking others and recycling old knowledge."
TonyM:
Don't bother with that challenge. I have put a few things on here about the creation and evolution of a couple of holes down there and there is a good reason I deleted them. I'm about finished with the Pine Valley creation story and it will go to the club. It won't go on here unless the club is OK with that. Over here we actually try to pretty much work with the clubs we research not outside them. David Moriarty's Merion archive access entitlement charade has changed some things for this website with some of us. Wayne Morrison has pretty much left over it, and with good reason, and for me I actually get into asking permission first which is apparently something too many on this website don't get, don't understand or don't care about, and that's a shame. When this kind of thing happens the automatic response from the likes of MacWood and Moriarty always seems to be that the clubs themselves have something to hide which is ridiculous and just makes things worse. If either of them or anyone else wants to see what we write about clubs like that they should consider going to those clubs and asking, as we do. We've said that for years. It's the decent and commonsensical thing to do in our book. If others don't see it that way, I think that's their good right but it's also their problem.
Total BS and you know it. If this is what you've always believed why put that stuff up on here in the first place? You've just backed yourself into a corner with this one and last time you gave this argument on here it was laughed out of court by (from memory) Paul Turner, Brad Klein and others.
So what’s the deal? I can't comment on a book without getting the authors permission first? Bullcrappy as a Californian friend of mine used to say.
You are now the biggest BORE on here; endlessly repeating "Agenda", "Merion" "Cornish and Whitten". I challenge you to do something creative on here; put up ANY new, original and pertinent historical material on a subject of your choice!
No response to my assertion that you are the originator of so much negativity on here?
-
Don't forget Menlo Country Club--credited as 1901
Kyle Phillips thinks it's a 1927 design (probably the 18 holes) but it's credited as:
Other early California Designs by Tom Nicoll, a Scottish-born golf professional:
Los Altos Hills Country Club--1923
San Jose Country club--1912
-
Tony Muldoon;
You can go straight to fucking Hell in my opinion, and I really do mean that.
If people like you are going to join this horseshit mentality of private club access entitlement from the likes of Moriaty on here I want no more part of this website than Wayne Morrison does if that's what it's turned into. I don't know where you people get off accusing Wayne or me who are connected for years to some of these clubs with hundreds of friends of trying to do the wrong thing here! Yeah, sure, Wayne did post the letter from Macdonald to MCC on this site. He was simply trying to be helpful. On reflection and in conjunction with MCC he and they decided it was not appropriate because of the wish of the club not to post more until this essay of ours is written. So for that, what does he get? He gets totally lambasted on here by the likes of Moriarty and MacWood and now you, as have I apparently for considering a club and what they want to do with their own material dissemination. If you're serious that Brad Klein and Paul Turner are on that preposterous bandwagon and of that mentality then just add them on too as a couple more who should go to hell. It doesn't matter to me one iota who it is who feels this way, including Ran Morrissett and Ben Dewar. It that's what this site has come to it it's definitely not for members of golf clubs with people like this on here.
Wayne Morrison belongs to that club and I've got hundreds of friends over there but people like you all don't give a shit about anything like that, do you?
If this is really the way it is, you are all a bunch of assholes, in my opinion. if that's really the way you think. You all take this subject of golf course architecture and your interest in it to a level or selfishness and arrogance and entitlement that is almost unspeakable, in my book and apparently in Wayne's. He's still on here but he's completely disguised by this website now and the way this has gotten out of control.
Enjoy yourselves! There is nothing left on this website that's enjoyable for me.
By the way, take your Goddamn challenge to me about the PV creation story and shove it. Stuff like that definitely ain't going to happen on here and for the very same reasons with this Merion charade by a couple of jerks on here.
-
Tony Muldoon;
You can go straight to fucking Hell in my opinion, and I really do mean that.
If people like you are going to join this horseshit mentality of private club access entitlement from the likes of Moriaty on here I want no more part of this website than Wayne Morrison does if that's what it's turned into. I don't know where you people get off accusing Wayne or me who are connected for years to some of these clubs with hundreds of friends of trying to do the wrong thing here! Yeah, sure, Wayne did post the letter from Macdonald to MCC on this site. He was simply trying to be helpful. On reflection and in conjunction with MCC he and they decided it was not appropriate because of the wish of the club not to post more until this essay of ours is written. So for that, what does he get? He gets totally lambasted on here by the likes of Moriarty and MacWood and now you, as have I apparently for considering a club and what they want to do with their own material dissemination. If you're serious that Brad Klein and Paul Turner are on that preposterous bandwagon and of that mentality then just add them on too as a couple more who should go to hell. It doesn't matter to me one iota who it is who feels this way, including Ran Morrissett and Ben Dewar. It that's what this site has come to it it's definitely not for members of golf clubs with people like this on here.
Wayne Morrison belongs to that club and I've got hundreds of friends over there but people like you all don't give a shit about anything like that, do you?
If this is really the way it is, you are all a bunch of assholes, in my opinion. if that's really the way you think. You all take this subject of golf course architecture and your interest in it to a level or selfishness and arrogance and entitlement that is almost unspeakable, in my book and apparently in Wayne's. He's still on here but he's completely disguised by this website now and the way this has gotten out of control.
Enjoy yourselves! There is nothing left on this website that's enjoyable for me.
By the way, take your Goddamn challenge to me about the PV creation story and shove it. Stuff like that definitely ain't going to happen on here and for the very same reasons with this Merion charade by a couple of jerks on here.
Wow! Nikita Khrushchev would be proud.
-
Tony Muldoon;
You can go straight to fucking Hell in my opinion, and I really do mean that.
If people like you are going to join this horseshit mentality of private club access entitlement from the likes of Moriaty on here I want no more part of this website than Wayne Morrison does if that's what it's turned into. I don't know where you people get off accusing Wayne or me who are connected for years to some of these clubs with hundreds of friends of trying to do the wrong thing here! Yeah, sure, Wayne did post the letter from Macdonald to MCC on this site. He was simply trying to be helpful. On reflection and in conjunction with MCC he and they decided it was not appropriate because of the wish of the club not to post more until this essay of ours is written. So for that, what does he get? He gets totally lambasted on here by the likes of Moriarty and MacWood and now you, as have I apparently for considering a club and what they want to do with their own material dissemination. If you're serious that Brad Klein and Paul Turner are on that preposterous bandwagon and of that mentality then just add them on too as a couple more who should go to hell. It doesn't matter to me one iota who it is who feels this way, including Ran Morrissett and Ben Dewar. It that's what this site has come to it it's definitely not for members of golf clubs with people like this on here.
Wayne Morrison belongs to that club and I've got hundreds of friends over there but people like you all don't give a shit about anything like that, do you?
If this is really the way it is, you are all a bunch of assholes, in my opinion. if that's really the way you think. You all take this subject of golf course architecture and your interest in it to a level or selfishness and arrogance and entitlement that is almost unspeakable, in my book and apparently in Wayne's. He's still on here but he's completely disguised by this website now and the way this has gotten out of control.
Enjoy yourselves! There is nothing left on this website that's enjoyable for me.
By the way, take your Goddamn challenge to me about the PV creation story and shove it. Stuff like that definitely ain't going to happen on here and for the very same reasons with this Merion charade by a couple of jerks on here.
Very classy. Please compare what I’ve written to you against the kind of language you routinely use against others. Do you have anger issues?
Tom Paul let me point out it’s you that keeps “this Merion charade” alive on here.
How do you justify the following, from a thread entitled, “California 1930”
Furthermore, your essay on here about Merion created a stir not because of some east coast or Philadelphia bias but because it's assumptions and conclusion are just inaccurate. It's pretty much as simple as that. The attribution given to Macdonald and Whigam by Merion is accurate and the attribution given to Hugh Wilson and his committee by Merion is accurate.
The story of his trip abroad in 1910 is very likely inaccurate and probably did not come within a half century of the routing and design and creation of Merion East. The point is that has nothing to do with what Wilson and his committee did at Ardmore in 1911. Wilson and his committee routed and designed the East course with advice and suggestions from Macdonald and Whigam, just as the architectural record has said.
Or this from a thread entitled “The Continent 1938”
I was thinking more along the lines of why a guy like you or Moriarty sort of automatically discounts what a man like Alan Wilson said about the creation of Merion. ???
About a week ago someone else called you out for the negativity and irrelevance of these bitchy comments. If you really worry what the members of the Merion Club think about what’s written on this site then why don’t you stop repeating this bile and rubbish? You bring down the tone of this place.
That’s it I’ve said my piece and now you can reply all you like. I’m going to take a week’s holiday from posting on this site and can only apologise to everyone for being the catalyst for yet more rubbish on here.
Enjoy the Open.
-
Tony M -
I have to defend my friend here. You wrote "I challenge you to do something creative on here; put up ANY new, original and pertinent historical material on a subject of your choice!"
Are you kidding me, Tony?
Do you (or the others who've said similar thngs in the last week) really believe that Tom hasn't added facts and details and insights and first-hand experiences on a huge number of gca-related subjects, and that he's done that for years around here and that he continues to do that? Do you really believe he hasn't been a tremendous asset to this website from the very beginning, and that he continues to be an amazing asset and resource?
If you really believe that, then in my opinion you haven't been paying attention.
And if you think that Tom sharing his opinions and experiences -- on course designs that he's been a part of and renovations that he's overseen, on USGA rules questions he's dealt with and the top-level amateur competitions he's participated in, on the great golf courses that he's played a thousand times and on some of the golf course architects he's known well for years, and on the reading and research he's done about the earliest days of golf in America and the ideas and philosophies that have shaped the game and the game's designs -- makes him a bore instead of one of the most generous (and consistently generous) posters this site has ever had, then I don't know what to say. I think your point of view is misguided.
I don't know Tom very well; I guess a dozen IMs and a few phone calls after some interesting posts makes him an "internet friend" of mine. But I do know that, unlike a few of the other knowledgable posters around here, he's not stingy or miserly with his opinions and he doesn't play favourites -- i.e. whether it's a newbie who is asking a question that's been asked a dozen times before or a veteran discovering an interesting subject for the first time, Tom offers his insights and opinions fully and with flair and -- most importantly -- without contempt or an air of superiority. He doesn't wait for posts from the select few or from those few deemed worthy of respect in order to answer people in the best way he can.
Anyway, Tony - like I say I felt I needed to defend my friend. The only thing I can agree with you on is that it's time for a week off to play and watch some golf.
Peter
-
And if you think that Tom sharing his opinions and experiences -- on course designs that he's been a part of and renovations that he's overseen, on USGA rules questions he's dealt with and the top-level amateur competitions he's participated in, on the great golf courses that he's played a thousand times and on some of the golf course architects he's known well for years, and on the reading and research he's done about the earliest days of golf in America and the ideas and philosophies that have shaped the game and the game's designs -- makes him a bore instead of one of the most generous (and consistently generous) posters this site has ever had, then I don't know what to say. I think your point of view is misguided.
Peter
I agree, as far as the rules are concerned, there is no one better.
-
Don't forget Menlo Country Club--credited as 1901
Kyle Phillips thinks it's a 1927 design (probably the 18 holes) but it's credited as:
Other early California Designs by Tom Nicoll, a Scottish-born golf professional:
Los Altos Hills Country Club--1923
San Jose Country club--1912
I grew up playing Los Altos Country Club and the course has seen several iterations since 1923. The property the original back nine was situated on was sold at some point during World War II to keep the club afloat. Not too long after the war, the club purchased back the land that was available and routed a new back nine. I'll look into who came in to do it, but don't know off hand. There is a very definite difference stylistically between the two nines.
The club has since undergone several renovations, the last being in 2004.
Interestingly enough the land the club was on at one point was owned by Santa Clara University who had plans to build a campus on the site, but decided to sell the land after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The area the club surrounds is known as Loyola Corners.
I've played San Jose Country Club numerous times as well, although it's been about 12 years since. The second hole is pretty severely uphill and features a 10 ft pin to keep the approach from being completely blind.
Maybe I'm a silly Newbie, but would Northwoods G.C perhaps fall somewhere in here? Granted it's only 9 holes, but it was an interesting collaboration between MacKenzie and Jack Neville with an interesting back story tied to the Bohemian Club.
-
This was the format we used last year. We tried to pin down the original designer and any subsequent redesigns. There was one on California, the South, Great Lakes and I think Continental Europe.
-
Tom,
Nice to have you back on the site.