Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Patrick_Mucci on February 15, 2013, 12:09:13 PM
-
west coast courses ?
How about a discussion on Rancho Santa Fe ?
A course by Behr with a storied history.
-
Pat -
The sun is shining and the temps in California will be 65F-70F today. We would rather spend our time playing golf than gab about some golf course that few of us have ever played! ;)
DT
P.S. Be sure to check out Matt Cohn's "In My Opinion" piece on Lincoln Park in San Francisco.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,54859.0.html
-
Because the 'Westies' now have their own site. ;)
Pete Lavallee started a thread on RSF a couple years back, lots of pics.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,44822.0.html
-
Thanks for the link Jim. Rancho Santa Fe is a great topic for discusssion. The Max Behr course is still a great test of golf, they hosted the Ca. Am two years ago. It also proves that sometimes rich people do stupid things too! The figure 8 routing was bisected by a creek which the club chose to dam at the bottom of the course to create a pond fronting the 13th green and pipe it underground through the rest of the course in orgder that there be "no wet spots". The new hazard is grassed and has beautiful palms trees though!
-
Pete is our SD golf expert, but Rancho Sane Fe is so exclusive that most of west coast guys have never seen it except in pictures. There are west coast oriented threads like the new one discussing why Cordevalle should host the US Women's Open and not one of the classic bay area courses.
-
Tim,
Although Rancho Santa Fe is a private club there are several ways to gain access. If you stay at the Rancho Santa Fe Inn you can play after 1:00; $210 with mandatory $100 forecaddy. I believe a stay at the Hotel Valencia grants access as well.
-
Pat,
I have asked myself why we don't discuss the west coast more and the only thing I can think of is there are a lot more GCAers on the east coast. There is plenty to talk about. LACC, Riviera, Rustic Canyon, Valley Club, Cypress, Pebble, MPCC, Olympic, SFGC, Pasatiempo, Meadow Club, Cal Club, Bandon (that's been covered plenty), Chambers Bay, etc. I feel like a lot more of these guys have played so much more on the east coast and into the carolinas. I try to add my two cents when I can on courses I have played...way more on the west coast. I can't contribute anything to the discussions on Merion, National, or Chechessee. Just a thought.
Tim
-
Pat,
Maybe because Tommy hangs his hat elsewhere.
-
Or maybe because it's so depressing to see what's happened to CA courses ... that it simply makes one want to cry ... or vomit.
Then again, there are a couple of exceptions here and there...
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?topic=50684.0
-
Pat,
I have asked myself why we don't discuss the west coast more and the only thing I can think of is there are a lot more GCAers on the east coast. There is plenty to talk about. LACC, Riviera, Rustic Canyon, Valley Club, Cypress, Pebble, MPCC, Olympic, SFGC, Pasatiempo, Meadow Club, Cal Club, Bandon (that's been covered plenty), Chambers Bay, etc.
Patrick:
Also, as you know, the impressive lineup of courses above is a good match for the area from New York to Philadelphia -- and not the whole east coast. There are 2x or 3x as many great courses to talk about in the East as in the West. The reasons for this are the population distribution of the country in 1925, and, water availability.
Actually, I think the Midwest is more under-rated in terms of exposure on Golf Club Atlas. There are never any threads about the courses in Detroit and Cleveland and Columbus and Pittsburgh, and it's pretty much fly-over country for the PGA Tour now, too.
-
I've written a piece for Golf Australia magazine, entitled California Dreamin' which will be featured in their next edition. Not sure if it is readily available to non-subscribers online, but it listed and discussed almost two dozen West Coast courses, from Torrey Pines to Meadow Club, and everything in between. Golf in California is wonderful, with great Clubs and courses designed by Thomas, Tillie, MacKenzie, Hanse, Doak and others. Several of the best are open to the public. Add in the great weather, wonderful people and off-course activities - West Coast golf takes some beating!
MM
-
I think there is plenty of talk about west coast courses here. Let's face it, as of late Merion and Streamsong have dominated the site. Last summer there was all the talk of Olympic, it goes in cycles.
-
Thanks for the link Jim. Rancho Santa Fe is a great topic for discusssion. The Max Behr course is still a great test of golf, they hosted the Ca. Am two years ago. It also proves that sometimes rich people do stupid things too! The figure 8 routing was bisected by a creek which the club chose to dam at the bottom of the course to create a pond fronting the 13th green and pipe it underground through the rest of the course in orgder that there be "no wet spots". The new hazard is grassed and has beautiful palms trees though!
Pete,
In what year was the dam introduced ?
-
The course has a figure 8 routing with La Orilla Creek flowing from east to west; the site also slopes from east to west with the 13th hole being the lowest point on the golf course. Originally Behr had the creek fronting the green with a marshy area with reeds catching the eventual oveflow. Like all creeks in San Diego they are bone dry in summer and have to carry several significant amounts of water during winter storms. Surely the area was prone to flooding during the rainy season. The creek was damed in 1945 to create the pond now fronting the green.
The real dissapointment was the Club's decision to eliminate the natural creek by underground piping. On the front nine the hazard is planted in berrmuda grass with palm trees. On the back nine it's been changed into an artificial creek with a pumped source.
-
Pete,
Can you post some photos.
I loved the course
On the second or third hole an attractive woman riding a horse engaged me in a conversation.
I thought it was pretty neat to see people on horseback on some flanking trails
-
Here is a link to my photo tour, there's even a horse picture!
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,44822.0.html
link corrected
-
Patrick:
Also, as you know, the impressive lineup of courses above is a good match for the area from New York to Philadelphia -- and not the whole east coast. There are 2x or 3x as many great courses to talk about in the East as in the West. The reasons for this are the population distribution of the country in 1925, and, water availability.
Tom Doak, While you are correct on water availability and population, I think your failing to realize that there were a lot of great golf courses that didn't survive the Great Depression and the War, as well as the redevelopment after. Per capita, I'd say the point is more comparative, as well as Golf Architecture was really coming together as a whole with the lands in California and Australia. I've always said it was like a school of knowledge that had grown and the golf architects involved were finally getting to take the Porsche for a drive and test and see where and how fast it could go. That wasn't happening like that back East. You had Tillinghast sort of struggling with whatever and Ross simply was a machine designing courses that he had little knowledge of how they were being built.
Meanwhile, you had on the West Coast, parttime midwest residents in William Watson, George O'Neill who influenced William P. Bell in design, all before he worked with Captain Thomas AND Max Behr. (At Oakmont CC in Glendale) There was John Duncan Dunn, who didn't seem to be getting the same type of work anymore laying out courses, but found success here in California--he even married the daughter of Gaylord Wilshire of Wilshire Boulevard fame. There was Norman Macbeth who designed, or helped design a slew of courses, starting with assisting at LACC, then Brentwood and then in 1919, his beloved Wilshire Country Club home. (A masterpiece/museum piece of its own.)
Assisting all along the way on all of these projects was "Uncle" Edward Tufts, whose power as a sporting goods salesman, tennis player who had the ear of many a wealthy man in early Los Angeles. he was with Joe Satori, one of the founding members of the Los Angeles Country Club; the first and longest running president of the Southern California Golf Association and who recognized Norman Macbeth's calls for year round all-grass greens as soon as they could find a water source, which thanks to William Mullholland, delivered the source via a pipeline and duct way that ran from the foot of the Sierra's Owen's Lake. (And which drained it dry!)(Its still an underground water supply to this day that with a brother that's a geologist, you'll know is a well-known controversy.
The list of NLE's is staggering in Southern California with one of the most dramatic--The Royal Palms being one of the great loses. It was located literally next door to Trump National/Ocean Trails Los Angeles and featured a panoramic view from every hole of the island of Catalina. On somedays you can even see Catalina's famed casino from the very gate for the Royal Palms that still exists in someone's front yard!
These are off of the top of my head. Apologies if I'm missing some:
Captain Thomas NLE's
•Fox Hills (36 holes with W.P. Bell)
•Griffith Park (36 Holes. Too many altered holes form the freeway)(Consulted by Edward Tufts and William Watson)
•La Cumbre (Death by Depression and WWII. Current course designed by W.F. Bell with a two holes following original routing around the lake.
•Red Hill (Original 9 hole course has been rerouted and increased to 18 holes by William P. Bell & Son. Original clubhouse was the still existing Sycamore Inn.)(further screwing up by the late Ken Killian who told the club he was a Thomas expert)
•Saticoy (Original 9 hole course: Not his. Recent information found by Robert Ball shows the course was designed by Max Behr)
William P. Bell
•The Royal Palms (18, but planned for 36)
•Sunset Fields (36 Holes, with plans for an added Executive 18 and a 9 hole mashie course)
•El Cabellero (18 holes on the old Edgar Rice Burroughs property. Some of it which is where the current El Cabellero is located. (No original holes though) (consultation with Captain George C. Thomas Jr.)
•Santa Susanna (18 Holes in the Santa Susanna Pass)
•Midwick CC (Remodeled this William Watson beauty which is now houses)
•Urban Club (partially on the current Candlewood Country Club)
•Newport Coast Country Club (located under what is now Newport Beach's Fashion Island)
•Mountain Meadows Country Club (With George O'Neill, 18 holes on top of what is now Mountain Meadows Golf Course near the LA County Fairplex
•Pasadena Golf Club (Assisted George O'Neil and then restored after the Great Flood of 1938 with A.W. Tillinghast. Front nine is now the Altadena 9 hole golf course)
•Sepulveda Country Club (Near or in the vicinity of Bel Air Country Club with possible involvement with John Duncan Dunn who served as the club's head professional)
•The Hacienda Hotel Golf Course in San Pedro (9 holes with W.F. Bell)
•Portrero Country Club (18 holes located next door to the Forum)
•California Country Club/Cheviot Hills CC (Remodel of William Watson's original design)
•Whitley Park Country Club (18 hole ladies course that was purportedly so good, the men took over it! Club was eventually destroyed by a massive fire in the hills and not rebuilt.
Norman Macbeth
•St. Andrews Pay As You Play (located on Ventura Blvd, right down the street from El Cabellero CC)
John Duncan Dunn
•El Sereno Country Club (18 holes located on what is now the Ascot Hills above County USC General Hospital)(Wild Bill Melhorn was head pro)
•Lake Elsinore Country Club (18 holes, but was planned for 54, just due South near lake Elsinore's airport)
•The Lake Norconian Grand Resort Supreme (18 holes, see the movie Robert Montgomery movie "Love in the Rough")
•El Merrie Del (18 holes located deep in the hills past Lake View Terrace)
•Idylwild Country Club (9, possibly 18 holes in the mountains above Palm Springs and Hemet)
•The Golfer's Club of Calabasas (18, with 36 planned, originally was looked at by MacKenzie)
•Western Avenue Golf Course (Original 18 hole course at the corner of Manchester Blvd. and Western Ave. that lasted two years before redevelopment)
•Parkridge Country Club, Norco (18 hole course situated on and around a portion of the current Cresta Verde Golf Course)
William Watson
•Midwick Country Club (Original design)
•Del Mar Country Club (Located in hills above and down around Del Mar Fairgrounds)
•Flintridge Country Club (And the 210 Freeway (and houses) run through it, just due North of Brookside #2 Golf Course
•Griffith Park Golf Course (Original 18 hole grass course is now the LA Zoo, Original 18 hole sand greens course is now the Zoo parking lot and a 9 hole pony course that was located past the driving range. he also contributed to the design of the Harding Golf Course with Captain Thomas and Edward Tufts and Max Behr) (all pro bono)
•Sunset Canyon Golf Club (9 Hole Executive or Par 3 course that fell victim to a massive fire in the canyon which also claimed the drop dead beautiful clubhouse)
•Hollywood Country Club (Now houses and Harvard-Westlake Private School)
•Encino Country Club (9 hole course with huge clubhouse with hunting, fishing horseback riding in the hills of Encino)
•Las Turas (18 holes in Woodland Hills on Ventura Blvd.)
•Raymond Hotel (18 holes in South Pasadena, now all houses)
•Inglewood Country Club (a mile due west of the Forum)
•Westward Ho! (9 Hole course located at the corner of Sawtelle and Washington Blvd.)
•Clover Field Golf Course (18 holes located on what is now houses and Santa Monica Airport)
•California Country Club/Cheviot Hills Country Club (18 holes with advice by Norman Macbeth and later remodeling with William P. Bell.)
•Annandale Golf Club (more then likely helped father with original design of Annandale)
Max Behr
•Westwood Hills Pay As You Play Golf Course (18 holes of Max Behr that is now the Nakatomi Bank Building, (from the movie Die Hard) Beverly Hills High School, Creative Artists Agency's "Death Star" (name for the building) etc. in Century City.)
•Montebello Golf Course. (Even though its on the same land, David Rainville destroyed this really fun golf course.)
There are far more, but like I said, those are at the top of my head at 3:11AM in the morning.
-
Tommy:
That's a great list of courses, and I have really no sense of any of them. It would be great if you could document one or two here and how good they really were.
As someone with 2 1/2 NLE's to my own credit -- High Pointe [which may still return!], Beechtree, and Apache Stronghold which gets the 1/2 credit -- I can say that it's possible that you are projecting a bit more onto those courses than they deserve. All three of mine were cool golf courses, or even very cool golf courses. But none of them would have made the short list of the best courses in metropolitan NYC or California, for anybody except a real golf architecture junkie like ourselves. You've probably listed a bunch of others in the same category. I didn't know there were that many.
-
This was a great read Tommy! I am from the LA area and some of these courses were in my backyard and I didn't even know about them. It is interesting that you bring up the gate from The Royal Palms. I know the house that you speak of, but I never made that connection.
-
Tommy, I have played a lot at LaCumbre, starting in college 50 years ago. Aren't there a number of holes at least in their original corridors? Current 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 :'(, 9, 10 (the original 1st down the mountain), 18?
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
;D
Now if you want to fund Emile in a fashion he would like to become accustomed to, he could be your reporter in the field in the Pacific northwest.
;D
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
;D
Now if you want to fund Emile in a fashion he would like to become accustomed to, he could be your reporter in the field in the Pacific northwest.
;D
Panhandle Bill,
The only corridors in use of the Thomas course at La Cumbre are as follows:
• Hole 1 Same corridor, different hole
• Hole 2 Same corridor, different hole
• Hole 3 Same corridor, different hole with added tee and an extra added island green (UGH!) Hoel is no longer the same length and used to play as either a one-shot or two shot hole, depending on which tee was used. (Thomas Hole with-in a Hole theory)
• Hole 4 Tee shot is same corridor, but instead of playing to a green next to the lake, it goes directly straight to a different green site.
• Hole 17 The famed 16th, only the barranca has been filled and the green enlarged and changed--an entirely different hole.
• Hole 18 Same corridor, different hole
-
Tommy:
That's a great list of courses, and I have really no sense of any of them. It would be great if you could document one or two here and how good they really were.
As someone with 2 1/2 NLE's to my own credit -- High Pointe [which may still return!], Beechtree, and Apache Stronghold which gets the 1/2 credit -- I can say that it's possible that you are projecting a bit more onto those courses than they deserve. All three of mine were cool golf courses, or even very cool golf courses. But none of them would have made the short list of the best courses in metropolitan NYC or California, for anybody except a real golf architecture junkie like ourselves. You've probably listed a bunch of others in the same category. I didn't know there were that many.
Tom,
A very good point, and I will do so when I get some time.
Regarding Cool vs. Very Cool, I think its all very debatable to some extent. In fact, I would go so far to say that the quirky natural feel of golf was being experienced out here at the next level, and this is why you saw courses like Riviera, LACC, Bel Air, El Cab, Wilshire, and of all, especially Lakeside garner the reputation they deserved. There were a lot more, and once LA84 finishes scanning the Country Club and Pacific Golf & Motor Magazine issues that they have, maybe it would be worth some time to peruse them, then visit what is remaining of the sites.
(http://i46.tinypic.com/34nptl0.jpg)
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
;D
Now if you want to fund Emile in a fashion he would like to become accustomed to, he could be your reporter in the field in the Pacific northwest.
;D
Panhandle Bill,
The only corridors in use of the Thomas course at La Cumbre are as follows:
• Hole 1 Same corridor, different hole
• Hole 2 Same corridor, different hole
• Hole 3 Same corridor, different hole with added tee and an extra added island green (UGH!) Hoel is no longer the same length and used to play as either a one-shot or two shot hole, depending on which tee was used. (Thomas Hole with-in a Hole theory)
• Hole 4 Tee shot is same corridor, but instead of playing to a green next to the lake, it goes directly straight to a different green site.
• Hole 17 The famed 16th, only the barranca has been filled and the green enlarged and changed--an entirely different hole.
• Hole 18 Same corridor, different hole
That island green is truly a piece of shit, literally so as coots hang out there. Now the 13th hole, it is also totally redundant as the original hole, a 200+ yard par 3 almost Redan around the lake, could be the best par 3 around.
-
Well, I can stop scanning the background and spectators for a Tommy sighting, and just watch the golf... since he is posting on GCA.com at present!!!! ;D :o 8)
-
@125 acres / course, that's like 5,500 acres of golf holes. Even if you subscribe to the theory of "monkeys at a drafting table" there had to have been some gems in that lot. Throw in the soil and climate and it's hard to think otherwise.
Tommy, welcome to GCA. For a newbie you sure seem to know a lot of stuff!
-
Thank you Coordinates! (Somewhere in Virginia or China)
-
Tommy,
While going through and cleaning out my golfbag today I came across some scorecards and a yardage book from Wilshire, a course I played for the first time a few months ago, and really, really liked it.
You made a comment that really resonated with me.
the quirky natural feel of golf was being experienced out here at the next level,
Wilshire, LACC, Bel Air and Rancho Santa Fe certainly give you that feel.
It's a unique blend of golf on unusual terrain, terrain not found back East.
I'm always fascinated by those old black and whites of Wilshire, LACC, Bel Air, Rancho Santa Fe and others.
Any additional information and photos on Wilshire would be appreciated.
I found it to be a unique, quirky course that's alot of fun to play, day in and day out.
Thanks
-
Tommy,
While going through and cleaning out my golfbag today I came across some scorecards and a yardage book from Wilshire, a course I played for the first time a few months ago, and really, really liked it.
You made a comment that really resonated with me.
the quirky natural feel of golf was being experienced out here at the next level,
Wilshire, LACC, Bel Air and Rancho Santa Fe certainly give you that feel.
It's a unique blend of golf on unusual terrain, terrain not found back East.
I'm always fascinated by those old black and whites of Wilshire, LACC, Bel Air, Rancho Santa Fe and others.
Any additional information and photos on Wilshire would be appreciated.
I found it to be a unique, quirky course that's alot of fun to play, day in and day out.
Thanks
Patrick, have you been to the Valley Club and Pasatiempo? (I figure you've been to Cypress Point). Those West Coast Mackenzie masterpieces make wonderful use of the natural terrain and features such as the creeks at Santa Barbara and the barrancas at Santa Cruz.
One of the negatives about some of the LA courses is how they have "managed" the natural washes and arroyos by filling in or grassing them. See the barrancas at Riviera with their kikuyu bottoms for an example.
-
One of the negatives about some of the LA courses have "managed" the natural washes and arroyos by filling in or grassing them. See the barrancas at Riviera with their kikuyu bottoms for an example.
That's one of the reasons I referenced the "lack of water availability," earlier in the thread. A lot of the work that's been done was to harness drainage water ... either to prevent washouts, or collect it for irrigation purposes.
-
Patrick, have you been to the Valley Club and Pasatiempo? (I figure you've been to Cypress Point). Those West Coast Mackenzie masterpieces make wonderful use of the natural terrain and features such as the creeks at Santa Barbara and the barrancas at Santa Cruz.
Bill,
I've played the Valley Club and am hoping to play Pasatiempo this May
One of the negatives about some of the LA courses is how they have "managed" the natural washes and arroyos by filling in or grassing them. See the barrancas at Riviera with their kikuyu bottoms for an example.
Could that be to further prevent erosion ?
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
One only has to look at this reply/post to answer the question as to why the site has deteriorated.
It's posts like these that dilute the quality and integrity of the discussions.
-
Tommy & Pete,
Do you have any early photos of Rancho Santa Fe ?
Pete, your link didn't reference Rancho Santa Fe, it was another thread instead.
Could you repost.
Thanks
-
There's a short book (pamphlet?) that was published by the Santa Fe Railway in 1900 in connection with a tour of California by Willie Smith and David Bell. I'm sure the Emperor is aware of this work, but thought I'd bring it to the attention of anyone else interested in the roots of golf in California.
The book has a brief description and some blurry photos (and in some cases a routing map) of courses in the following locations:
Coronado (Coronado GC, San Diego CC)
Santa Catalina (Santa Catalina Golf Links)
Riverside (Rubidoux, Riverside Golf and Polo Club, Pachappa Club)
Redlands (La Cosa Noma Hotel Course, Redlands CC)
Redondo (Redondo Beach CC)
Los Angeles (LACC)
Santa Monica (Ocean Park links, Santa Monica GC)
Pasadena (Hotel Green, Pasadena CC)
Santa Barbara (CC of Santa Barbara)
Del Monte (Hotel Del Monte)
Burlingame and San Rafael (Burlingame Club, San Rafael GC)
Oakland (Oakland GC)
Its not an exhaustive list, more of a highlight of the better courses from that time.
The booklet contains the following excerpt:
"Golf as a game has a firmer hold on the West than the East. This is because it is something that can be taken up by the average business man, played during his leisure time, and without the necessity of keeping in the fine physical condition essential to more rapid games. It will not die out, because it is a reasonable means of giving such men exercise in the open air under the most favorable conditions."
-
Sven,
1900 would seem to be prior to some of the courses you listed being built.
LACC wasn't built until 1911.
-
Pat:
The first iteration of LACC was built c. 1898. The club moved and the old grounds were taken over by Westmoorland CC.
Sven
-
Patrick, have you been to the Valley Club and Pasatiempo? (I figure you've been to Cypress Point). Those West Coast Mackenzie masterpieces make wonderful use of the natural terrain and features such as the creeks at Santa Barbara and the barrancas at Santa Cruz.
Bill,
I've played the Valley Club and am hoping to play Pasatiempo this May
One of the negatives about some of the LA courses is how they have "managed" the natural washes and arroyos by filling in or grassing them. See the barrancas at Riviera with their kikuyu bottoms for an example.
Could that be to further prevent erosion ?
Most likely so. Since there's no groundwater in Los Angeles and rainfall is sparse, when there's a lot of rain in a short period it can create torrents. It's too bad, because photos of the original washes are terrific.
-
One of the negatives about some of the LA courses is how they have "managed" the natural washes and arroyos by filling in or grassing them. See the barrancas at Riviera with their kikuyu bottoms for an example.
What they have done at Riviera with the barranca is embarrassing Looking at the blimp shots the barranca running across the 1st and 11th is now nothing more that a slight dip.
I left out in the Amy Alcott interview how when she first started playing Riv in the 70's it was a rushing torrent and how deep it use to be. Now the rumor is the owners are going to fill it in saying it only penalizes bad golfers.
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
One only has to look at this reply/post to answer the question as to why the site has deteriorated.
It's posts like these that dilute the quality and integrity of the discussions.
Sorry Patrick, but that was just stating a fact, with perhaps a poor attempt at humor in referring to you as a schmoozer. In Portland for example, we don't have posters that belong to or have a high degree of access to Portland Golf Club and Waverly that could be reported on. Bill McBride had a "national" membership a Columbia Edgewater, and could report on it, but has dropped that for a few years since the economy went bad. But, yet we hear from you right coasters about members or access at Merion, Garden City, Winged Foot, etc. You yourself have quite good access to many clubs that our members on the left coast can only dream about having access to. If you are dismayed that we don't report on second tier clubs and courses out in the Pacific northwest than I think you are wrong. Many have been reported on, had photo tours, and often get recommended to people inquiring about traveling to Bandon. You yourself have gotten friends on Portland Golf Club and Waverly. Why don't you discuss? ;)
-
There's a short book (pamphlet?) that was published by the Santa Fe Railway in 1900 in connection with a tour of California by Willie Smith and David Bell. I'm sure the Emperor is aware of this work, but thought I'd bring it to the attention of anyone else interested in the roots of golf in California.
The book has a brief description and some blurry photos (and in some cases a routing map) of courses in the following locations:
Coronado (Coronado GC, San Diego CC)
Santa Catalina (Santa Catalina Golf Links)
Riverside (Rubidoux, Riverside Golf and Polo Club, Pachappa Club)
Redlands (La Cosa Noma Hotel Course, Redlands CC)
Redondo (Redondo Beach CC)
Los Angeles (LACC)
Santa Monica (Ocean Park links, Santa Monica GC)
Pasadena (Hotel Green, Pasadena CC)
Santa Barbara (CC of Santa Barbara)
Del Monte (Hotel Del Monte)
Burlingame and San Rafael (Burlingame Club, San Rafael GC)
Oakland (Oakland GC)
Its not an exhaustive list, more of a highlight of the better courses from that time.
The booklet contains the following excerpt:
"Golf as a game has a firmer hold on the West than the East. This is because it is something that can be taken up by the average business man, played during his leisure time, and without the necessity of keeping in the fine physical condition essential to more rapid games. It will not die out, because it is a reasonable means of giving such men exercise in the open air under the most favorable conditions."
Sven,
Yes, thanks! I m aware of the pamphlet and it answered a lot of questions when the Seagle Library first went digital (thanks USGA!).
LACC got it s start at the corner of Pico and Alvarado on the parcel of land that is now known as the famed Alvarado Terrace district. It has on the property some of the most glorious Victorian homes that can be found in Los Angeles and was the site of the original Los Angeles Golf Club aka The Los Angeles Country Club back in the late 1890's. The course was laid out with tomato soup cans for golf holes on sand greens; Edward Tufts, completely addicted to golf by this point; had almost entirely given up playing Tennis--his original sport of choice.
With Security Bank Presdent, Joseph Sartori acting as the financial guru of this group, the need to find a bigger parcel down the street became evident and so was born LACC's Convent Links (It was located right next door to a convent). That site quickly proved to be problematic and the purchase of a vast parcel with a creek running trough it was bought at the corner of Pico and Western. This is the club which David Bell and Willie Smith played at during their Santa Fe Railroad tour.
What I think Pat was referring to was the date golf started being played at the current site of The Los Angeles Country Club. Originally, the course was laid out by Ed Tufts, Joesph Sartori and Norman Macbeth. Soon after, the need for a more thorough design was observed and the hiring of Herbert Fowler took place with a transplanted Pennsylvanian name George C. Thomas Jr. overseeing construction of the course. By 1928, Thomas had redesign North and was in the middle of redesigning the South at the time of his death.
-
Patrick:
Also, as you know, the impressive lineup of courses above is a good match for the area from New York to Philadelphia -- and not the whole east coast. There are 2x or 3x as many great courses to talk about in the East as in the West. The reasons for this are the population distribution of the country in 1925, and, water availability.
Actually, I think the Midwest is more under-rated in terms of exposure on Golf Club Atlas. There are never any threads about the courses in Detroit and Cleveland and Columbus and Pittsburgh, and it's pretty much fly-over country for the PGA Tour now, too.
Tom, I'd like for you to get back to the subject at hand. This isn't about you and your courses. Its about quality and quantity which I agree with the Quantity. I don't think your fully aware of the Quality. You brought it up, so lets talk about it!
First off, weren't you the guy that once said on this very website that there were only so many courses worthy of restoration? Odd, I seem to remember you saying that, so for all of those great golf courses on the Eastern seaboard, are they not worthy? From the sounds of it, you really think they are! (Which I'm inclined to agree with you!)
Now, being that I love New York, Philadelphia and Connecticut, Westchester, Long Island down into Jersey (and relax pardoners (Matt Ward Pardners.) I'm not going to forget Joisie!) but that call to arms to see those courses in the 1980's is what inspired me to learn further. Learn by actually getting out of the car and seeing the entire course, and not just a few holes and then walking away and saying "5." No, Golf Courses and their architecture mean a lot more then that to me and I know you know that! But what's bewildering to me is that your ready to discount so many California courses when the very natural environment which you strive to represent in your own work--the use of it, your failing to realize that the California Dynamic (along with the Australian because what was going on down there was going on up here!) was at the very pivotal moment of Golf Architecture Excellence--THE GOLDEN AGE of Golf Course Architecture for which the subject had reached its most pivotal moment of intellect with a whole list of knowledgable people that followed it.
I'm going to list the names of people concerned with golf courses and their architecture at that time period of the 1920's on the West Coast
At the same time, I'd like you to list they greats on the East Coast and once we get these lists complete, then I'll show you my point. Its not quantity, but even better quality because the Art of Golf Course design and construction was at full speed and the majority of it was all going down on the West Coast and down in Australia.
My list of guys on the West Coast that either designed, worked on or had influence in the direction of Golf Course Architecture and the California Dynamic of the 1920's. There are more then likely some I'm forgetting, but non-the-less, here is my list. (those with asterisks represent those who actually designed at least one golf course):
• Edward Tufts*
• John Duncan Dunn*
• Norman Macbeth*
• William Watson*
• George O'Neill*
• Jack Croke*
• William Park Bell*
• Captain George C. Thomas Jr.*
• Joe Mayo (Superintendent and Construction Manager at Pebble Beach)
• Jack Neville*
• Douglas Grant*
• Herbert Fowler*
• Walter Travis (Probably turned it around for us here in the Sun)
• Robert Wiles Hunter*
• Max Behr*
• Dr. Alister MacKenzie*
• A.W. Tillinghast*
• Donald Ross*(Tried but was still despondent over the death of his wife Janet)
• H. Chandler Egan*
• Vernon Macan*
• Stanley Thompson*
• Sam Whiting*
• Jack Fleming (Superintendent and Construction Manager for Hunter)
• A. Herbert Wilson (Behr Associate)
• Bill Johnson* (Bell Associate and superintendent in his own right.)
• Bob Baldock Sr.* (Bell Associate)
• Paddy Cole (MacKenzie & Hunter& Egan Associate)
I Might be missing a guy or two--definitely some that Tull can add here also, but now I'd like you to add your list Tom, of architects and other important personnel working on the East Coast that did the same in the 1920's.
-
Well, I can stop scanning the background and spectators for a Tommy sighting, and just watch the golf... since he is posting on GCA.com at present!!!! ;D :o 8)
Dick, I hope you and Jo are well!
-
I am sure that Ran and Ben are happy to have Tommy back on GCA even if it is for just a few hours more.
People just don't understand sometimes how much information is out there for people to consume.
I spent an evening with Sean Tully in San Diego last week browsing over a very interesting book detailing the architecture of the Chicago area back in the early 1900's. I could have traded stories with Sean for hours. It started with a stick routing detailing cross bunkers located 150 -200 yards of the tee right in the line of flight. Are discussion expanded to routings done by some of the most respected designers of that era. Some really fascinating routings and a bunch of duds in my honest opnion.
I was amazed how 100's of pages of written and sketched diagrams could paint a picture of how qucikly golf course architetcure was evolving at that time in history.
Tommy is just one of those guys consuming every ounce of information that he can lay his hands on. We are lucky to have people like Tommy and Sean willing to delve back into history
-
Many of us old dogs know of Tommy's incredible encyclopedic knowledge of GCA, history, and all the theoretical schools of design and characteristics of various era. While he has not confined himself to his west coast home base (from Washington State to San Diego and a bit over the border) he has also undertaken to learn and share information he had pursued relentlessly, east coast and the 'old sod'. No doubt about it, Tommy has one of the deepest knowlege bases on the subject of any person alive. But, his curiosity also includes learning so many 'back stories' by putting together snipits of articles that lend to understanding the personality of the many historical people that were involved within the golf industry expansion in the golden age. It is as if Tommy knew some of those cats, who had actually died years before Tommy was born.
I think Tommy is a freak, in that he must have a large frontal cortex of deep crevice dimensions to be able to retain as much detail about GCA and its historical minutia as he does. That is only equalled by the size of his balls. ::) :o ;D
The thing about his balls is that Tommy don't give a shit who you are or what position or situation you are in, he goes up to all folks of all stripes and 'engages' them with genuine curiosity. That showed itself to us (wife and I visiting with him) where Tommy just tools around L.A. and all surrounds ( a very big place) like he is the Mayor (or actually - Emperor) and literally stops here and there, and folks just pop out of the woodwork and say, "hey Tommy, how ya doin?" He then learns everything that person has to know, and takes his leave with that person feeling like, wow... I just met the Emperor! :o
But even more freaky, is Tommy isn't confined in his encyclopedic retention of just GCA and related topics. He goes about as deep in knowledge of aspects of music culture, or wine, or electrical work. Did I mention hot rods and motor sports?
Tommy, you freak! Spend more time on here, if only to balance out what has become east coast centric Mucciland, and represent the west coast topics that seem to have fallen off the radar. You and about 10 other west coasters have gone missing, and it ain't the same without youse. 8)
-
My apologies to the spell checkers.
I meant - Our discussion
-
Here is a link to my photo tour, there's even a horse picture!
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,44822.0.html
link corrected
-
I think we do talk a ton about left hand golf courses. Its just that the same ones are brought up over and over. Much is the same for the right hand courses with some recent additions of lesser name courses in the past couple of years.
Pat mentioned Wilshire. While I had heard of the course I had no idea of its quality til I saw photo tour on Tommy's site. For me it looks like one of the most interesting courses in California.
Tom D - here is a thread on a few Detroit area courses.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,53933.0.html
Part of the problem with trying to go off the beaten path on this site is so few people will have played the courses and often times very few people are really interested in 2nd tier courses. This site and many of the prime members are primarily about 1st tier courses. Its a great shame, but in a big way mag lists drive this sort of behaviour of searching out big guns.
Ciao
-
Its about quality and quantity which I agree with the Quantity. I don't think your fully aware of the Quality. You brought it up, so lets talk about it!
First off, weren't you the guy that once said on this very website that there were only so many courses worthy of restoration? Odd, I seem to remember you saying that, so for all of those great golf courses on the Eastern seaboard, are they not worthy? From the sounds of it, you really think they are! (Which I'm inclined to agree with you!)
Tommy:
I still don't think there are hundreds of courses worth restoring. What's driving the restoration industry is desperation, on the part of many out-of-work architects, and vanity, on the part of many club members [WE have a DONALD ROSS course, too!].
I do think it's important to have a handful of examples of each architect's best work. It's too bad that so many of the guys whose names you listed have had all of their work destroyed, and it's too bad that hardly anyone is out there trying to restore the best of it. I've been to Woodland Hills and Palos Verdes CC, for example, and if they were once great courses, they've done a great job of hiding it between then and now ... neither would even get a 5 in The Confidential Guide today.
If there was such a great legacy of golf architectural thought out west, I can't quite understand how all you enlightened west-coasters allowed it to be lost after the Depression, but that's another story. I do think you're "reaching" a little bit, if you are listing the name of Paddy Cole [a young Irish bunker-builder] as a great mind of design. There are probably dozens of guys who worked on building all those courses in the East who knew as much about design as Paddy Cole did -- but their names were never even mentioned out East, so I can't provide a comparable list to what you've given. But here are some of the guys who actually built courses in the first three decades out East:
Donald Ross and his associates (Ellis Maples, George McGovern, Orrin Smith, Walter Hatch, etc.)
C.B. Macdonald and his associates (Seth Raynor, Charles Banks)
A.W. Tillinghast
George C. Thomas (though he did only the one course out East)
Harry Colt
Hugh Alison
Alister MacKenzie
Perry Maxwell (and the Wood Brothers who built his courses)
George Crump
Herbert Leeds
William Fownes (and his superintendent)
Hugh Wilson
William Flynn (and his young associate, Dick Wilson)
Fred Hood
John Duncan Dunn
Walter Travis
Devereux Emmet
Wayne Stiles
John Van Kleek
Willie Park, Jr.
Robert White (one of Tom MacWood's faves - I have no clue if he designed anything or not)
Herbert Strong
I think this is really beside the point, though. What matters is the courses that got in the ground, not who built them. When you concentrate on who built them, you're projecting about the quality of the work, unless you've got the pictures to prove it.
Just curious -- of all the NLE courses you listed, which of them do you think might have got a 7 or higher in The Confidential Guide if I'd seen them in their heyday?
-
Tom,
+ HCC Tippet, designer of original Montauk Downs and La Gorce.
-
Tommy,
While you are gracing us with your presence, perhaps you can enlighten us travelling snobs as to which courses between LA and the Mexican border other than Barona Creek that we should make a special effort to see?
-
The real reason is that there a not a bunch of well heeled, affluent, schmoozers like you Patrick that belong to the website out here on the left coast that can report on the old and renowned; and the best and new.
One only has to look at this reply/post to answer the question as to why the site has deteriorated.
It's posts like these that dilute the quality and integrity of the discussions.
Sorry Patrick, but that was just stating a fact, with perhaps a poor attempt at humor in referring to you as a schmoozer. In Portland for example, we don't have posters that belong to or have a high degree of access to Portland Golf Club and Waverly that could be reported on. Bill McBride had a "national" membership a Columbia Edgewater, and could report on it, but has dropped that for a few years since the economy went bad. But, yet we hear from you right coasters about members or access at Merion, Garden City, Winged Foot, etc. You yourself have quite good access to many clubs that our members on the left coast can only dream about having access to. If you are dismayed that we don't report on second tier clubs and courses out in the Pacific northwest than I think you are wrong. Many have been reported on, had photo tours, and often get recommended to people inquiring about traveling to Bandon. You yourself have gotten friends on Portland Golf Club and Waverly. Why don't you discuss? ;)
GJ,
It wasn't the word "schmoozers". It was the words "well heeled, affluent schmoozers" that I found objectionable.
It's indicative of resentment, envy and class warfare and has no place on this website.
As to access to "Merion, Garden City and Winged Foot, Chip Oat is a member of Merion, I'm a member of Garden City and Neal Regan is a member of Winged Foot and all of us are friends who met on GCA.com. All of us would gladly extend invitations to each other because of our friendship and respect for one another. In addition, all three of us have generously extended invitations to others whom we've met on this site, without ever having met them in person. If you haven't been the recipient of any invitations perhaps introspection might help.
As to my access to clubs in the Northwest, I played at Portland CC in the 1999 USGA Sr Am.
I arranged for my surgeon to play a number of course in the Portland area thanks to another kind fellow I met on GCA.com.
So, In both cases, it had nothing to do with being a "well heeled, affluent schmoozer"
As to discussing "second tier" courses, I've discussed "Sandpines" and "Tokatee" on numerous occassions.
The fact is, there's a paucity of great to good courses worthy of discussion in the Northwest, when compared to the "right" coast, as you say.
But, California has an ample supply of courses worthy of discussion.
Rancho Santa Fe is certainly one of them.
Wilshire was another.
Sandpiper another, and I've initiated and participated in discussion on all of them.
So what's your problem.
P.S. As to being "well heeled and affluent", I never inherited a penny when my parents died, nor was I the benefactor of any trusts or gifts, during their lives or after their passing. My parents provided me with a great education in and out of school.
-
Tom, I'm going to use quote bubbles here simply because you bring up a lot of points I believe need addressing. I don't want to make it seem like a debate, but more a healthy discussion.
I still don't think there are hundreds of courses worth restoring. What's driving the restoration industry is desperation, on the part of many out-of-work architects, and vanity, on the part of many club members [WE have a DONALD ROSS course, too!].
100% on the desperation part and we can see the results of those that are using the gimmick of the word restoration to power the work they no longer have: RIVIERA is a perfect example, but now, I think the persons responsible for that mess see that there is only one way to disguise it and say its renovation, thus actually destroying the masterpiece they once had. By chance, did you get to see any of that same person's work at Winged Foot? I did, and I was shocked, dismayed and saddened. What's worse is now we have Merion to mourn as well as the greatest course of the all--the very one that drive you and I to our love and passion for this great art--THE Old Course of St. Andrews, all done by rank amateurs with little to no insight other then to strengthen. Its a dirty word.
But, I think your selling short those that would like to see their courses brought back to life by those that care and know where the greatness lies in the ground and know that there are the "right" people out there to get it back. I've met many a passionate and driven member that will go to no end to show his fellow members that they made mistakes and there is a place to recover from them. They are out there doing there best to get it done, even if it means getting lambasted as the club lunatic and treated harshly to the point of wanting to leave their club. But these are resilient people and they still fight on for architectural greatness at their club's. One of them is even a woman whose driven to restoring the greatness. I've got to tell you how impressive it is to see her in action!
Having people passionate about their golf courses and restoring the elements that made them fun and entertaining designs is a good thing I would think. They just need the right people to get it going. And once again, I disagree with you. I think every course with the name Raynor, Ross, Macdonald, MacKenzie, Hunter, Thomas, Bell, Watson, Macbeth, Egan, Macan, Dunn et. al. should be restored and we should be reading whats in the ground as a testament to the greatness.
I do think it's important to have a handful of examples of each architect's best work. It's too bad that so many of the guys whose names you listed have had all of their work destroyed, and it's too bad that hardly anyone is out there trying to restore the best of it. I've been to Woodland Hills and Palos Verdes CC, for example, and if they were once great courses, they've done a great job of hiding it between then and now ... neither would even get a 5 in The Confidential Guide today.
Tom, This is where both you and your book have failed. As much as that book inspired a lot of us and gave us the legs which to stand, there are many faults to the book; many courses where you didn't see all of the course, yet rated them. Also, the subject and the opinions are always varied. Look at us on this thread!
At the time you rated Lundin Golf Club I think it was a four or something well short of the mark. Then, you admitted to me on this very site that you only saw four holes! Yet, here on this fabled grounds were some of the most influential golf holes which Charles Blair Macdonald would use as inspiration for his designs in America, which you would later revisit and design a golf course in his honor using the same tools of inspiration.
Hmmmm? ? ? ? ? Inspiration? ? ? ? ? Maybe just maybe there is something to see and learn with these courses, or, are you shutting yourself off now to the learning process? I hope not! I know I will never do that till the day I close my eyes.
You yourself have to admit that what existed at Lundin had devolved horribly, yet the bones were there to see the greatness of what Macdonald saw--I mean, come on! You even got Mike Kaiser and Uncle George Bahto to go there with you!
And one can see this same thing at what is left of our West Coast courses. You have good people driven to make bring it out. I think it would be far better to help drive the industry of good people capable of doing the work--a positive for you then put it down. This is why all golf courses that any of us should see as worthy, deserve restoration. and most, honestly, do you really want to be the judge and juror to this?
If there was such a great legacy of golf architectural thought out west, I can't quite understand how all you enlightened west-coasters allowed it to be lost after the Depression, but that's another story.
Tom, How did Lido die? Timber Point and the others during this harrowing time in our world's history? When you say "enlightened west coasters" it makes me realize your smugness and arrogance, or what fame and success has done to you. I think I could, myself, go on any course in the world; on any coast in the world and appreciate the architecture at any level--its what I love and I used to think you did too. Now, I'm not so sure.
This makes it even more confusing when thinking that you used an open mind while writing the critical commentary in the Confidential Guide. Like I said earlier, there are many faults in that book. Still it remains one of my most prized because its not only a great book because of your insight on courses you did actually write about with passion but also allows me to now see exactly what you don't know and should. None of us are perfect! It also makes me appreciate Ran's write ups that much more.
Tom, I say this with all due respect and honesty: You have the power to influence many with your knowledge and intellect into the art. You educated me with your writings and our camaraderie in the past. I'm pointing this stuff out to prove to you what you are seemingly no longer capable of seeing or simply don't want to see. Just like our West Coast courses that only an assorted few can be seen in photographs and what little, but still valuable evidence that is still in the ground. That is after all the brain candy for guys like you and me--what's in the ground. The same use of what's in the ground at places like Palos Verdes and Woodland Hills. Its there.
Donald Ross and his associates (Ellis Maples, George McGovern, Orrin Smith, Walter Hatch, etc.)
C.B. Macdonald and his associates (Seth Raynor, Charles Banks)
A.W. Tillinghast
George C. Thomas (though he did only the one course out East)
Harry Colt
Hugh Alison
Alister MacKenzie
Perry Maxwell (and the Wood Brothers who built his courses)
George Crump
Herbert Leeds
William Fownes (and his superintendent)
Hugh Wilson
William Flynn (and his young associate, Dick Wilson)
Fred Hood
John Duncan Dunn
Walter Travis
Devereux Emmet
Wayne Stiles
John Van Kleek
Willie Park, Jr.
Robert White (one of Tom MacWood's faves - I have no clue if he designed anything or not)
Herbert Strong
I think this is really beside the point, though. What matters is the courses that got in the ground, not who built them. When you concentrate on who built them, you're projecting about the quality of the work, unless you've got the pictures to prove it.
Tom, There were a few points to listing. The main thing was to list how many of the same guys you listed, that I listed, and I didn't even put down Seth Raynor on purpose, despite two courses in Hawaii and no courses completed, only planned in California. You see, they moved out here; They settled here; they worked here and eventually died here, or close to died here. (In the case of Tillinghast who then moved in with is daughter in Ohio for the last year or two of his life) These minds of great influence in the classic Golf Architecture we love.
Compare out list, we have six, but you forgot Fowler and his masterful work at Eastward Ho! so that's seven; If I would have included Raynor or Allison (who was doing work in Japan and stayed out of California, simply because of MacKenzie, well, I think you can get my point. n some ways today its no different then you or Rees Jones in China, where you went were the work was or where it carried you. But in California, the all moved out here for various reasons. Hunter was teaching at Cal I believe, Thomas to grow roses year round; MacKenzie, whether it was to get out of town to evade a jealous husband or wife or simply because he saw a vast landscape that was worthy of great golf and could yield a crop like Cypress Point, Pasatiempo or The Valley Club. You had a Max Behr, who was the most vocal if not influential voice with his Golf Illustrated magazine, who after losing his wife to Influenza, picked up his young son and daughter and moved out West and tarted finally getting to prove his theories in the ground. Tom we are talking some very bright and intellectual people that became "enlightened west coasters."
Some of these very same people would go on to write the most definitive books ever on the subject. Are you going to now discount them also?
The fact was it was getting done out here in the Enlightened West, Australia, Japan and even in Hawaii, then a depression, world war, redevelopment and simply old age and illness stop this movement dead in its tracks here in the United States. It ended faster then it got started with no one left to drive the car. And that's why it can barely be seen today. To me, that tragedy in golf is far more enlightening in what can happen. I've had a front row seat to see what is left being destroyed on a day to day basis every time Fazio's Tom Marzlotov gets off of a plane at LAX. And that's the point, what can you do to stop it!?!?
Just curious -- of all the NLE courses you listed, which of them do you think might have got a 7 or higher in The Confidential Guide if I'd seen them in their heyday?
Tom, if its O.K. with you, I'd like to take a brief rest here for a bit, not because I can't produce a list full of El Cabellero's and Royal Palms. I have to get some work done. But I promise that I will list for you all of the courses that were worthy, what is left and what will never be again, as well as how technology would have deemed a lot of them obsolete, even for an amateur.
-
Not sure why Chandler Egan hasn't been mentioned.
-
Bill, I've mentioned him more then twice I think.
-
...
The fact is, there's a paucity of great to good courses worthy of discussion in the Northwest, when compared to the "right" coast, as you say.
...
Oregon, population 3,899,353
1. Pacific Dunes, Bandon ★ ♣ ♦
2. Bandon Dunes (pictured above), Bandon ★ ♣ ♦
3. Old MacDonald, Bandon ★ ♣ ♦
4. Bandon Trails, Bandon ★ ♣ ♦
5. Eugene C.C. Eugene ★
6. Pronghorn Club (Nicklaus), Bend ♣ ♦
7. Pronghorn Club (Fazio), Bend
8. Pumpkin Ridge G.C. (Witch Hollow), North Plains
9. Crosswater, Sunriver ♣ ♦
10. Portland G.C., Portland
11. Pumpkin Ridge G.C. (Ghost Creek), N. Plains ♣ ♦
12. Tetherow G.C., Bend ♣ ♦
13. Columbia-Edgewater C.C., Portland
14. Salishan Spa & G. Resort, Gleneden Beach ♦
15. Running Y Ranch, Klamath Falls ♦
Read More http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/oregon#ixzz2LB2RlhOH
New Jersey, population 8,864,590
1. Pine Valley G.C. (pictured above), Pine Valley ★
2. Baltusrol G.C. (Lower), Springfield ★
3. Baltusrol G.C. (Upper), Springfield ★
4. Plainfield C.C. Edison ★
5. Somerset Hills C.C., Bernardsville ★
6. Galloway National G.C., Galloway
7. Ridgewood C.C. (East/West), Paramus
8. Bayonne G.C., Bayonne
9. Liberty National G. Cse., Jersey City
10. Trump National G.C. Bedminster (Old), Bedminster
11. The Ridge at Back Brook, Ringoes
12. Mountain Ridge C.C., West Caldwell
13. Hidden Creek G.C., Egg Harbor Township
14. Trump National G.C. Bedminster (New), Bedminster
15. 15 Hamilton Farm G.C. (Highlands), Gladstone
16. Hollywood G.C., Deal
17. Metedeconk National G.C. (1st/3rd), Jackson
18. Trump National G.C. Philadelphia, Pine Hill
19. Atlantic City C.C., Northfield ♦
20. Trump National G.C. Colts Neck, Colts Neck
Read More http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/new_jersey#ixzz2LB2lzP7k
Given these ratings from Golf Digest, it may be that the paucity is actually in New Jersey, with twice the population of Oregon. ;D
Also, the Oregon courses seem to get far more discussion than the New Jersey ones, putting the premise of your thread in severe doubt. ;D
-
Tommy,
While you are gracing us with your presence, perhaps you can enlighten us travelling snobs as to which courses between LA and the Mexican border other than Barona Creek that we should make a special effort to see?
Jud,
Tell you what, give me a bit and I'll give you a good list of courses which to see; hopefully even maybe a chance for a beer or two if the schedules work out.
-
Jud,
Rancho Santa Fe would be one
-
Bill, I've mentioned him more then twice I think.
Sorry, missed it in that long list. He certainly did some excellent work.
-
GJ,
I don't want to burst your bubble, but, after the first top 3 or 4 courses, the rest wouldn't make top 50 in the greater Met area.
There are so many courses that you never heard of that are good to great.
Just in NJ, courses like Essex County, The Knoll, Alpine, Montclair, Preakness Hills, Canoe Brook, Morris County, Woodcrest, Tavistock, etc., etc..
-
GJ,
I don't want to burst your bubble, but, after the first top 3 or 4 courses, the rest wouldn't make top 50 in the greater Met area.
There are so many courses that you never heard of that are good to great.
Just in NJ, courses like Essex County, The Knoll, Alpine, Montclair, Preakness Hills, Canoe Brook, Morris County, Woodcrest, Tavistock, etc., etc..
I've played or seen most every course in the Portland area, as well as seen a lot of them in the MET and I would agree.
-
GJ,
I don't want to burst your bubble, but, after the first top 3 or 4 courses, the rest wouldn't make top 50 in the greater Met area.
There are so many courses that you never heard of that are good to great.
Just in NJ, courses like Essex County, The Knoll, Alpine, Montclair, Preakness Hills, Canoe Brook, Morris County, Woodcrest, Tavistock, etc., etc..
I've played or seen most every course in the Portland area, as well as seen a lot of them in the MET and I would agree.
Perhaps you two missed the state population comparison. And, it was a state comparison, not a metropolitan area comparison. I am perfectly willing to concede the Portland metropolitan area definitely lacks in comparison to the New York City metropolitan area.
Do you stack the deck when you play cards too Patrick?
Why don't you keep it in on topic, and discuss why you can list so many courses from back east that don't get discussed?
-
... It was the words "well heeled, affluent schmoozers" that I found objectionable.
It's indicative of resentment, envy and class warfare and has no place on this website.
Envy and class warfare? Really? Which part of ;D didn't you understand? Why do you choose to quote without the ;D context?
...If you haven't been the recipient of any invitations perhaps introspection might help.
I've had the invitations, so I don't think introspection is necessary. You've had many suggest you should be removed from the website. So where is the introspection necessary? ;D
...
P.S. As to being "well heeled and affluent", I never inherited a penny when my parents died, nor was I the benefactor of any trusts or gifts, during their lives or after their passing. My parents provided me with a great education in and out of school.
[/color]
P.S. Since when does well heeled and affluent mean inheritance and trust benefactor? ??? Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are well heeled and affluent aren't they?
-
... It was the words "well heeled, affluent schmoozers" that I found objectionable.
It's indicative of resentment, envy and class warfare and has no place on this website.
Envy and class warfare? Really? Which part of ;D didn't you understand? Why do you choose to quote without the ;D context?
Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the phrase, "what truth there be in jest".
I saw the ;D, but it didn't override your words
...If you haven't been the recipient of any invitations perhaps introspection might help.
I've had the invitations, so I don't think introspection is necessary.
That's contradictory to your post # 20 where you complained about being unable to gain access
You've had many suggest you should be removed from the website. So where is the introspection necessary? ;D
To be accurate, "many" didn't suggest my removal, only a disgruntled few with bloody noses. ;D
...
P.S. As to being "well heeled and affluent", I never inherited a penny when my parents died, nor was I the benefactor of any trusts or gifts, during their lives or after their passing. My parents provided me with a great education in and out of school.
[/color]
P.S. Since when does well heeled and affluent mean inheritance and trust benefactor? ??? Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are well heeled and affluent aren't they?
The inference was there
In addition you never mentioned Gates or Buffet in order to give your words context.
But, at the core, you knew what you were doing, you were personalizing the thread and adding a derogatory flavor to the thread.
And by doing so you added nothing to the value of the thread, rather, you detracted from it.
-
GJ,
I don't want to burst your bubble, but, after the first top 3 or 4 courses, the rest wouldn't make top 50 in the greater Met area.
There are so many courses that you never heard of that are good to great.
Just in NJ, courses like Essex County, The Knoll, Alpine, Montclair, Preakness Hills, Canoe Brook, Morris County, Woodcrest, Tavistock, etc., etc..
I've played or seen most every course in the Portland area, as well as seen a lot of them in the MET and I would agree.
Perhaps you two missed the state population comparison. And, it was a state comparison, not a metropolitan area comparison.
We didn't miss anything.
As long as you're comparing states, compare the size of the two states.
Until a Midwesterner in the form of Mike Keiser came along recently, there really was a paucity of good courses.
Take away the courses at Bandon and there's not a single course that makes the top 20
I am perfectly willing to concede the Portland metropolitan area definitely lacks in comparison to the New York City metropolitan area.
Forget the New York City area, the little dinky town of West Orange, NJ had more good courses than Portland.
Essex County East
Essex County West
Crestmont
Essex Fells
Rock Spring
Montclair 1&2
Montclair 3&4
Mountain Ridge
Do you stack the deck when you play cards too Patrick?
No and no need to stack the deck.
You're just in the dark when it comes to the abundance of courses, good to great courses in the greater NY area
Why don't you keep it in on topic, and discuss why you can list so many courses from back east that don't get discussed?
Because most want to discuss the recognizable icons, not the neat hidden gems that abound in the area.
And more have played those popular icons rather than the hidden gems, so for discussion purposes, they may not gain much traction, although The Knoll, Essex County and others were discussed in detail, you probably skipped over those threads as the names didn't catch your attention. ;D
-
...
That's contradictory to your post # 20 where you complained about being unable to gain access
...
Back to grammar school for you for the learning of the English language.
I might be forced to conclude that you have a guilty conscience that would bring you to make such a statement.
-
Tommy:
That's a great list of courses, and I have really no sense of any of them. It would be great if you could document one or two here and how good they really were.
As someone with 2 1/2 NLE's to my own credit -- High Pointe [which may still return!], Beechtree, and Apache Stronghold which gets the 1/2 credit -- I can say that it's possible that you are projecting a bit more onto those courses than they deserve. All three of mine were cool golf courses, or even very cool golf courses. But none of them would have made the short list of the best courses in metropolitan NYC or California, for anybody except a real golf architecture junkie like ourselves. You've probably listed a bunch of others in the same category. I didn't know there were that many.
Tom, tell me there's a real chance that High Pointe may live again! Please!
-
...
The inference was there
In addition you never mentioned Gates or Buffet in order to give your words context.
But, at the core, you knew what you were doing, you were personalizing the thread and adding a derogatory flavor to the thread.
And by doing so you added nothing to the value of the thread, rather, you detracted from it.
Warren Buffet is mentioned in every one of my posts. ;) Check it out.
You are the one personalizing the thread with what seems to be a guilty reaction to a jest. You made an inference that was not implied other than in apparently your mind.
The point still stands. We don't have a member of this website that belongs to the toniest old clubs in the Portland area to report on or discuss them. That is a serious statement attempting to answer your question about why there might be a lack of the discussion you are seeking.
How could a playful suggestion that you fund a Portland area member so he could get membership or access be taken as derogatory is beyond me. I didn't suggest you fund me, because I could care less. So much for your class warfare nonsense.
In a following post you write:
"most want to discuss the recognizable icons, not the neat hidden gems that abound in the area.
And more have played those popular icons rather than the hidden gems"
So it seems to me that you have answered the whole question that you started the thread with.
-
GJ,
This post isn't about courses in the Portland area.
If you'd like to start one, feel free to do so
I've started and participated on threads about Tokatee and Sandpines.
In addition, Astoria has often been mentioned.
I started this thread about WEST COAST COURSES
RANCHO SANTA FE in particular.
You want to discuss courses in the Portland area, so start a thread on them.
You've diverted the thread, not me.
-
Out of curiosity, how many GCA-ers have actually played Rancho Santa Fe in the past 2 years?
-
Out of curiosity, how many GCA-ers have actually played Rancho Santa Fe in the past 2 years?
I haven't
But, I haven't played Merion in the last two years either
-
GJ,
This post isn't about courses in the Portland area.
If you'd like to start one, feel free to do so
I've started and participated on threads about Tokatee and Sandpines.
In addition, Astoria has often been mentioned.
I started this thread about WEST COAST COURSES
RANCHO SANTA FE in particular.
You want to discuss courses in the Portland area, so start a thread on them.
You've diverted the thread, not me.
Back to grammar school again for you since Portland would certainly be considered to be "west coast" if Rancho Santa Fe is.
I don't see you telling Tommy to go start a thread on California courses since that is what he knows best.
I don't see why you keep diverting your thread with your particular peccadilloes.
Also, when did Sandpines and Tokatee get promoted to 2nd tier? ;D
-
Tommy,
Great to see you here. Stop by more often!
That said, I don't think Tom D "failed" with his book (The Confidential Guide), anymore than you failed here at GCA or its predecessor Tradionalgolf.com.
Both were breakouts from the prevailing culture surrounding the golf course industry in which it wasn't ok the offer any criticism of the product. You and Tom were leaders encouraging change. We are thankful for that. I still remember that wonderful day when you gave your "tough love" speech to the brass at Yale. Wow, that was priceless.
Honestly, Tom probably showed even more courage with the CG. After all, he intended to make his living in the business. I can tell you from my oil industry experience, criticizing the powers that be is often pretty risky, especially if your paycheck can take a hit.
-
Tim,
I think there is a difference.
You can't present a comprehensive analysis of a golf course when you've only seen four of the 18 holes on a golf course.
That's intellectual dishonesty.
I'd agree that it was a landmark book, probably the first to provide critical analysis of golf courses and their architecture, and I think it set the tone and standard by which golf courses are now judged.
And, I agree that it took a lot of "chutzpah" for Tom to come out with it.
It was a ballsy move and he took a big risk, but, that's what he believed in and he should be congratulated and commended for same.
Certainly a variation on Gary Player's method of describing courses. ;D
Never forget that we're all ignorant, ............just on different subjects.
And, that just because we're good to great in one area, doesn't mean that we sing well in the shower too ! ;D
-
Pat,
I stand by my main point that Tom Doak and Tommy Naccarato both made a major contribution to understanding golf architecture, Tom with his landmark book and Tommy via the Internet. The big picture of their contribution should not be lost with any minor criticism.
In fairness, I don't think Tom ever claimed he played or walked every hole at every course included in the Confidential Guide. Ditto for Tommy who took liberty - and I am glad he did - criticizing big name architects ( e.g., Fazio, Rees Jones, Etc.) without ever seeing much of their work.
Their contribution was getting us to think critically and, honestly, we are all better for what Tom and Tommy did.
-
Tim,
I think there is a difference.
You can't present a comprehensive analysis of a golf course when you've only seen four of the 18 holes on a golf course.
That's intellectual dishonesty.
Here's my supposedly "intellectually dishonest" review of Lundin Links from 1994:
"Really half a links; the first five and last four holes were part of the original Innerleven course, along with the seaside holes from Leven GC down the shore, with play commencing from either end of the links. The course extension, which lies partway up a hill facing the Firth of Forth, is of different character than the old holes. Best of the lot is the 18th, a long two-shotter up a depression in the dunes to the old clubhouse. 3. [7/82]"
Everything in that review is factual and honest. Tommy takes me to task because he disagrees with the rating assigned to the course; and I would agree, having seen the course twice more, that I underrated it. [The same is true for a few courses I saw in Scotland ... it was hard to put a number to the lesser courses, right on the heels of living in St. Andrews and North Berwick.] I was there on a Sunday in July, 1982, when I couldn't caddie at St. Andrews because The Old Course was closed, and it was too busy for me to play, so I walked as much as I could without getting in people's way. Unfortunately, I missed the two or three really good holes at the start which would have made my opinion of the course higher; but it's still only a 5, maybe a 6 if you are being really generous and ignoring the inland half of the course, which is WAY inferior. I haven't even gone back and looked at those inland holes on my last two trips, so I don't want to be dishonest ... I wonder if Tommy N. has?
Just because Macdonald took a couple of ideas from Leven makes it important to Tommy, but it does not make those particular holes any more compelling for the traveling golfer to visit today. If you, Patrick, played the 15th hole you probably wouldn't even realize it was the genesis of the 17th at National, because it only played that way when Macdonald was using the old equipment in the 1870's; the hazards that made the hole interesting are less than 150 yards off the tee. And it wasn't until my second walk-through with George years later, that I recognized the tee shot on the 17th hole to be the genesis of the drive on 16 at National, which Macdonald never mentioned anywhere ... but again, you have to visualize it playing a gutty ball, today you drive it 50 yards past the crown of the fairway.
Intellectually dishonest? Tommy's argument is more intellectually dishonest than my book. There are 800 courses in the book and I said right up front I didn't play them all, and for some I didn't walk every hole. But for the vast majority, I walked every bit of them, and on the ones I didn't, there's nothing in the reviews that's dishonest.
-
Pat,
I stand by my main point that Tom Doak and Tommy Naccarato both made a major contribution to understanding golf architecture, Tom with his landmark book and Tommy via the Internet. The big picture of their contribution should not be lost with any minor criticism.
Agreed
In fairness, I don't think Tom ever claimed he played or walked every hole at every course included in the Confidential Guide. Ditto for Tommy who took liberty - and I am glad he did - criticizing big name architects ( e.g., Fazio, Rees Jones, Etc.) without ever seeing much of their work.
Agree that some license was taken, but, I don't think you can offer a general critique of a golf course without seeing the entire golf course.
At the very least, a highlighted footnote should indicate the extent of the examination.
Giving Adios a 5 and Boca Rio a 4 has to be one of the all time blunders in golf.
Loxahatchee a 6, Lake Nona a 7, The Medalist a 7, Mountain Lake a 4, Eagle Trace a 5, Old Marsh a 6.
Loblolly Pines a 6, TPC Sawgrass an 8. Pine Tree a 6.
Some might take exception to those scores, maybe even Tom ;D
However, that's what can happen when a thorough examination isn't performed.
Their contribution was getting us to think critically and, honestly, we are all better for what Tom and Tommy did.
I don't think that anyone disagrees with that.
Their contributions have been and continue to be both substantial and appreciated.
Let's just wait a little while before we grant them "deity" status ;D
-
Tom,
It's not a question of you being factual and honest, no one questioned either.
It's a matter of basing an evaluation on limited and incomplete data and expanding that limited and incomplete data to form a general conclusion.
It's a matter of not footnoting those courses where your review and analysis was incomplete.
Failure to do so can lead the reader to an inaccurate conclusion.
I think you have to understand that you enjoy a lofty position in the world of golf and golf course architecture.
And as such, some consider your words as carrying great weight, great authority, so when they read one of your reviews of a golf course, they accept that review as "The Gospel".
When your review of that course was on the run, sketchy and/or significantly incomplete, how fair is it for that course to forever carry the blemish of a mediocre or poor rating ? A rating based upon incomplete data and analysis ?
I would think that a fairer analysis of courses where you didn't have the opportunity to see the courses in their entirety would have been for you to mark the course with an asterisk and footnote the extent of your evaluation.
Making a general statement, either at the begining or end of the book, that you didn't evaluate all 18 holes on all courses is irrelevant without referencing which courses failed to get your complete attention, because the reader soon forgets your general caveat and gets lost in the individual reviews.
Once into the book, the reader has no way of knowing the extent of your familiarity, experience and evaluative criteria for the entire course.
Hope that helps.
I'll address Tommy in a seperate reply
It's like "fine print" which often goes unread or is quickly ignored.
-
Tom,
It's not a question of you being factual and honest, no one questioned either.
It's a matter of basing an evaluation on limited and incomplete data and expanding that limited and incomplete data to form a general conclusion.
It's a matter of not footnoting those courses where your review and analysis was incomplete.
Failure to do so can lead the reader to an inaccurate conclusion.
I think you have to understand that you enjoy a lofty position in the world of golf and golf course architecture.
And as such, some consider your words as carrying great weight, great authority, so when they read one of your reviews of a golf course, they accept that review as "The Gospel".
When your review of that course was on the run, sketchy and/or significantly incomplete, how fair is it for that course to forever carry the blemish of a mediocre or poor rating ? A rating based upon incomplete data and analysis ?
I would think that a fairer analysis of courses where you didn't have the opportunity to see the courses in their entirety would have been for you to mark the course with an asterisk and footnote the extent of your evaluation.
Making a general statement, either at the begining or end of the book, that you didn't evaluate all 18 holes on all courses is irrelevant without referencing which courses failed to get your complete attention, because the reader soon forgets your general caveat and gets lost in the individual reviews.
Once into the book, the reader has no way of knowing the extent of your familiarity, experience and evaluative criteria for the entire course.
Hope that helps.
I'll address Tommy in a seperate reply
It's like "fine print" which often goes unread or is quickly ignored.
Patrick:
There are two things wrong with your analysis.
One, I did not "enjoy a lofty position in the world of golf and golf course architecture" when I wrote The Confidential Guide. The book helped me gain that status, but I certainly didn't have that status when I wrote the first bit in 1988, or even the published version in 1996. I'd designed five courses as of 1996, and you probably still couldn't name one of them.
Second, some have argued that I shouldn't rate any course unless I am intimately familiar with it, or make a detailed footnote about any course I didn't spend more time on. I understand that point, and maybe agree with it ... but if I followed it, there would be much less of a book. If I'd walked the whole course, they'd tell me I had to have played it. If I'd played it, they'd say I had to have played it under different wind conditions. By the time we finished, I would only be allowed to comment on 80 courses, not 800, and there would be no book.
What did the "3" for Lundin Links mean? It meant that if you were going to Scotland for a week or two, I don't think it's one of the courses you ought to seek out, as much as the courses I rated 4 or 5. I will stand by that ... and as I also wrote in the foreword, if you agree with me on 80% of the courses, then the others should just be chalked up to a difference of opinion. I will probably change the ratings for 50 of the 800 courses I listed in the original book, most of which will be based on a second look. [Also, I have a method to improve upon my ratings this next time around, but that's still a trade secret for a few months more.]
Thanks for your advice.
-
Tom,
No one doubts that rating 800 courses is a Herculian task, one where the numbers makes it almost impossible to conduct an in depth analysis of each course.
It's kind of like "speed dating" ;D
But, if you're going to give a course a "thumbs up" versus a "thumbs down" isn't a course entitled to an architectural form of "due process" ?
Especially with your "new found" notoriety and reputation ?
I happened to like the concept of the "Gourmet's Choice".
If I had to value a book, I'd rather have an expanded version of the "Gourmet's Choice" where you provide in depth analysis based on intimate experience with those 80 courses, rather than "drive by shootings" of 800 courses. ;D
But, I understand the nature of "book sales"
My thought would be to publish the expanded "Gourmet's Choice" and add to it with each course that you're able to review in detail.
Maybe it's a product made for the internet rather than print publishing.
But, I'd rather read your book evaluating 80 courses you played than your book based on 800 courses you whizzed around in a cart.
Despite what you may think, I value your opinion...............................most of the time. ;D
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
-
An improved method of rating?!!!!!! That ought to be good for 6 months of thread topics!
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
-
Tom,
No one doubts that rating 800 courses is a Herculian task, one where the numbers makes it almost impossible to conduct an in depth analysis of each course.
It's kind of like "speed dating" ;D
But, if you're going to give a course a "thumbs up" versus a "thumbs down" isn't a course entitled to an architectural form of "due process" ?
Especially with your "new found" notoriety and reputation ?
I happened to like the concept of the "Gourmet's Choice".
If I had to value a book, I'd rather have an expanded version of the "Gourmet's Choice" where you provide in depth analysis based on intimate experience with those 80 courses, rather than "drive by shootings" of 800 courses. ;D
But, I understand the nature of "book sales"
My thought would be to publish the expanded "Gourmet's Choice" and add to it with each course that you're able to review in detail.
Maybe it's a product made for the internet rather than print publishing.
But, I'd rather read your book evaluating 80 courses you played than your book based on 800 courses you whizzed around in a cart.
Despite what you may think, I value your opinion...............................most of the time. ;D
Patrick:
You have seriously misrepresented my visits to golf courses above, by characterizing them as "speed dating" and "whizzing around in a cart." I've played more than half the courses -- I've played the best of them 10+ times -- and I spent a good two hours or more walking most of the others, except where somebody wouldn't let me walk for fear I'd get in the way. I'd appreciate it if you didn't paint my reviews with a broad and inaccurate brush. My visit to Lundin Links was an exception, not the rule.
I also think you're still missing the point of the book. It isn't intended to be my through analysis of every course or even of all my favorites. I am sure some people would be interested in reading that, too, but I'm not that interested in writing it; plenty of others have already tried. The point of my book was to encourage people to go and see all the great out-of-the-way courses I was recommending and to judge for themselves -- and the more of them I could include, the better.
-
Now Tom,
1. You're getting too sensative, I did post some smilies ;D
2. Perhaps you're forgetting some of our conversations we've had on this subject.
3. I understand the purpose of the book, I was just informing you that I'd find your in-depth analysis more informative and
more interesting.
-
Pat,
Further to some of the points Tom made, I don't think a golf course is "entitled to architectural due process". The Confidential Guide was and is Tom's book. The opinions expressed are nothing more than his opinions which people are quite free to discard if they choose,
Thanks to the Internet and Ran people are also free to express why they think Tom or anyone else rated a course too low. For example, quite a few people have told me I should see Mountain Lake and I regret not seeing it when I attended the Ren Cup.
But, we never have time to see everything.
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
Kissing up to Tom, I'm one of the people who complains about the Doak butt boy mentality around here. I see a problem in this thread and many other threads, you are always get into a pissing match with someone. Why is that, is it fun, are you that bored? Does it arouse you?
-
Pat,
Further to some of the points Tom made, I don't think a golf course is "entitled to architectural due process". The Confidential Guide was and is Tom's book. The opinions expressed are nothing more than his opinions which people are quite free to discard if they choose,
Thanks to the Internet and Ran people are also free to express why they think Tom or anyone else rated a course too low. For example, quite a few people have told me I should see Mountain Lake and I regret not seeing it when I attended the Ren Cup.
But, we never have time to see everything.
Agreed, but, If you don't see a course in its entirety, then that should be pointed out via an asterisk and footnote.
Isn't that akin to a critic providing a review after he left halfway through the show ?
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
Kissing up to Tom, I'm one of the people who complains about the Doak butt boy mentality around here. I see a problem in this thread and many other threads, you are always get into a pissing match with someone. Why is that, is it fun, are you that bored? Does it arouse you?
Sam, I didn't know that we should all be like minded and not have another point of view.
You're defending Doak for only seeing four (4) holes and not footnoting same when he provided a review of the ENTIRE course.
That's misleading, his review is incomplete and generalizing on 18 holes when only 4 were evaluated is intellectually dishonest.
Your defense is ridiculous and you know it.
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
Kissing up to Tom, I'm one of the people who complains about the Doak butt boy mentality around here. I see a problem in this thread and many other threads, you are always get into a pissing match with someone. Why is that, is it fun, are you that bored? Does it arouse you?
Sam, I didn't know that we should all be like minded and not have another point of view.
You're defending Doak for only seeing four (4) holes and not footnoting same when he provided a review of the ENTIRE course.
That's misleading, his review is incomplete and generalizing on 18 holes when only 4 were evaluated is intellectually dishonest.
Your defense is ridiculous and you know it.
Did you read Doak's entire book?
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
Kissing up to Tom, I'm one of the people who complains about the Doak butt boy mentality around here. I see a problem in this thread and many other threads, you are always get into a pissing match with someone. Why is that, is it fun, are you that bored? Does it arouse you?
Sam, I didn't know that we should all be like minded and not have another point of view.
You're defending Doak for only seeing four (4) holes and not footnoting same when he provided a review of the ENTIRE course.
That's misleading, his review is incomplete and generalizing on 18 holes when only 4 were evaluated is intellectually dishonest.
Your defense is ridiculous and you know it.
Did you read Doak's entire book?
Cover to cover and probably before you ever heard of it. ;D
-
Aren't the thoughts in Doak's book just that, his thoughts? If he sees 4 holes he sees 4 holes.
But, if you're led to believe that he saw all 18, then what ?
Sam,
No kissing up and Tom can speak for himself.
Kissing up to Tom, I'm one of the people who complains about the Doak butt boy mentality around here. I see a problem in this thread and many other threads, you are always get into a pissing match with someone. Why is that, is it fun, are you that bored? Does it arouse you?
Sam, I didn't know that we should all be like minded and not have another point of view.
You're defending Doak for only seeing four (4) holes and not footnoting same when he provided a review of the ENTIRE course.
That's misleading, his review is incomplete and generalizing on 18 holes when only 4 were evaluated is intellectually dishonest.
Your defense is ridiculous and you know it.
Did you read Doak's entire book?
Cover to cover and probably before you ever heard of it. ;D
I read about 4 holes worth.
-
Tim,
You bring up a great point about me in regards to the amount I've seen. You are completely correct!
Tom is right about the portion of the book I forget--and like Pat says, it is read like fine print especially when no one actually reads anything anymore! The first thing I'm sure that happens is people go directly to the number--because we are a number society--and frankly put, I hate numbers because its a tool that if in a different thinking mind, watch out!
As I wrote earlier, if it wasn't for the words in the Confidential Guide, I would have never learned to speak out about the subject. When Tom says that the book helped make his career, well BOLLOCKS! Tom's talent alone got him there justly; he paid his dues and for some of you that like to kiss up to him, honestly, Tom is one of the few architects you can be critical with and he respects the viewpoint. I'm not sure if he still does it at Ren Cups, but he used to hand out a questionnaire asking people to be honest and give some of their opinions on the course from that weekend--he wanted TRUTHFUL opinions and I've seen him respect people more because of it.
While I disagree--and its a matter of opinion--about his opinion of California greatness and "Enlightenment" I still believe that the landscape offered a dynamic that hadn't been experienced in a great majority of lands which many great East Coast clubs had to offer. Probably more a testament to those designing but out here, it had to be like kids in a candy store--those great amateur architects who made a name for themselves no different then they did in the East. They even got Walter Travis to come here for a couple of winters!
I urge you all to pick up a copy of Daniel Wexler's Missing Links and Lost Links as a start.
You'll quickly learn that form that time period--to dream of what once was--how the fever pitch of this sport was at mass centigrade and exploding into the same mindset that could have been just like the Mecca, the home of Golf in Scotland, where Golf is a way of life no different then an afternoon stroll. It would have been really something. Unfortunately, we can only learn by our mistakes.
The visit has been great! Back to the Lounge I must go! I have a bunch of thirsty Lounger's wanting a drink and I don't want to get fired!
-
Tommy,
I miss Rec Park and Long Beach. We'll have to do it again before too long with dinner afterwards in Belmont Shore.
-
Tom Doak, in the new edition of the CG, will you rate courses if you haven't seen all the holes on them? It sounds like that was a small minority of courses in the earlier editions.
-
Tom Doak, in the new edition of the CG, will you rate courses if you haven't seen all the holes on them? It sounds like that was a small minority of courses in the earlier editions.
Jim:
I'm not sure. I've asked for feedback here recently, whether I should just include the courses I would recommend, or whether I should include every last course. Part of that is an issue about space ... if I include every course, and any pictures, then the book is going to have to be more than one volume.
The response was pretty mixed. Some said why comment on a course you didn't like, while others said my criticisms of those courses were important, both to argue against their status as a destination, and to make observations about design that didn't work so well.
The first edition included every single course I'd seen [18 holes or not quite all of them], partly so I wouldn't be accused of playing favorites or avoiding a sensitive topic. I haven't really intended to duck those questions now, so I will probably include every course, in some form or another. But, it remains to be seen how all that will fit into the book(s).
I don't think there were even ten courses of the 800 where I didn't see all the holes, so it's not really much of an issue. But I sure as hell can't remember all of the holes from all of those courses anymore!
-
Tom, I definitely think you should comment on and rate courses you don't like. That is one thing that made/makes the CG special.
You could tag each course to show whether you played or walked it (or saw it), along with played once or multiple times.
Any interest in ranking the 10's? I'm guessing you don't see all them as equally good.
-
Tom, I'm going to use quote bubbles here simply because you bring up a lot of points I believe need addressing. I don't want to make it seem like a debate, but more a healthy discussion.
I still don't think there are hundreds of courses worth restoring. What's driving the restoration industry is desperation, on the part of many out-of-work architects, and vanity, on the part of many club members [WE have a DONALD ROSS course, too!].
100% on the desperation part and we can see the results of those that are using the gimmick of the word restoration to power the work they no longer have: RIVIERA is a perfect example, but now, I think the persons responsible for that mess see that there is only one way to disguise it and say its renovation, thus actually destroying the masterpiece they once had. By chance, did you get to see any of that same person's work at Winged Foot? I did, and I was shocked, dismayed and saddened. What's worse is now we have Merion to mourn as well as the greatest course of the all--the very one that drive you and I to our love and passion for this great art--THE Old Course of St. Andrews, all done by rank amateurs with little to no insight other then to strengthen. Its a dirty word.
But, I think your selling short those that would like to see their courses brought back to life by those that care and know where the greatness lies in the ground and know that there are the "right" people out there to get it back. I've met many a passionate and driven member that will go to no end to show his fellow members that they made mistakes and there is a place to recover from them. They are out there doing there best to get it done, even if it means getting lambasted as the club lunatic and treated harshly to the point of wanting to leave their club. But these are resilient people and they still fight on for architectural greatness at their club's. One of them is even a woman whose driven to restoring the greatness. I've got to tell you how impressive it is to see her in action!
Having people passionate about their golf courses and restoring the elements that made them fun and entertaining designs is a good thing I would think. They just need the right people to get it going. And once again, I disagree with you. I think every course with the name Raynor, Ross, Macdonald, MacKenzie, Hunter, Thomas, Bell, Watson, Macbeth, Egan, Macan, Dunn et. al. should be restored and we should be reading whats in the ground as a testament to the greatness.
I do think it's important to have a handful of examples of each architect's best work. It's too bad that so many of the guys whose names you listed have had all of their work destroyed, and it's too bad that hardly anyone is out there trying to restore the best of it. I've been to Woodland Hills and Palos Verdes CC, for example, and if they were once great courses, they've done a great job of hiding it between then and now ... neither would even get a 5 in The Confidential Guide today.
Tom, This is where both you and your book have failed. As much as that book inspired a lot of us and gave us the legs which to stand, there are many faults to the book; many courses where you didn't see all of the course, yet rated them. Also, the subject and the opinions are always varied. Look at us on this thread!
At the time you rated Lundin Golf Club I think it was a four or something well short of the mark. Then, you admitted to me on this very site that you only saw four holes! Yet, here on this fabled grounds were some of the most influential golf holes which Charles Blair Macdonald would use as inspiration for his designs in America, which you would later revisit and design a golf course in his honor using the same tools of inspiration.
Hmmmm? ? ? ? ? Inspiration? ? ? ? ? Maybe just maybe there is something to see and learn with these courses, or, are you shutting yourself off now to the learning process? I hope not! I know I will never do that till the day I close my eyes.
You yourself have to admit that what existed at Lundin had devolved horribly, yet the bones were there to see the greatness of what Macdonald saw--I mean, come on! You even got Mike Kaiser and Uncle George Bahto to go there with you!
And one can see this same thing at what is left of our West Coast courses. You have good people driven to make bring it out. I think it would be far better to help drive the industry of good people capable of doing the work--a positive for you then put it down. This is why all golf courses that any of us should see as worthy, deserve restoration. and most, honestly, do you really want to be the judge and juror to this?
If there was such a great legacy of golf architectural thought out west, I can't quite understand how all you enlightened west-coasters allowed it to be lost after the Depression, but that's another story.
Tom, How did Lido die? Timber Point and the others during this harrowing time in our world's history? When you say "enlightened west coasters" it makes me realize your smugness and arrogance, or what fame and success has done to you. I think I could, myself, go on any course in the world; on any coast in the world and appreciate the architecture at any level--its what I love and I used to think you did too. Now, I'm not so sure.
This makes it even more confusing when thinking that you used an open mind while writing the critical commentary in the Confidential Guide. Like I said earlier, there are many faults in that book. Still it remains one of my most prized because its not only a great book because of your insight on courses you did actually write about with passion but also allows me to now see exactly what you don't know and should. None of us are perfect! It also makes me appreciate Ran's write ups that much more.
Tom, I say this with all due respect and honesty: You have the power to influence many with your knowledge and intellect into the art. You educated me with your writings and our camaraderie in the past. I'm pointing this stuff out to prove to you what you are seemingly no longer capable of seeing or simply don't want to see. Just like our West Coast courses that only an assorted few can be seen in photographs and what little, but still valuable evidence that is still in the ground. That is after all the brain candy for guys like you and me--what's in the ground. The same use of what's in the ground at places like Palos Verdes and Woodland Hills. Its there.
Donald Ross and his associates (Ellis Maples, George McGovern, Orrin Smith, Walter Hatch, etc.)
C.B. Macdonald and his associates (Seth Raynor, Charles Banks)
A.W. Tillinghast
George C. Thomas (though he did only the one course out East)
Harry Colt
Hugh Alison
Alister MacKenzie
Perry Maxwell (and the Wood Brothers who built his courses)
George Crump
Herbert Leeds
William Fownes (and his superintendent)
Hugh Wilson
William Flynn (and his young associate, Dick Wilson)
Fred Hood
John Duncan Dunn
Walter Travis
Devereux Emmet
Wayne Stiles
John Van Kleek
Willie Park, Jr.
Robert White (one of Tom MacWood's faves - I have no clue if he designed anything or not)
Herbert Strong
I think this is really beside the point, though. What matters is the courses that got in the ground, not who built them. When you concentrate on who built them, you're projecting about the quality of the work, unless you've got the pictures to prove it.
Tom, There were a few points to listing. The main thing was to list how many of the same guys you listed, that I listed, and I didn't even put down Seth Raynor on purpose, despite two courses in Hawaii and no courses completed, only planned in California. You see, they moved out here; They settled here; they worked here and eventually died here, or close to died here. (In the case of Tillinghast who then moved in with is daughter in Ohio for the last year or two of his life) These minds of great influence in the classic Golf Architecture we love.
Compare out list, we have six, but you forgot Fowler and his masterful work at Eastward Ho! so that's seven; If I would have included Raynor or Allison (who was doing work in Japan and stayed out of California, simply because of MacKenzie, well, I think you can get my point. n some ways today its no different then you or Rees Jones in China, where you went were the work was or where it carried you. But in California, the all moved out here for various reasons. Hunter was teaching at Cal I believe, Thomas to grow roses year round; MacKenzie, whether it was to get out of town to evade a jealous husband or wife or simply because he saw a vast landscape that was worthy of great golf and could yield a crop like Cypress Point, Pasatiempo or The Valley Club. You had a Max Behr, who was the most vocal if not influential voice with his Golf Illustrated magazine, who after losing his wife to Influenza, picked up his young son and daughter and moved out West and tarted finally getting to prove his theories in the ground. Tom we are talking some very bright and intellectual people that became "enlightened west coasters."
Some of these very same people would go on to write the most definitive books ever on the subject. Are you going to now discount them also?
The fact was it was getting done out here in the Enlightened West, Australia, Japan and even in Hawaii, then a depression, world war, redevelopment and simply old age and illness stop this movement dead in its tracks here in the United States. It ended faster then it got started with no one left to drive the car. And that's why it can barely be seen today. To me, that tragedy in golf is far more enlightening in what can happen. I've had a front row seat to see what is left being destroyed on a day to day basis every time Fazio's Tom Marzlotov gets off of a plane at LAX. And that's the point, what can you do to stop it!?!?
Just curious -- of all the NLE courses you listed, which of them do you think might have got a 7 or higher in The Confidential Guide if I'd seen them in their heyday?
Tom, if its O.K. with you, I'd like to take a brief rest here for a bit, not because I can't produce a list full of El Cabellero's and Royal Palms. I have to get some work done. But I promise that I will list for you all of the courses that were worthy, what is left and what will never be again, as well as how technology would have deemed a lot of them obsolete, even for an amateur.
Naccers
I think you are being a bit unreasonable. Remember, we are talking about a guy who as far as I can tell is committed to properly restoring classic courses. From his perspective as a dirt guy, I think it very reasonable to question the value of restoring (sounds like you are saying practically every course built by an ODG) courses which aren't really special in one way or another. Its probably partly a philosophical approach, partly a pragmatic approach and partly a business approach. You are out there in dreamland with pretty blue wishes while Doak is trying to make a living fulfilling "your" wishes and yet chasing his own ambitions. I think it is always useful to bring these pie in the sky/esoteric/philosophical leanings back to a realistic level where choices have to be made.
Tom D
I realize that the CG was meant as a travel guide, but don't you think it has been used by yourself as a ranking?
Ciao