Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Ira Fishman on May 19, 2023, 04:43:35 PM
-
I have not played even 10% of Ross courses, but among the several that I have played, I do not remember chocolate drop mounds like those at Oak Hill. Are they original to the design?
Ira
-
I have not played even 10% of Ross courses, but among the several that I have played, I do not remember chocolate drop mounds like those at Oak Hill. Are they original to the design?
I don't remember chocolate drops on the 1980's version of the course, but it's possible Tom Fazio wiped them out.
Chocolate drops were an entirely practical thing . . . they used them on courses where there were a lot of stones during the clean-up operation, as a way to get rid of the stones without carting them off to a dump. So you'd only find them on courses where the soil was kind of stony . . . typically in the Northeast, but not in the Carolinas.
-
There are some at Monroe a few miles away (or at least there were 20 years ago when I was there).
-
The HH Wind 1966(?) Golf Digest article that I have somewhere claimed Ross used them, and other wobbles in chipping areas, extensively. His point was that the then current architects had sort of stopped using those in favor of mostly sand bunkers. I had the impression that Wind liked them a lot.
-
The HH Wind 1966(?) Golf Digest article that I have somewhere claimed Ross used them, and other wobbles in chipping areas, extensively. His point was that the then current architects had sort of stopped using those in favor of mostly sand bunkers. I had the impression that Wind liked them a lot.
Mr. Wind grew up in Brockton, Mass. - at Thorny Lea Golf Club - which certainly would have had chocolate drops.
-
Travis, Emmet and Stiles all used them. There was a thread a while back about Bass Rocks GC and there are a bunch there on the Herbert Leeds design. Brian Schneider is doing some terrific work at the Travis designed North Jersey CC and there are a bunch there also.
-
FWIW on SKY tv in the UK one of the commentators said with a degree of confidence that the chocolate drop mounding was a favourite trick of Andrew Green.
Niall
-
FWIW on SKY tv in the UK one of the commentators said with a degree of confidence that the chocolate drop mounding was a favourite trick of Andrew Green.
Niall
I was under the impression these were added by Green. They look terrible covered in monochromatic green same height rough.
Ciao
-
Rocks piles covered over.
Atb
-
Not a fan. They look totally fake, no doubt because they are.
-
FWIW on SKY tv in the UK one of the commentators said with a degree of confidence that the chocolate drop mounding was a favourite trick of Andrew Green.
Niall
I was under the impression these were added by Green. They look terrible covered in monochromatic green same height rough.
Ciao
Sean
That is what I think as well but I think what the commentator was suggesting was that they were added by Green, not because Ross had originally designed them but because Green was a fan of them. I might have misconstrued that but that is what I think he was saying.
I do agree with you that they don't look very good although they are a pretty effective hazard.
Niall
-
I like the look and the challenge they represent. It seems some are saying that they are ok if they are grassed over debris piles but meh if they are a wholly created feature. I agree with Niall that they are an effective hazard.
-
FWIW on SKY tv in the UK one of the commentators said with a degree of confidence that the chocolate drop mounding was a favourite trick of Andrew Green.
Niall
I was under the impression these were added by Green. They look terrible covered in monochromatic green same height rough.
Ciao
Sean
That is what I think as well but I think what the commentator was suggesting was that they were added by Green, not because Ross had originally designed them but because Green was a fan of them. I might have misconstrued that but that is what I think he was saying.
I do agree with you that they don't look very good although they are a pretty effective hazard.
Niall
Yes, it was my understanding that Green added the mounds. I don't know how effective the mounds are as I am yet to see them in play. It's a great pity about the rough. Back to the bad old days of the 70s and 80s. Dreadful.
Ciao
-
Not a fan. They look totally fake, no doubt because they are.
Ok well sand bunkers look totally fake on a rocky clay soiled site in the northeast but somehow that's deemed acceptable. That bunker sand arrived on trucks from Ohio. What's faker than fake?
-
I hope most here know that “chocolate drops” were never meant to look natural. They were simply rocks from the nearby area (mostly removed from the fairways or from rock walls that separated different parcels of land). They were often pushed to the sides of the fairways and/or in strategic locations and covered with soil. It was an efficient and frugal way to deal with the rocks without expensive and time consuming long distance hauling. Some of the most famous are the ones by Leeds at Myopia Hunt Club and by Tillinghast at Somerset Hills. At Myopia for example, the Leeds “chocolate drops” came from the boundary walls. Leeds didn’t like the walls and when they interrupted his routing he had them dismantled, sometimes only partially, leaving segments that would later be covered with soil and grasses. Some think the Myopia Drops inspired Ross at nearby Essex Country Club. But none of them look natural at all but neither do bunkers on Parkland golf courses. Let’s face it, some of the most famous greathazards do not look natural. It’s ok :)
By the way, Green used chocolate drops at his redo of Wannamoisett as well.
-
I can't find now, but a few days ago I saw piece with green specifically about them and his argument was that the affected good players more than average players.
The opposite of sand, and they're way less expensive to maintain.
-
Mark
Whether they were meant to look natural or not they still don't look good to my eye but appreciate they are an effective hazard.
However given he was supposed to be restoring Ross back into the course, the question is whether the chocolate drops are Ross or Green ?
Niall
-
Niall,
I don’t know the answer but I do know Green said is was a “sympathetic restoration”. In the interview I saw, Green talked a lot about restoring classic Ross features and original design intent. I doubt those chocolate drops were original but maybe Jones or Fazio removed them when they worked there and Green added them back? Old aerials would make this easy to determine. I have gotten a lot of grief on this site from guys like Tom Doak when I talk about trying to restore “original design intent” (how would any of us know what someone like Ross was thinking) 8) I think Green did his best like most of us do and study all we can about the history of the course and the architect/s who were responsible for what we find when we get there. But even Andrew Green will agree, Oak Hill is not a pure restoration, and that is ok too ;)
-
Are we talking about the mounding in the rough? If so, that’s not what I consider chocolate drops. I always thought chocolate drops were like Hershey Kisses.I like them.
I prefer what Tom Paul calls “ pullups “ that the Nature Faker Flynn did. They look like they are natural.
-
Mike,
I am sure you know what chocolate drops are when it comes to golf course architecture. The pull-ups that Flynn did as I think you also know were raised areas around the green edges that bleed into the putting surface. They are not chocolate drops. We are talking two different things. Mounding is mounding and some can be made to look “natural” but chocolate drops were not. I wish I remembered how to post photos :(
-
I’m not a fan of the Oak Hill bunkers either. They look contrived. But I’m not a student of architecture. Maybe they are a fair representation of Donald Ross at Oak Hill?
-
I have not played even 10% of Ross courses, but among the several that I have played, I do not remember chocolate drop mounds like those at Oak Hill. Are they original to the design?
I don't remember chocolate drops on the 1980's version of the course, but it's possible Tom Fazio wiped them out.
Chocolate drops were an entirely practical thing . . . they used them on courses where there were a lot of stones during the clean-up operation, as a way to get rid of the stones without carting them off to a dump. So you'd only find them on courses where the soil was kind of stony . . . typically in the Northeast, but not in the Carolinas.
Tom,
Not to hijack the thread, but there is one course where the clearing of stones led to another practical use. The course is Pelham Country club where stones were taken to Fowler Avenue to build homes circa 1925, including the house I grew up in and 2-3 others.
Thanks to research by Neil Regan, it is clear those houses were built on land where Dr. Edward Fowler from New York City built the first course in Pelham right around 1990.
-
Just reviewed the Ross design plans. His notations designate them as "mounds or undulations not less than 4 feet" Most were green-side, like at holes 1 and 17. Not seeing where Ross used them here flanking fairways. Definitely a theme originally....that Green likely expanded upon.
-
Mike,
I am sure you know what chocolate drops are when it comes to golf course architecture. The pull-ups that Flynn did as I think you also know were raised areas around the green edges that bleed into the putting surface. They are not chocolate drops. We are talking two different things. Mounding is mounding and some can be made to look “natural” but chocolate drops were not. I wish I remembered how to post photos :(
Mark,
I was suggesting that mounds aren’t chocolate drops and that I prefer the way Flynn handled the debris and stuff from bunker construction by creating pullups.
-
Mike,
Take a look a pictures from Myopia and Somerset Hills to see true Chocolate Drops. Chocolate Drops are mounds but they were not meant to look natural is all I am saying. I always think of Flynn’s pull-ups as areas where he lifted up the edges of his green surfaces. Flynn also used mounds that were separate from the greens but I don’t call them pull-ups. Flynn buried much of the debris he had to remove but other architects just piled it up and covered it with soil and grass. Some “cop” mounds were built in this fashion. They sure don’t look natural but that variety is what makes golf so unique. As I said some of the most famous hazards in golf are not natural looking at all.
-
Some of the best buried stone / chocolate drops you'll find are at Kittansett
-
Some of the best buried stone / chocolate drops you'll find are at Kittansett
Would be interesting to know if those predate Flynn involvement
-
Kittansett was the first place that popped into my mind when I was reading this thread. I had no idea there were so many different terms to describe mounds. but whatever the verbiage, they work great at Kittansett. The series of mounds that cut across the 10th fairway don't look natural at all, but they are such a cool and integral feature that they were moved back a ways during recent changes to bring them back into play off the tee.
-
I have always loved this illustration of Scioto Country Club circa 1926. By this time the golf course was already 10 years old. Are some of the elements of this drawing exaggerated? I think, most definitely, they are. Some artistic license was certainly taken with seemingly every tee beeing grossly elevated. Some of the hummocks may have been a little more pronounced than they actually were, but I have to believe the artist was working off of some sort of plan or aerial photo, or both.
The fairway contours are very much what I knew back twenty years ago when I worked there. The general lay of the land was very much what you see in this drawing. There's a hump on the left side of eight that is sizeable and is part of the generally topography. This is graphically represented as it actually looks, not as a mound, but as a gradual slope. My point being that it didn't look like a 'chocolate drop' or whatever you call it, we know that slopes are slopes and mounds are mounds.
Call them chocolate drops, mounds, hummocks, whatever - I think those things had been long erased even before the 1962 renovation. I'd be curious if Jack Nicklaus ever remembers them being there. Could they have been a casualty of the aggressive tree planting program that ensued in the '30's? I don't know, but judging by the way the natural topography is drawn, these mounds were definitely pronounced and unnatural looking. It would appear this was Donald Ross's "thing" way before Andrew Green was ever born.
The bunkers also look very much like what we saw at Oak Hill (see hole 15). Did Ross do the same thing OHCC as he did at Scioto? I have no clue, but from what I was told a lot of Andrew's design decisions were often backed up with some type of photographic evidence. Some holes had more photos than others and made things much easier to argue.
When Mark mentions "sympathetic restoration" I think that rings true. There is some things in this drawing that weren't brought back, that wine cellar of a bunker in the middle of number one (perhaps a "firm kick in gonads" for the golfer that struggles to get the ball in the air), the cross bunker spanning the width of 13 is another that jumps out.
I walked away impressed with what they've done out at Scioto. It looks like a very fun round of golf that would have an appeal to a very wide range of abilities and ages. Does it look as "natural" as MacKenzie or Flynn? No, but it seems to me this is the way it may well have been designed - like it or not.
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH1q20bUMaZNxZMmU4306ZJzw1B80oHdQ4lK-3IZxrbc-p4CQsVu8-yhsQlysWzGLIQ3GNxS10fk3ckJpOHQJoY_bf4adKwCnwm5T0a9ozgP8Z43keFQ5I0NhXz2HtfeHnY_vecToposi1B1q7n4fUE125I1l_6oWlcXdKhClsPA-QKmMZvkzS7TriWg/s2360/Dodo%20straightened.jpeg)
-
FWIW on SKY tv in the UK one of the commentators said with a degree of confidence that the chocolate drop mounding was a favourite trick of Andrew Green.
Niall
I was under the impression these were added by Green. They look terrible covered in monochromatic green same height rough.
Ciao
Sean
That is what I think as well but I think what the commentator was suggesting was that they were added by Green, not because Ross had originally designed them but because Green was a fan of them. I might have misconstrued that but that is what I think he was saying.
I do agree with you that they don't look very good although they are a pretty effective hazard.
Niall
I watched an interview with Andrew Green, and they had an oblique sketch of the original course, and the areas where he "reintroduced" the chocolate drop mounds were where they were shown on the drawing.
Tyler
-
I have not played even 10% of Ross courses, but among the several that I have played, I do not remember chocolate drop mounds like those at Oak Hill. Are they original to the design?
I don't remember chocolate drops on the 1980's version of the course, but it's possible Tom Fazio wiped them out.
Chocolate drops were an entirely practical thing . . . they used them on courses where there were a lot of stones during the clean-up operation, as a way to get rid of the stones without carting them off to a dump. So you'd only find them on courses where the soil was kind of stony . . . typically in the Northeast, but not in the Carolinas.
Although on our Ross course in Charlotte (Carolinas for those who don't know where it is) we added "chocolate drops',. which we call mounds, in our 2006-2008 restoration. One of them covers a pump, so it has a lid on top, and serves a practical purpose. The others are purely for effect, to mimic a Ross look. So you do find non-original chocolate drops on our Ross course in the Carolinas.
-
Pinehurst used to have chocolate drop mounds.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYKCkdfXwAAQ0mr?format=jpg&name=large)