[Carl Williams]

Ron Forse, Ron Pritchard, Gil Hanse and others are known and well regarded for their work in restoring classic golf courses.

What architects, in recent years, have been responsible for altering classic courses ?

Robert Trent Jones and Dick Wilson altered some courses about 40 years ago, but what architects have altered classic golf courses more recently, over the last 20 years ?

List the architect with the course, the year the work was done, and if possible, can you provide any information as to why it was done ?

[Frank Leeds]

Wouldn't the Tillinghast and Ross Society's have information on this.

[TEPaul]

This kind of question accurately answered will doubtless lead eventually to all kinds of accusations on here of "bias" against the architects who might and probably will be named!

[TEPaul]

My own father, God rest his soul, probably had a big hand in altering numerous classic courses! He certainly belonged to enough of them throughout his life and certainly sat on enough committees and sure did know plenty of architects and knew them well.

But how can you hold that against him really? That's what they did in those days! That was the popular and accepted thing to do back then. But the question is what would he think or say now about what he was responsible for back then?

Would he be like that 95 year old man who sat on our restoration committee and made that extraordinary remark? I hope he would be!

Today, there're still plenty of people altering classic courses for the worse but the good news is there're many more trying to put them back to the way they were supposed to be than there were back then!

[Jeff Mingay]

Don't forget Mother Nature and the effects of decades of play on aged classic courses.

Plenty of great courses, like Pine Valley for example, were overtaken by trees and other vegetation, simply as a result of natural growth rather than haphazard planting by Green committees, superintendents and architects.  

And repeated blast shots have innocently changed the appearance of greeside bunkers on plenty of classical layouts like Riviera, and my own home course, Essex.

The orchestrators of blatant redesign efforts are the easy culprits to point out, but natural evolutionary effects have also played a major role in altering classic courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

You make a good point, nature certainly has a hand in altering courses.

Green Committees, Presidents and Boards are often the offending culprits in altering a golf course.

Carl Williams,

Is the question in the context of everyday courses, or only those courses that host Majors, or both ?

[TEPaul]

Jeff Mingay:

In fairness to both history and evolution, Pine Valley's tree growth may have been the result of Mother Nature, but Mother Nature had a real friend at Pine Valley for a while there! Things have evolved now though!

[Jeff Mingay]

Tom,

After using Pine Valley as an example, I thought, whoops, that probably isn't 100% accurate.

But still, there must have been a bunch of those scrubby little pines that naturally evolved and grew into big trees between 1917 and 2000?!?!

I'm thinking about the 14th hole in particular. I can't believe that that "friend of Mother Nature" at Pine Valley (who, by the way, admitted later in life that he planted far too many trees on the course!) actually planted all of those trees on that steep hillside that grew to narrow the hole and block out views of the rail line and the lake from the tee!

No way

[Carl Williams]

Patrick Mucci,

I was not thinking about courses that are prepared for special tournaments like the majors, just everyday golf and country clubs designed by some of the classic designers.

[Jeff Mingay]

Carl,

The list of architects who've altered a classic course is a long one. I don't think it's a stretch to say, every architect working between 1950 and the present is "guilty" of doing so. Some to a worse degree than others.

[TEPaul]

In the 1930s Perry Maxwell came into GMGC and altered five separate holes in three separate sessions complete with greens and bunkering that was true Maxwell and looking very little like Ross!

I'm sure almost all the members of GMGC (and others) would join me in saying; "Thanks a lot Perry!" In my opinion, and that of most others, those five greens (and holes) are some of the most interesting at GMGC.

Also, I was stunned about a two ago to realize (having played the course for decades) that #15 at Gulf Stream G.C., which was reputedly one of Donald Ross's favorite short par 4s anywhere had it's green and the entire orientation of it totally redone in the 1950s by Dick Wilson!

I looked hard at the aerial of the way the Ross green was and I can't help but feel it could not have been as good as the one Wilson did, but perhaps not, as I certainly never played the Ross one!

It was the same overall strategic theme to play your tee shot to a point on a wide fairway to give yourself the approach choice of a long and narrow angle or a shallow and wide one! Wilson just oriented the green to reverse those positions on the fairway!

Matter of fact, this particular strategy makes me think of a subject for a separate thread--"What would you opt for on a hole like this--long and narrow or shallow and wide?"

[Dave_Miller]

Carl:

Everyday Classic Golf courses have been bastardized mostly by Members, Green Committees and Presidents who think they know more about the game than the original architect.  

These are the members with a personal agenda and they then bring in architects who have nothing in their inventory that resembles what was designed.

I don't blame the archie he's making a living.  But how do people who make their living selling or manufacturing or doctoring or whatever have this kind of influence just because they play the game.

It is mind boggling at times.  Pat Mucci is right on the money.

Best,
Dave

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()