[Patrick_Mucci]

I visited Merion today.

Based on a zillion posts that previously appeared,
I wasn't sure what I'd encounter.

But, what I found was quite different from what I expected.
Are you sitting down Tommy (aka Tony)
And while some may not like the upholstered or pompador look of the lips, lets let a little time and fine tuning take place before making any FINAL judgements.

The visit also triggered several questions.
The first question was:
How were the wrap around grasses forming the lips going to be maintained ?  And how would they be maintained without causing problems with the faces of the bunkers.
Someone indicated that a subsurface irrigation system would provide adequate water for this feature,  and that fly mowing would probably be used to trim the bunkers.
That seemed like an arduous and expensive mowing method,
and I was wondering if anyone knew how the underground irrigation system functioned (if it exists)

The second question had to do with the two (2) distinct bunker areas, one clean, the other fescued.
I was curious as to what, or who determined which bunkers would receive each treatment, and why two distinct styles were created ?

The other question I had dealt with accessability.
Without spikes, entry into the bunkers is cumbersome to difficult, with most of the bunkers having a bathtub like configuration.  As the membership experiences these bunkers over the next year or so, will the teeside lips be beveled to permit easier access ?

Do pictures tell the whole story ?
Can camera angles distort ?
Should pictures be taken of a golf course and its features, the way they present themselves to the golfer playing the course ?

I'm ready for my close up Mr. DeMille  

[ChipOat]

Patrick:

Can only answer one of your inquiries:  the accessability issue will be addressed as many of the (older) members find entering (especially) and leaving the newly-deepened bunkers to be problematic.  The board is aware and intends to be responsive.

Aesthetics of the "surrounds" aside (which many will not let happen), if you remember the "old" bunkers, do you find the "new" bunkers more similar in "degree of difficulty" to what Hugh Wilson probably had in mind in 1912 (or ended up with anyway) when the sand club of choice was a hickory shafted niblick?

Of course, with the quality of your game, I suspect you weren't actually in any bunkers - instead merely observing the controversial creatures from the fairways and greens with a discerning eye!

[TEPaul]

Pat Mucci:

You've always asked too many questions, in my opinion, but your questions in this thread are all extremely valid and all very interesting questions which happen to get into much of the minutae that involves really good research which is necessary to do good restoration implimentation!

I hope the answers to these questions are forthcoming, even if from anonymous contributors intent on hiding their idenities.

These are good questions, interesting to those that are into the finer points of architecture, particularly restoration architecture.

Questions and threads like this one, if followed by valid answers are much of what makes Golfclubatlas an interesting site and a valuable resource!

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

Good post!

You get beyond the questionable aesthetic factors, and jump right into the maintenance, playability, and even "reasonableness" issues.

I'm glad you finally got a chance to see the work, and I hope that those in the know will be able to answer your questions satisfactorily.

I'm not sure if you've visited Merion before, but the question about how the grass faces were maintained would have been moot.  There were no grass faces, as the sand proceeded all the way up to the top of the bunkers, with rough edged, scarred lips barely containing the wave of sand at the top...the heretofore "white faces" of Merion.   

As for which bunkers have plantings versus those that don't, I think an effort is being made to re-plant grasses in those that had them in historically.  Unfortunately, at present, it looks sort of like hair plugs, with even rows of plantings...don't you think?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

I wasn't referencing the hair plugs, but the surrounding fescue on some bunkers, versus the cleaner surrounding areas on other bunkers.  There are clearly two (2) styles, and I'm curious as to how and why the styles exist, and what determined which bunkers received each style.

I don't particularly like the grasses IN the bunkers as I feel they create a dual penalty, and when mature, can create unplayable lies and rule disputes.

TEPaul,

I Learned, a long time ago, to ask questions, like,
"Doctor, what are you doing with that needle and scalpel ?
"Seek, and ye shall find"

I hope some well informed individuals can address the questions posed.

I have another question relating to the fairway lines, but I'll ask that later.

[Ran Morrissett]

Pat,

Much has been said about the aesthetics of the bunkers but what did you make of some of the other work like the

1) 8-10 reclaimed bunkers. My favorite was the diagonal one off the 6th tee -  can't imagine why it was ever taken out but I am delighted that it is back.

2) In general, assuming that access isn't a prohibitive issue, I like the penal aspect of deep bunkers, thus I like what I saw, especially at the 11th. Before it seemed a relatively simple splash shot; now a recovery shot from that four-five foot deep bunker toward Cobb's Creek across a firm green must be one of the most nervy bunker shots in the game, fitting for a short length hole.

3) the clearing around the Quarry Hole.

4) the removal of Valentine's bunker to the left of the 14th green and the re-insertion of Wilson's mound, consistent with some of his manufactured features on the West course. A man in our group got to the left of it and the best he could do was twenty-five feet from the hole whereas if he had been in the bunker, I bet he would have recovered closer.

5) the high side to the right of the 5th green is now maintained as fairway so that the hole plays properly, as opposed to the last time I was there when it was rough.

6) the widening of several  fairways is now on track to commence with the tree clearing having been completed.

7) Gil's new tee on the 5th.

the promotion of the fescues, taking the course away from a traditional parkland look to something that surely must be more consistent with what Wilson saw during his famous UK trip and when he first walked the property.

I don't understanding the pros and cons of the removal of the second, back left greenside bunker on the 7th to comment one way or another - I think that it's probably good as it must increase depth perception problems and make recovery harder. Plus it shows a commitment to their stated early 1930s plan but still, I am not totally sure.

Otherwise, the changes listed above seem EXCELLENT to me.

Cheers,

[Mike_Cirba]

Ran;

I too appreciate much of the work, but would ask your opinion of the following;

1) The new pot bunkers protecting the creek on the 5th, as well as the bunker now placed at the start of the quarry on 16.  I'm also not sure that as many bunkers as you claim have been "recovered".  I count the 2 on 5, 1 on 6, and 1 on 16.  With the removal of the one on 7, the one on 14, two on 10 (upper right), I think it's a wash overall.  

2) Agreed that the bunker on 11 is an improvement.  I also have nothing against the depth of the bunkers, but question the vertical grass faces as a "restoration".  

3) In general, I like the clearing on 16, but question the bunker fronting the quarry, as well as the man made earthworks on the upper right that don't look very natural.

4) Can't say I like the mound on 14.  Most of Merion had been so completely natural looking and all of a sudden comes this incongruous feature that is cylindrical in shape.

5) LOVE IT, LOVE it, LOVE it.

6) Hope they proceed as I've heard speculated.  

7) Unfortunately, necessary with today's technology.  The spot for the tee is superb.

Aarrgghhh...you've got to be kidding!  There is more than enough going on within Merion that it doesn't need gunsch.  

Most importantly Ran (and Patrick), now that you've seen the work.....

Although you both completely gloss over the issue of  the "aesthetics of the bunkers", would you term the work a true "restoration", and uphold Fazio's work at Merion as something other classic clubs should look to as an avatar when considering their own restoration needs?  

No need for a fussy answer...a simple yes or no will suffice.

[Ed_Baker]

Mike Cirba,

I asked a member about those bunkers just over the creek on 5 when I was there, he told me that his understanding was that they " were visible in one of the photographs of the period that the club was trying to recapture." Therefore it was decided to reproduce them.

He opined that they would become a maintainence problem because the creek swells seasonally and they would wash out. He also thought that with the grade of the bank, and the proximity of the green to the creek, that the bunkers were not neccesary.

I played with a man that caddied there in his youth that kept lamenting all the way around," this isn't the Merion I remember as a kid," yet at the end of the day his comment was, "it's still World class, isn't it?".... It sure is!

[Mike_Cirba]

Ed;

Yes, it is!  No question.  

But is it better, worse, or netting out a wash after all of the work by Fazio's company?

Would you call it an accurate historic restoration and how did you like the new bunkers?

Jaclyn Smith would still be beautiful with a face lift and a boob job, but would she be improved or slightly diminished?

[Ed_Baker]

In my opinion, it's a wash that created a different look and added maintainence challenges. $$$$.

An accurate historical restoration? No.

Did I like the new bunkers? No, I liked the old ones. Did the new ones play fine? Yes. But they are hard to enter and exit for the waistline challenged player and the senior members must need a ladder.

I guess in all honesty, overall, "slightly diminished" would be accurate. The "whats on the ground" architecture is just so magnificent it overcomes a lot.

[Mike_Cirba]

Ed;

Thanks for your frank assessment.  By the way, where's Dave been?  

Ran & Patrick;

I'm looking forward to reading your impressions and responses to the same questions.  

[Ed_Baker]

Mike;

David is currently pretending to work, although he did have time for a 1 day member-guest on Wednesday and last I saw him he was on the phone with Pat discussing some Von Hagge debacle taking place at Admirals Cove.

Trust me he'll be back soon, the work gig gets old with him fast.

[Dave_Miller]

Mike Cirba:
Just got back and contrary to Ed's assertion I was, unfortunately, not working.  I had to attend a funeral in Phila.  
When I have a chance to read and digest all of this I'll probably chime in.  But to me Merion is just great.  They just need a lawnmower.

Cheers,
Dave  

[Michael_Burrows]

Patrick

I can kind of anwser one of your questions about the under ground irrigation. There is such a thing called sub air. Sub air is used to pump air to the root zone in mostly greens. I believe that it can be used to pump water to the root zone as well. I don't know the exact details on parts that go into running the system but  like I said I do know that it is used mostly on greens though and for for what it cost to install such systems I find it hard to believe that it would be used for an area other than a green such as the case with the grass around the bunkers that you are talking about.


As for flymowing the bunkers I don't understand why you think that it would cost so much. Flymowing is pretty inexpensive but is ardous labor wise.  I wish you could please explain yourself more.  

I'm sure Matt Shaffer the new superintendent will do an excellent job at Merion. I hope to do an internship at Merion next year at which time I will be able to tell you more.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Burrows,

The convex nature of the bunker lips, wrapping down and back into the sand bunker face are difficult to access, and will require great care and time.  You indicated that the process is arduous labor.

Arduous Labor, Plus time, equals money.

Ran,

One can't answer the question about Gil's tee on # 5 without factoring in the fairway configuration in the drive zone.
The fairway dips in by the right hand bunker, and the fairway is excessively pinched in.  The tee makes the hole a bear, but the fairway lines are terrible, especially when you factor in the right to left slope, and the creek left.

I don't care for the two fairway bunkers just right of the creek, but can live with them.

I like the deeper bunkers.

I liked the cleaner quarry hole, but think that the grass and any remaining bushes may be too thick.

Mike Cirba,

Without seeing the 1930 photos, aerial and ground level,
I could not make an accurate assessment of whether the recent work reflects a true 1930 restoration, or a departure from same.

One thing I do not like are the wavy gravy fairway lines.
They need to be restored/fixed as soon as possible

[Michael_Burrows]

Patrick

You can spray chemicals such as growth regulators such as  Primo to help reduce how fast the grass grows on bunkers. At Lookout Mountain we can usually spray the bunkers banks and for about two to three weeks we don't have to fly mow. It does cost money but the cost more than makes up for it's self by reducing man hours.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat,
Glad you got to see Merion up-close and personal to make the observations from the perspective of seeing it before and after. (Which I have not seen the after in fear of having a coronary.)

However, there seems to be some genuis going on with the reclaiming of fairways and the clearing of quarry. But, for me it has always been about Merion's beloved bunkering which is no longer existing and can never again be replicated. After all, Golf's Greatest Living Architect didn't get it right, correct?



Anybody know where I can get a good deal on a Porsche or Mercedes?

[TEPaul]

Dexter and Ross:

Sorry this website hasn't been more helpful to you with information that you can use for a computer virtual golf sim of Merion but if you want information about the holes of Merion for that maybe the best (or first thing) you should do is call up the club itself and talk to them about it.

PVGC sometimes allows people playing the course to take photos for their own (non commercial) use but if a photo of PVGC appears on the Internet they'd probably ban cameras altogether. I, for one, am not ready to argue with the club's request on that--the best thing to do if you go down there to play or whatever is just comply with their request!

I have no idea how Merion feels about that but the best thing to do might be to ask them first--not us.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Burrows,

Have you seen and studied the new Merion Bunkers  ?

In my very limited experience, the convex nature of the wrap around lips, back into the sand face of the bunker will make maintainance a difficult and expensive task.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba,

Without seeing the 1930 photos, aerial and ground level,
I could not make an accurate assessment of whether the recent work reflects a true 1930 restoration, or a departure from same.

Patrick;

Although we sometimes disagree, one thing I've always counted on you for is your penchant for expressing an honest and forthright opinion, opposing viewpoints be damned.  

Do you own Geoff Shackelford's "Golden Age of Golf Design"?  If so, please turn to page 70, and then scroll back to the picture that Tommy posted.  Or, look at page 69, or 71, and tell me that the course you just played had bunkers that looked even remotely like that!!

You know...some people worry that our sometimes overly critical attitude might be the achilles heel of this website.

I COMPLETELY disagree.  In fact, I think the biggest risk we collectively face here is that we will become so damn politically correct that all of this typing becomes as irrelevant as any other toned-down, vanilla, milquetoast, wimpy, patronizing, fluffy, and "everything is good" golf publication.

Did you like the friggin bunkers or not??

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Those that know me, and those that log on to this site,
know that I don't construct and communicate my views in politically correct terms.

Some random photos, from select angles, don't provide a sufficient data base from which I can draw the conclusion you seek.  Rather than make a pronouncement, I would prefer to wait until I have had the opportunity to view an abundance of aerial and ground photos.  Then and only then will I make a judgement and provide an honest answer to your question.

I could be wrong, but I don't see the clean bunkers surviving in their present form.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

The bunkers, as constructed, and as they exist RIGHT now (the work was finished over a year ago and you just played there),  represent what Tom Fazio, Macdonald & Co, and I assume the supervising committee of the club believe is consistent with 1930's Merion.  

I'm quite sure that whoever the late photographer of those 1920's and 30's photos wasn't looking to create photos of "select angles", to proactively prove the critics wrong some 70 years later!!!

Have you EVER seen any photo from Merion in any time during it's 90 year history that had vertical, grass-faced bunkers??

Do the bunkers look ANYTHING like the photos in Geoff's book, or not??

Why would they have been nicknamed the "white faces of Merion" by Chick Evans in 1916!! if they had vertical grass faces??

This isn't rocket science.  You can tell me what you see, and if we both see something different, so be it.

I'm asking for your learned, experienced opinion here.  If someone "restored" Garden City with bunkers that looked similarly, would you be pleased or would you have a coronary?

I am confused why you won't offer your frank opinion, when I know you are one who presses others (as you have to me, quite often) to do the same.

I'm also hoping that Ran weighs in.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

One could say that some of the old photos do look like today's bunkers, IF you factor in the effects of years of edging.

Some of the pictures posted on this site have that slightly convex appearance on the top of the bunker face.  
Not as drastic or dramatic as what exists now, but, if you take today's bunkers and fast forward with the effects of 5, 10, or 20 years of edging, one could say that they could be similar.

If you asked me if I liked the "Pompadored look", I would answer NO, but you asked me if I felt that the bunkers represented a restoration and I can't answer that until I see more exhibits of the 1930 bunkers.

As I mentioned, I noticed two distinct styles of bunkers.

How do you like the fescued, non-clean look bunkers ?
Do you think that they did a good job designing and building them.

With regard to GCGC, it's a sore subject with me.

I can't understand why the model for any restoration or bunker work wouldn't be the 1936 aerial and ground photos.
Why would anyone want to design or construct anything that departs from those principals as evidenced in abundant documentation and photos ??

A series of new bunkers has been recently constructed on the right side of the 17th green, replacing a large bunker that was similar to the one located there in 1936.

Why is the course being experimented on, like a cadaver ??

But, that's another issue, let's get back to Merion for the time being.

[TEPaul]

If you really want to cut to the chase on the "restored" look of the Merion bunkers you will very likely find this to be true.

The look of the new bunkers is remarkably similar to the old aerials of Merion's bunkers probably from around 1930 on if the new bunkers were viewed from around 2000ft (which is about what the old aerials are!). But if you compare the old "on ground" photos (late 1920s on) to the "on ground" look of the new bunkers you can't help but pick up on a difference.

At this point I'm fairly certain that anyone who has half decent eyes and knows just a little about architecture can not only see that "on ground" difference but also understand why there's an "on ground" difference in the look of the before and after!

One might also have to say that the unfortunate thing about it (if they really care) is almost all golfers both play and look at bunkering from on the ground not from 2000ft!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

This is difficult to say.    

I think you're right,..... the look on the ground is the more important view.

I believe aerials are valueable in determining linear relationships relative to the individual features, but that the "Golfers eye view" is the most important view to replicate.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()