This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
The theme of this discussion thread pretty much sums up the almost 20 year mission of the Travis Society. We would argue that Travis's contributions to the game of golf are largely unknown and underappreciated. Among other factes of his contributions follows. His great success as an amateur golfer can be only attributed to his study of the game, and personal dedication. Without question, he was the country's leading and most well-known golfer through the first decade of the 1900s. His positive influence on the games of Bobby Jones and Frances Quimet are well documented. His influence on the development of golf equipment is seen throughout the early literature. His golf course design ideas were revolutionary in the very early 1900s, e.g. can you find anyone who wrote so frequently and disparagingly about the ubiquitous use of cross-bunkers, and the strategic placement of bunkers earlier than Travis? I'm ignoring his influence on the rules and format of play, or his years as founder and editor of The American Golfer, etc, etc., etc. I rest our case.
I think his 1904 Open win was the nitrous oxide that powered the golf engine in the USA.
Ed,Interesting comment about cross bunkering, a feature that was tremendously repetitive at GCGC in 1938.If Travis didn't like them he sure fooled the members at GCGC
Ed:What's your take on Travis's influence on Ross, in light of his words in this American Golfer article:http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1920/ag2333f.pdfSven
Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on May 06, 2014, 08:14:45 AMEd,Interesting comment about cross bunkering, a feature that was tremendously repetitive at GCGC in 1938.If Travis didn't like them he sure fooled the members at GCGCPatrick:Are you sure the cross bunkers should be attributed to Travis and not to Emmet?Tom,I guess part of the answer to your question is whether Travis endorsed cross bunkering by retaining Emmett's prior work.As to differentiating between what Travis introduced and what Travis left intact, and what Emmett may have reintroduced or left, I'd have to spend some time with Tom Kirby in the archives.I don't know the answer to that.
There's an old plan of Hollywood in the men's clubhouse that predates Travis' renovations. It'd be worth looking at that to see how many cross bunkers Travis inherited.Blake,If an architect is brought in to an existing golf course and retains specific features from that course, that's tacit approval of those features.
I would agree with Patrick's assertion that if an architect, while remodeling, leaves existing features on a course, that is "tacit" approval. In the case of Hollywood, I think that the best source for determining what Travis did there is a map published in the HGC history book. There are absolutely no cross-bunkers of the type that Travis railed against, and illustrated in various articles.Ed,Maps are nice, but, I'll have an early aerial that I have of Hollywood posted by Bill Brightly.I think you'll find an abundance of cross bunkers in the photo.The aerial reflects what was built and played.
I think it is a real stretch to call any of the original Travis bunkering at Hollywood "cross-bunkers".Early aerial photos refute that statement. But, given the very large number of bunkers on holes such as #12, it was virtually impossible to get to the green without going over a bunker. And, #3 had fairway bunkering that stretched nearly across the fiarway. None of those resemble the cross-bunkering that was ubiquitous in the very early days of golf course design, and as illustrated in Travis's 1920 article mentioned previously in this thread. What about the cross bunker on # 4 ?9 ? 16 ? 18 ? That does not disprove your point, Patrick, nor am I trying to. Just looking at the impact that Travis had on golf course design in terms that what he expressed in his writings and that vast majority, if not all, of his golf course projects.Ed,The photo is very revealing.Hollywood had to be one of the great courses in the country.It's a shame that it was softened over all these years.Especially when you consider that it's less than a mile from the ocean and enjoys great breezes.