News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Matt_Ward

Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« on: September 03, 2003, 08:34:46 PM »
Can someone explain to me how Seth Raynor is so valued as anarchitect but Charles "steam shovel" Banks gets lost in the sauce.

I just finished playing Forsgate / Banks Course and there were some changes since the previous year. The course is exceptional and the green designs and bunker work are first rate stuff. How the course goes unnoticed is beyond me.

Ditto the fine work carried out by George Bahto at another Banks Course -- Essex County CC in West Orange, NJ. Wonderful layout that gets also lost in the sauce. Let's also not forget The Knoll which the late Dave Marr listed among his ten finest courses he had played. George is also involved with doing work there.

Finally, you have thw work of Banks at Montclair Golf Club and the way the nines are worked together with a Donald Ross nine. The combo of #2 & #4 at Montclair is also underappreciated by a great many people.

Is Banks really undervalued or is it because so few people have really sampled his work? Please help me to understand.

Thanks!

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2003, 08:41:30 PM »
Matt Ward,

Probably because his work is so localized, and that localized work lives in the shadow of giants, Tillinghast, Ross, MacDonald, Raynor, Travis, Emmett and others

GeoffreyC

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #2 on: September 03, 2003, 09:27:08 PM »
Matt

I'd echo what Pat said. He didn't have a "superstar" course.  In addition, its only recently that Raynor is getting his due and that is in part I think because its finally realized what an essential part of MacDonald's work he played.  Think LIDO would have been built if Raynor was not around?  Banks might suffer from the perception that he is just an extension of Raynor without differences.  I see from The Knoll, Forsgate and Essex that Banks must have had a serious drinking problem or suffered from feature envy because he really built some wild greens and bunkers that are almost parodies of Raynor or MacDonald's (the double plateau at Knoll is an example).

Michael Moore

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2003, 09:43:49 PM »
Mr. Ward -

I like that typo - anarchitect! I guess there was some anarchy in Raynor's severe unnatural designs.

Thanks for taking my previous tweak in good humor - until I get some snaps of George Wright Golf Club I have nothing to offer here.
Metaphor is social and shares the table with the objects it intertwines and the attitudes it reconciles. Opinion, like the Michelin inspector, dines alone. - Adam Gopnik, The Table Comes First

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2003, 10:24:36 PM »
Banks worked relatively late in the Golden Age, and by the time his career got going the golf market was dying off.

Stiles and Van Kleek did great work in the Northeast as well and never get the recognition they deserve.


ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2003, 10:42:17 PM »
I haven't seen any of his work yet, but I'll get there eventually. Its a numbers game and there are only so many examples to see, and in my case they are on the east coast ,as far as I know, so that limits my ability to see his work. The association with Raynor probably affects it too, since if you've seen a lot of Raynor most would probably expect Bank's work to be much the same.
  I look forward to George's future books to help educate me more about Banks.
   Time is the biggest factor, there are so many courses and so little time.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ian

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #6 on: September 03, 2003, 10:45:08 PM »
The work at Montclair is excellent and really was a wonderful first impression of Banks.

I harp on Stanley Thompson's greatness continuously on this site, but most people have not seen his work due to the fact he worked almost exclusively in Canada. So them Thomspn remains intresting, but by no means "a giant". To see Banks, and you have to see it in person, you have to travel to see his work (unless you live in the New Jersey area.

Thomas, Thompson, Flynn, etc. all suffer from restricting their work to a region. You can't appreciate what you haven't seen in person, and if you don't live in the area, it is unlikely you will be familiar with the architect.

Mike_Cirba

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #7 on: September 03, 2003, 10:55:40 PM »
Adding to Brad's comment about Stiles & Van Kleek, one needs only to look at their work at the public Split Rock course in the Bronx to see a taste of their special talents.

One of my biggest regrets about my last trip to Vermont is having missed playing their Rutland Country Club.  I understand from the locals that it rivals Taconic for natural integration and challenge.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #8 on: September 03, 2003, 10:57:19 PM »
Tom Paul will appreciate that Banks "had a drinking problem!"

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #9 on: September 03, 2003, 11:08:32 PM »
I've got to jump in here and protect Raynor and Banks ......  here we have two of the "straightest" guys you could imagine - gentlemaen both - the kind of guys (who would be driving Volvos today) we'd all like to have for neighbors ..........

ON THE OTHER HAND ..... we have Charlie Macdonald!!

Raynor and Banks die early (49 & 51) - worked themselves to death!

Macdonald (lots of: wine, women and song) on the other hand, lived to be 83!!!!

Whatever the message is there, I'm not sure of, but it may  bear pondering!!!    8)   ???   :P   :-\   ;D   ;D
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2003, 09:38:52 AM »
I hate to continue beating the drum on Annapolis Roads GC but y'all have got to see the nine holes that remains of what was to be a huge complex....the redan is of the largest scale I've ever seen--a huge bank on the right and a huge deep (10ft plus bunker) on the left....the rest of the nine has these type of grand scale features...George B. has seen it and I'd love to hear more of its history.

Lester George

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2003, 09:55:06 AM »
Scott Burroughs has pictures of Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club which we just finished working on.  I still maintain it's one of the, if not the finest Banks Course out there.  When this group discovers it, it will take it's rightful place. Check it out.

Lester

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2003, 09:59:43 AM »
Lester--sorry we could never catch up a few weeks ago while I was at Sandbridge...i'm looking forward to getting back there next year and getting in touch with you to see Cavalier.

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #13 on: September 04, 2003, 10:27:57 AM »
See the new thread on Banks' Cavalier G&YC.

Matt_Ward

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #14 on: September 04, 2003, 12:05:31 PM »
I'll just add this -- if anyone comes to Jersey or its immediate surrounding states you need to check out Forsgate Country Club and it's Banks Course. The layout, I believe, was the last major design by Banks and for all you out there in GCA land who go ga-ga over Raynor and all such similar courses you will find in Forsgate a layout that has all the qualities one can want.

The layout added a bit more distance this year with a few more new back tees -- distance is just over 6,700 yards. The bunkers at Forsgate are as deep, if not DEEPER, than what yo find at Yale and the other courses of this pedigree.

The green designs are also unique and quite imaginative. One other thing -- among all Jersey courses -- and that includes PV and Plainfield -- the quarter of par-3's at the design will stand toe to toe with any course in the state IMHO. You also have back-to-back par-5's that are well done -- with thje long uphill 8th at 575 yards being one of the best pure three-shot holes you can play and it features a sensational spine that cuts across the green for two first rate sections (just make sure you find the correct one with the approach).

I would dare say that with all the talk about courses that don't get much publicity but could easily make the top 100 classic of GolfWeek I would dare say Forsgate is a solid contender for such a placement. The reasons for its being unknown is that most people just think of the state as Pine Valley, Plainfield, Baltusrol, Somerset Hills, etc, etc.

Charles Banks may have only really centered himself in a local context but his designs are no less in quality than what you find in Raynor courses. I'll say this clearly -- not be misunderstood -- if Shoreacres merits a top 50 placement than Forsgate is without doubt no less in quality!

P.S. For those who want a public connection to Banks try The Knoll in Parsippany. I can't wait for George to finish his efforts here because you have holes that are also dynamic.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2003, 03:54:05 PM »
Matt Ward,

I would agree that the collection of Banks courses in New Jersey is outstanding, not a mediocre one in the bunch.

If Forsgate was able to extend their tees I think it would be difficult to keep it out of the top 100.

Matt_Ward

Re:Why is Charles Banks so Underappreciated?
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2003, 04:13:13 PM »
Pat:

Forsgate has placed a new tee for the following holes:

*the 2nd now has a tee pad to the back right of the 1st green. The angle makes for a better hole.

*the 9th has a tee pad directly behind the 8th green. The existing lower tees still make it a better hole though.

*the 14th hole has been extended from 398 yards to 438 yards and with the existign green being a bit on the small side it pays to be on the left side of the fairway for the best angle.

*the 18th has been extended from 418 to 450 yards and now the tee shots will not likely get the benefit of the downslope that caused many balls to gain significantly more yardage.

Pat -- the course is at 6,700 yards and what's really hilarious is that when you see courses of shorter distances that don't have the terrain or green contours or even the general character of such layouts and then you find people gushing over them. Forsgate / Banks Course is a supreme product by Banks and if they were to simply cut a few more fir trees that were haphazardly placed and ill-considered the vistas for the course would be nothing short of sensational.

The only other aspect that needs attending to is to finally complete the Biarritz hole at the par-3 17th. If the club were to ever connect the entire green from the very front plateau through to where the existing green is today the result would be equal, if not greater, than what one finds now at the 9th at Yale.

The Banks Course has all the characteristics that superior courses need to have. Ditto Essex County with what George Bahto has done and hopefully in the very near future The Knoll. I have yet to hear from anyone who has recently played Forsgate to say otherwise.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back