This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Sven, This is a very important find. It states, that in 1913, both the front and back tiers were maintained as putting surfaces. Over the years we had heard a number of contributors claim to the contrary, but, Emmett's written words confirm that both tiers were maintained as putting surfaces/greens. Bill:Here are Emmet's words on Piping Rock from the Nov. 1913 edition of Golf Magazine:"The ninth is a very uncommon hole. I have never seen one like it. There are two large greens, one beyond the other, with a hollow between them and serious trouble on either side in the shape of bunkers. It must be 220 yards (I speak from memory) from the tee to the center of the farthest green. It is slightly down hill, so that one can see exactly what there is to do. It will take a fine cleek shot or a difficult drive with wooden club by a second class player, as the gulley which separates the two greens must be run through at the end of the shot. This is one of the only good cleek holes I have ever seen. There is a slight upward slope beyond the green so that there may be no fear of hitting the ball a little too hard - the difficulty being to get there."
"It isn't surprising that a cross bunker was added to some of their versions, just like how he "corrected" his version of the Eden at NGLA."Sven -I had not heard before that the Eden at NGLA was "corrected". Could you amplify?Bob
Quote from: Sven Nilsen on November 10, 2015, 10:21:19 PM Sven, This is a very important find. It states, that in 1913, both the front and back tiers were maintained as putting surfaces. Over the years we had heard a number of contributors claim to the contrary, but, Emmett's written words confirm that both tiers were maintained as putting surfaces/greens.
Sven, This is a very important find. It states, that in 1913, both the front and back tiers were maintained as putting surfaces. Over the years we had heard a number of contributors claim to the contrary, but, Emmett's written words confirm that both tiers were maintained as putting surfaces/greens.
Sven, do you read Emmett's statement as saying the swale was also part of the green? Or does he indicate two separate greens, with a swale between them that was not maintained as green?
Thanks Sven. I am a bit less interested in the muse than I am in the product. Would you say that some cross bunker, or forced carry was present in most of the original MAc/Raynor versions? Or no?
Pat,To paraphrase a famous GCA poster, common sense is not that common.Let's think about what we know. CB Macdonald was a great golf course architect, right? You love what he did at NGLA. You know what he wrote in Scotland's Gift about the ideal "classical "golf course. You know that he streesed the importance of par three hole varying in length.How could he possibly design a front section on his longest par three so that there was a playing distance rougly equal to the Redan and Eden hole? There is NO WAY Macdonald would do that!Playing to the front section of a MacRaynor Biarritz hole is an absolute letdown. The hole becomes SO much easier. I'll never be able to conceive Macdonald designing such a boring hole.
Whenever we talk about how Biarritz holes play in 2015, it makes me wonder how they played when they were first built between the years 1910-1929.Bill,I think they played like par 3 1/2, not too disimilar from the par 5's that play as a par 4 1/2's.I think my first experience with a Biarritz may have been # 13 at The Knoll in the mid 50's.# 13 was always one of the hardest holes on the golf course because you had to be long and straight, and, the green had a spine in it, so putting was also a challenge.Getting to the back tier was a considerable challenge and we used 3-woods or drivers. Nothing less could reach the back tier.A par was a great score.Birdies were virtually unheard of.How firm was the turf? And how would that turf comapre to the lush grass we play on today?I think Mother Nature was the primary factor in determining the quality of the playing surfaces.However, due to their elevated footpads I think they dried out sooner Han other sections of the golf courses.And, I suspect that they got plenty of sunlight and wind due to the absence of nearby treesWhat was the first bounce like then compared to modern times? Did the ball bound forward or did it check a bit like it does so often now?My recollection from the 50's is that courses were far firmer than the wall to wall green we typically see today.