Merion Vs Aronomink, who gets the credit ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

MacDonald & Co have been roasted on this site for building terrible bunkers at Merion, yet Ron Prichard has been praised for designing great Ross bunkers, based on Ross's field drawings, at Aronomink.

But, MacDonald & Co was the contractor for the bunkers at Merion and Aronomink.

Why is the fact that MacDonald & Co did the bunkers at Aronomink rarely mentioned ?

Why isn't this firm given credit for doing great bunker construction work, in a timely fashion, to almost universal praise at Aronomink ?

Instead we hear that Ron Prichard did great work, which he did, but why render the contractor at Aronomink invisible ?

How can the same contractor do such a great job at Aronomink and such a poor job at Merion ?

And, how can this site not praise their work at Aronomink ?

It is the same company isn't it ?

P.S.  TEPaul, please refrain from commenting, early.

[Tyler Kearns]

Patrick,
       It is a shame that golf course shapers receive so little, if any credit for high-quality construction work that plays such an important role in the successfulness of the golf course. They are an intrinsic element of the overall project team, and have the ability to make or break a project, however well intentioned the architect's plans are.
       Macdonald & Co. are building the bunkers that were envisioned by the archietcts for the courses in question, Merion and Aronomink. I'm sure a contractor landing such high profile jobs as these is first rate, and thus feel they should not shoulder the blame for Merion's "restoration". Were they not executing Tom Fazio's plans to the best of their ability? Were they not executing Ron Prichard's plans to the best of their ability? I believe they probably were, and should thus be credited in both cases for doing quality work!! The restorative effort is not the responsibility of the contractor, that is the work of the architect and they alone should be judged on those merits.

Tyler Kearns

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

You've come a long way.  

But, back to MacDonald & Co.

They did both jobs, how can they be criticized for one, and begrudgingly praised for the other ?

Double standard ?

Depends on the architect ?

Fazio did Merion and Pine Valley.

Merion gets hammered, Pine Valley gets praised.

Where do the inherent differences lie ?

[TEPaul]

"P.S.  TEPaul, please refrain from commenting, early."

Hey, professor, what's going on here? I've got my hand up and do I have the complete answers for you! So what is this, some kind of pop quiz to see if the class did its homework?  

PS;

If this is the beginning of another one of those "bias" threads I just might have to cut you off at the pass and massacre you with a whole division of cavalry!

[DMoriarty]

Patrick, I know little about the details of the restorations at Merion and Aronomink.  Perhaps you can help me out by filling me in on how much Fazio was hands-on involved and/or personally supervised the bunker work at Merion, compared to the Ron Prichard's hands-on involment or personal supervision at Aronomink.  Otherwise, I am not sure how we can answer your questions.  Thanks.

TEPaul.  Blow the bugle and charge.  Of course this is the beginning of yet another thread about bias.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat, your 100% equivocably right. I haven't seen any of MacDonald's work at Merion in person.

But I have seen it at Riviera..................Please, keep him on the East Coast!

[Patrick Hitt]

Mr. Mucci,
I do not know enough about the process at Merion to say why the bunkers ended up looking like they do. I do know that  Ron Prichard approves the finish work on each bunker before grassing. I raised the same point about the builder here after seeing both courses 18 months ago.  I give Ron credit for finding a prosess that works or him. I don't know the shapers that deserve credit for recreating shapes from the old drawings at Aronimink. I'm not sure we'll ever know who chose the look for the Merion bunkers. I miss the old faces but love how steep an deep the new bunkers play.

[Mike_Cirba]

The answer is simply because I'm BIASED!!!

Actually, it's a basic question...as basic as simple geometry.

The bunkers at Aronimink are almost all of basic geometric form in shape, with all of them just flat sand bottoms with grass faces.  THe outside shaping is rectangular in most cases, similar to something by Seth Raynor.

The bunkers at Merion were much more free form, with all sorts of capes, bays, twists, turns, and sand flashed up to the top lip at bunker height.  They had internal contour within the bunkers themselves.  80-90% of them had more twists and turns than anything one finds at Aronimink.

Given the differences in complexity, the bunkers at Aronimink lent themselves well enough to the machine-shaping, modus operandi of MacDonald and Sons.  The bunkers at Merion did not.

The same solution applied to two different questions leaves us with the questionable results.  Simple as that.

Part of the equation was also almost certainly due to the fact that Ron Prichard seems to me to be the kind of guy who would be onsite as much as possible and puts his heart and soul into "restoration", as he is a true believer.  I assume that he'd work hard to try to get the details right.  In the case of Merion, I'm not sure that Tom Fazio could make similar claims.    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman & Mike Cirba,

Are you going to tell me that the bunker work, under the design, direction and supervision of Fazio on the short course at Pine Valley isn't terrific

You must be kidding, or in denial.

How about the bunker work on the new alternate green on #8, are you going to tell me that that isn't terrific ?

Seems to me, that Fazio did a great job in replicating the bunkers at Pine Valley, with all those capes and bays, nooks and crannies, and all that good stuff Mike Cirba likes.

You fellows are troubled by the dilema that Fazio designed and produced great bunkers at Pine Valley and MacDonald produced great bunkers at Aronomink.

And you can't understand.... Merion ?

That's okay,

DMoriarty,

Could you tell me how hands on Donald Ross was at Aronomink ?  How much personal supervision he put in to the construction of the bunkers at Aronomink ?  

I think you fellows live in fantasy land with respect to the construction of bunkers and other features.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

I'd advise being a little bit careful with this issue.

To answer your question would probably require getting down and dirty about specifically who did what during the project. In other words, we would not only have to examine a project at a far more detailed level than we typically do, but we would also have to get far more personal than I think is wise for this discussion group.

Keep the long term in mind. We are trying to attract more industry participation. I don't think adding individual performance appraisals - e.g., how well did Johnny supervise this project? - is a direction we want to go.

Why not just focus on the final product, i.e., what people like and don't like about what was done?

[SPDB]

credit: Geoffrey Childs

[Dave_Miller]

Patrick et al:

As one who has been a member at Aronimink for over 25 years and a guy who actually caddied at Merion as a kid I believe there are a few reasons why Fazio and McDonald are criticized by many concerning Merion and Prichard and mcDonald are praised for Aronimink.

To begin when I was 13, 14 years old and caddied at Merion the Bunkers did have many twists, scotch broom in some, etc. but were almost universally referred to as "the white faces of Merion."  The work done by Fazio and McDonald changed the so-called "White faces of Merion".  

When I played Merion last summer I was surprised at the bunker surrounds and the facings coming over the bunker lip and into the face.  

This look was not what I remembered as "The White Faces of Merion".

At Aronimink Pritchard and McDonald built the bunkers to what the oringinal plans showed.  They clearly showed the Ross type bunker with the grassing down the facings to the bunker floor.

It is difficult to know what was really what at Aronimink for many years due to the many changes that had taken place with the bunkering.

For this reason I believe Pritchard and McDonald get kudos at Aronimink.

I have also been told by others that this is the type of bunker McDonald specializes in.  Don't really know if this is true or not but I have been told that.

Perhaps Wille Dow and Chip Oat can lend some insight into the process at Merion.

Best,
Dave

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

I haven't seen the Short Course at PV, although I have seen other work Fazio has done on cleaning up and reconditioning the bunkers on the regular course that has been done in recent years.  I've seen them fore and aft.    

My honest opinion...it's ok, although it's much too clean, tidy, "fairer" and formalized for my tastes and I prefer the more rugged and natural look that Pine Valley has been known for over past decades.  Did I like it better before?  Yes.   Was some of it probably necessary due to maintenance issues or bunker disrepair.  Yes, I'd imagine it was.

The work on 8 was done a few years back, and I even like the alternate green Fazio built there.  However, more recent bunker work on holes like 10, 14, etc., seem to me to be more dictated by concepts like standarization, formalization, and fairness in outcome than the wild variations in terrain one experienced before.

Case in point.  The old left hand bunker on 10 was almost trench-like.  If you ended up there you might be well-advised to pitch sideways.  That's been widened so no such dilemma exists anymore.  Seems a shame on such an exacting little hole.    

[SPDB]

Oddly enough, the surrounds on the left bunker bears an uncanny resemblance (if you don't agree just dismiss me - i have no interest in reprising the Berkshire/Merion donnybrook), whereas the one on the right (Fazio) looks more simplistic.

but I digress

Does anybody have any postable Merion pictures from 1930 that they can post? There seems to be a dispute on the Aronomink thread as to whether the original Ross creations were grass faced or flashed, might a similar claim be made as to the Merion bunkers, i.e. might the orig. faces of merion have eroded or declined from a lack of maintenance interest?
such that they evolved into the look of c.1998?

Also, to satisfy my own curiosity. Does anybody have a problem with the depth of the bunkers? particularly in view of the fact that for most of the bunkers they dug down through 2-3 feet of sand that had been continuously added over the year?

[Paul_Turner]

Yep, that bunker work by Fazio, on the 8th at PV, was highly criticised on GCA.  The pot bunkers on the 11th look much too formal now too, although I don't know who did this work.

A question about Aromomink.  Was the original "Aronimink" a Tillinghast design on a different location (about 1913).  I think I remember reading this.  The course incorporated an old ruin, somewhat like the one at Devil's Paintbrush.

[Mike_Cirba]

Sean;

Certain of the new bunkers at Merion are now effectively deeper because as I understand it, Macdonald & Co. dug down to the original bunker "footprint" during their construction work.  

On certain much-frequented bunkers, such as those fronting 8 & 13, sand spashing over the years had raised their top edges rather dramatically.  There was concern that taking down those top edges back to their original levels might lead to uncertain green characteristics (the splashing had also altered the green attributes over time), so a decision was made not to touch the top ends of certain greenside bunkers (ironically, the only bunker "surrounds" untouched in the entire process).

The combination of original footprint (flooring), with the evolved top end (ceiling) made for effectively deeper bunkers.  Do I have a problem with that?  No, not at all.  

As far as Pine Valley, re-read your post because I think on the last time you said "left", you meant "right".  In any case, I believe that Fazio did stabilization work to the entire green complex, including both bunkers, but hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong here.

[Dave_Miller]

Aronomink thread as to whether the original Ross creations were grass faced or flashed,  
 

Sean:

It is unclear whether the origninal bunkers at Aronimink were grass faced or flashed.  The only evidence available were some aerial photos from the 1930's.  These photos show many of the bunkers as a series of three bunkers and some of them, if not many, were flashed.

This led to the discussion of whether Ross's assistant, James McGovern who oversaw the day to day construction, changed
the bunkering in the field or did the membership change them after the course had opened.  

Given that the Great Depression came a few years after the opening of Aronimink it seemed unlikely, but not definitive, that the bunkers were changed by the Membership. It appeared more likely, but again not definitive, that the bunkering was changed during construction by McGovern and probably, but again not difinitively, approved by Ross.

Thus the decision to go with the original plans and the original field drawings.

Best,
Dave

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty,

Could you tell me how hands on Donald Ross was at Aronomink ?  How much personal supervision he put in to the construction of the bunkers at Aronomink ?  

I think you fellows live in fantasy land with respect to the construction of bunkers and other features.

Patrick,  I said I know very little about the restorations; I know even less about the original work.  You are the one who is making the comparison.  I think it only fair that you fill us in on some of the specifics so that we can adequately compare.  

What fantasy land do I live in with respect to the construction of bunkers and other features?  Have I ever expressed an opinion on construction?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat,
I'm starting to wonder where you are going with all of this. Please do tell.

[Dave_Miller]

A question about Aromomink.  Was the original "Aronimink" a Tillinghast design on a different location (about 1913).  I think I remember reading this.  The course incorporated an ruin, somewhat like the one at Devil's Paintbrush.

Paul:

Aronimink was originally located at 52nd and Chester Ave. in Philadelphia in 1896.  In 1904 or 1906 it moved to the Aronimink section of Drexel Hill, Pa. and built a golf course which I believe was 9 holes and could have been designed by Tillinghast, I just don't know.

In 1926 the Club moved to the current location and Donald Ross designed the current course.

Best,
Dave

[Dave_Miller]

Paul
I don't know if it was a different site or not, but Tillinghast did design the first Aronimink (or at least the Aronimink prior to Ross's)

Dave
Does the club have photos of the golf course - other than the aerial - from the 20's, 30's and 40's? I would think a club with such a rich history would have a considerable archive of photos. Was there a clubhouse fire?

There are photos of the 1st hole (from the tee) on the cover of the August 1929 issue of Golfdom and the 18th green from the July 1929 issue of Golf Illustrated that clearly show sand flashed and in the case of the 1st a multiple bunker scheme.

 

Tom:
See my prior post to Paul.  The course you are referring to as designed by Tillinghast was located in the Drexel Hill about seven miles or so east of the current location.

I am not aware of any fire but in looking at the photos in the Club House, etc.  The earliest I have seen are from the 30's forward.  I do agree that in 1929 the photos to which you refer had flashing on the face of the bunkers but again no one knows for sure whether that was done in 1926 or later.  My guess is they were built that way due to what McGovern found in the field.
The aerial photos from the 30's show the sets of three and also bunkers with flashings and some with grass facings.  
As there was no definitive information available the decision was made to restore to the original plans and drawings.

Best,
Dave

[G.Crump]

Rumor has it Mr. Mucci wants to join Merion.
That makes him BIASED, so you should ignore everything he says about Merion.  

[Mike_Cirba]

The original Aronimink course was designed by Alex Findlay in 1896.  

I don't know what the bunkers looked like, but I do know they weren't done by MacDonald & Sons.  

[SPDB]

It should also be noted, for the sake of completeness, that McDonald & Sons also did the construction of the Bethpage restoration/renovation/redesign. Placing it yet another controversial project.

[Dave_Miller]

The original Aronimink course was designed by Alex Findlay in 1896.  

I don't know what the bunkers looked like, but I do know they weren't done by MacDonald & Sons.  

Mike:
Was this course designed by Alex Findlay a nine hole course.  I believe it was located at 52nd and Chester Ave's. in Phila.

The course in Drexel Hill may have been 18 holes and could that have been Tillinghast.  I can't find my write-up on the history at the moment.
Best
Dave

PS - How was Sunday.