News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #150 on: November 29, 2004, 05:32:29 PM »
Tom,

Lets face it, for whatever reason you've got a blind spot when it comes to Rees' style...I recall you arguing with someone about the Rees-ification at Quaker Ridge and Ridgewood....you just couldn't see it.

That's interesting, but not accurate.
It was Paul Turner, I believe, and we were discussing the bunkering at Ridgewood and Bethpage.
[/color]

I said Emmet's original GCGC was average...the original Wheaton course was average too and I'm being generous in both cases.

I'm sure you're eminently more qualified then Charles Blair MacDonald who differs with you regarding GCGC.  But, what  does he know, he was only a member.
[/color]

Those mounds in the 7th fairway are original.

All of them ?
[/color]

Hambone
The first three pictures are taken from the same general direction....I think what may  be throwing you off is Rees' bunkering. You can see the mound with door (near the 17th green, which was directly behind the 7th green) in both B&W pictures and obviously the fairway in front of the green of the first color picture.

T_MacWood

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #151 on: November 30, 2004, 06:21:22 AM »
Here you go Pat. This is 7th green just prior to Rees, obviously taken from the back. What are you looking for or attempting to prove? Whatever you are trying to prove it seems clear he didn't do a very good job of emulating the original Travis look but on the other hand did do a very good job of emulaing the Rees Jones look.



Here is an old image of the 'doorway' through the mound by the 17th green.



As far as I could tell yes all of the mounds you asked about in the 7th fairway are original...then again I didn't spend much time studying them. Why...was Brian Schneider right?
« Last Edit: November 30, 2004, 06:46:19 AM by Tom MacWood »

blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #152 on: November 30, 2004, 09:23:53 PM »
Some links to updated photos, as you can see we've laid a lot of sod and much of the shaping is complete:

#7

right greenside

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A34943%3B9ot1lsi[/img.]

back left greenside

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp47%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A34974%3C3wp1lsi[/img.]

# 8

view from tee

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp47%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497532wp1lsi[/img.]

view of 8th green while walking off toward 9th tee

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497574wp1lsi[/img.]

# 9 tee shot

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp46%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497553wp1lsi[/img.]

cross bunker

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp45%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497545wp1lsi[/img.]

bunkers down right side of 9, pinching inward toward middle of fairway, they run from about 130 out to greenside

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp4%3Evq%3D323%3B%3E7%3A6%3E747%3EWSNRCG%3D32327943%3A664%3Avq0mrj[/img.]

from this view you can see the center of the green, in line with the chestnut tree, about 1/2 the green is now a forced carry over the bunkering right and any pin on the right half of the green will be semi-blind

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp4%3Evq%3D323%3B%3E7%3A6%3E747%3EWSNRCG%3D32327943%3A6656vq0mrj[/img.]

this is actually a view looking backwards from the 7th tee down the 12th hole, the 6th green is directly to the right and the 11th tee complex is visible in the far left corner, this gives a good sense of how we've recaptured the open flow of Emmet's layout

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3A8%3B523232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dwp%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497577wp1lsi[/img.]



blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #153 on: November 30, 2004, 09:26:43 PM »
We'll that sucked, can someone tell me how to get the photo to appear as opposed to just the link.  

Is it me or is posting photos ridiculously hard?   >:( >:( >:(

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #154 on: November 30, 2004, 09:28:55 PM »
Mike Cirba, you said that Rees moved the fairways bunkers "out" at BPB; do you mean farther out from the tee, which I guess means the tees were moved farther back, or farther out from the fairway edges, which I guess means the fairways were cut more narrow.  Did he really build a bunch of new fairway bunkers?  I think the most ghastly photo of BPB set up for the Open was the 18th fairway with those bunkers 15 yds out in the rough.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #155 on: November 30, 2004, 09:49:24 PM »
Tom MacWood,

The question is, what are you attempting to hide ?

Who planted those clumps of grass all along the perimeter of # 7 ?  And when ?

Why don't you post a picture from the same angle, not one from behind the green that doesn't reveal the look of the left  and right greenside bunkering, the bunkering you were so anxious to post.  Also, why is a recent photo, one you said was taken right before Rees did the work, in B&W.
Post the color photo, for intellectual honesty's sake, and post it from the same angle as the others, from in front of the green, not a new angle from the back right of the green.

Brian Schneider was wrong, Rees didn't do any of that mounding.

But, you didn't answer my question.  Was all of the mounding on the right of # 7 Travis's original work, or was some of it added subsequent to his work ?

You claim to be a great researcher, but you never answered the question regarding the two original B&W photos you posted.

What was the date of the second B&W photo, and
Who made the changes to the 7th green surrounds that appear in the 2nd B&W photo.

It would appear that someone was altering the golf course 70 years before Rees arrived.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2004, 09:50:53 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

T_MacWood

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #156 on: November 30, 2004, 10:04:46 PM »
Pat
Are you testing me? The Travis course had love grass, in fact Dick Wilson liked it so much he took some of it to Deepdale. I don't like the grass they have on the course today, it must be a different strain because it doesn't look like any love grass I have seen (or anything like the grass in old photos)...IMO it looks stupid and unnatural....poodle-like. Don't tell me Rees planted it.

Are these questions designed to trip me up or rehabilitate your floundering Rees apologizing stance?

What are you trying to prove with these constant demands that I come up with more pictures...why don't you send to me some pictures...I'll post them? Or why don't just make your point, whatever it is, about the 7th and Rees' involvement? Did he restore the hole to Travis's original character? Did he leave his own stylistic mark on the hole?

You are correct about the course being altered long before Rees arrived, there is no disputing that...in your opinion is that a good reason for you defensive stance and excusing his recent transgressions?

« Last Edit: November 30, 2004, 10:18:11 PM by Tom MacWood »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #157 on: December 01, 2004, 02:55:08 AM »
Tom MacWood,
Pat
Are you testing me?

Absolutely.

You continually make wild statements and draw false conclusions about Hollywood.  You post two photos of #7 taken some time ago, and a recent photo of # 7, presenting the issue as if the golf course just prior to Rees's project looked like it did in the B&W photos, photos which already reflect changes to the golf course.  

Then when asked to post of photo of # 7 just prior ot Rees, you post a photo from an angle that doesn't show the bunkering you complained about, and you post it in black and white.  That's disengenuous and intellectually dishonest and you know it.

Answer the questions, don't avoid them.

You're the research expert, you know the answers but don't want to respond in an honest fashion because those answers defeat your argument.  You would have the viewers believe that the golf course looked as Travis left it, just before Rees undertook his project, when nothing could be further from the truth.  

Had you ever personally seen how the golf course looked immediately prior to Rees's project ?
[/color]

The Travis course had love grass, in fact Dick Wilson liked it so much he took some of it to Deepdale. I don't like the grass they have on the course today, it must be a different strain because it doesn't look like any love grass I have seen (or anything like the grass in old photos)...IMO it looks stupid and unnatural....poodle-like. Don't tell me Rees planted it.
This is exactly what I mean.  You're dishonest.

You show a picture, and say that this is how # 7 looked prior to Rees, and now you insinuate that Rees planted the grass, knowing full well that he didn't.  But tell me Tom, when was it planted, and by whom ?
[/color=green]

Are these questions designed to trip me up or rehabilitate your floundering Rees apologizing stance?

No, they're meant to expose you for being disengenuous and intellectually dishonest.

Show a picture of # 7 from the same angle just prior to Rees's project and let the viewers see what had already happened to # 7 before Rees set foot on the property.

Again, which members at Hollywood support your view of restoring the golf course as Travis left it ?

And, what's the date on the second B&W, and who altered the golf course as evidenced in that picture, when compared to the first B&W one ?

If you don't know the answers to the questions I asked, just say so.  And, if you do know the answers, post them.
Stop ducking the questions, especially when you know that your answers, your own admissions will undermine your position.

Try being honest and fair, it's not that hard.
[/color]

What are you trying to prove with these constant demands that I come up with more pictures...why don't you send to me some pictures...I'll post them? Or why don't just make your point, whatever it is, about the 7th and Rees' involvement? Did he restore the hole to Travis's original character? Did he leave his own stylistic mark on the hole?

Tom, they're not demands. They're questions, requests and statements, the answers to which will reveal how intellectually dishonest you've been regarding Hollywood and Rees's work there.

You know my point and so does everybody else.

Why, when cornered, do you always try to weasel out of your predicament, one you put yourself into with outrageous claims false conclusions and presentations, and half truths, by deflecting the issue, avoiding the questions, and changing the subject.

Try being honest with everyone, including yourself.
[/color]  

You are correct about the course being altered long before Rees arrived, there is no disputing that...in your opinion is that a good reason for you defensive stance and excusing his recent transgressions?

Be specific Tom, what transgressions ?
Could you identify them on a hole by hole, feature by feature basis ?
And, don't go back 70 years, go back to just prior to Rees's work, to what the golf course looked and played like.
[/color]



Mike Cirba,

The aerial photo you reference, the one I had Tommy Naccarato post, is a copy I had made of the photo that hangs in the Men's locker room, on the wall just to the left of the exit to the golf course.  That photo is huge.

Why am I telling you the details about the photo's location.

Because it shows that the members were keenly aware of what the golf course looked like.  They are reminded of how it looked every time they go out that door.  The HUGE photo is starring them right in the face, day in and day out. Every day of the year.

YET, being keenly aware of what the golf course looked like, and what it looked like pre Rees, the members determined that they didn't want to restore it to the golf course as reflected in the photographic image that hangs on the wall right by the exit door, the one they see every day.

I would have liked to have seen it restored, but, I wasn't asked to vote.  Did you and Tom MacWood receive your ballots ?
[/color]

T_MacWood

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #158 on: December 01, 2004, 06:47:39 AM »
Pat
You are grasping for straws. I'm tired of arguing with someone who refuses to answer the simple and primary questions about the 7th...today does it accurately reflect Travis's original design or does it reflect Rees' architetural design characteristics or perhaps a little of both. I'll give you credit you are a loyal friend of Rees...willing to go down with the ship.

How about that Seawane?!
« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 06:50:01 AM by Tom MacWood »

blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #159 on: December 01, 2004, 10:21:35 AM »
Here's an attempt at larger pics:

Some updated photos, as you can see we've laid a lot of sod and much of the shaping is complete:

#7

right greenside

[img.]
http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A34943%3B9ot1lsi [/img.]

back left greenside

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A34974%3C3ot1lsi [/img.]

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A34974%3C8ot1lsi [/img.]

This is a view of the 8th green from the 7th green, before the trees were removed the 8th green was barely visible
 
[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497572ot1lsi [/img.]

# 8

view from tee

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497532ot1lsi [/img.]

view of 8th green while walking off toward 9th tee

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D323%3B%3E7%3A6%3E747%3EWSNRCG%3D32327943%3A662%3Bnu0mrj [/img.]

same view from newly carved walking path through mounding (over, not under) from 8 green to 9 tee

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D323%3B%3E7%3A6%3E747%3EWSNRCG%3D32327943%3A6665nu0mrj [/img.]

back greenside bunker

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497537ot1lsi [/img.]

# 9 tee shot

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497553ot1lsi [/img.]

cross bunker

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp47%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497545ot1lsi [/img.]

bunkers down right side of 9, pinching inward toward middle of fairway, they run from about 130 out to greenside

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497559ot1lsi [/img.]

from this view you can see the center of the green, in line with the chestnut tree not originally planted but when it’s in bloom it’s magnificent, this tree is not likely to be removed, about 1/2 the green is now a forced carry over the bunkering right and any pin on the right half of the green will be semi-blind

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D323%3B%3E7%3A6%3E747%3EWSNRCG%3D32327943%3A665%3Anu0mrj [/img.]

different angle of same

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp47%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497565ot1lsi [/img.]

this is actually a view looking backwards from the 7th tee down the 12th hole (the back tee is shared for both holes) the 6th left greenside bunker is directly to the right and the 11th tee complex is visible in the far left corner, this gives a good sense of how we've recaptured the open flow of Emmet's layout and hopefully have greatly enhanced the “walk in the park” element.

[img.] http://images.mysticcolorlab.com/3424%3B3%3B923232%7Ffp3%3B%3Dot%3E232%3C%3D897%3D838%3DXROQDF%3E23236%3A3497577ot1lsi [/img.]

blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #160 on: December 01, 2004, 10:27:26 AM »
"One last time with feeling!"

Some updated photos, as you can see we've laid a lot of sod and much of the shaping is complete:

#7

right greenside



back left greenside





This is a view of the 8th green from the 7th green, before the trees were removed the 8th green was barely visible
 


# 8

view from tee



view of 8th green while walking off toward 9th tee



same view from newly carved walking path through mounding (over, not under) from 8 green to 9 tee



back greenside bunker



# 9 tee shot



cross bunker



bunkers down right side of 9, pinching inward toward middle of fairway, they run from about 130 out to greenside



from this view you can see the center of the green, in line with the chestnut tree not originally planted but when it’s in bloom it’s magnificent, this tree is not likely to be removed, about 1/2 the green is now a forced carry over the bunkering right and any pin on the right half of the green will be semi-blind



different angle of same



this is actually a view looking backwards from the 7th tee down the 12th hole (the back tee is shared for both holes) the 6th left greenside bunker is directly to the right and the 11th tee complex is visible in the far left corner, this gives a good sense of how we've recaptured the open flow of Emmet's layout and hopefully have greatly enhanced the “walk in the park” element.





blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #161 on: December 01, 2004, 10:30:50 AM »
Thanks Tom.

Okay, so I've saved a form word document to guide me through going forward, sorry for the multiple efforts I think I've got it now.


T_MacWood

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #162 on: December 01, 2004, 10:46:55 AM »
Jason
A very bold look you are creating there...somewhat remeniscent of Loxahatchee.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 11:49:40 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #163 on: December 01, 2004, 11:23:59 AM »
What are those photographs Jason posted of?

Mike_Cirba

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #164 on: December 01, 2004, 01:32:36 PM »
Tom;

They are the ongoing renovations at Seawane.  As Jason mentioned, they are not intended to be a true restoration, but more of a tribute to our boy Devereaux Emmett's style.  

I'm quite sure Emmett would have rather fancied the sharply upward-rising protrusions bulging forth, exploding in torrents of architectural bliss.   ;D

Jason;

Sorry, I couldn't resist!  

 
« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 01:35:09 PM by Mike_Cirba »

blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #165 on: December 01, 2004, 05:08:44 PM »
I'm quite sure Emmett would have rather fancied the sharply upward-rising protrusions bulging forth, exploding in torrents of architectural bliss.   ;D

Jason;

Sorry, I couldn't resist!  
 

Mike:

Since this was a sympathetic renovation we made sure to keep Mr. Emmet's tendencies in mind, thanks for noticing the tribute.   ;D

TEPaul

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #166 on: December 01, 2004, 06:27:01 PM »
I'm no authority on Dev Emmet but let me just say looking at those posted photos---I cannot believe my eyes!

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #167 on: December 01, 2004, 06:38:01 PM »
TP
Please elaborate.
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #168 on: December 01, 2004, 06:47:03 PM »

You are grasping for straws.

No Tom, it's you who refuses to answer questions and grasps for anything to divert attention from your disengenuous attempts to misrepresent the hole in question and the Hollywood project.
[/color]

I'm tired of arguing with someone who refuses to answer the simple and primary questions about the 7th...today does it accurately reflect Travis's original design or does it reflect Rees' architetural design characteristics or perhaps a little of both.

It more accurately reflects Travis's principles.
Rees's work changed little about the hole, as it existed prior to Rees, and its play.

But, you wouldn't know that because you never saw or played it just prior to Rees's work.

Could you please tell us, the date on the 2nd B&W photo, and answer the simple questions I asked ?
[/color]

I'll give you credit you are a loyal friend of Rees. .willing to go down with the ship.

I have criticisms of Rees's work, but, when he's unfairly attacked, and gross misrepresentations, such as the ones you made, are presented as fact, I'm going to defend him and point out the error in the gross misrepresentations and try to present or determine the real facts, and not rely on your disengenuous smear campaign.  
That's the HONEST thing to do, irrespective of friendship.
[/color]

How about that Seawane?!

I'd rather reserve judgement until I see it for myself.
I first played there in the 60's.
I'm anxious to see what the finished product looks like, and I'm anxious to find out what the members intended to accomplish when they undertook this project.

It may not be what I would have done, but again, they didn't send me an absentee ballot.

I'll just have to wait until next spring to answer your question honestly.
[/color]

« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 06:47:39 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

HamiltonBHearst

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #169 on: December 01, 2004, 07:04:11 PM »

Tom Macwood-

Pat Mucci is also friends with a lot of guys on this site and that certainly has not prevented him from offering his HONEST opinion when he may disagree.  Why would you imply that somehow a friendship with Rees would cloud his judgement?  He is just preventing UNFAIR,UNWARRENTED, criticism from someone who does not have nor does he care to have all the facts.

TEPaul

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #170 on: December 01, 2004, 10:18:23 PM »
I'm having a hard time seeing what the big deal is between those B&Ws and those color photos of #7.

"TP
Please elaborate."

John:

Sure---as I was saying to Mike Cirba a couple of days ago---I can see Devie Emmet dabbling in a little early Gay Architecture but I never figured he did anything that looked like he was on a triple dose of LSD!

;)
« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 10:27:55 PM by TEPaul »

T_MacWood

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #171 on: December 01, 2004, 11:30:47 PM »
Pat
I always enjoy it when you engage your schizophrenic friend.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2004, 11:32:28 PM by Tom MacWood »

blasbe1

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #172 on: December 02, 2004, 10:09:10 AM »
I never figured he did anything that looked like he was on a triple dose of LSD!
;)

Tom:

"Welcome to the nineties Mr. Banks." (extra credit for those naming the movie, the speaking actor and the actor playing Mr. Banks).

Seriously Tom, we never claimed to be doing an Emmet restoration and our goal has always been to revive the links character of the course while keeping Emmet's routing and green surfaces because they are both fantastic.  Otherwise, we've literally re-built the course.  I've been perfectly clear about that on all of my posts.  

The last three groups of holes (two years ago 10-14, last year 6 and 15 and this year 7-9) have been increasingly more dramatic in style than the first two groups that we did.  I think you'll find the flow works, however, because it really catches and keeps your attention through the middle of the round.  Keep in mind also that the land Emmet worked with was virtually unencumbered on all water side property boundaries, thus, even from the 1940 aerial I have it is clear that in 1927 one had clear vistas of the dunes and Reynolds Channel from nearly every hole.  Thus, while Emmet's bunkering was naturally understated (IMO) especially compared to MacKenzie's flashier style, for instance, Emmet could easily rely upon the enchanting links land for much of the course's interest.

We no longer have that option as Hewlett Harbor has grown up around much of Seawane and our water views are limited to the channels that cut through and border the course.  Part of the challenge that we faced, I believe, was recreating the wow factor with playable ground versus amazing views.    

In addition, for right or wrong the larger mounding that you see in holes 7-9 is for protection where large trees or groups of smaller trees were removed.  For better or worse we've got more lawsuits to think about today than Emmet had in 1927 and so long as Seawane stays in the outing business protection must be a consideration.  

I think you will find that holes 7-9 will have a taste of Whistling Straights, which, from the several times I've walked the holes  works dramatically well.

Lastly, you will not see this in your face bold style dominate throughout the course.  For instance, you'll see more subtle bunkering on 1 and 18 which take us from and return us to the clubhouse.  

Overall, I think this is for two reasons:  1) we did the project over a 5 year span and we developed our ideas and skills over that time; and 2) certain parts of the property are just more interesting than others (for instance, little was done to 3, 4, 13 and 16 where the character of the holes are defined primarily by the channels in play. vs. 6, 7, 9 and 15, which are on much less interesting land.

 

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #173 on: December 02, 2004, 10:31:04 AM »
Tom,
Pat
I always enjoy it when you engage your schizophrenic friend.

The betting window remains perpetually open.
And, the odds remain extremely high.
As does the minimum bet.

This is one of the problems you have,
Your research is good, your conclusions flawed.

I have never personally communicated with HBH and don't know who he is, although I could hazard a guess or two.


Last night I gave some additional thought to your question on Seawane, which was framed in the context of the pictures that were posted.  To be honest, the work, as presented in the pictures did look ..... radical.

As I commented, I would like to see the completed work for myself, and I'd like to learn, preferably through documentation, what the membership wanted to accomplish.
It appears evident that restoration was not their goal.

As you know, I prefer restoration, in concept, but, I'm not a member, and I'd hazard a guess that I'd be in the great minority if I were a member and advocated a true restoration.

I've notice more and more clubs that restore certain features and then alter others.

When I first came on to this site I advocated clubs getting second and third opinions, just like we do for our own good health.  Recently, I advocated eliminating compensation based on project costs.  I think, between the two, that you'd come closer to restorations then alterations, but, then again, if the membership wants to alter or disfigure their golf course, I may not agree with it, but, they're going to do what THEY want.  I've seen it recently at my home club in NJ.  We should have restored our 15th hole, which was ruined years ago.
Instead, we're altering it, probably for the better, but a return to the original would have been so much better.  

Members today, are so far removed from their golf course's origins, that the original course has no architectural relevance.  You may not want to hear that, but, that's been the case in the majority of situations I've been privy to.
One can only hope that the compromises being made will include restoration efforts on some of the holes that were altered since inception.

If you understood how these project come into being, it would help you understand why changes are made and why restoration isn't the goal of every golf course, classic or modern.
[/color]





« Last Edit: December 02, 2004, 10:31:41 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

TEPaul

Re:Renovations at Seawane/Holes 7 -9
« Reply #174 on: December 02, 2004, 10:39:54 AM »
Jason:

Thanks for the post and the interesting explanation of things to do with the architecture you're doing. Please understand that while I find the architecture I can see in those photos a massive exaggeration, I do recognize that sometimes there're other purposes and points to do these things. If you're trying to hide something obnoxious looking off-site, minimize liablity or whatever etc.

I don't know Sewane, never been there, but I do recognize that some of those early architects and what they did may seem (at least to me) both rudimentary and sometimes somewhat shocking looking. I accept things like that as examples of the way things were---eg, just part of the interesting evolution of golf architecture over the last 100 or more years.

I have no problem with the fact that Coore and Crenshaw purposely created bunker surround shapes, in an architectural context at Hidden Creek, that may be more rudimentary than what they otherwise do. They did it as a tribute to the early Heathland architecture. I have no problem with JH Taylor's "alpinization" or "Mid Surrey mounds" experiment. I find it to be an evolutionary curiosity and probably a good thing for that! I have no problem with the bunker sets that Ian Andrews did at Scranton because they were representative or a restoration of what Travis did there.

Primarily, I'm interested in the evolution of all this---why some things happened in various times, how and for what reasons.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2004, 10:41:58 AM by TEPaul »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back