Country Club of York

[wsmorrison]

We are including in our book on William Flynn a chapter on the CC of York.  This course was designed by Donald Ross in 1926 and opened for play in 1927.  At the same time, or just prior to Ross's proposal, William Flynn submitted detailed drawings for a design on the same ground.  The farmhouse on site was designated the clubhouse so the starting and finishing points were established.  

Interestingly, there are very few holes that cover the same ground, except for the finish of 9 and 18.  There are a few spots where the two master architects went in opposite directions for at least some of the hole.  They had only one green site in common (18).  

We are determined not to make any judgements on which routing may be better.  Our intention is to do an analysis that may shed some light on routing tendencies and hole designs of each. It is one of our goals to clarify for the reader what design philosophies are associated with Flynn golf courses and what examples support this.  And how his maritime courses differed from his parkland style?

I think I asked this question some time ago (I can't find the thread), but what would you folks like to see in such a chapter?  We don't think there exists drawings by two great architects for the same project at the same time.  Although Raynor and Mackenzie submitted drawings for Cypress Point, they weren't in direct competition were they?  In any case, the Raynor drawings are lost as of now.  

This is a unique opportunity and we want to get it right.  We have some great people helping us out with this including architects intimately familiar with both Ross and Flynn and also the former 11 year head pro.  We sure would like to hear your thoughts.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Wayne,

This is a fantastic idea. I'm sure it will make a wonderful study.

[wsmorrison]

What sort of points of analysis do you think we should be considering, Jeff?  I was a bit surprised that Flynn's plan and Ross's plan overlapped so very little.  Finding out why should be very interesting.

[Cory Lewis]

Wayne,

I played the course a couple weeks ago.  I don't know how much of the Ross design is left but you may want to discuss the use of elevation changes in the two different routings.  Those par 5's on the back nine are pretty unique for Ross, I would wonder what Flynn intented to do with the different elevations at the site that Ross would not have.  

[wsmorrison]

Cory,

We're looking forward to touring the site for the first time when the weather gets a bit warmer.  

According to Scott Nye, the former head pro at CC York and now the head professional at Merion, the Ross plan has not really been compromised.  Bunkers haven't been moved down the fairways and nearly every feature remains intact.  Scott also mentioned that the business ties are closer to Baltimore than Philadelphia while at Lancaster the ties are Philadelphia.  York and Lancaster are friendly rivals, not War of the Roses-like.  Flynn's work at Lancaster might be one reason to consider in York's selection process.

The one back 9 par 5 that really stood out to us in looking at the drawings (Flynn's is on a topo map, Ross a simple routing map) was the 14th.  The 506 yards on the scorecard are misleading as the hole drops more than 120 feet!  15 is  the other par 5.  Typically, Ross did not have par on any of his drawings but I looked on a modern scorecard.  This 15th hole was originally 462 yards.  It looks from the topo with Ross's plan overlaid (thanks Craig Disher) that the hole plays slightly uphill on the tee shot but is relatively flat afterwards.  It doesn't seem nearly as interesting as 14.  In what ways do you think them unique to Ross?

Flynn's 12th was near the Ross 15th playing in opposite directions.  Ross's 14th was in a direction that Flynn did not go; he went perpendicular to the first portion of this hole.  On the second half of Ross's 14th,  Flynn had a par 3 then a par 4 going up the hill in the opposite direction and well to the right of Ross's hole (as it played).

I think you're right, Cory.  Use of elevation change should be a big difference between Ross and Flynn.  According to some, Ross's preference for high tee, valley and high green is evidenced at CC York.

[Jeff_Mingay]

I really don't know, Wayne. The two routing plans featuring contour lines (if possible) would be enough for me. Leave the analysis to the individual reader? I don't know, that's just a thought.

Another interesting study is the front nine at Manor CC near Washington, DC. As you know, Harry Collis routed the front nine there as it lies on the ground today, but there's a Flynn routing plan over the same ground.

That was a very interesting study for me. Walking the property looking at Flynn's proposed holes. Very interesting.

[wsmorrison]

Jeff,

If I'm not mistaken, Craig Disher can say with certainty, didn't Flynn clear cut the front nine and Collis came in later and pretty much created his plan using these hole corridors except in reverse?  You brought up a good point though.  I'll give Craig a call and find out.  He may be skiing somewhere, but I'll track him down.  By the way, keep an eye on your emails (for some reason I have 3 different email addresses for you).

[SPDB]

York and Lancaster are friendly rivals, not War of the Roses-like.  Flynn's work at Lancaster might be one reason to consider in York's selection process.

Wayne,
You're not showing your bias here, are you?  
You know old Donny Ross was a fairly capable architect, who lots of clubs would have wanted as the designer of their course.

[wsmorrison]

"You know old Donny Ross was a fairly capable architect, who lots of clubs would have wanted as the designer of their course."

Agreed.  Ross was the preeminent architect of his day and far and away the most prolific.  However, for your perspective, by the end of 1926, Flynn's portfolio of original designs included Eagles Mere (similarly hilly terrain), Lancaster CC, Cascades, Cherry Hills, Kittansett, Yorktown CC, Pepper Pike Club, Manufacturers, Lehigh CC, Mill Road Farm, Rolling Green, Philmont North and Opa Locka.  His significant redesigns included Merion East, Glen View, Atlantic City CC and the Old Course at the Homestead.  Quite an impressive collection of course work.  Certainly not the quantity of Ross's work but how do you feel about the quality to date?

I don't mean to imply any bias at all.  I simply think that in order to appreciate the decision making process at CC York, one needs to take into account the big picture.  For instance, another area we need to look into is to see if one design was considerably cheaper to build than the other.  

None of this is meant to search for reasons why Flynn's plans were not chosen.  This is an exercise in analysis of the plans themselves and not a determination of which is superior.  We'll leave that up to the readers  

Wouldn't you agree, however, that all material facts should be brought to the reader's attention?

[SPDB]

Wayne - Sounds like a good plan. I'd stick to the routing, though, and not divine the motives for the founding members of CC of Y, unless it is expressed somewhere. I'm not sure its a material fact, though.  If you do include that bit about not wanting to copycat LCC, I'd also include the equally likely possibility that they may have determined Ross the stronger architect, as mind boggling as that may seem.  

[SPDB]

Wayne - I'm sure it also didn't hurt his chances that at the time he was pitching CC of Y, the last 3 (and 6 of the previous US Opens had been played on Ross courses.

1926 - Scioto
1925 - Worcester
1924 - Oakland Hills

1922 - Skokie

1920 - Inverness
1919 - Brae Burn

[Craig Disher]

Wayne,
Perhaps you can point out Flynn's characteristic holes at York - ones that might be twinned with holes at other courses of his. The routings are so different that I wonder if cost of construction was a factor in selecting Ross. Flynn's 12-16 are very striking; I hope you'll bring me along to see them when the weather warms up.

You're right about Flynn's front 9 at Manor. I walked over his routing many times and finally convinced myself that the loss of a few housing lots were what sunk it. He would have known how good it was (the early advertisements said it would be the unique part of the course) and must have been righteously upset that it wasn't built. His 5th would have been one of the strongest par 4s in the area and the 3rd one of the best uses of streams and natural contours.  The earliest aerial I have (1938) shows that his routing was cut into the woods that covered the site but I never found evidence that any course construction was started. Collis's modification was weaker, but not bad given what the club made him work with. The 1938 changes were a big step backward. I'll reserve comment on Hills' interpretation of Flynn until it's finished next year.

[wsmorrison]

Thanks, Craig.  

So it sounds like you're saying that there wasn't tree clearing done on the front of Manor and Collis routed the 9 backwards.
My memory is not as reliable as I thought it once was.

I hope that you will join us at CC York when we eventually get out there.  That is if you're not at Pinehurst, the Kent coast, Florida, Montana or all the other places you frequent.  Jealousy is an ugly thing  

As to the current work by Hills and Company at Manor, I know I didn't get a Christmas card from Arty.  I trust you didn't either  

[wsmorrison]

SPDB,

No doubt that Ross was and is considered by far the more renowned architect.  Without a doubt that is true.  

You may also be right in pointing out the tournament record of Ross's courses around that time.  I spoke to Byron Nelson about whether or not he and the other touring pros knew the architects of the courses he played tournaments on.  He said most didn't know anything about who the architects were except for Ross.  He pointed out that Ross designed so many courses and the regard for Pinehurst #2 was so strong that Ross was really the only well known architect to the touring pros of his day.

In general I think you are right that we should just stick to the routing and let's see what happens.  However, don't you think that cost comes into play at all?  What if, for instance Flynn's plan cost 1/3 more to build than Ross's plan.  I'm not saying it did, but isn't that a consideration even if we don't find it in any files.  Club records are often tossed or lost so we may not find anything documented.  But what if one of the architects studying this stuff concludes that Flynn's plan was by far the more expensive.  Shouldn't we bring that up?  After all, it might be that Ross's was more expensive and that would certainly lead to the conclusion that Ross's design had greater merit.

[michael j fay]

Wayne:

There are two factors that may have swayed the Committee in picking Ross over Flynn.

1.) Ross was exceptionally well organized and known to build his courses on a timetable that once established would be met.

2.) Ross was the better known of the two Architects and was operating out of Pinehurst where most of the movers and shakers spent their time in the winter months. I would not be surprised that the people at York met Ross in Pinehurst while playing his courses there and decided that he was their guy.

Ross was the beneficiary of many recommended jobs because of his connection to Pinehurst. In 1927, a visitor to Pinehurst would have been exposed to #1,2,3,4, the Mid Pine Club and the Southern Pines Country Club. This was a pretty strong local portfolio and difficult to ignore.

Ross also had as many as 25 crews operating throughout the country in 1927 an assuring quality to anyone building a new course at the time.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

The opportunity to study the differences in how two renowned architects approached the same site, down to actual plans, is both rare and interesting.

Can you imagine having two more architects like CBM and AWT having routing plans at York.

It would be a study for the ages.

I'd like to see a topo and overlays of the routing plans from Ross and Flynn.

How fortunate you are to have such a wonderful opportunity to study what two masters would have put in the ground on the same piece of property.

I'd be fascinated to see Fazio's routing plans at Friar's Head and compare them to what's in the ground today.

And then compare the design differences between Ross and Flynn, C&C and Fazio, to see if there's a pattern in the respective differences ?

Interesting stuff.

[wsmorrison]

While we should look into the factors that were part of the decision making at CC York, the overwhelming majority of our efforts will be to present the differences in the routings and designs of the two great architects.

While Ross mastered the operations of a huge network of jobs (40 in different stages in 1920 alone) Flynn was a part of the growing movement in scientific applications to design and must have learned many of the cutting edge efficiency techniques and cost analysis from Frederick Taylor who was also quite a golf enthusiast.  Frederick Winslow Taylor is a controversial figure in management history. His innovations in industrial engineering, particularly in time and motion studies, paid off in dramatic improvements in productivity and were applied to golf construction.  Taylor worked at courses where Flynn was associated including the redesign of Sunnybrook (formerly a Ross) and Pine Valley.  Flynn would quote jobs based upon a pricing formula that dealt with soil type, conditions and type of golf course.  His analysis method impressed JD Rockefeller, Jr.- a man that kept an accounting book since he was a little lad--so much so that along with his portfolio of designs, especially Shinnecock Hills, he got the job to design the family course at Pocantico Hills (over the only other man considered for the job, Donald Ross).

But, we want this to be really an analysis of the two designs and how it might be used to elucidate routing preferences and design preferences of the two men.  It is rather remarkable that with a given starting and ending point, so little is the same.  It must be that we can infer preferences.  In the meantime, we should look at possible cost differences and other factors.

No doubt Ross was the beneficiary of jobs due to the tremendous success of Pinehurst.  But for this region, Atlantic City Country Club and the Homestead were significant destination spots and were also the playgrounds of the movers and shakers that would have been involved in the process.

As to quality assurance, I would say that Flynn's method of operations were inherently superior.  Flynn, much as Coore and Crenshaw work today, seemed to have made a commitment to limiting the amount of his work in a given year.  His method was to spend a great deal of time on site and have either Red Lawrence or William Gordon oversee construction with Howard Toomey providing engineering expertise.  Flynn also used when allowable (the proximity of York to his home base was the same as York to Ross/McGovern's Wynnewood office) the same work crews on each job which is an obvious benefit.

One thing we should look at is the work schedules and determine if Ross and Flynn's schedule of work allowed them to compete favorably.  Ross was capable of a huge output so he apparently would not have been affected.  Flynn's schedule might have been much more constraining.

By the way, Michael.  Thank you so much for your help in securing the Ross drawings.  Obviously this was a huge factor in our being able to do this chapter.

[wsmorrison]

Pat,

You got an early Christmas present-check your email.  Ho Ho Ho!  Merry Christmas.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

I checked, nothings there.

Santa must be stuck in the chimney  

[Craig Disher]

Wayne,
I gave the wrong impression. The Flynn routing WAS cut through the woods at Manor - probably at the same time holes 15-18 were cut through the woods at the other end of the property. In the 1938 aerial there is a deforested area between the 2nd and 3rd fairways that had new growth on it. I thought it was a cleared area for an unbuilt house until I saw a 1925 Manor brochure that had a rough drawing of Flynn's overall plan. The clearing matched the location of Flynn's #8 fairway perfectly. The other fairway openings that Collis used also coincided with Flynn's plans.  The 1925 brochure also had a photograph of Flynn's 1st fairway - cleared of trees - (ultimately used as Collis's 9th) looking up the hill towards the clubhouse.

I had a hard time selling the idea that Flynn's front 9 routing was almost built, then was accused by some of being a whacko for suggesting that it was possible to restore it at a reasonable cost. It was a fanciful idea but impractical given the golfing demands in this area.

[wsmorrison]

Pat,

I'm a bit on the heavy side, but I don't think I'd get stuck in your chimney yet.  Next year, maybe  

Sorry, I sent it to your old verizon email.  I updated my contact list and resent.  Please let me know if you receive it.

Best,
Wayne

[wsmorrison]

Craig,

The real wackos are the ones that ignored you and are getting saddled with the expense of a new course and the loss of their old one.  One of a relatively small number of Flynn's bites the dust.  Sad  

When are we going to meet at the Hagley?

[SPDB]

SPDB,

No doubt that Ross was and is considered by far the more renowned architect.  Without a doubt that is true.  

Wayne, that's not what I was implying. I was merely trying to illustrate that there could be a whole range of reasons why they might have opted for Ross over Flynn, and to point out that LCC and CCY were friendly rivals, gives the inference that but for the rivalry, Flynn would have been chosen.

In general I think you are right that we should just stick to the routing and let's see what happens.  

I agree.

However, don't you think that cost comes into play at all?  What if, for instance Flynn's plan cost 1/3 more to build than Ross's plan.  I'm not saying it did, but isn't that a consideration even if we don't find it in any files.  Club records are often tossed or lost so we may not find anything documented.  But what if one of the architects studying this stuff concludes that Flynn's plan was by far the more expensive.  Shouldn't we bring that up?  After all, it might be that Ross's was more expensive and that would certainly lead to the conclusion that Ross's design had greater merit.

Wayne, I don't think it should be brought up at all. You're injecting a value judgment into the whole process. For all you know, price may not have been any object to the CCY decision makers, and too bring it up, again implies that Ross was the low cost alternative. The implicit message, again, is Flynn's plan might have been the superior, but we'll never know because of those damned skinflints at CCY. IMO, it adds nothing to the substance of the comparison of the two plans.

Your last sentence is a logical error, in the same vein. Nothing should be assumed about the merits of the design vis-a-vis the decision makers at CCY. It may be that they found Ross' plan more economical, but inferior. It may also be that they found Ross' plan more economical, and superior. It may also be that they found Ross' plan less economical, but still superior. In the absence of any evidence of the decision criteria, I'd simply stay away from club politics. You have a wonderful resource as it is and a dispassionate comparison of the styles would be a terrific addition. Speculating on why one was chosen vs. the other would cast the analysis in a totally different light. IMO    

[JNagle]

Cory,

The current C.C. of Y is much as it was when it opened.  Yes, you must consider all that happens on a course in nearly 80 years, but, all 18 greens are original (a some of the best when you consider the entire course) and many of the strategies are still there.  Bunkers added or removed did little to compromise the intended lines-of-play as many of the removed bunkers were short or served as double-duty ball containing bunkers.

As far as we can see the changes are as follows -

Holes 1-3 original

Hole #4 - When viewing the shapes and undulations of the "Ross" bunkers I question the two bunkers right and left of #4 green.  They are quite bland and small in size when compared to the others.  The bunkers show in the 1938 aerial, it would be interesting to see if they show on a plan by Ross.  The green is exceptional and the bunkers seem unecessary with a fall-off left and rear and a grassy slope and swale to the right.  Also the green is quite large which can often times be difficult for inaccurate shots.

#6 - a back right bunker has been removed.

#9 - A short carry bunker to the right (100-125 yards from the tee) was removed.  An additional bunker was added to the right approximately 240 yards from the tee.

Front-nine TWO bunkers were removed.  That is hard to believe.  This nine may be one of the most pure Ross nines in existence.

Hole #10 - A bunker was removed 200 or so yards from the tee (right side)

#11 - This hole has the most changes - The hole is on tough ground both the tees and green are elevated.  The tee shot is to severely sloping ground (left to right).  Hanging lie to an elevated green - good luck.  Bunkers short and left off the tee were removed.  Two  bunkers between 210-250 yards have been added.  A bail-out area was eliminated by placing the bunkers as now golfers cannot play to the rough hoping to stay on the high side.  Most balls hit to the fairway end-up in the rough to the right.

A bunker left of the green was added but will ultimately be removed.

#12 - two short bunkers right of play (about where the forward tee now sits) were removed.  These bunkers seemed to serve as double-duty ball contianing bunkers for #12 & #13

#14 - two ball-containing bunkers have been added to the left.  These are necessary considering fairway slope and housing.

#15 - two bunkers have been added left of the green - possbily for ball containment considering the uphill lie of the fairway and slope off the left of the green.  The first of the two will be shortened and the forced carry over it, to the green, eliminated.   The second bunker will be removed and a grassy hollow will be constructed in its place.

#16 - Considered the most difficult par 4 in the area.  A bunker left of the green, in the hillside, was removed (this will be reinstated).  A ball containing bunker was added right of the green, this will remain.

#18 - bunkers added left of the green but are to be removed during the restoration.

The back has had more chagnes made to it, but when you consider all that has been done to many great courses C.C. of Y. has been spared.  In its history the club has managed its money very well, that may be why you see so few changes.  We are hoping in the years to come we get to pull the trigger on implementing the Master Plan to restore this great old course.  The Club actually owns a large model (to scale) of the course just after construction was completed.

[wsmorrison]

SPDB,

Yes, you are correct.  We should definitely highlight the routings and the plans and simply look at each on its own merits.  But I think we should do a bit more.  Not only should there be a comparison of how each routing used the natural topography and an analysis of the differences in the context of each architect's design preferences.  But this doesn't imply any bias.  If you interpreted my statements above as indicating there is a mindset to bolster Flynn's reputation at the expense of Ross, you've been talking to Tom MacWood too much  

I'm not implying that there are simplistic reasons why Ross was chosen over Flynn and that Flynn's work was not properly regarded.  Not at all.  It probably did come down to Ross's greater reputation and the taste of the powers that be at the club.  Nothing wrong with that.  They probably liked Ross's plan better.

Yet we should look for club minutes that might add to the body of knowledge and make factual statements and not try to glorify Flynn at Ross's expense.  There is no reason nor merit to doing so.

I find it hard to believe that we shouldn't present other information.  I'm not saying that the friendly rivalry between Lancaster and York is the reason Flynn wasn't chosen.  I don't think I gave that impression--I certainly did not intend to.  I only feel that it should be known.  I find the historical coincidence between the clubs and the houses of Lancaster and York in England more interesting than the context of two country clubs and what this might have to do with why York may not have chosen Flynn.  Why would I think Flynn would win every competition?  It would be absurd.

As to cost, at some point it would have to be a consideration.  For all I know, the Ross plan would've cost more.  I haven't looked into this at all.  Please don't think I have a preconceived notion or have made any logical errors (at least I don't think I have).  In my opinion, it would be inexcusable if we did not at least look into such an issue.  We should be careful to not make any judgements about any findings.  I only point out that we would be remiss if we didn't take it into account.  

What you seem to be saying is, if we were to find club records that said Flynn's proposal was too expensive, that is not something we should bring to people's attention.  If we found out that Ross's plan was the more expensive to produce but they chose it anyway, that would be significant and we'd present it.  This search will probably not come to anything significant, but it should be done.  

I cannot figure out why you think we should not at least consider work schedules.  It is simply factoring out variables in one's consideration of the facts.  We're not looking for information to support any hypothesis especially one as ridiculous as the wrong guy got the job.  Neither of us think that is true and we are careful to avoid any preconceived notions.

If we can look in depth into the process, we should.  It is interesting in and of itself.  But, as you said, the designs themselves are what we have and what is by far the most interesting.  We will do an objective analysis.  I wish more people would contribute areas to look for and tendecies to consider.  

Can't you believe we just want to do the right thing and it doesn't entail pushing any agenda?  Let's be open-minded and see what we can find.  Now tell me what you think we should look for  

By the way, Sean, I appreciate your constructive comments and don't think you are doing anything other than trying to keep us in line.  Thanks and I appreciate your responses.

Jim Nagle,
Thanks very much for your comments about the course and how close it is to the original plans.  Merry Christmas to you and yours.