We've missed the boat !

[Patrick_Mucci]

While reading a book that I received as a gift for Christmas, Tom Doak, James Scott and Ray Haddock's
"Dr Alister MacKenzie", it occured to me that we as a group may have missed the boat, misdirected our efforts, failed to use our collective talents, or a combination of all of the above.

At the present time Tom Paul and Wayne Morrison are engaged in a project which will uncover, detail and exalt the works of "William Flynn.

I believe that another project may be in the works regarding Perry Maxwell

George Bahto has written a book/s relating to Charles Blair MacDonald.

Brad Klein has written books about Donald Ross.

Rick Wollfe and Bob Trebus have written books on Tillinghast.

Geoff Shackelford has written books on many of the above architects.

Bob Labbance has written about Travis

A Donald Ross Society exists
A Tillinghast Society exists
A Raynor Society exists
A Flynn Society will probably exist after TEP and WM's work

Why haven't we collectively attempted to provide clubs whose origins can be traced to these designers with a detailed accounting of their architect's work, design principles, history of their particular club and subsequent alterations made to their golf course by other then the original architect ?

Why don't we make an effort to co-ordinate these societies and authors in an attempt to provide positive information about select golf courses, their architect/s, history and alterations.

Imagine if a package could be assembled that would go to the President, Green Chairman, Superintendent, Pro and Club Manager.

Imagine further if they could use the societies, authors and other interested parties as valueable third party resources.

As an example, look at how David Gookin from Fox Chapel sought imput from this group.

I'm sure many of his peers seek the same information, but, they just don't know where to go to obtain it.

Let me have your creative thoughts on constructing a co-ordinated approach to positively influencing golf courses created by the Masters.

Thanks

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I don't know about the rest of the contributors on here but Wayne and I have been on a virtual road show around the country with those comprehensive inventories of Flynn's plans and drawings. Have they gotten attention within clubs? You bet they have, but like anything else to varying degrees depending on who at those clubs picks up and runs with what we're showing them and telling them. We've spoken to plenty of central members individually, memberships and representations of memberships and definitely lots of superintendents. This is a lot different than it was 20 years ago or even ten years ago. It's a coming, it's coming, but give it time---you can't force this stuff on people but if they're ready to think about it and begin to plan or act on it it's an impressive aid and tool. The ones who've been most interested, of course, are the supers and architects who are involved with these courses and their restorations. We talk to a number of them about this stuff all the time.

I've always known you've missed the boat (how many times do I have to remind you that you're only correct about 2% of the time) but never count me in on even the same pier as you, much less the same boat!  

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

You wrote, "A Donald Ross Society exists
A Tillinghast Society exists
A Raynor Society exists
A Flynn Society will probably exist after TEP and WM's work

Why haven't we collectively attempted to provide clubs whose origins can be traced to these designers with a detailed accounting of their architect's work, design principles, history of their particular club and subsequent alterations made to their golf course by other then the original architect ?"

Speaking as someone who is serving in two of the capacities you mentioned, I believe that you have made a very important and useful suggestion.

I have just recently been asked to serve on the Board of the Tillinghast Association. Beyond the honor and privilege, it has allowed me a look into what an organization such as this COULD be. In an effort to preserve and protect the great works of art by the architects of these designs, clubs go to green committees and boards of directors and might bring in an architect or two for consultation, but usually NEVER consult an association dedicated to the designer or even the club historian.

The historic nature of a design is almost always given a back seat to budget and the interpretations of the one in charge at the moment, rather than a carefully studied long-range or master plan that has been instituted to protect heritage and course through proper maintenance and growth.

The Tillinghast Association would very much like to aid any Tillinghast course to protect what it has. Consider, would a person who owns a Van Gogh or a Rembrandt go to Mary of Mary's Art School to ask how to preserve the maserpiece or even to clean it? The absurdity of that leaves no room for response, yet works of art as great and as valuable as these, the golf designs of the masters (past and present) is continually left in the hands of "Mary's Art School."

It takes more than an "Association" though to do this. The Association itself has to have a membership dedicated and willing to learn and serve willingly. It is a very two-edged sword. All it takes is some bad advice one time and ALL associations of this type are branded.

As for the authors working on projects about architects or courses, I again speak from personal experience in saying help of this kind, solicited or not, is MOST appreciated.

I received a tremendous amount of aid in research and artifacts for my coming biography of Tillinghast. It was through some incredible interviews with several people who knew and worked with him and are still alive after the more than 60 years it is since his death, that a very different picture of the man has surfaced. Every one of these people mentioned to me that they were aware of a person or two who were 'working on a bio of him' and yet had never approached them. They were disappointed over that fact and they all felt they had some very important information to add to his story, something that usually turned out to be true.

As a writer I was surprised to hear that no one had approached them, especially in the case of three of his grand-children who remembered him very well, as some of them lived in the house behind his. Still, I also realized that I only learned of them and the others because SOMEONE TOLD ME ABOUT THEM! MY book would be very different if I had never spoken to these people and VERY inaccurate as a result.

If you know of someone who is working on a project of this type, either e-mail him or send him a message on here. They will most definitely appreciate it.

If you are not a member of any of the existing architectural organiziations, such as the Tillinghast Association, get off your lazy butts and learn about them and join one or more and then HELP!

It's fun and you will preserving history while it CAN be preserved.

[Tom_Doak]

Dear Pat:

I would be glad to help with your effort, if I thought it would help.  

Unfortunately, I think it would be very easy to oversimplify such a mission.  What can you tell a MacKenzie club about MacKenzie's style, in general terms?  His courses stand out because they're not all the same.

The same is true for all of the masters; that's why they are the masters.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I couldn't tell them anything about MacKenzie's work on their golf course except to preserve it.

But, you could inform and educate them with respect to the alterations that have taken place on that golf course since MacKenzie left it, and how to reclaim his lost features,
and therein lies the value of the effort.

Preservation and restoration.

[Brad Klein]

Pat, the real problem I think is not a lack of coordination. Certainly the Donald Ross Society (confession, I'm on the Board of DRS) has attempted such a project, or a version of it, and say what you want about any organization's limits, the real dilemma is not the lack of material or resources. It's the intent and willingness of clubs to come forth.

Like David Goodkind of Fox Chapel and a dozen other bright, inqusitive club representatives I could name, those who seek help are finding it. I don't think a blueprint exists - you'd have too much concern and grumbling from organized industry trade associations, as well as individual members of the ASGCA. That's fine, by the way. The clubs that seek help find plenty. It's a bit of a scatter-shot free market out there, but like the work TEP and Wayne Morrision are doing, it gets to those who know to look for it. The real work is getting those clubs to ask for help; when they do, it comes in droves.

[TEPaul]

In my opinion, one of the best concerted efforts that could happen would be to advise golf clubs interested in beginning a restoration how to go about setting up the process to get what they probably really want. The fact of the matter is almost all clubs that enter into a restoration project are doing it with people (members) who've never done it before! This is normal and natural because how many restorations has any golf club been through? Name me a golf club anywhere that's been through more than one. If there is one it certainly wasn't with the same members.

I see a number of clubs who feel when all is said and done they wished they'd picked a different architect, contractor or God knows what. There is a service to be rendered in advising clubs how to just set up their process and what to expect and what not to expect. Any club needs that help, in my opinion, from others who have gone through what they probably hope to go through. In a sense Brad Klein as been doing this kind of thing for a lot longer than most realize!

[Tom_Doak]

Tom:  The problem with any group advising a club on how to pick an architect, is that the group makes a list of a handful of favorite architects and pushes them to every club which calls.  And, like it or not, those groups are usually influenced by how the architect has politicked them over the years, rather than exclusively by the success or failure of his restoration work.

The bylaws of the Donald Ross Society say specifically that they will not recommend architects to golf clubs, but I've had at least half a dozen clubs call me specifically on the recommendation of the Ross Society [or someone in it who acts as if they had the authority].  Now, their recommendations may be entirely well-intentioned, and I'm certainly not complaining that they recommended me ... but it isn't a level playing field.

[ChipOat]

Patrick:

I share your opinion (even at the risk of jeopardizing my firendship w/TEPaul and others), but the following questions come to mind.

1) Who's going to actually DO all the fine work you suggested that's "connected" w/GCA?  The whole site is already a major labor of love as it is.

2) With immense due respect to Messrs. Klein, Doak et al, most memberships seem more inclined to pay $$$ for a "name" to do something (it's "safer") than to seek the counsel of "amateurs" for free.  This despite the fine results from the likes of MacDonald, Wilson, Neville, Crump, etc.

Given that, how effective do you think such a GCA-connected effort would really be?

Practically speaking, is there really a boat for "us" to catch?

[ian]

Why haven't we collectively attempted to provide clubs whose origins can be traced to these designers with a detailed accounting of their architect's work, design principles, history of their particular club and subsequent alterations made to their golf course by other then the original architect ?

Pat, the research is a long process on many of these clubs because there is little or no record of any kind to be found. In talking with Karen Hewson, the wonderful RCGA historian we both spoke about the "magic box" that contains all Thompson's plans, notes, models, etc. Without the magic box, we are left to sort through legend and plan to try find out the origins of each course.

Why don't we make an effort to co-ordinate these societies and authors in an attempt to provide positive information about select golf courses, their architect/s, history and alterations.

Many architects and societies share information on a very regular basis. The Travis Society has a go to guy who lives near Far Hills. Once a course is identified, they call him to look through the archives for verification. Most of them are doing what they are supposed to do. Assembling or indexing all known information.

Imagine if a package could be assembled that would go to the President, Green Chairman, Superintendent, Pro and Club Manager.

It took me months to review and understand everything I had before beginning St. Georges. Pat I honestly think the time required to be ACCURATE is well beyond what you think. Look at the conjecture on this site, and the collective knowledge is pretty good.

Imagine further if they could use the societies, authors and other interested parties as valueable third party resources.

Again, "if they are well behaved", I perfer the Societies as the clearing house for all information known.

As an example, look at how David Gookin from Fox Chapel sought imput from this group. I'm sure many of his peers seek the same information, but, they just don't know where to go to obtain it.

A call to the USGA could start any club rolling in the right direction, they are familiar with all the societies too.

Let me have your creative thoughts on constructing a co-ordinated approach to positively influencing golf courses created by the Masters.

1. I think if there should be one[u/] central clearing house for information, not a society or any other organization, but a pure resource center.

2. They should have copies of everything without holding an original. The center would be set up to receive, scan, and return all documents. The key is building the knowledge base, not a collection.

3. The center would be set up by golf as resource center subsidized by the USGA, ASGCA, GCSAA, etc. etc.
The cost for the scanning will be paid for by the people obtaining the digital documents. Donators of documents for scanning will be given free access to the archives.

4. It should be set up to give or receive documents on line. Others are capable of scanning and sending a digital copy.

5. The source shall be documented for cross-referencing. I have seen incorrect information in many books because one source was wrong.


Pat I had wanted to do this for Ontario as sort of a life project. (Then I had kids) I have had so much muddled and incorrect information from clubs that I fear trusting someone else to do the research. The only way I could do this is quit being a golf architect and to work as a researcher. Problem is the pay.

If each club had one excellent historian, there would be no need for this thread.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

TEPaul,

Do you really feel that clubs know exactly what they want when they begin to embark on a project ?

Do you think each club is keenly aware of the configuration of its golf course as it existed 40-60-80 years ago.

Aerial photos, courtesy of Craig Disher and others, have been an eye opener to many clubs that never realized how their holes and features existed long before they were members.

I see more clubs that are in the dark when it comes to their origins and evolution, then clubs keenly aware of every architectural change over the years.

It seems that today's memberships are turning over far more rapidly then in the past, and as such the continuity, the connection with the past has been lost.

It seemed that with all of the resources and talent on this site that an architectural lifeline could be extended to these clubs in the form of aerials, historical information and an overview of the design principles of the architect of record.

Looking at aerials from the 1930's and 1940's clubs I'm familiar with were blown away by how much their golf courses had been altered over the years.  In many cases there is no record of who changed the golf course, or why, but when evidence exists relative to the historical pedigree of the club, why not provide it, unsolicited, in the hope that the club will
"see the light" and hopefully restore the lost features.

What possible negative could arise from supplying this information to the club President, Green Chairman, Superintendent, Pro and Manager ?

[TEPaul]

"Patrick:
I share your opinion (even at the risk of jeopardizing my firendship w/TEPaul and others), but the following questions come to mind."

Chip:

You're not going to jeopardize our friendship but the best policy is to share Patrick's opinion while at the same time doing your very best not to admit to that on here!  

An even better policy is to just co-opt Patrick's opinion as if it were your own and then sit back and watch him scream or even better watch him disagree with it even though it was his opinion in the first place!  Since Patrick is the absolute king of "devil's advocacy" it's a lot of fun to try to get him chasing his tail at maximum speed!

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
Do you really feel that clubs know exactly what they want when they begin to embark on a project?"

No, just the opposite in fact, and that's precisely my point. Even with the best intentions clubs often set off down the wrong road without realizing it until later. If you think about it this is actually a pretty normal thing to do simply because in almost all cases they've just never done it before. I can't tell you how many clubs and people at them who say in retrospect they wish they'd done things differently in the planning process for a restoration, and in many cases that includes picking a particular architect or contractor or even understand what they ideally want and how to accomplish that. This is where clubs need help, in my opinion. In a broad sense it's just called collaboration goiing into the process with others who've done it before them. In this way they can avoid a lot of mistakes in planning that they really can't be expected to know about unless they collaborate first going into their restoration process.  

[TEPaul]

"What possible negative could arise from supplying this information to the club President, Green Chairman, Superintendent, Pro and Manager?"

No negative at all. Any good restoration is going to be based on good research. A club can try to do it on their own, they can have it supplied to them by such as us or they can hope their architect will do it. One way or the other research of how the course was originally and both how, when and why it evolved in various ways is very important to know. One of the truly important things to know and to really understand the details of the "why" of, even if its something original, is why it was changed in the first place so that something isn't restored that didn't work well in the first place. This is a fact that some purists either don't understand or just don't want to hear! The fact is that even the best architects did make mistakes sometimes and the details of something like that really does have to be very well understood, or history will just repeat itself and none of us want that.

[Jonathan Cummings]

I have always been uncomfortable with some clubs jumping on the restoration bandwagon.  While there are certainly courses that have lost character as they mature, naturally or through manmade influences, and warrant resurrection, I get the sense that old photographs are too much perceived as "discovering Atlantis" - the blueprint to greatness.  

It may be a little tough for classical enthusiasts to stomach, but some old gems which have never been restored are even better today due to accumlative modifications and changes over the years.

JC  

[T_MacWood]

Its fairly early in the ballgame. The appreciation for these great old architects is a relatively recent occurance, the last decade or so.

The Ross, MacKenzie and Macdonald books are only a couple of years old. The Travis and Thompson books unfortunately didn't focus much on the architectural side. We've got Flynn, Maxwell and Tillinghast books on the horizon.

The Ross Society is the oldest and most active of the organizations...they have the enormous advantage of the Tufts Archives as well. There are other organziations...for Tilly (never really been focused on preservation or restoration), MacKenzie (my impression a looser knit organization probably a result of geography), Thompson, Travis, Raynor, Colt and Simpson (brand new). Most of these in the last few years. I suspect as the years go by these organizations will become more effective, as they gather more information and savy, ultimately their power and influence  will grow. And perhaps some may band together....IMO that makes the most sense....something like Wm Morris's Society to Protect Ancient Buildings.

I think there still are a few missing ingredents. A central depository of information, not only for the architects already mentioned, but for those who don't have their own Society...like Langford, Emmet, Thomas, Bell, Fowler, Park, Banks, etc. The USGA maybe the best postioned for this, especially if they are able to digitize the information...making access easier and less expensive than at present. From what I understand, they are interested in this idea, but the key to its success will be the ease of access in my opinion.

Another missing ingredent is critical review. Too many remodelings are allowed to be called restorations, and too many restoration architects are not scrutinized thoroughly (even on GCA...the best, most honest exchange on this subject--ever--just occured between Geoff Childs and Tom Doak...indentify two little talked about major dilemmas...the serious destructive power of greenspeeds and accepting a restoration/preservation job to prevent a golf course from falling into the hands of an infamous architect). IMO letting these restorations go unchallenged defeats the purpose, and ultimately leads to more loss of great old architecture. It would help if some of our golf magazines would look at both good and bad with a more critical eye. There should also be more emphasis on preservation (as opposed to restoration) than at present.

Lastly the ASGCA, and their European counterpart, need to take a more active role in preserving their own art and heritage. If you could get the architects on board, perhaps creating some peer review/pressure, the preservation movement would really take off.

[Brad Klein]

The basic problem is that these decisions by clubs are all made by members of private clubs. The whole thread here presumes everyone eagerly shares the GCA's predilection for restoration. That's simply not the case.

As for jumping in and volunteering, there's an old adage among anthropologists: beware the over-eager informant. They usually have the most one-sided and biased, unreliable information to present.

[BCrosby]

We've had this discussion (or something like it) a couple of times in the past.

The key is having a central repository of archival materials and someone to administer it. It would be a place where clubs could get historical information if they want it. The logical candidate is the USGA with its vast resources, both in historic materials, physical plant, personnel and capital.

You would think the USGA would jump at a chance to serve it constituent members in this way. But alas..... they seem to have no interest in pursuing the idea.

To borrow from our Secretary of Defense, we have the USGA we have, not the one we wish we had.

Bob

[john_stiles]

There have been a few posts about this subject.

Anyway, as to the Ross records,   the DRS continues to support the Tufts Archives who preserve and maintain Ross course records.  The Tufts Archives continues to support the Ross courses and those who call for information.  The DRS has supported the Tufts Archives over many, many years now and in the last 3 years, the DRS has provided an annual grant between $7,500-$10,000.

The Tufts Archives is striving towards improving their excellent collection of Ross documents and the preservation of those documents along the 'archival' lines mentioned above.  The DRS membership is helping the Tufts Archives as best as possible.

I assume many at this GCA site are their club historians but also realize that GCA website has great new 'members' and visitors.   So,  if you are a member of a Ross course,  and you are interested in your GCA, your club history,   see what exists and what is available as to Ross documents.   If you have a GCA interest,  do not assume that someone is taking care of it.   If you find historical records stuffed away in the club's attic,   you should contact Audrey Moriarty of the Tufts Archives at 910-295-3642 to see if the records might be needed by Tufts (Tufts Archives, 150 Cherokee Road, P.O. Box 159, Pinehurst, NC  28370).  Tufts Archives may or may not have the records.   Audrey can detail records existing for your club and if needed,   make arrangements for copies you might need at the club or desire for your 'office.'

But as others have mentioned,  the GCA history thing receives little notice at many clubs.

The other day someone at the course, who plays quite frequently and even during the week, asked me about tree removal, the course's early days,  what about this tree and that, etc., etc.   I quietly explained that we have several photos on the clubhouse walls from the late 1930s, etc. (without mentioning, at some expense to my blood pressure and heart rate, that these are the photos that you pass by every time you visit the clubhouse).

John Stiles
DRS Treasurer
865-251-3174  for any criticial questions,  or complaints re: DRS, or tax deductible donations to help Tufts

[BCrosby]

John -

A propos your fellow member's questions, there is a large 1955 aerial hanging at the entrance to the Athens CC clubhouse. Been there for ten years or so.

People still think I'm making stuff up when I tell them that 80% of the trees now pinching the fairways weren't there as late as 1955 and that 60 or so bunkers have been removed since then.

Bob  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

I have always been uncomfortable with some clubs jumping on the restoration bandwagon.  While there are certainly courses that have lost character as they mature, naturally or through manmade influences, and warrant resurrection, I get the sense that old photographs are too much perceived as "discovering Atlantis" - the blueprint to greatness.  

It may be a little tough for classical enthusiasts to stomach, but some old gems which have never been restored are even better today due to accumlative modifications and changes over the years.

Could you cite just ten examples of what you describe above ?[/color]

Brad Klein,

I don't see the process I've described as an advocacy for an agenda on anyone's part.

Most clubs don't have aerials taken every 5 or 10 years in their files, and many clubs don't know where to go to get early aerials or aerials from various points in time.  Most memberships don't know what was in the ground 20 years ago, let alone 40-60-80 years ago.  Providing that information doesn't satisfy anyone's particular agenda, but it would provide the club with its lineage, its pedigree, like the AKC.

Clubs could then see for themselves, what they were, and what they've become, and could decide whether they would be better served by remaining as they are, or undoing changes wrought against the golf course by parties other then the original architect, over the years.

Information about their architect could be supplied without creating a path leading to specific changes, rather the information would provide a general overview of the architect's design philosophy, which when combined with the aerial presentations could lead the club to follow the most obvious or prudent path, or, they could reject the historical information, and continue altering the golf course as they see fit.  But, at least they'd have the choices clearly layed out before them, which is rarely the case.

It would seem that this would be a good starting point, aerial documentation of a golf course, from inception to current date.

Tom MacWood,

The USGA would seem like the natural choice for undertaking this endeavor, but, someone would have to get their attention, interest and committment to pursuing this concept.

[Jonathan Cummings]

You know Pat, I knew someone was going to ask me this.  Only two, both local to the DC area, come immediately to mind - the old Ross course at Chevy Chase and the Colt/Alison Burning Tree.  Both have undergone a number of modification over the years roundly thought by area golf writers to be improvements.  Neither has ever attempted to restore their courses to the original design.

There must be many more.  Who else can suggest examples?

Jonathan

[BCrosby]

We have a situation right now where important historical materials are not available to clubs making the restoration or renovation decsions. Those materials are buried in archives, museums, govt. aerial photo collections, and private holdings.

Most clubs don't know that these historical resouces exist.There needs to be a way to get those materials to clubs that would like to use them. There is currently no easy way to do that.

The USGA ought to take on the responsibility.

None of this pre-judges whether a club ought to restore or not restore. How clubs use the information it is up to them. As Pat notes, it's about getting the information off the shelves and to the clubs. It's not rocket science, but it does require a little administration.

Bob

[TEPaul]

Bob:

You're undoubtedly right about that. There is no real central resource that some of these clubs considering restoration or just change can go to to do research on the original or evolutionary architecture of their courses.

However, and for the time being, perhaps the best way to go about disseminating this research material is from the opposite end---basically from some entity like this site to them. They may not be very aware where to go but it seems to me this website and its far-flung group of contributors is well enough aware of what various clubs are doing and about to do to be able to simply call those clubs and offer them research material or to help them find it!

We can certainly do that far more than we have. It's also my experience, and Wayne's, that when we go to Flynn clubs, for instance, to do our own research, those clubs then become very interested in using what we have for their courses!

[BCrosby]

Tom -

I'm not sure the bottom-up approach will work very well. The Flynn clubs you have visited are very fortunate to have a couple of guys who sought them out and dropped on their doorstep lots of information they wouldn't have otherwise had. They ought to be deeply, deeply grateful.

There are hundreds of clubs, however, who don't even know who designed their own courses. And they are about to invest big bucks in a master plan totally oblivious to their own history. They don't know any architects, architectural historians, they don't know archives exist, they don't know what their course looked like in the 30's and they sure as hell don't frequent this web site. In short, they don't have a clue about where they came from or how to find out about it.

That is far and away the most common situation. (Trust me, Philadelphia and surrounds is unique in its level of historical appreciation.)

What these clubs do know about is the USGA. I think a simple paragraph in a USGA bulletin to the effect that they have someone on staff to provide architectural research services would make a huge difference. The difference would be felt immediately. These clubs would finally know where they could go to get answers.


Bob