The Robert Trent Jones man

[T_MacWood]

Ron Prichard has focused and specialized on Ross restorations...with more than 200 Ross courses that was a good business decision. Isn't almost time for a RTJ expert? If someone is smart they'll start grooming themselves pronto. What stereotypical RTJ style do you think will emerge?

[BCrosby]

As noted, Ron's smart business decision was based on the fact that he picked an architect who offered lots of very good courses to work with. There are/were a large number of Ross courses in the top 100 lists and an even larger number just outside those lists.  

There just aren't that many RTJ courses in the top 100 lists or near those lists. The simple fact is that RTJ built vastly fewer good courses. Even fewer that are worth restoring.

Which is pretty remarkable when you consider that RTJ dominated golf course architecture for nearly four decades.

A Dark Age indeed.

Bob
   

[PThomas]

so if there seems to be a need to work on RTJ courses in the future, the question is should they only be "restored" or should they be "redone"?

[T_MacWood]

There was a day when RTJ dominated the top 100 list, and was the toast of the golf world. I suspect someday in the future he will enjoy a resurgance, a nostalgic reappreciation...like bellbottoms and hip huggers.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom,

I've thought about this subject too.

To be honest, I'm not that familiar with Trent Jones' original works. But I suspect that a lot of his early courses have negatively evolved, in the very same way aged Ross courses have.

Perhaps RTJ's earliest work was better than we're giving him credit for? I don't know for sure.

I will say, Trent Jones' Oakland Hills-South was much more attractive than the current version of that course. In fact, I've often thought Oakland Hills-South was an excellent candidate for restoration to Trent Jones' remodel specs of the early 1950s.

Rees is signed up to work there in the near future. It'll be interesting to see what he does.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:

Other than jagged-edged bunkers -- which the club restored with RTJ's help about twenty years ago, but which only lasted through a couple of years of edging -- what was "more attractive" about Oakland Hills in 1951 than in 2005?

(Apart from the fact that a lot of the par-4 holes required more than a driver / 9-iron from good players.)

[BCrosby]

Tom MacW -

Maybe. If lava lamps can regain popularity, I guess anything can.

Bob

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom D.,

You hit the nail on the head. RTJ's original bunker styling made Oakland Hills-South much more attractive during the 1951 US Open than the course is today. The bunkers out there currently are very sterile in comparison.

And, Oakland Hills-South also features a lot of "junk" trees that detract from the beautiful expanse of the property. (I suspect a lot of those trees weren't around during the early 1950s.)  

Comparatively, it appears the course is less attractive today, principally because of the current look of the bunkers.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood said;

"Isn't almost time for a RTJ expert? If someone is smart they'll start grooming themselves pronto. What stereotypical RTJ style do you think will emerge?"

Tom:

It's so interesting you'd say that. Yesterday there were a group of really good players at GMGC who'd come down from Canada. One of them belongs to GMGC but they were all from the London Hunt G.C. in London Ontario. They wanted to talk to me because I was asked to write a "maintenance meld" report for the London Hunt course about a year ago---and now they want to discuss some specific details of how to go about doing that.

London Hunt G.C. was designed by RTJ but over the years it was redesigned by one architect or someone or another to such an extent (although not the routing) that RTJ actually asked them to take his name off the course. And so, some years ago they decided to begin to restore it back to the way it was (to one degree or another).

And now they have contacted Rees to be their consulting architect. Rees has apparently sent Keith Evans (an associate) to London Hunt to consult with them.

I was just thinking coming home last night that this restoration wave and popularity has gone a long way---and has begun to filter past just the pre-WW2 era courses into the "Modern Age" of architecture following WW2.

London Hunt G.C. is a very interesting golf course in many ways and it's interesting to consider the design intent of it from RTJ's perspective.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Could the current emphasis on stopping increasing length - not a lot different than the mindset in the 1951 OH redo, spur a new look at RTJ's work?

And, I was asked to restore a William Diddel design from 1950.  So, I do think the appreciation of that era of design will reach the proportions of sympathy for golden age designs in due time, if not on gca, then elsewhere.

So, yes, I think some market driven gca, probably Rees and/or Bobby or one of their former associates will probably start chiming in that its time to restore those RTj courses.

Given that Bobby and Rees have both become known for their own styles, it may be possible for a lesser known former associate to grab some of the work from the Jones sons, at least from clubs who want to quietly restore the club.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think RTJ II is working that angle.

[TEPaul]

"What stereotypical RTJ style do you think will emerge?"

Tom MacWood:

I'll tell you one thing that's really interesting about the London Hunt Club and it's design or inherent design intent that is more than a little ironic, at least to me.

Some have considered RTJ to be one of the strongest practictioners of what some refer to as aerial architecture---eg where the golfer is required to fly an aerial approach shot onto a green. At the London Hunt club due to the immense size of some of the greens this is surely an option and a most interesting one but the real irony is there are only three holes on the course where an aerial approach shot is actually REQUIRED (15 open front holes) and those fellows told me that RTJ actually wanted to take that aerial requirement out on one hole.

It's not lost on me that the likes of PVGC and Merion East have about half the holes where architecturally aerial shots are actually REQUIRED by all while the later "modern age" course of RTJ's (London Hunt) only had three holes where an aerial shot was required by all (and he actually wanted to remove one).

And so if they actually do apply the "maintenance meld" application I recommended at London Hunt the ground game approach option will be back to full effect!  

Ironic, don't you think?  

[Jim Sweeney]

A recent visit to The Wiawam Resort in Litchfield PArk, AZ revealed that Forrest Richardson is working on restorations / renovations of its two RTJ course, the Gold and the Blue. The Gold Course was a GD Top 100 fixture for years.

In addition to bunker restoration and moving a few greens, he is designing a new finishing hole for the Gold to replace a very weak one, and moving holes 17 aqnd 18 on the Blue for the same reason. The re-do will also create a new range and golf academy.

The Wigwam's original 9 holer opened in the thirties; the Jones courses came along in the early 60's, I believe. It was the first 7000+ yard course I ever played (back in the 70's).

Three gernerations on one family, the Allens (Red, Doug, and Craig) have been the Wigwam's head golf professionals!

[T_MacWood]

Based upon his work at Congressional and Hazeltine, I don't think Rees will be the RTJ...in both cases he left his unique style, instead of preserving or restoring his old man's. Perhaps he'll approach his father's legacy at London Hunt with more respect.

[TEPaul]

As I said, Rees probably won't have a thing to say about London Hunt. The man consulting on it is one of his old time associates Keith Evans. Interestingly, when I first became involved in architecture with that Ardrossan project it was Keith Evans who was the very first architect I ever dealt with.

Keith Evans was basically the designer of the world class Tattersall in Chester County Pa, the course about which Mayday Malone said the other day he looked way out in the distance from the front nine of Tattersall and asked what it was that he could see about 35 miles away and was told that was the back nine of Tattersall!

But in defense of Rees and Keith and Tattersall I should say that wasn't exactly their fault. There are some ultra strong conservation interests out there where that course is and they nailed Jones & Co and Tattersall but good about where they could put things and where they couldn't!

[T_MacWood]

The same Keith Evans of Southern Hills fame?

[ian]

Tom P,

London Hunt has been renovated by Keith already (2 years back). The course was a collaboration of Trent and Robbie Robinson. Keith did a nice job, I still don't like the origional 9,000-14,000 sq.ft. greens.

Tom M,

Ron works on Ross courses because he admires the work, not because he found a nieche (sp?). You would need to find an architect who admires Trent's work enough to want to restore it. (That certainly isn't me).

I think Rees seems to have the upper hand on this work by default.

[danielfaleman]

This group are indicative of all that you need to know about Robert Trent Jones' efforts, of who owns his courses, and of who redesigns them:

http://www.firestonecountryclub.com/golf/course_descriptions.htm

yawn.

[JBergan]

so if there seems to be a need to work on RTJ courses in the future, the question is should they only be "restored" or should they be "redone"?

I had the same thought.  One of the local public courses is an RTJ design.  The routing is pretty good for an awkward piece of property.  The course suffers from a lack of strategy and too many bunkers.  The greens are rather one-dimensional (pushed up, back to front slope).  I have redone the course in my head countless times.  Remove 2/3 of the existing bunkers, add a few new strategically placed bunkers and add some variety to the greens and the course would improve dramatically.

[T_MacWood]

Ian
Ron hasn't found a niche is restoring Ross courses? It appears you feel having a niche has a negative connotation. I'm more concerned with the stereotyplical product, than the niche.

I personally think RTJ had a great flair...perhaps the only Thompson desciple who did. I consider early RTJ part of the golden age.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ian,

I agree with Tom Mac. Ron P. has definitely found a niche.

And, Tom Mac.: which early RTJ courses would you recommend? I'm curious.

Has anyone visit Midvale Golf Club near Rochester, NY? As I understand, that was Trent Jones' first solo design. The new club hired him with one stipulation. They mandated that Stanley Thompson oversee the job. That's how the Thompson-Jones partnership, of sorts, began.

[TEPaul]

"Tom P,
London Hunt has been renovated by Keith already (2 years back). The course was a collaboration of Trent and Robbie Robinson. Keith did a nice job, I still don't like the origional 9,000-14,000 sq.ft. greens."


Ian:

Do you mean you don't like the greens or the size of them--or both?

[ian]

Tom and Jeff,

Yes he found a niche, but that wasn't the point I was making. He got into restoration because he admired the work of Ross, not because no one else had thought to do this.

I stumbled into the Travis work, there was no plan to get involved with Travis restorations. I travelled and researched to avoid screwing up the first course that hired me. I had to tell them I needed a month before I could start the Master Plan work, so I could spend some time learning about Travis. In the end I ended up making contacts and first club recommend me to the second, which lead to the third, etc. I ended up working with six clubs without every setting out to do this. I didn't plan this, and I would assume that Ron's story is not far removed.

Tom M

You restore an architect's work because you admire it, not because it makes you money. There are more fun and lucrative ways to practice golf architecture than restoration.

Niche was not used as a negative. I admire Ron P, Bruce H, Ron F, and any other architect who will do the research. If they have a niche, good on them. They protect work that others would soon build over top of.

Tom P,

The green sizes are so large, that even I can hit greens all day. The bunkers become out of play, because you can play safely to the middle of the green and be wrong by a club and be OK. The only skill required to be successful there is lag putting.

[Scott Witter]

Jeff M.:

I have played Midvale CC several times over the past few years as well as working for the club, mostly on planning efforts for tees, tree work and bunker renovations.  The course is really a mixed bag of identifiable efforts from both RTJ and Stanley T.  There still remains the unmistakeable strong routing, or oversight of, from ST, with some classic ST long uphill par 3's and some very successfull long sweeping par 4's and a real natural flow and use of the topo.  Without question, the framework is ST and he was obviously looking over the apprentice shoulder of RTJ the whole time.  What appears to have occured is that RTJ had the greatest amount of influence while he was probably onsite during construction and this is where he had an opportunity to input some of his thoughts and ideas.  Fortunately, there remain a hand full of his ST bunkers, or "style" of bunkers that we have come to recognize, I should say, but the majority of the others, may or may not actually be from RTJ, since this was one of his first works and he had no "style" at this point.

In general, except for the few left over ST bunkers, the bunkering is very weak and needs much work.  Most of the bunkers have been so reworked by maintenance crews, etc. over the years that the character has been lost and dissolved.  It is interesting to note, however, that many of the tees are the long and narrow RTJ "runway" tees that he used so often.  Without a doubt, Midvale has great potential to really standout, but it will take a significant effort and committment, financially and correctly so, on the part of the club to turn it around.  About two years ago, I lost to Rees for a Master Plan, with a focus on the bunkers, so it will be interesting to see what his suggestions are and if the club follows through with them.

From the clubs point of view, they advertize it as the first RTJ solo course, I think that is debatable, but there are many unmistakeable and infused characteristics from his mentor Stanley Thompson.

[Mike_Young]

Tom,
You state " If someone is smart they'll start grooming themselves pronto. What stereotypical RTJ style do you think will emerge?"

I am sure someone will do just that but this entire "restoration specialist"name tag is nothing more than marketing for doing the work of all the dead guys.

Ian makes a point where he says he took a month to study Travis b4 beginning a master plan of a Travis Course. I think any working architect is in most cases capable of doing  restoration or renovation of any of the dead guys in an acceptable and responsible manner.  Which means he would do as Ian suggested.  
I personally consider architecture the ability to complete an entire project from routing thru permitting and construction thru grow-in and opening.  I do not consider rebuilding a bunker to a dead guy's style architecture.  I consider it a very basic skill that an architect should possess after years of building 18 hole dolf courses.  
So would it not suffice to say that one should have a sufficient body of their own style and work on the ground before they can be branded a specialist of another architect's work?  How often is this the case?  I ask as an example: How many people would consider a knee specialist a specialist if he had not been an orthopeadic surgeon first?  


Recently, I was told by a committee that a person had much more experience than myself.  And this was based on a committee, without much experience ,viewing one's list of 50 clients.  However, the work description ,if one looked closely, may have consisted of a day visit to look at one bunker whereas many full service architects only list completed or 18 hole projects.  That type of marketing is very misleading.  And IMHO this entire restoration hype is misleading. Think about it.  
Remember the concerns of this site when John Fought was named to restore Pine Needles or Mid Pines(sorry forgot which one)?    Now it seems to be accepted that he did an excellent job.But the Dead guy societies usually push the guys that do no new work with a few exceptions.  
Have you heard a word form one of the dead guy societies since Art Hills restored a Ross course, Columbus CC in Columbus Ga?  NO.  I played it and it was fine.  

While there are many people today capable of "restoring' dead guys' work only a few market themselves as specialist.I would hope that the "Jones Man" would be one of his family; that would only be right.  But there will be someone that has read all the history of RTJ will market themselves as a RTJ specialist without having ever completed an 18 hole project .  
With the above said: there are many architects that have proven themselves as capable of restoration or renovation but there are not many so called"restoration specialist" that have proven themselves as architects.