Breaking Point

[Kyle Harris]

Is there a point in the life cycle of the golf course when it becomes too much or too impractical to restore original features?

Are there any examples where it's better to work with what is put there, and assume those features to be "natural?"

[Joel_Stewart]

Interesting question and I would say both.   I've studied my home course which is about 100 years old and there is no reason why the course couldn't be put back in its original form should the club want to and they don't.

On the other hand, a course like Augusta is probably too far gone and a course like Sand Hills is never going to be in the same shape year after year because of the elements.

[Rick Shefchik]

I think you'd have to determine the purpose of an individual course before you could decide whether it could be restored. If it were just about money, Augusta National could probably be restored by Thanksgiving, but they have no interest whatsoever in doing that -- the purpose of the course is to challenge the pros at the Masters. They aren't lengthening it for the members.

In some cases there may not be enough historical evidence left to put things back the way they were, but I'm sure it's more about what a club sees as its purpose, and what the members want, than whether it can or can't be done.

[Tom_Doak]

Kyle:

When they blow up original golf holes to build a practice facility, or to expand the clubhouse, that is pretty much a permanent decision that isn't going to be restored later.  [It's feasable to blow up the practice facility and restore the holes, but I've seen at least 15 cases where it ought to be done, and it never has.]

Obviously, too, if some of the course is sold off for housing, that's it.

The other issue is when holes are changed for safety concerns, either by planting of trees or by moving the hole away from the boundary.  There's no going back there.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom,

You touched on the one point that motivated these questions for me: trees. In my thoughts on the work slated to be done at Schuylkill CC in Orwigsburg, PA and the work that I think should be done at the White Course at Penn State the problem most prevelant is tree plantings.

I'd imagine there are some original features that are lost when the trees go in due to root growth and the simple action of planting. Subsequently removing the trees may compound the problem by destroying contour from removal. I see the tree plantings at both courses as requiring painstaking measures to maintain and ensure proper restoration.

Hence my question, is there a point of no return where despite the unnatural appearance such new features should be considered "a priori" to any modifications? I am envoking a ceteris parabus assumption here and assuming that all necessary funds are there. As Joel and Rick pointed out, given unlimited funds any course could attempt to be restored fully.

Does Heisenburg's uncertainty principle apply to golf courses at some point?

[Mike Nuzzo]

At Beaumont CC the corp of engineers placed a large berm (12') high around the perimeter of the course for drainage easment.
Recently Baxter Spann and I relocated the 13th green by shifting it back 35 yards and placed it on the berm and made a very, very nice complex.
From dud to stud.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom,

Just thought of the C-Nine at Huntingdon Valley, where pretty much all cases you presented have occured. I wonder what contour or other features may have been lost under the years of neglect and tree/shrub growth.

Also, the construction of the driving range altered the plans for 6 and 7. Though, I would imagine, if the range wasn't there those holes could be recreated in similar form.

But, how similar?

[Tom_Doak]

Kyle:

Actually, a great example of what you are talking about was the old 12th green at Garden City Golf Club, which Pat Mucci hounds me about incessantly.

It is not an original feature of the Devereux Emmet course ... it was added by Walter Travis when he was involved there several years later.  It was completely unlike the other greens on the golf course, but so distinctive that for many years (especially in the late 1920's at the heyday of design) it was considered the signature hole on the course.

In the 1950's it started to be seen as an anachronism, and in 1960 Robert Trent Jones declared it dead and redesigned it.  In the past 15 years there has been some sentiment to restore it to Travis's version, but there are others who consider it weird and don't want to see it done.  I'm supposed to be the arbiter of all that, and it's tough duty.  My vote would be to restore it, but it's not entirely my call.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom,

Is 12 at GCGC the par 3 on the northern part of the property?

I hesistate to add Bethpage Black to this growing list. But I'd imagine just through the course of the years even prior to the major restoration that a lot of the subtler features were lost.

Perhaps on the other courses, too, though the Red seems relatively untouched.

[TEPaul]

Kyle:

On the "C" nine at HVGC the way the 2nd, 6th and 7th holes once were can obviously never happen again---or won't. However, that does not mean at least two of those holes can not be made better than they are now. Forget #6, that hole may not be what it once was but it works fine as it is. #2 and #7 do need something done to them that makes them work better than they do now. These are not opinions in a vacuum either. Both those holes have had plenty of time now to basically take that "test of time", and something clever and effective has to be done or the perception of the "C" nine will continue to suffer. #2 and #7 probably suffer most from a form of "one dimensionality" and the one dimensionality on both of them just doesn't make much sense to far too many players. Figure out the most effective way of creating a greater degree of strategy and shot variety on both and they'll be fine, in my opinion.

[TEPaul]

"My vote would be to restore it, but it's not entirely my call."

TomD:

I'm glad to hear you say that. Who cares if the old 12th is Travis and not Emmet? That's a course that can and will be it's best if the course is restored to the way it was when Travis was done with it. That way the architectural pedigree will be a little of both which is the way it probably should be.

The hardest thing about restoring Travis's 12th, in my opinion, is to figure out how to basically restore the playability that once was with the realities of agronomy and maintenance today.

[Mike_Cirba]

I would say that once original bunkers and their surrounds have been completely dug-up, excavated by machines, re-dug, rebuilt, and re-grassed, that's a "breaking point".  

For instance, I doubt very seriously that anyone attempting to "restore" Merion's bunkers to their pre-Fazio state could do it because even with photographic evidence, the original depths, surrounds, and other dimensions have been irreparably and forever altered.

Letting the grass on the "white faces" grow to Don King-like lengths and style to mask the shaping does not change this fact.  

[Kyle Harris]

I would say that once original bunkers and their surrounds have been completely dug-up, excavated by machines, re-dug, rebuilt, and re-grassed, that's a "breaking point".  

For instance, I doubt very seriously that anyone attempting to "restore" Merion's bunkers to their pre-Fazio state could do it because even with photographic evidence, the original depths, surrounds, and other dimensions have been irreparably and forever altered.

Letting the grass on the "white faces" grow to Don King-like lengths and style to mask the shaping does not change this fact.  

Mike, this also leads me to believe that modern equipment/methods may be a limiting factor in just how much a restoration can accomplish...

I see a niche market for someone that can build a golf course with horse drawn power...  

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike, this also leads me to believe that modern equipment/methods may be a limiting factor in just how much a restoration can accomplish...

I see a niche market for someone that can build a golf course with horse drawn power...  

Kyle,

You don't know how right you are.  Before Fazio's bulldozer powered bunker "restoration" at Merion, another group was restoring them by hand and they looked fantastic.  

Apparently, that method was 'too slow" for the club, because they had to get the course ready for the 2005 Amateur (this was about 1999 mind you   ).

Of course, that was a bunch of hooey.

[mike_beene]

The flood control at Colonial according to those a little older than me forever altered several holes,including 8 and 13,with its out of place pond and green(any time you play a hole and walk right back to the same tee to play the next hole the routing flow is amiss)