[T_MacWood]

Is this golf course a Flynn original design or a redesign of an existing course? If it is a redesign, any idea who designed the original course?

[ChipOat]

Tom:

I don't know the answer either way, but are you referring to Springdale Country Club?

Perhaps Matt Ward, Pat Mucci or Wayne Morrison would know.

[T_MacWood]

Yes. Springdale. Although I believe the club was called Princeton prior to 1924.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Bill Quirin's Golf Clubs of the MGA says:

In 1899, a group of alumni purchased the present property and engaged Willie Dunn to design an 18-hole golf course.  Nine holes were ready for the 1902 season.  The Club's name was changed to Springdale circa 1913......The second nine was built in 1914, according to Dunn's plans, by the Club professional Peter Eagen.  The course was totally revised before 1928 by Howard Toomey and William Flynn....

[wsmorrison]

The information I have obtained varies a bit from Bill Quirin's history of MGA clubs.  To my knowledge, and I may well be wrong as the evidence isn't strong any which way, it was Lambert not Eagen that was responsible for the expansion of the golf course in 1914/1915.

The Princeton Golf Club was formed in the fall of 1895 by alumni, faculty and undergraduates of Princeton University.  The golf club is one of the oldest university-affiliated golf courses in the country.  It is not known who laid out the original nine-hole course in an area known as Stockton Woods at the lower end of Bayard Lane.

The first tournament was held in 1897.   A new nine-hole course was opened for play in March 1902 while the old Stockton Woods course was abandoned.  Gerald B. Lambert expanded the course to 18-holes, which opened for play on June 1, 1915.

In the summer of 1922, the name of the club was changed to the Springdale Golf Club. To this day, the University continues to lease the property to the club membership and in exchange the club pays the local taxes and cares for the property.  The University has limited golf privileges and remains the home course for the men and women’s golf teams.

William Flynn was hired to redesign much of the course and this work was completed in 1928.  Like all of the design work, it is Flynn alone that is responsible.  Toomey and Flynn I believe did the construction.  For the most part Flynn kept the routing intact but revised the intra-hole details in the same playing corridors.  Flynn did make better use of the graduate tower as a background visual.  Over the years some holes were changed as a result of encroachment by University buildings and parking lots yet it remains very close to the Flynn redesign with some bunker remodeling in a redundant style completed within the last few years by Ault and Clarke.  

The course sits on approximately 100 acres and plays to 6,380 yards from the championship tees with par at 71.

Why the interest, Tom?  Do you have any articles/archival materials that might shed some light on a pretty dim base of information?

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Wayne,

What you say here is surely enough to persuade us all that we need an academically-led archive of all golf-related material (not just architecture).  

There is so much information out there that is anecdotal and, at the opposite end, so much that is verifiable yet lying unrecognised or uncomprehended.

Until we start to get this information collated in one reference source (and I do not mean an exclusive collection but, rather, a central means of accessing all catalogued material) we are going to end up fighting each other about each and every received bit of information, and we are certainly going to miss the interconnections between players, officials, architects, green-keepers, writers and all others involved in laying down the huge international archive which is surely essential if the history of golf in the 19th and 20th centuries is to be recorded in a sensible and objective manner.  

Basically, we who contribute to this site are all interested in golf course architecture in 101 different aspects.  It's not just about re-creating dinosaurs or arguing the merits of Fazio or Doak.  Our arguments may be fun, personal and (on the surface) based in scholarship.  But there is so much quality knowledge out there amongst so many contributors that this is surely the place to start the business of setting up a serious database of golfing knowledge in all its different facets.  

I know that I need to persuade neither you nor Tom Paul of the merits of such an initiative.  It's imperative, and needs to be kick-started at exactly this moment, while scholarly enthusiasm is tempered by educated objectivity.

Just the fact that I buy a book in Barnes and Noble opposite the Lincoln Center (in the late 90s) and import it into the UK seems to confer (to my inexperienced eye) utter authority on that book about all matters relating to the hundreds of courses in the MGA.  Probably most of it is correct, but if Quirin's information about Princeton is incorrect does this mean that, from this moment forth, I no longer trust Quirin, the book nor the MGA?

We need to start to get all this imformation recorded in a scholarly way which avoids the intrusions of ordinary people and mega-personalities.  


What a sermon!  But I hope the point has been made sufficiently for those outside the confines of this site that we must take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that courses such as Yale or St Enodoc manage to preserve thier unique qualties without opting out to the current trends.  

[wsmorrison]

Mark it is a sermon that needs to be heard and by a wider audience than this treehouse full of nuts.

I think we are making great strides and keeping the issue at the forefront of the right people, one of whom you met at Merion.  There may be a meeting of the minds very soon.  Some may not believe that we are heading in the right direction but I believe we are.  Any constructive advice is welcome but there are some good minds involved.  We should try to conference you in.  We can do it for free on Skype if you join (free) or for 2 cents per minute if you don't.  Tom or I will keep you abreast.  The significance of this effort is well worth the necessary means of getting there.  We've come up with some interesting ideas since we spoke on Tom's pergola.

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
The interest was sparked by an advertisement in 1922 for the Cleveland Tractor Co. The adv. listed 14 courses that were using their equipment in the early twenties and they all appeared to be courses that were newly built or recently revised. Curiously seven (maybe eight or nine) were Herbert Strong designs. Princeton was one of the courses listed.

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
I'm also a little dubious when I see a course is attributed to someone like  Gerald B. Lambert....whoever he was.

[wsmorrison]

I thought by your penultimate post that you implied that the course might be Strong.  I think to draw such a conclusion by a tractor advertisement is a bit of a stretch.  As many as 5 to 7 of the other courses listed were not by Strong.  Who are the architects associated with these?  

Your unfamiliarity with Gerald B. Lambert aside, there is surely not enough evidence to be dubious of anything at this point.  Unless of course you have other information.  Do you?  Princeton University's website attributes the earlier course to Lambert.  I wonder where they got that information.  

Do you think the earlier effort resembles anything by Strong?  Was Strong in the Princeton area around 1913/1914?  When did he go beyond the scope of professional at Apawamis (1905-1911) and then Inwood?  Or do you think it is evidence that Strong may have revised the existing course in the 1920s coinciding with the tractor article?

That's a lot of speculation from one advertisement.  Back in the early 1900s was it that unusual for an unknown to build a golf course?  Wilson, Crump, Fownes and others were all unknowns.  I haven't been able to find any information on Lambert but that didn't encourage me to look for other candidates partly because it doesn't have anything to do with my primary investigation.

[T_MacWood]

The advertisement was in 1922. Strong was fairly active in the area in the early 20's. Linwood (NJ), Mountain Lake (NJ), Florham Park (NJ), Sherwood Forest (Md) and Saucon Valley (Pa). The majority of the courses listed in the adv were recently built or rebuilt in the late teens or the early twenties.

Lambert was a wealthy gentleman who owned a large estate in Princeton. There is an article featuring his estate in Country Life in America (1927)...thats all I know. If Lambert did in fact layout the new course in 1915...it probably was in need of professional help.

[wsmorrison]

"If Lambert did in fact layout the new course in 1915...it probably was in need of professional help."

That may or may not be true.  Who knows?  Maybe there are records in Princeton's archives.  Just because the course was mentioned in a tractor ad means absolutely nothing.  Again, who designed the other courses in the article?  You mentioned there might be as many as 6 or 8 courses not by Strong.

Since you mention Strong and courses in the early 1920s I take it you believe if Lambert (or whomever) did redesign the course in 1913 or so, you believe the advertisement indicates that Strong may have reworked the course in the 1920s.  This might be true but would likely be a coincidence and not indicated by an advertisement.  Is there any other proof?

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
Your reaction is a little harsh wouldn't you say? Absolutely nothing? I don't see that way, all information is useful, time will tell if this small ad is significant or not.  

The other architects involved with Cleveland Tractor: one Ross (1920)  and one Park (1919) both nearby in Ohio, one Wogan (1922), two Emmet (1921), two unknown (Princeton & Princess Anne-1922) and seven Herbert Strong courses (1920-22).

What the ad tells me is that Princeton was likely involved in some remodeling in the early 20's...as the ad says "courses built with the help of Cleveland Tractor Co." If nothing else the ad is a lead, a lead on possible design work that was not previously known.

[wsmorrison]

You're right, Tom.  It doesn't mean absolutely nothing and it might indicate some work was done at Springdale in the 1920s.  But in and of itself it is still speculative but a lead that can be followed.  I guess the best way to do that is to look through the Princeton Archives.  Here's a course routing that preceded Flynn's work.  Does it look like a drawing by Strong or his staff?

 

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
That is an interesting layout...particularly the way the fairways meld together. Is there a date on it? That map reminds more of Emmet than Strong.

[JESII]

Wayne,

What you say here is surely enough to persuade us all that we need an academically-led archive of all golf-related material (not just architecture).  

There is so much information out there that is anecdotal and, at the opposite end, so much that is verifiable yet lying unrecognised or uncomprehended.

Until we start to get this information collated in one reference source (and I do not mean an exclusive collection but, rather, a central means of accessing all catalogued material) we are going to end up fighting each other about each and every received bit of information, and we are certainly going to miss the interconnections between players, officials, architects, green-keepers, writers and all others involved in laying down the huge international archive which is surely essential if the history of golf in the 19th and 20th centuries is to be recorded in a sensible and objective manner.  

Basically, we who contribute to this site are all interested in golf course architecture in 101 different aspects.  It's not just about re-creating dinosaurs or arguing the merits of Fazio or Doak.  Our arguments may be fun, personal and (on the surface) based in scholarship.  But there is so much quality knowledge out there amongst so many contributors that this is surely the place to start the business of setting up a serious database of golfing knowledge in all its different facets.  

I know that I need to persuade neither you nor Tom Paul of the merits of such an initiative.  It's imperative, and needs to be kick-started at exactly this moment, while scholarly enthusiasm is tempered by educated objectivity.

Just the fact that I buy a book in Barnes and Noble opposite the Lincoln Center (in the late 90s) and import it into the UK seems to confer (to my inexperienced eye) utter authority on that book about all matters relating to the hundreds of courses in the MGA.  Probably most of it is correct, but if Quirin's information about Princeton is incorrect does this mean that, from this moment forth, I no longer trust Quirin, the book nor the MGA?

We need to start to get all this imformation recorded in a scholarly way which avoids the intrusions of ordinary people and mega-personalities.  


What a sermon!  But I hope the point has been made sufficiently for those outside the confines of this site that we must take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that courses such as Yale or St Enodoc manage to preserve thier unique qualties without opting out to the current trends.  

Wayne, Mark and anyone else,

Last months issue of Forbes (with Barry Diller on the cover) ran an article on an electronic database called Wikipedia (The Answer Man). What sets this apart from ones I am familiar with is it is editable by anyone. Along the lines of what Mark recommends above, I think it could be really awesome. It seems it costs about $150,000 per year to operate.

Those of you with any degree of expetise migth be able to show why this is not a good idea for someone to run with, but it seems to offer real potential in solving the information problem in regards to golf history.

[Kyle Harris]

Jim,

Go back a few pages, I had a thread started about a wikipedia golf architecture article which I am currently writing.

Any input would be great!

 

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

I cannot locate the date.  I need it for the book project so be sure I will get over there soon to figure it out.  

Jim and Kyle,

That sure looks like it is worth taking a look at.  I'll try to get a copy.  If I cannot and you have access to it, will you make a copy for me, Jim?

[JESII]

Kyle,

Are you talking about the Philmont thread? I have followed it a bit but have no real contribution. Would that format make sense as a database for golf (all aspects of) that consolidates everyones information into one place? How do the operators confirm or refute someones edit on-line?

Wayne,

I'll try to link to or cut and paste the article, but I'm betting Kyle will be able to offer more insight about the usefullness (for the purpose I have in mind) than the article does.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()