Willie Park Jr & Huntercombe

[Sean_A]

I went back and read the Arts & Crafts/WPJ ding dong between Rich, Tommy Mac and Tom Paul.  The question arises as to why Huntercombe was considered one of the first modern designs?

The course strikes me as very much a product of the pre-modern era.  The hand of man is everywhere.

The Huntercombe hollows are ever present.  These pits don't fit the landscape.  Some look very ancient and weathered now, but they are still quite obviously man made.

The greens are for the most part quite flat or have severe slopes which spring out of the ground rather than flow from the surrounds.  Mind you, a few of these wild greens are fantastic.  #s 3 & 4 come to mind.  There are a few notabale exceptions such as #1, #11 and #15.  These greens look like they could have been built today.  Much more of an even flow, easy on the eye.  

The bunkering (what little there is) tends to be like the hollows in reverse.  Many pop out of the ground, very old fashioned looking.  

There is only one green which is noticeably arificially raised-the 17th.  The entire green complex suddenly erupts from the ground.  I like this hole very much, but it is clearly very artificial.  Little attempt was made to make the hole look natural.  This is also the only hole which requires an aerial approach.    

Huntercombe does have an appealing mix of penal and strategic holes.  Perhaps this is why people feel Huntercombe is essentially a modern design.  

The third is wonderfully penal, especially if the flag is on the high, right side of the green.  The drive must thread a small wood and a pit.  One can layup here and take a long iron in, but the approach is a bit brutal, even with a short iron.  The hill kicks the approach right toward ob, but if the pin is on the right side, a par is good for any class of player.  

The 6th is quite a strategic short par five.  The scattered hollows create targets to be hit.  The player must decide on line and distance for each shot.  There is nothing great about this hole, but it does require thought.  

The 8th is brutally penal.  Long par four with a pinching fairway at the driving zone.  A big pit right in front of the green.  A nasty two tiered green with a very abrupt 5 footish slope.  

#13 is another strategic hole which isn't long or great, but requires some thinking due to the pits.  

#16 is probably the best strategic hole on the course.  A short 3 shotter which has the choice of carrying an ob area to the right or staying left.  Plenty of room out to the left.  Strange option here.  For the big hitter, the best play may still be out to the left as it is easier to hit the left layup area if he can't get home for some reason.  The approach is over a large pit, but there is space out to the left again.  If a player can't reach in two, the place to be is on the left.  You get a perfect angle to attack yet another severe two tier green.  

All in all, Huntercombe is a lovely place to play and it throws surprises now and then at the player.  A good set of one shotters may be the highlight of the course, but the hollows and severe greens are worth a look as well.  I am just not sure why it is called a modern design.

Ciao

Sean

[Jeff_Mingay]

Sean,

I speculate Huntercombe is labelled "modern" because it was revolutionary in comparison to what had been done up to 1901 or thereabouts at inland sites throughout Great Britain, and elsewhere.  

[Jeff_Mingay]

Sean,

The way I understand it is... at Huntercombe, and a year or so earlier Sunningdale, Park Jr. created a more natural looking, and strategic golf course than any one had ever seen on an inland site in Great Britain.

Sure, Huntercombe may have some clearly artificial features, but at the time Park Jr.'s work there was a giant step forward, leading away from the one-dimensional, geometric inland golf courses that had been constructed to that point in the history of golf architecture.  

[Jeff_Mingay]

Sean,

I hope there are NO "Victorian era" courses left  

[ForkaB]

Sean

Next time you are up in Scotland, give me a call and I'll take you to an untouched Victorian Willie Park Jr. course!  It was before Oor Willie moved to Ingerland and started reading Country Life, and it's unquestionable existence and character is what got Tom MacWood apoplectic in that thread long ago.  Nothing like a few facts that blow a hole in one's theories to make a boy cry....

PS--Jeff, you can come too!

[Marc Haring]

Sean

I think there are remnants of pre Huntercombe design all over the place; you just have to visit those courses that have celebrated their centenaries. Having said that, I can't think of many that have the original character in tact. However, they are categorised by a succession of cross-bunkers at regular intervals on the tee shots and some way in front of the greens. It was architecture based upon national hunt racing i.e. the hazard was a hurdle to cross so as to punish those that could not get the ball airborne (something that was less than easy in those days).

I believe Park and those that followed were the first responsible for placing hazards around the edges of the fairways which would have looked more natural and were clearly more strategic.

[Philip Gawith]

Sean - There are people more expert than me who should chip in, but I think your error is to identify the modern era as being synonymous with the absence of the "hand of man" instead of seeing it as the era when strategic design was introduced to inland courses.

By this reasonsing, what makes Huntercombe modern is the fact that it shows evidence of strategic design, not that the "hand of man" is disguised.

The "hand of man" is also evident at Sunningdale Old. My memory is going to fail me, but there are some man-made humps c 100 yards from the green on the first; on the left side of the fifth green. The excellent 11th green is not natural, I wouldn't say, etc.

Like you, I have not seen with my own eyes the old-style Victorian courses Marc and Jeff refer to, but you can certainly see that Huntercombe has links style characteristics, and that as much as anything is why, I think, it is seen as being a progression from previous inland architecture.

Marc - you are not quite right re the placing of hazards on the edge of the fairway, at least re Huntercombe. As you probably know, there are not many bunkers anyway - about a dozen in total, spread over about 6 holes - but in fact many of the hazards - grass bunkers or large holes - are quite central.

Sean - you say the 3rd green is wild. I agree it is very difficult, and a very challenging hole, but I would say that the green is fairly "organic" in the sense that it is consistent with the steeply sloping land (btw - you mean the hill kicks the approach LEFT to ob).