Best on opening day or not?

[Mark_Fine]

On the thread about “bunkering the course later”, Tom Doak made a comment that, “A lot of those classic courses evolved over the first several years; they weren't nearly as good when they opened as they are today.”

If you think about it, how many of the greatest classic courses were at their best the day they opened?  Off the top of my head, I can’t think of too many, in fact I can’t think of any right now?  Can any of you?

Almost every great course I’m thinking of took time to reach it’s own design pinnacle.  Of course that timeframe/date is VERY SUBJECTIVE but none the less, few will argue it was on opening day.  For many of them, I'm not sure that the date is today either.  

[wsmorrison]

From what I've read, it would seem that Cypress Point was exceptional in many ways including the mature look it had on opening day.  Was there much evolution to the course design after opening day?

Some great courses such as Merion, Pine Valley, The Country Club in Brookline, Philadelphia Country Club, NGLA, Augusta National (early on) and others became far greater over the years with design changes (bunkering and otherwise) by the original or other architects.

[cary lichtenstein]

I think what is so neat are the old, old photographs of these old classic gems.

In most cases they were very rough around the edges, not manicured to the 9's as they are today and had more charm.

If anyone cares to post some old and new photos of #7 at Pebble Beach or others, this might a good contribtion to this thread.

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
You may be right about Cypress Point.  Maybe Doak or Shackelford will offer their thoughts about that one.  

Cary,
I'll let others post some old photos.  Maybe I'll put a few up later.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mark,

If your supposition is correct, could one reason be because trees had to be given an opportunity to grow in and define holes on many of the parkland courses of America?

Of course on almost everyone they would inevitably overgrow...

Other than trees, can you cite specific examples of the maturing process that you believe golf courses go through to grow into greatness?

[Mark_Fine]

Philip,
I wasn't implying the grow of trees though in certain instances, that could be the case.  It was more a suggestion that the architects needed time to "get it right".  Think about some of the greatest courses and how they evolved (not just from a conditioning standpoint, but from a design standpoint).
Pinehurst #2 is just one example.  What do you think?
Mark

[Bruce_Dixon]

From purely a CONDITIONAL stand point, it was surreal to play on the opening day of course I had recently worked on.  Teeing it up on the par 3's without a single divot hole on the tee surface and putting on greens without any pitch/ball marks was an extremely rare experience.  Sure there were thin patches in some of the fairways and roughs, but the tees and greens were immaculate.  Given that the course is public, with a reasonable green fee and in a good location, it was conditions that were soon to change quite quickly.

Cheers,

Bruce

[Mark_Fine]

Bruce,
I hear you about conditioning.  I guess I was referring to the rest of the design architecture and how that evolved on many of the great courses.  

[Tom_Doak]

I will agree with Cypress Point being better on Day One than it is now, based on the pictures I've seen.  Perhaps The Valley Club and Pasatiempo were as well, especially if you factor in the shot values then vs. now.  Which is why we're trying to restore the latter two.

Some of the Raynor courses were better then than now, too.  Yale?  Camargo?

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
You won't get much argument about some courses being better then vs. now.  However, the real question (and the most subjective one) is "When do you think they were at their pinnacle?"  

At Cherry Hills for example, our Master plan is based around a date of 1937/38 which was at the time of the club’s hosting of the 1938 U.S. Open.  From all the old photos, aerials, drawings, etc. that we had/discovered, we believe the course was at it’s own pinnacle around that time.  We know Flynn was contacted about recommended changes to the course (mostly tee work) which was done prior to the tournament though we have no records that he ever returned to the course after it was first built.  Soon after the Open, we believe the design started a downward spiral of changes and these changes are well documented in our plans.  

Was this the course's pinnacle, who knows for sure?  We do believe the course held up well through the depression and we felt this was the timeframe to aim for.  

I will add that one thing we know for certain is that the course in 1938 was far superior to what is there now.  At least that is my opinion.  

[TEPaul]

"If you think about it, how many of the greatest classic courses were at their best the day they opened?  Off the top of my head, I can’t think of too many, in fact I can’t think of any right now?  Can any of you?"

Definitely. Cypress Point.

Some on here say you can't rely on photographs to get a sense of golf architeture. Well, the hell with that. That incredible chronicle in GeoffShac's Cypress Point book of photos of MacKenzie playing Cypress probably close to right out of the box just don't lie----and I don't care what Pat or anyone else shrieks about never relying on photos.  

Ironically, the course that probably wasn't close to its best near opening was Pine Valley. But Pat Mucci keeps saying the course should be taken back to the way it was back then particularly regarding its trees.

And what does Pat Mucci use to make that assessment? Yep, you guessed it, the very thing he says should not be used to determine a course----photographs.  

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
You could be right about CP.  Care to take a stab at some of the other great classic designs?  I realize this is not at all an easy task and there are no right answers, only opinions.  

[Steve Curry]

Lido?

[TEPaul]

Mark:

If you're asking me, I can't really think of another although the same could possibly be said about Pebble after its 1927 redesign as is said about Cypress.

Those incredibly "imitation sand dunes" of Pebble were just gorgeous apparently right out of the box which probably isn't surprising since they were probably done by the same people---eg "The American Construction Company" and its Irish shapers and craftsmen.

However, who can deny that these courses done today by the likes of this sort of "renaissance" group of architects, particularly the bunkering looks awful good and sort of like its been aging for a hundred years even right out of the box.

[TEPaul]

Steve:

That's an interesting point about Lido. It probably did look great on opening but the tragedy with that course is within a year or two it really went to pot and was never the same again. When Macdonald went back to see it after a few years from opening he was shocked how run down it'd become.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Some on here say you can't rely on photographs to get a sense of golf architeture. Well, the hell with that. That incredible chronicle in GeoffShac's Cypress Point book of photos of MacKenzie playing Cypress probably close to right out of the box just don't lie----and I don't care what Pat or anyone else shrieks about never relying on photos.  

Could you cite for me, exactly where I said that you should NEVER rely on photos, and in WHAT CONTEXT ?

They can be a valid source for depicting what existed, a permanent record, and not the determiner of quality or play.


Ironically, the course that probably wasn't close to its best near opening was Pine Valley. But Pat Mucci keeps saying the course should be taken back to the way it was back then particularly regarding its trees.

Could you cite for me where I ever said the Pine Valley should be restored to how it was on Opening Day ?

Once again, you've distorted and fabricated my position to suit your own.

I"ve ALWAYS stated that the golf course should be returned to it's configuration as depicted in the photo that hangs in the big room next to the exit door to the parking lot.

I believe that photo is circa 1925, seven years after the golf course opened.

And what does Pat Mucci use to make that assessment? Yep, you guessed it, the very thing he says should not be used to determine a course----photographs.  

Could you explain or define what you mean when you use the phrase, "to determine a course" ?

Thanks