Morrissett's Ten Great Architectural Crimes of the 20thC

[Geoffrey Childs]

Mike
Shouldn't Tilly's large sandy waste bunkers been restored to the right of the driving zone at #4 and to the right of the green at #7?

Tom

Shouldn't the large sandy waste bunkers on #9 and other holes be restored at Cypress Point?

[TEPaul]

If either of you guys are serious about restoring those so-called sandy waste areas at Bethpage Black or at Cypress or Shinnecock or any other golf course like that, I'm afraid the thing you will need to do with absolute certainty is begin to dial down on this dream-like notion a Tom MacWood has about pure restoration and begin to get into the nitty gritty of what that kind of thing is all about in vigilance, maintenance practices, cost, etc, etc.

It becomes more obvious to me every day what a virtual waste of time this discussion and debate on here is with a Tom MacWood if he or anyone who proposes what he is does not get involved in the realities of these kinds of things.

To restore that sandy waste area look on those courses mentioned takes a lot of thought, understanding and obviously work too.

One who I would check with on that specific subject if they're interested in the truth of it would be Ken Bakst, in my opinion.

I mention checking with him on the realities of that subject because I just did.  

Checked with Shinnecock on that too.

Has Tom MacWood checked with Bethpage Black, it's super or its architect on the realities of that? And If the answer is that he hasn't, then I wonder why not if he's going to try to seriously mention on here with some degree of credibility that particular restoration aspect.

[T_MacWood]

For those of us who PLAY golf, BPB is essentially the same course it has been for as long as I've been alive.

For those who LOOK at the golf course as a static canvas, obviously you can find things that are different.

Since I play golf, BPB is the same course.  The rest of you can decide which side of the fence you belong.

Bravo Mike.

Phil - The expansion of the green in the back or #14 by adding quite a bit of space as a kickback has changedd the playing characteristics for all the other pin locations immensly and for the worse.  Its a much EASIER tee shot now that you have a much less chance of going over the green and pitching downhill to a back to front sloped green.  It is now easy to use the green extension as a backstop to funnel balls back to the center section of the green.  This was a HORRIBLE decision IMHO.

PS - I am somewhat offended that this discussion is in a thread entitled "Architectural Crimes".  If this is a crime then every urban golf center with munis deserves a massive crime spree.

Enough of Bethpage please.  Our lines are obviously drawn in the sand.

Tom Mac - You STILL have not provided either a detailed definition of a true restoration NOR have you answered my question about which course that you have visited most applies to your definition. Where have you seen a good restoration.

I want to dissect that course.  I also want YOU to to pick a course and show us that it is closer today to its state 70 years or more ago then Bethpage.  You choose Newport initially so lets get hopping on that comparison.

If you are not going to answer or can't find an appropriate course to dissect then please tell us.

Geoff
I define restoration as trying to restore a golf course to a certain point in time. I wouldn't recommend it across the board, only a few select courses that are (or were) recognized as design masterpieces that have also been significantly redesigned or neglected over time. If a course has evolved gracefullly I say leave it alone (other than recapturing fairways, greens and removing trees). Far too many restoration turn into redesigns and the original work is destroyed.

Newport, Chicago, Lawsonia, Pine Needles, Camargo, Cypress Point...you can choose any of them. Dissect away!

Do you mean the dune on #9 CPC...as far I know it didn't go anywhere.

TE
It doesn't sound like you are too familar with Bethpage, the course has two significant sandy waste areas today (thankfully both survivors--more or less--intact since the course's opening)...in fact those two existing waste bunkers are larger than the two waste areas that did not survive. A little more naturalized sandy area wouldn't present huge increase in expense IMO, especially when you consider how much maintained sand area the course has....less grass to mow.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Tom Mac

The sandy waste area on the right landing zone of #4 at BB is still there Tom.  Its just covered in grasses the same as teh dune at #9 at CPC.  

You always seem to apply different standards to different courses to your choosing.

Of course you won't document another course.  Its not your choosing even though I let you pick any course.  NO WAY Cypress Point is closer today compared with 70 years ago then Bethpage.  NO WAY. THat's probably the worst example because those dunes can't and won't be maintained.  Cry out natural evolution all you want but the course is way different from the day it opened.  Way different AND not as good in just about every man's opinion except perhaps yours.

[T_MacWood]

Geoffrey
It is your excercise and theory...disect away!

[Geoffrey Childs]

Geoffrey
It is your excercise and theory...disect away!

Its a question I posed to you to allow you to back up your claims.  You would not even post a single Bethpage comparison. As far as I'm concerned you failed to document a single case that you attept to make here with regard to restoration.

Every one of those cases you gave (Newport, Chicago, Lawsonia, Pine Needles, Camargo, Cypress Point) are less faithful today to their designs 70 years ago then is Bethpage.  Every single one of them. You are totally off base with your claim and you choose poor examples.

Prove me wrong.

[T_MacWood]

Prove me wrong.  

Geoffrey
Its your claim and your excercise...dissect away!

This thread is beginning to sound like gradeschool playground.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Tom

Your entire repitoire reminds me of the Seinfield episode where he tries to rent a car having made a reservation.  The rental agency said that they had his reservation but no car for him. The car place was adiment that they understood but did no wrong and could not help him.

Jerry aptly went on to argue with them that they knew how to take a reservation but not how to honor the reservation or run a business.

You know how to make claims.  You just don't know how to back them up or how to make good on your claims.  When you get back to earth maybe we can have a real world discussion.

[Jeff Goldman]

Every one of those cases you gave (Newport, Chicago, Lawsonia, Pine Needles, Camargo, Cypress Point) are less faithful today to their designs 70 years ago then is Bethpage.  Every single one of them. You are totally off base with your claim and you choose poor examples.

Prove me wrong.

Geoff,

How much has changed at Chicago since the Raynor redo.  The aerial from the 30s shows a few more trees, and there are one or two back tees, but boy, do the holes, bunkers and greens look the same!

Jeff

[TEPaul]

Geoffery Childs:

#86 is perhaps the most apropos and entertaining analogy I have ever seen on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.

The next step is to get Tom MacWood to evidence and admit to humor or a sense of humor. I've known him and reparteed with him long enough to know that he has a sense of humor and a fairly subtle one. The trick is to get him to exhibit it more often because one thing we can all guarantee is that he sure ain't no Jerry Seinfeld.  

[Matt_Ward]

Geoff C:

Fantastic retort with the Seinfeld link.

It amazes me people continue to go back and forth with MacWood. Nothing more than the same MO all the time.

Questions never get answered that are put to him and he simply turns things around and throws more questions in order to obfuscate the fact that he doesn't have the answers others are seeking.

[James Bennett]

Tom

... reminds me of the Seinfield episode where he tries to rent a car having made a reservation.  The rental agency said that they had his reservation but no car for him. The car place was adiment that they understood but did no wrong and could not help him.

Jerry aptly went on to argue with them that they knew how to take a reservation but not how to honor the reservation or run a business.

I think I visited this rental agency on two occasions a few months ago.  The first was New York City on a Sunday.  I don't think there is such a thing as a spare vacant hire car in New York on a fine, sunny weekend, even if you have one booked.  There might be a spare car (probably a big one!)across town, but not where you booked and have turned up.  Now, get across Manhattan to the next agency, before that car gets hired out to someone else (oh, and it helps to have your wife with you who is waiting to be transferred to an international airport later that day as well).

The second was in Nice France, in the week preceeding Cannes film festival.  I was so pleased to have a booking, but was amazed at the 90 minute queue to get to the counter and be served, and the consequent 30 minute wait for 'my' car to be cleaned.  

As bad as it seems for the hirer, I have sympathy for the employees at these places.  They must have very thick hides to put up with the frustrated customers.

James B

[Kerry Gray]

I am really not interested in the ongoing battle for Bethpage reno or no-reno?
But, I quite often ask myself after these "restorations" why the original look of the course is not more closely followed. Some of Rees' new bunkers at Bethpage are certainly not in keeping with the rest of the bunkers on the course. He knew that.
Is installing uncharacteristic bunkers part of his plan to "restore Tilly's shot values"?  
Why did he build them that way?
Seems to me that it may be his way of putting his "stamp" upon the course. Unfortunate, because it is just not necessary and they look out of place.
I understand that the USGA and Rees did a fine job in fixing up BB for the Open. I give them credit.
If he respects Tilly's work so much, why could he not just use Tilly's style instead of mixing in his own?
I find it difficult to believe after some of his esthetic choices that he wants it simply to be known as a "restoration".

Kerry.
 

[Geoffrey Childs]

But, I quite often ask myself after these "restorations" why the original look of the course is not more closely followed. Some of Rees' new bunkers at Bethpage are certainly not in keeping with the rest of the bunkers on the course. He knew that.
Is installing uncharacteristic bunkers part of his plan to "restore Tilly's shot values"?  
Why did he build them that way?
Seems to me that it may be his way of putting his "stamp" upon the course. Unfortunate, because it is just not necessary and they look out of place.
I understand that the USGA and Rees did a fine job in fixing up BB for the Open. I give them credit.
If he respects Tilly's work so much, why could he not just use Tilly's style instead of mixing in his own?
I find it difficult to believe after some of his esthetic choices that he wants it simply to be known as a "restoration".

Kerry.
 

Kerry

Do you have photos in addition to the aerial photo from 1938 (which is very closely followed in the present course) to show us what exactly was the original look of the course.  I'd like to see them. What is the Tillie style you refer to?  Winged Foot, Somerset Hills, Newport, Rockaway Hunting Club, his Pine Valley Influence or is there a specific Bethpage Style that we need to learn?

Which new bunkers are not in keeping with the rest of the course? How do you know he knew he was building a different look in the bunkers?

Show us the Tilly style you write about and show us how they differ from what is in the ground today.

Are you aware of what was in the ground in 1996 before this work was started and just how many bunkers were put back in place that were either abandoned, sectioned into multiple bunkers for maintenance or virtually reshaped into saucers by play, neglect and maintenance not caring how they were shaped? Did it have to be 100% exact right down to the unmaintainable sandy waste area seen in one photo and not necessarily in any plan?  Does this matter at all to you?

I don't know how you can make these statements.

**** I can't decide if all these questions are Mucciesque or MacWood-like but inquiring minds want the answers*****  

[Bob_Huntley]

Tom

... reminds me of the Seinfield episode where he tries to rent a car having made a reservation.  The rental agency said that they had his reservation but no car for him. The car place was adiment that they understood but did no wrong and could not help him.

Jerry aptly went on to argue with them that they knew how to take a reservation but not how to honor the reservation or run a business.

I think I visited this rental agency on two occasions a few months ago.  The first was New York City on a Sunday.  I don't think there is such a thing as a spare vacant hire car in New York on a fine, sunny weekend, even if you have one booked.  There might be a spare car (probably a big one!)across town, but not where you booked and have turned up.  Now, get across Manhattan to the next agency, before that car gets hired out to someone else (oh, and it helps to have your wife with you who is waiting to be transferred to an international airport later that day as well).

The second was in Nice France, in the week preceeding Cannes film festival.  I was so pleased to have a booking, but was amazed at the 90 minute queue to get to the counter and be served, and the consequent 30 minute wait for 'my' car to be cleaned.  

As bad as it seems for the hirer, I have sympathy for the employees at these places.  They must have very thick hides to put up with the frustrated customers.

James B

About ten years ago my wife and I and another couple rented a house in Sienna for a couple of weeks. I arranged to pick up a Mercedes at the Zurich Airport for our trip south.

I arrived full of bonhommie with the world and looking forward to this wonderful vacation. Whoops, wait a minute.  The rental agency did not rent expensive cars to go into Italy, too much crime and the gypsies could steal a car, strip it and have the parts sold in four minutes and thirty seconds.  I then asked what sort of car COULD we hire. Believe it or not they offered us two Yugos. Fortunately, a friend who happened to be a Member of Parliament,  or whatever the equivalent body is in Switzerland, lent us a car for the rest of the trip.

The moral of the story is use Hertz or one of the better known agencies and give them your schedule.


Bob

[T_MacWood]

Kerry
If I may give you some friendly advice, its not a good idea to question anything done a Bethpage. We both know Rees took certain liberties with his redesign, but it is emotional subject and not really worth getting them all worked up.
 
Its still a great golf course...let Geoffrey and the others think what they want about the reestoration.

Now lets get back to some other architectural crimes...anyone have any thoughts on Rees's work at Baltusrol, Quaker Ridge, Lake Merced, Hollywood, Equinox, James River, Ridgewood or Sleepy Hollow?

[Geoffrey Childs]

Tom Mac

It only continues because you provide us with conclusions but you always seem to fail to add any data to support the hypothesis. If you did that perhaps you would not get called out so often. I know the girl behind the counter knew what a reservation was but she still didn't grasp the concept that she had to provide that car when the reservation was due  

I'd like to see the answers to those questions but no one except perhaps Phil has any good ground level photos that show any details larger then 1/2 millimeter from the three Tillinghast books and they are less then useless to make any realistic conclusions. Maybe you can post some to show the Bethpage style.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom Mac

Like Mike Golden who has played the course many more times then I, I think you are really nitpicking over the bunker changes and I still defy you to find another golf course that fits the criteria you require and survives the magnifying glass.

Kyle - The changes to 14 at BB were a horrible mistake.  I hate what was done to that hole. I don't like the new bunkering on #8 either although its better then the sewer-like little pond that was to the left of the green from 1969-?.

What golf course (if any) that you have visited would you consider a true restoration?

Geoff,

Sorry for the delayed response. The closest I am seeing to a true restoration is occuring at Schuylkill Country Club by Donald Ross. Jim Rattigan, their superintendent, is painstakingly working with Ron Prichard on slowly, but surely, restoring bunkers, greens, and play corridors to their original intents from the original 1922 9 hole course, and the additional 9 hole 1939 Donald Ross course.

However, as I believe with all renovation/restoration projects, certain liberties are being taken. Some green contours will be softened to provide the angles of attack lost due to faster green speeds, and yes, while the green may not putt EXACTLY the same, the restoration of the lines of play from the tee or fairway is, IMO, sometimes justified.  

The first question to be asked is "What is to be restored?" This establishes the value the membership/superintendent/architect place on various aspects of the original course design.

Is adding a small bump to provide a hole location on a 10-stimp green that was originally designed for a 6-stimp green justified?

-Depends on the architect's value. However, both can be considered true restoration since the trade off of losing a hole location and gaining a new play angle is both restoring an original aspect of the golf course.

A question for the board: Are they any golf courses out there that are fully restorable?

[TEPaul]

"But, I quite often ask myself after these "restorations" why the original look of the course is not more closely followed."

Kerry:

That is a most valid point and one that is rarely if ever the specific subject of discussion on this site.

To do something close to an exact restoration of bunkering, for instance, the project and decision making generally falls into two distinct areas;

1. To restore or return bunkering to its original positioning and shape if need be or not.

2. To restore the "look" of the bunker to its original look which basically includes its sand and grassing lines, shape and characteristics. Obviously this could be done even if the bunker is repositoned on the hole in some way.

Even most of the most faithful restoration architects tend to reposition bunkering sometimes if need be these days for obvious reasons---eg it can tend to get obsolete and non-functional in its original position on some holes (generally ones that have little or no elasticity) Obviously this is generally the plight of fairway bunkering, not greenside bunkering.

But even if some bunkers may need to be repositioned to function in the same conceptual and strategic ways for which they were originally designed and built one certainly does wonder why most architects doing restorations don't give them the same original "look" they had with their sand and grassing lines, shapes and characteristics.

Generally, the reasons given not to do that, in my experience, have to do with maintenance concerns that relate to cost or just maintenance practices.

But you are certainly right---if an architect and club is going to restore any bunkering, even if it's repositioned in some way why not try harder to do it in such a way that it more exactly matches the sand and grassing lines, shape and characteristics it originally had?