Knoll (Banks) in nj ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

"Of all the schools of design, none was more significant to the Golden Age than "The National School of Design".  Oddly though, Charles Blair Macdonald and disciples Seth Raynor, Charles Banks and Devereux Emmett, are among the least recognized of the master golf architects."

"The Golden Age of Golf Design" - Geoff Shackelford, page 31.


The water's getting deep.  

[Matt_Ward]

George B:

It might be helpful -- if are permitted to it -- to list the specific changes / upgrades / restoration, call it what one may for PV purposes, the work you expect to carry out at The Knoll in the next 6-12 months.

Many people sadly are not aware of the overall charm and pedigree of the place.

The issue for me in observing The Knoll is how out of touch the various owners of the facility have been over the years. I am hopeful that with the news on having a new contractor that progress is indeed just around the corner.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

"Of all the schools of design, none was more significant to the Golden Age than "The National School of Design".  Oddly though,

Charles Blair Macdonald and disciples Seth Raynor, Charles Banks and Devereux Emmett, are among the least recognized of the master golf architects."

"The Golden Age of Golf Design" - Geoff Shackelford, page 31.

Don't tell me that you now adhere to the Tom MacWood theory of authenticity whereby one sentence or alleged quote is meant to be taken as the Gospel.

Emmet was designing golf courses before CBM put a spade in the ground at NGLA.

As to "Steamshovel Banks", Raynor was his mentor and partner, not CBM.[/color]

The water's getting deep.  

Evidently not deep enough as you've run aground again.
That's the problem with those big boats.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

I don't think that's a good idea.
It opens up Pandora's Box.

Perhaps George and The Knoll would be better served by listing the improvements he's made to date

[T_MacWood]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

Thats news to me. Based upon his first solo designs and their similarity to the work of Macdonald...I'm pretty sure his time working with both Macdonald and Raynor was a major influence.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

In the true spirit of the political season, I see you refused to answer any of my specific questions above but instead chose to focus on a very flimsy contention that Charles Banks was "not" a disciple of Macdonald because he was a disciple of Raynor instead.   Patrick, that's not only splitting hairs, now you're virtually splitting atoms!  

In case you missed the questions, let me repeat them, and add one.

Is the 3rd hole at The Knoll a redan?

Is the 17th hole at Mid Ocean a redan?  

Is there a reverse redan hole at Sleepy Hollow?

If the answers to any of the last three questions is "no", then why did their creators, men looking to build template holes based on the greatest holes in the old country, continually name and refer to them as such?

Is the 3rd at Pine Valley based on the redan template?

Why today would George Bahto, clearly the preeminent expert on Macdonald/Raynor & Banks call the left front bunker on the 3rd hole at The Knoll, "the Redan bunker"?

If it is a Redan hole, then how can it be when the hole is downhill, and the green is clearly visible from the tee??

And finally,

Is the 7th hole at Shinnecock a redan?  Virtually all of the green is visible from the tee, as you know, so was the entire golf world mistaken to refer to it as such repeatedly during the last US Open?  

Simple yes or no answers will suffice.  

Don't worry about this boat running aground anytime soon, Pat.   I think you're caught up in a very, very big net!    

[Matt_Ward]

I agree w the assessment Paul T outlined. The holes that are clustered w trees at Knoll West are a good bit below the qualities of those out in the open.

The only issue I have is that I would add the 2nd and 18th holes to his quite right lofty praise of the long par-3 13th.

The 2nd has one of the most demanding tee shots on the course and the greensite is indeed a real treat to putt. The closing hole is also grand and if stretched out a bit more to reflect the gains in technology over the years it will return to its right place as one of the best finishers in NJ -- public or private.

[Patrick_Mucci]

In case you missed the questions, let me repeat them, and add one.

Is the 3rd hole at The Knoll a redan?

It's generally called a redan, but, it's NOT a "TRUE" redan, which is a distinction I made earlier.

Think of dogs and triangles.
A cocker spaniel is not a Great Dane,
Victor Borge was a Great Dane.

It's got to do with pedigree, or congruent triangles.

There are many pretenders to the throne, but, the real deal, the "TRUE" redan must have ALL of the architectural characteristics and playing qualities of a redan, not just some of them, as you want to insist.

You want to take mutts and deem them purebreds just because they have SOME similar characteristics.

Is the 17th hole at Mid Ocean a redan?  

I wouldn't know, I never played it.

Is there a reverse redan hole at Sleepy Hollow?

I wouldn't know, I never played it.

If the answers to any of the last three questions is "no", then why did their creators, men looking to build template holes based on the greatest holes in the old country, continually name and refer to them as such?

To place them in a GENERAL category, and perhaps for marketing reasons.
And, probably because there was a demand for template holes and to satisfy that demand, even though the hole wasn't a true replica of the original, or model, OR, it didn't have the playing characteristics of the original, or model, the designers may have called them redans, although, it's probably more likely that the clubs themselves, named the holes, and therefore classified a hybrid or pseudo redan as a redan.

But, those with a discerning eye can see the flaw in deeming every hole with SOME similar characteristics as a TRUE redan.
A True redan has to have all of the goods

Is the 3rd at Pine Valley based on the redan template?

I don't believe it is.
Neither the approach nor the configuration of the green bear a close resemblance to a redan.

Why today would George Bahto, clearly the preeminent expert on Macdonald/Raynor & Banks call the left front bunker on the 3rd hole at The Knoll, "the Redan bunker" ?

Probably because the name of the hole is "redan"
Or, because of the bunkers relationship to the green.
It's deep, it's fronting and as such is similar in nature to the fronting bunkers on the redan holes at NGLA and NB.[/b]

If it is a Redan hole, then how can it be when the hole is downhill, and the green is clearly visible from the tee??

Because it's a hybrid, a pseudo redan, just like # 8 at PRC.
It's not a "TRUE" redan, which requires certain architectural and playing elements in order to qualify as a true redan.

You want to take any hole that has some of the architectural features and playing characteristics of a TRUE redan and annoint it as a true redan.   You want to broaden the definition of a redan by grasping on to a feature or features that might be similar to those found at a true redan and immediately classify it as a redan.

Your declaration that the 11th at LACC is a redan is a perfect example.

It's NOWHERE near a redan, in architectural features or in playability.  Yet, because there's an element that you can extract from it, that bears a resemblence to a true redan, you seize upon that and declare a mutt, a pedigree.

The 11th at LACC is NO REDAN.

Are you now going to insist that all triangles are the same.

They all have three sides, they all have three angles, yet, without equal angles and equal sides they can't be considered congruent triangles, only similar triangles.

And so it is with redans.  Just because they have SOME of the features of a redan, doesn't make them a redan, they have to have ALL of the features of a redan in order to be a TRUE redan.

And finally,

Is the 7th hole at Shinnecock a redan?  Virtually all of the green is visible from the tee, as you know, so was the entire golf world mistaken to refer to it as such repeatedly during the last US Open?

No, it's not a true redan.

It's a hybrid or pseudo redan.

But, if you want to see a true redan, just walk northwest for a while and you'll run into one.  

Simple yes or no answers will suffice.  

That's akin to asking: "did you stop beating your wife ?
a simple yes or no will suffice".  
If you never engaged in the activity, a more thorough answer is required, since the design of the question includes a predetermined, although false, premise, which requires a more elaborate answer.

Don't worry about this boat running aground anytime soon, Pat.   I think you're caught up in a very, very big net!    

Neither Houdini nor I are concerned.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

Thats news to me. Based upon his first solo designs and their similarity to the work of Macdonald...I'm pretty sure his time working with both Macdonald and Raynor was a major influence.

Tom MacWood,

How much time did he spend working with CBM ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

Even the Great Houdini wouldn't attempt the awkward, twisting gymnastics and verbally convoluted gyrations of your last post!  

Can you tell me who is the arbiter that will decide which holes are "true" redans and which holes are "pseudo" redans?  

The first and only original redan is the 15th at North Berwick.  It is blind from the tee, with only the upper portion of the flagstick visible.   As that is the only "true" redan, then I would contend that by your definition, the 4th at NGLA is a "pseudo redan", particularly given that you can see a good portion of the green, the fronting bunker, and a whole lot of other visual comforts that aren't afforded when you play the "original".  

Of course, that's nonsense.   The 4th at NGLA is of course a redan, and there are many more redan holes based on the original that more or less comply with the concept and template of the original.  

The irony of what you're attempting to argue is that you're arguing with CB Macdonald himself, who likely anticipated the inability to build the exact type of hole in differing settings and said that the "concept of the redan can be used in almost infinite variations", and proceeded to build many of those variations on his courses, which were followed by Raynor and Banks doing the same things.  Heck, Raynor even built one in Hawaii.

You can't have it both ways.  Either the 4th at NGLA is deficient, not a true pureblood, and ultimately a faux redan because it does not copy the blind tee shot of the original namesake, or you need to concede that there are many other holes based on the concept that while not the original, are still "redan" holes, all the same.   The fact that the 4th at NGLA is probably the most stirring and "best" of the breed doesn't mean that it's the most accurate rendition of the original.  It's ultimately just one of many copies, even if it's probably the best golf hole among them.  

[T_MacWood]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

Thats news to me. Based upon his first solo designs and their similarity to the work of Macdonald...I'm pretty sure his time working with both Macdonald and Raynor was a major influence.

Tom MacWood,

How much time did he spend working with CBM ?

Yale and Mid Ocean...not a bad way to become indoctrinated into the Macdonald School...I'm still searching for his time card.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

Thats news to me. Based upon his first solo designs and their similarity to the work of Macdonald...I'm pretty sure his time working with both Macdonald and Raynor was a major influence.

Tom MacWood,

How much time did he spend working with CBM ?

Yale and Mid Ocean...not a bad way to become indoctrinated into the Macdonald School...

I'm still searching for his time card.

Tom MacWood,

I can see why you wouldn't want to find his time card.

Banks started with Raynor in 1921, three (3) years before Mid Ocean and five (5) years before Yale.

Working for 3 to 5 years with Raynor before being involved with CBM would seem to have accounted for the great majority of his indoctrination.

Do you know the extent of his involvement at Mid Ocean and Yale ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick

Redan or no?



Redan or all wet?



Redan or so much flotsam and jetsam?



Redan or drowning in a sea of split hairs?    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Can you tell me who is the arbiter that will decide which holes are "true" redans and which holes are "pseudo" redans?  

That's fairly simple.
It's not "who" will decide, it's when all of the component pieces are present, not just some of them, that determines if the hole is a true redan.  Absent ALL of the elements, the hole fails the "true" redan test.

There are a number of holes that don't quite have all of the elements, yet, they remain terrific golf holes.

And, the 11th at LACC doesn't come close to being a true redan, by architectural standards and/or by playability standards.

The first and only original redan is the 15th at North Berwick.  It is blind from the tee, with only the upper portion of the flagstick visible.  

The extent of flagstick visibility is a function of its location on the green, it's not a universal.

As that is the only "true" redan, then I would contend that by your definition, the 4th at NGLA is a "pseudo redan", particularly given that you can see a good portion of the green,

That's not true.
You're confusing the shoulder with the green.
The putting surface is hidden by the fronting ridge.

the fronting bunker, and a whole lot of other visual comforts that aren't afforded when you play the "original".  

Like what ?

Of course, that's nonsense.   The 4th at NGLA is of course a redan, and there are many more redan holes based on the original that more or less comply with the concept and template of the original.

This is where you go astray.  The phrase: " More or less comply with the "CONCEPT" .....

You're willing to accept mutants as genuine, and I'm not.

I think you have to recognize that you're taking extreme liberties because you're trying to force a square peg in a round hole.

There is NO way that the 11th at LACC is a redan.
 
The irony of what you're attempting to argue is that you're arguing with CB Macdonald himself, who likely anticipated the inability to build the exact type of hole in differing settings and said that the[size=4x] concept of the redan[/size] can be used in almost infinite variations", and proceeded to build many of those variations on his courses, which were followed by Raynor and Banks doing the same things.  Heck, Raynor even built one in Hawaii.

I've bolded and sized the critical portion of CBM's quote, one you don't seem to understand.

CBM and I are in perfect harmony.
He's referencing the general "CONCEPT" of the hole, not the particular features and their relationship to the architecture and the golfer.  He's referencing "variations of the theme".

You want to throw every mongrel into the purebred category.

A "true" redan has special architectural and playing qualities and those holes absent those qualities can't be deemed "true" redans by any standard.

To try to claim that the 11th at LACC is a redan is .......more than a stretch, it's a revisionist effort to recategorize the definition of a redan, let alone a "true" redan.

You can't have it both ways.  Either the 4th at NGLA is deficient, not a true pureblood, and ultimately a faux redan because it does not copy the blind tee shot of the original namesake, or you need to concede that there are many other holes based on the concept that while not the original, are still "redan" holes, all the same.

Mike,

You're confused, the tee shot at # 4 is blind.
The putting surface is not visible from the tee, it's obscured by the fronting ridge.

However, the 3rd at PRC is more akin to the 15th at NB.

The fact that the 4th at NGLA is probably the most stirring and "best" of the breed doesn't mean that it's the most accurate rendition of the original.  

I stated that many posts ago.
I think the 3rd at PRC is a more accurate rendition of the original.
As I stated previously, the 4th at NGLA enjoys an unusual site, with spectacular views.

It's ultimately just one of many copies, even if it's probably the best golf hole among them.  

The 3rd at PRC is probably its architectural equal, or better, save for the setting.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Those are nice pictures.

Each employs the general theme or concept of a redan, but, absent ALL of the critical features, they're just hybrids, and not "TRUE" redans.

Why don't you post another picture of # 11 at LACC ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

Those are nice pictures.

Each employs the general theme or concept of a redan, but, absent ALL of the critical features, they're just hybrids, and not "TRUE" redans.

Why don't you post another picture of # 11 at LACC ?

"The parkland beauty of LACC is captured in this view of the all-world Reverse Redan 11th with the skyscrapers in the distance." - Ran Morrissett

By the way, I'm sure you know that the 4 holes pictured above were all titled "redans" by their creator, that hopeless charlatan Seth Raynor.    

[Patrick_Mucci]

"The parkland beauty of LACC is captured in this view of the all-world Reverse Redan 11th with the skyscrapers in the distance." - Ran Morrissett

Mike Cirba,

Ran was just being polite to his host, nothing more.

And, Ran's from North Carolina.
He considers any building with 15 floors or more a skyscraper.
So, what would he know about a redan ?

Look at that picture.
Do you really think that that hole is a redan ?

By the way, I'm sure you know that the 4 holes pictured above were all titled "redans" by their creator, that hopeless charlatan Seth Raynor.    

Did you think they were goint to be named "Alps" or "Capes', and are you sure that the club, not the architect named them ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

How many "true redans" would you say you've seen and/or played?   That would be helpful to me in trying to understand exactly where you're drawing the line, which right now seems about 500 yards to the right of most everyone in the history of golf to this point.    

[T_MacWood]

Mike Cirba,

Charles Banks was NOT a disciple of Charles Blair MacDonald.

Thats news to me. Based upon his first solo designs and their similarity to the work of Macdonald...I'm pretty sure his time working with both Macdonald and Raynor was a major influence.

Tom MacWood,

How much time did he spend working with CBM ?

Yale and Mid Ocean...not a bad way to become indoctrinated into the Macdonald School...

I'm still searching for his time card.

Tom MacWood,

I can see why you wouldn't want to find his time card.

Banks started with Raynor in 1921, three (3) years before Mid Ocean and five (5) years before Yale.

Working for 3 to 5 years with Raynor before being involved with CBM would seem to have accounted for the great majority of his indoctrination.

Do you know the extent of his involvement at Mid Ocean and Yale ?

Pat
Where do you get these dates?

Banks was in charge of the Hotchkiss project, which is how he met Raynor. That was 1923, the same year the Yale project began. I believe Banks got his nickname of 'Steamshovel' based on his work at Yale. Its my impression Yale had a big impact on Banks...the scale of the features there was very similar to the scale of his features in his solo work. And those folks in Bermuda (where incedently CB had a home) were so impressed with Banks they brought him back to build a second course.

No doubt Banks was influenced by both Raynor and Macdonald, with Macdonald being the undisputed father of that architectural style. Trying to detatch Banks from the work of Macdonald (and Raynor) has to be one of your biggest bone-head moves.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat
Where do you get these dates?

From reference books.

Banks was in charge of the Hotchkiss project, which is how he met Raynor. That was 1923, the same year the Yale project began.

That's interesting since he joined Raynor's firm in 1921, two years prior to 1923, three years prior to 1924 and two to five years prior to the project at Yale, which is listed as 1926.

Perhaps he had one of those "no show" jobs for the first two years to five years.

I believe Banks got his nickname of 'Steamshovel' based on his work at Yale.

Then you believe "wrong"
It was at Whippoorwill where the nickname, "steamshovel" came into being

Its my impression Yale had a big impact on Banks...the scale of the features there was very similar to the scale of his features in his solo work.

Well, you're not very good at impressions.
Have you called Rich Little ?

And those folks in Bermuda (where incedently CB had a home) were so impressed with Banks they brought him back to build a second course.

How do you know he wasn't the lowest bidder ?

Are you certain that the owners of Mid-Ocean were the same people that owned Castle Harbour ?

How can you conclude what the reasons for his being awarded the job at Castle Harbour were ?

No doubt Banks was influenced by both Raynor and Macdonald, with Macdonald being the undisputed father of that architectural style.

I'd say that he was influenced more by the man he partnered with, Seth Raynor..

Trying to detatch Banks from the work of Macdonald (and Raynor) has to be one of your biggest bone-head moves.

Leave it to you to draw wild conclusions.
I'm not trying to detach him from CBM, merely stating that there was an important intermediary, his mentor, Seth Raynor, who had more of a direct influence on his work than CBM.

How on earth can you state that I tried to detach Banks from Raynor ?  Or, is that just another of your conclusions absent the facts ?

[T_MacWood]

Pat
Where do you get these dates?

From reference books.

Banks was in charge of the Hotchkiss project, which is how he met Raynor. That was 1923, the same year the Yale project began.

That's interesting since he joined Raynor's firm in 1921, two years prior to 1923, three years prior to 1924 and two to five years prior to the project at Yale, which is listed as 1926.

Perhaps he had one of those "no show" jobs for the first two years to five years.

I believe Banks got his nickname of 'Steamshovel' based on his work at Yale.

Then you believe "wrong"
It was at Whippoorwill where the nickname, "steamshovel" came into being

Its my impression Yale had a big impact on Banks...the scale of the features there was very similar to the scale of his features in his solo work.

Well, you're not very good at impressions.
Have you called Rich Little ?

And those folks in Bermuda (where incedently CB had a home) were so impressed with Banks they brought him back to build a second course.

How do you know he wasn't the lowest bidder ?

Are you certain that the owners of Mid-Ocean were the same people that owned Castle Harbour ?

How can you conclude what the reasons for his being awarded the job at Castle Harbour were ?

No doubt Banks was influenced by both Raynor and Macdonald, with Macdonald being the undisputed father of that architectural style.

I'd say that he was influenced more by the man he partnered with, Seth Raynor..

Trying to detatch Banks from the work of Macdonald (and Raynor) has to be one of your biggest bone-head moves.

Leave it to you to draw wild conclusions.
I'm not trying to detach him from CBM, merely stating that there was an important intermediary, his mentor, Seth Raynor, who had more of a direct influence on his work than CBM.

How on earth can you state that I tried to detach Banks from Raynor ?  Or, is that just another of your conclusions absent the facts ?

Pat
Your off by two years on your Banks chronology....which may explain your confusion.

[Tags:]

Tags: