Golf is a game we play.....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

That's a good question.

One that every club should be asking of itself.

The answer is, after some length had been added, but before the golf course became open season for every green chairman, and before a landscape architect was brought in to make free form tees, swirly fairway lines, moved fairway lines, and heavy tree planting.  Probably the late 60's, and I would add, prior to the first automatic sprinkler system.

In addition, two key, enormous trees were lost to lightening, and this allowed the landscape architect to shift the fairways, 20-30 yards, on both holes, to their detriment.

Since that time virtually every hole except # 9 has been tampered with.

One of the trademarks of the golf course was large bunkers.

Several green chairman, with an architect in hand, chopped them up into two or three smaller bunkers with difficult sides,
such that we have two types of bunkers, flat bottomed and tea cup.  

On our 18th hole, there was a magnificent horseshoe shaped bunker surrounding the green, which was fronted by water.
A green chairman, one winter, without board approval, chopped that bunker into three sand bunkers and one grass bunker, all of which are a horror.  Yet, the club did not restore the damaged bunkers.

I am hopeful, that my meeting tomorrow will produce an agreement to RESTORE the course, feature wise to that point in time.

It is also interesting to note, that originally, there was but one fairway bunker, which NLE, on the second hole.  Today, eight of the holes have fairway bunkers which were built by various green chairman since the late 60's.  They are inconsistent in look, construction and play.

HOD,

Thanks.

Claude and my dad were friends, I think they shared the same needle.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

One of the other changes was to the 15th hole which had a marvelous diagonal kidney shaped green, exceptionally well bunkered, with an option off the tee to carry a creek to the left side of the fairway leaving one with an ideal angle of attack into that green, or play a less risky tee shot straight away, leaving a more difficult shot into the narrow angle of the green.

Within the last year the ability to recreate/restore that hole has been lost as a retention reservoir has been built along the right side (old straight away fairway).  This was built despite the fact that a firm was willing to dredge and haul away our large ponds that have silted in over the years.  Over 15,000 cubic yards of excavated dirt from the creation of a retention pond has been relocated ON the Golf course in the form of mounds.  All under the supervision and approval of an architect retained by the LRPC chairman, without consultation with the committee.

Despite all the work done to the 15th hole, the individuals in charge forgot, or didn't pay attention to ongoing drainage problems which they could have cured as the retention pond was being built.

In addition, when the 15th was first altered, and a mini pond created, I objected to same, but was assured that the pitch wouldn't exceed three (3) degrees.  Unfortunately, the closer to the pond one gets, the steeper the grade, which exceeds three (3) degrees by a good margin, further adversely affecting the play of the hole.

One of the early solutions to the drainage problem when the hole was first altered was to plant weeping willows to soak up the water.  But, the rocket scientists in charge of the project planted the weeping willows on the low side of the fairway.

When the retention pond was built this last year, I suggested that some of the non-clay fill be used to ameliorate the excessive pitch of the fairway, and that the drainage problem be addressed at the high side of the hole.  Both suggestions were not pursued.

When I mentioned that the location of the new pump house was incorrect, and that it should be offset 20 yards from the far side of the pond, allowing for cart traffic, and to further hide the pump house, visually and accoustically from golfers playing the 15th hole, that too was ignored, resulting in a club joke about the pump house which now resides largely, and directly on the pond, casting a beautiful reflection for all golfers to enjoy.

The individual in charge suggested that carts ride to the left of the fairway, and then cross the fairway in front of the green between the pond and the green so that they could proceed behind the green to the 16th tee.  This creates a terrible eyesore, and impediment to play.

However, I still feel that the original green can be reproduced, helping to recreate the advantage to a riskier tee shot, and leaving the safer tee shot with a more difficult shot to the green.

The three bunkers that now surround the HUGE green are so out of character with the rest of the golf course, and two of them are unplayable for most members as they are raised above the green, and slope to the green, creating downhill lies to a green that slopes away from the golfer.

I hope this provides you with a general idea of some of the changes that have taken place on most of the holes.

If you have any questions about the 15th hole, or any other hole, let me know.

[Rich Goodale]

I stumbledupon this old thread whlst using GCA.com's crack search engine.  Those were the days......

[Colin Macqueen]

Gentlemen,

Having wallowed in this wonderful thread for over  two hours I can only quote Ed Baker

"Not much to add except that from what I have learned from this site about GCA has made the playing of the game much more fun and fulfilling..........Isn't that the point of the game, the site, the study of golf architecture as a hobby, to have fun?"

And Shakespeareans versus Newtonites ...... I just love it!

What a terrific thread. And Rich Goodale gets whacked about the ears. That's worth reading about in itself.

Cheers Colin

[TEPaul]

Rich:

This was (is) a marvelous thread and thank you for reprising it. In my opinion, those were the true Halycon days of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com (this thread is almost a decade old).

As you know, I've always been fascinated by your particular approach to the subject of golf course architecture both actually and historically. I believe in a "Big World" theory of opinion and over the years the only thing I don't much agree with you on is your basic lambasting or at least pooh-poohing of Max Behr and his writing.

I am a huge, HUGE fan of Behr's writing even if I do recognize and admit that his writing style is peculiar (for many of us today). He wrote in a form of Edwardian style so he is hard to follow but once you get onto his style his themes and points and premises are laser-like, in my opinion-----perhaps far more than anyone ever was who wrote on golf course architecture. Max looked so deeply into golf course architecture he practically looked right into the golfer's soul. But apparently you do not read EDWARDIAN very well or appreciate it!

This was a wonderful thread, including the fact Pat Mucci was a putz then and he is still a putz today!

[Rich Goodale]

Hi Tom

I'd classify Behr as Jabberwockean rather than Edwardian, but that is the picking of a very minor nit.

Rich

[TEPaul]

"I'd classify Behr as Jabberwockean rather than Edwardian, but that is the picking of a very minor nit."


Ricardo the Magnidiot:

It certainly is picking a very minor nit considering King Edward VII was probably weaned on Carrol and Jabberwocky! Both King Edwards of the 20th century were slow learners and of something less than top-notich minds so Carrol's "nonsense" style apparently appealed to them more than most. Furthermore writing in mirror image might be the highest form of intelligence. Leonardo did it and so did Carrol. This was all obviously not lost on Max Behr who looked so deep into golf and golf architecture he apparently discovered there is some serious "nonsense" in the best of golf and golf architecture too! Anyone who actually achieves the ultimate goal of reaching the sunlit uplands of golf and golf architecture understands that they aren't ultimately looking at a golf course or golf architecture----they are looking at it through a looking glass and looking at themselves.