Who would make a better Open Doctor than Rees?

[Jim Nugent]

I hear lots of complaints about how he alters courses for major championships.  Who could do a better job and why?  Does it take a special set of skills to change (butcher?) a course for top pro play?  Could the architects on GCA.com do this, if they wanted to?  What sorts of changes might they make, if they took the work?    

You might say the courses are better left alone.  But then they probably won't get the majors they crave.  

[Steve Lapper]

Mike Davis

Cheaper and equally or better talent!

or,

 A Flock of Sheep (more talented)
 

[wsmorrison]

An architect that might say on occasion, "Do nothing at all."  Of course they would have to have enough clout for someone to accept this perplexing suggestion.  I think we know who they are and who they are not.

[John Kavanaugh]

Please give an example where Rees butchered a course.  It was my opinion that both Bethpage and Torrey were improved by his work.

[Dan Herrmann]

I'm with Wayne - Leave it alone.

But if I were to pick one, it'd be Gil Hanse.  He gets the premise of making a course "better" while staying true to the original intent of the architect.

Or, as a guy from Country Club of Rochester told me, he just put the "Ross back into the Ross"

[TEPaul]

SteveL:

That's funny---I saw the title of this thread and I clicked on it to suggest that a great alternative to Open doctoring would be Mike Davis. But you beat me to it.

[Tom_Doak]

Jim N:

Your original post included the question, "Does it take a special set of skills to change a course for top pro play?"

Architectural skills, not at all.  In truth, I don't think it takes that much architectural skill to build back tees and move bunker locations.

Political skills, yes.  Willingness to mess with 80 years of history for one week of play, definitely.  Other than that, it's much ado about nothing.

[Ian Andrew]

We would be better off without one open doctor.

The current problem is that many USGA staff openly recommend Fazio and Jones to top clubs because of their existing relashionships. They also recommend specific contractors - particularly if you want to hold a USGA event too - and all this needs to change. It may be innocent in nature, but has created a culture of everyone going to the same people.

[John Kavanaugh]

Please, someone, anyone give me just one example where Rees butchered a course for a US Open.  

[michael_j_fay]

Gil Hanse would make a great Open Doctor. I say this in respect for the work he did in Boston and the bunker restoration at Plainfield.

Gil seems to know how to bolster the strengths of the course while improving the weaknesses and not making a course a "Sluggers Alley".

[michael_j_fay]

Rees has not butchered any of the Open courses he has prepared. His work at the Black Course was quite good.

He does have the sense to make very few changes on great courses. Pinehurst #2 is a very good example.

[Joe Hancock]

What does butchered mean?

[Mike Golden]

Please, someone, anyone give me just one example where Rees butchered a course for a US Open.  

Rees did a good job of cleaning up Bethpage for the Open but, in all honesty, any of us with an intimate knowledge of the golf course and the resources at his disposal could have done an equal or superior job.

There really weren't any substantial changes made to the course other than cleaning it up, adding a new tee on #8 (as well as extending the green toward the back.  The only other changes I have seen pre and post Rees were several bunkers wrapped around the front of the green (#7 and #11).  And, of course, the addition of new back tees and the bunkering on #18.  Everything else is essentially the same although it has been a few years since I have been at Bethpage so don't know if anything else was done.

The true hero in the Bethpage story is Craig Currier, the superintendent, who has created the outstanding conditions exemplified by comments during the Open of how the conditioning was superior to most of the courses played on tour.

I give Rees tons of credit for recognizing the need to leave a great course alone but wouldn't exactly make him into a hero for his work there.

[Jay Flemma]

Why not Doak?  Or Stephen Kay?  Or Brauer and Engh?  They did nice restoration work at Dornick...

[Bob_Huntley]

Please, someone, anyone give me just one example where Rees butchered a course for a US Open.  

John,

No one can.

Bob

[Gib_Papazian]

Barnyf,

"Butchered" is a loaded gun that nobody is going to point at Rees Jones because he is a competent enough craftsman not to "butcher" anything.

A better question might be: "Is there anybody out there who can do a better job of optimizing opportunities for courses wishing to hold a national championship?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I know Uncle Bob, who I agree with 99.999% of the time, will always defend Rees because he did a good job on the Dunes Course at MPCC. I even went on record on this very board with a mea culpa and unqualified acknowledgment that Rees created something I would like - provided I came into it blind and knew nothing about the history of the golf course.

Now, the other end of the question is: "If Mike DeVries (for the MacKenzie portion) or Doak (for the Raynor part) had gotten ahold of the job, would it have turned out better?

"Pure Speculation" of course will be the shrill cries in his defense, but so is all opinion; if I had to bet my life, I would not put my Quatloos on Rees Jones winning that contest if put to a vote in the Treehouse.

Yes, I am being dogmatic . . . . . woof.

Torrey is . . . . well . . . . I've given my opinion before. It is okay, but lacks interior hazards or the kind of clever strategic geometry found in the work of more daring designers.  

There are only two par-fours on the back side of Pac Dunes . . . . I just don't see Rees having those kind of stones in his khakis.

It will offend some here, but I am not fond at all of what he did at Lake Merced. Bo Links is one of my favorite people, but I wonder - in his heart of hearts - if he would have hired Rees knowing that the Women's Open was never going to make it there.

This is the same guy who just won the Lido Prize with a golf hole light years beyond anything I have ever seen on a Rees Jones course.

Maybe I am hopelessly prejudiced, but Bobby Jones courses - whether it is his work or those in his (former) stable - are invariably clever and interesting. I am glad the apple fell and rolled far away from that tree.

I can name five Jones Jr. courses off the top of my head I like better than anything I've seen out of Rees, but maybe I suffer from the same Zen, Northern California, Esalen Institute, New Age nuttyness as Bobby.

The problem really begins with the USGA, so perhaps Rees is just giving them what they want - a deadly dull obstacle course along the same lines as Oakland Hills.

What came first, the chicken (R.T. Jones Sr.) or the egg (the USGA) when it comes to the philosophy of testing only one aspect of the game?

Even courses like Pebble or Shinnecock - which do not get remodeled for the Open to any extent - end up being unrecognizable to how they were intended to play by the architect.

So, if David Fay - who I believe *really* runs the show - wants the golf courses to be presented every year (exception: Pinehurst) in the same mind-numbing way, then there is nobody who can do his bidding better than Rees "Forced Carry" Jones.

However, if the USGA ever stops to consider the concept of variety and more subjectivity than objectivity, Rees would be at the bottom of the 8th page on my list, right below Zippy the Pinhead.

 

[Matt_Cohn]

He didn't "butcher" Torrey Pines, but did he do a great job?

[Jerry Kluger]

It is my recollection that Rees was responsible for the work which was done at Congressional - they putted on dirt for the 95 Senior Open and now they are doing the greens again for the 2011 Open.  The new 10th at Congressional is his design - to me, it has a totally different feel from the rest of the course.

I think Ron Forse has done some really nice work and I believe he respects the heritage of a course.

[Tom_Doak]

The key to being an Open Doctor is simply that you are in agreement with the USGA on what ought to be done.  The USGA is not at all shy about saying what they think ought to be done, and they don't want to deal with someone who objects to anything they say.  Technically, the club is the client, but the clubs want the Open so bad that they are willing to self-mutilate to have it.

[Mike Golden]

It will offend some here, but I am not fond at all of what he did at Lake Merced. Bo Links is one of my favorite people, but I wonder - in his heart of hearts - if he would have hired Rees knowing that the Women's Open was never going to make it there.

This is the same guy who just won the Lido Prize with a golf hole a light year beyond anything I have ever seen on a Rees Jones course.

 

Gib,

No offense here, Lake Merced is a really good test of golf but this was clearly an opportunity lost, that is, to restore the MacKenzie aspects of the golf course that were lost to I-280 and a membership that decided to trust Robert Muir Graves with his first solo project.

You, Bo, and I could rework that course in a heartbeat and make it outstanding, it really wouldn't take that much-it's really small touches that would put some character into the bunkering (instead of it just being tough), allow for some more places to run the ball on the green (#7 should be a great par 4 instead of just really tough), and blow up #4. Bo has a really good idea for that one-move the tee up and to the right so the hidden fairway bunker can be carried and you are hitting 7 or 8 iron after a well placed drive.

[Gib_Papazian]

Mike,

I concur with all of your thoughts - Bo actually showed me that spot to the right of the tee on #4. I cannot understand why that tee was not built. The green is actually the worst butcher job in remodeling history, so if Barnyf is looking for a specific example, he may find it there.

I will echo your sentiments re: #7, but also have a problem with the right side of #8. It just looked forced, inartistic and completely lacking in the presentations of options. If I did not know better, I'd guess the club hired Nicklaus to design that green.

The same can be said for the green complex on #10 - except the wrap-around bunker looks suspiciously like a faux Raynor sort of motif, which I don't mind except it looks like it was beamed in from Jupiter.

A few days ago I posted one of my meandering rants about low-handicappers jamming through a remodel and I'll admit Lake Merced was in the back of my boiling skull when I was pounding the keyboard.

It has always seemed to me that your (former) club had a lot of elderly Jewish members and the results struck me as completely inappropriate for the majority of the club.

You are also right that there is a lack of high art out there - the photos on the clubhouse wall of some of Mackenzie's wild bunkering are a sad  counterpoint to what Rees gave you - a generic, difficult golf course lacking in charm or intellectual content.

As long as you and Bo are going to invite me into your group to make some tweaks, the first thing I am going to do is make #15 an expansive, flowing, modified-Redan.

Rotate the green just one tick clockwise, build up some irregular mounding on the right side, deepen the bunker on the left so it dares you to miss down the hill and tilt the putting surface so it twists and wriggles all the way to the back left of the green.

I also don't like the way the 1st hole turns. It seems clumsy and neither fish nor fowl; the opener needs something in the fairway to embellish the tale. Perhaps some foreshortening cross bunkers, which of course would mean we would have to reorient the putting surface to favor one side or another.

I've got quite a few friends over there, a small Daly City neighborhood is all that separates us, so I'll save the rest of my well-meaning suggestions for an off-line conversation.

[Mike Golden]

Mike,

I concur with all of your thoughts - Bo actually showed me that spot to the right of the tee on #4. I cannot understand why that tee was not built. The green is actually the worst butcher job in remodeling history, so if Barnyf is looking for a specific example, he may find it there.

I will echo your sentiments re: #7, but also have a problem with the right side of #8. It just looked forced, inartistic and completely lacking in the presentations of options. If I did not know better, I'd guess the club hired Nicklaus to design that green.

The same can be said for the green complex on #10 - except the wrap-around bunker looks suspiciously like a faux Raynor sort of motif, which I don't mind except it looks like it was beamed in from Jupiter.

A few days ago I posted one of my meandering rants about low-handicappers jamming through a remodel and I'll admit Lake Merced was in the back of my boiling skull when I was pounding the keyboard.

It has always seemed to me that your (former) club had a lot of elderly Jewish members and the results struck me as completely inappropriate for the majority of the club.

You are also right that there is a lack of high art out there - the photos on the clubhouse wall of some of Mackenzie's wild bunkering are a sad  counterpoint to what Rees gave you - a generic, difficult golf course lacking in charm or intellectual content.

As long as you and Bo are going to invite me into your group to make some tweaks, the first thing I am going to do is make #15 an expansive, flowing modified-Redan.

Rotate the green just one tick clockwise, build up some irregular mounding on the right side, deepen the bunker on the left so it dares you to miss down the hill and tilt the putting surface so it twists and wriggles all the way to the back left of the green.

I also don't like the way the 1st hole turns. It seems clumsy and neither fish nor fowl; the opener needs something in the fairway to embellish the tale. Perhaps some foreshortening cross bunkers, which of course would mean we would have to reorient the putting surface to favor one side or another.

I've got quite a few friends over there, a small Daly City neighborhood is all that separates us, so I'll save the rest of my well-meaning suggestions for an off-line conversation.

Gib, the biggest problem with the bunkering is that there are way too many places where you have a severely downhill lie trying to hold a very shallow green.  The bunkers were created that way, I am told, so that the bunkers could be seen from the tee.  I agree with you on 15, it's a reallly good Redan waiting to happen.

On #1, though, it is really the the only hole on the golf course where you can take advantage of the land and bring it in on the ground from the right side, it's actually a really good golf hole.  

#4 green as bad as it is for a mid to long iron (or wood), is pretty good if you have 8, 9 or wedge in your hand-the few times I've played it from the whites and got it to the upslope it made the hole very fair even though the green is really vicious.  It just totally unfair hitting from a downhill lie with a mid iron.

You are right about the influence of some of the low handicappers on the redesign of the golf course, that's how it happened.  In spite of all that, though, Lake Merced is still a very good test of golf and one that is fun to play on a daily basis, I miss it a great deal.  Maybe one of these days I'll get to be a non-resident member and spend some time there on a semi-regular basis.

[mark chalfant]

Keith  Foster,gil  Hanse, Ian  Andrew, Brian Silva etc might be more  respectful  original design style.


regarding Rees  ,
the work at  Ridgewood in the late 1980s was
him   imposing  his   unatural  bunker style all over the place.  He also  claimed that his work was based on
" historic research"  The members at Oakland Hills may love his current work there, but it certainly shows  little respect for Ross or the early  work of Rees's dad , RTJ senior.
Rees'  work at MPCC Dunes is quite good however I dont think  his work at Aronimink was embraced by many as authentic.

On the other hand Keith Fosters work at  Baltimore is   not screaming out  : Foster was here !!!  nor was  Gil's fine work  at Plainfield.
Instead they  were eloquently whispering:   i love  Tilinghast  or  I revere  Ross.
Ive seen  several restorations of Tillinghast work across the country. including  Brook Hollow(Coore), SFGC(Urbina), Golden Valley(Forse), and Suburban (prichard)  I certainly dont  think Rees could have exercised the same   amount of vision tempered  by restraint. In fact  anyone who thinks   Jones work at Black course is  inspired or that  Hollywood is a revelation/ homage to Travis   to  needs to book  a trip  real soon to CC Scranton or CC of Troy

So is Rees prone to  ruthlessly  chopping up filet mignon ?
Ill let others decide, however some of his past p.r. banquets have  featured some sizable cuts of  bologna
       

[John Kavanaugh]

Keith  Foster,gil  Hanse, ian  Andrew, brian Silva etc might be more  respectful  original design style.

Hanse showed zero respect to the work Palmer had done at TPC Boston.  I am sure he is an excellent architect from scratch but I am not really interested in seeing a drivable par 4 and a single hole without bunkers for every US Open.  Hanse can not leave well enough alone.

[Mike_Young]

JK,
I am more apt to try preventive medicine, acupuncture, chiropractic before I have a doctor get involved.  USGA just loves surgery for surgery sake.

TD makes an interesting comment above:  "Architectural skills, not at all.  In truth, I don't think it takes that much architectural skill to build back tees and move bunker locations."   To me that says so much about restoration issues in this day.