Cobb's Creek Collaborators - Restoration Dreams

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

Maybe the course was just too difficult or the pace of play was too slow for Wilson to go back and bunker it the way he wanted.  I think that's the most probable reason.  He also may have grown distant from the operators of the golf course, grown weary of the FPC's bureaucracy/restrictions or focused his attention back on other projects.  There are a number of reasons that could emerge.

Or maybe, heresy though it may be, the historical record seems to suggest that Hugh Wilson was not much of a bunkering master himself, but was instead was an amazing architectural prodigy, who could find wonderfully natural golf holes, incredible greensites, and sound shot values on limited acreage by fully utilizing existing topography.

Hugh Wilson resigned as Green Chairman at Merion in 1914, well before this.   Although suspect health is certainly a possible reason, as could have been the nation at war in 1917-1919, I very much suspect that he didn't fully bunker Cobbs Creek because;

1) The course was universally hailed as is.
2) The course was amazingly popular as is.
3) The course proved amazingly difficult as is.

In 1924 he worked with William Flynn to come up with a rebunkering scheme for Merion, which Flynn largely implemented after Wilson's untimely death.  So, he was still active for quite a number of years after Cobb's was built.

I suspect that after working on Cobb's Creek for six months, he would have been very pleased to hear how it's held up all of these years simply based on largely natural features.

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

If you look closely at the earliest of those aerials, you can sort of see where the fairway probably used to run and the 9th green and 10th tee would not be very much in play.

Joe,

It may have been even more dangerous with the old tee but I still think it would be in play for the average golfer because the hole doglegs right around that tee and green.  I actually was looking at those newer aerials when I thought about posing that question.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

It may have been even more dangerous with the old tee but I still think it would be in play for the average golfer because the hole doglegs right around that tee and green.  I actually was looking at those newer aerials when I thought about posing that question.

Geoffrey,

I thought the same thing but what I think we're forgetting is the topography in that area at the time.   Yesterday's 9th green is at one of the highest points of the property, and it sloped downwards towards the creek from there.  

So, although it looks to be much in play from a top-down aerial, I'm betting that perched up on that hill it wasn't much of a consideration, especially when the tee was back and too the left as originally built.

The one that concerns me is the old 12th tee and drives coming from the old 6th tee.

I will guarantee you that the pole we saw in the woods held a net at one time.  

[Joe Bausch]

Joe,

It may have been even more dangerous with the old tee but I still think it would be in play for the average golfer because the hole doglegs right around that tee and green.  I actually was looking at those newer aerials when I thought about posing that question.

Geoffrey,

I thought the same thing but what I think we're forgetting is the topography in that area at the time.   Yesterday's 9th green is at one of the highest points of the property, and it sloped downwards towards the creek from there.  

So, although it looks to be much in play from a top-down aerial, I'm betting that perched up on that hill it wasn't much of a consideration, especially when the tee was back and too the left as originally built.

The one that concerns me is the old 12th tee and drives coming from the old 6th tee.

I will guarantee you that the pole we saw in the woods held a net at one time.  

Mike, I'm not as concerned with that old 12th tee taking drives from the 6th tee as you.  Those photos from October 15, 1939 show a group of trees protecting the 12th tee from a hook off the 6th tee.  Also, some have suggested the original 6th tee required a tee across the creek and up the hill.  If the yardages we've read about are accurate, meaning <400 yards, then that tee, in my estimation, could not have been across the creek but would be near the current tee for #7.  This would further minimize the problem.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

It sure looked from the other aerials that you and Geoffrey posted last week that they old 6th tee was on the far side of the creek, across that bridge.

Man, I just want to hit one up there one time.

Like the 18th at Riviera, or the 18th at Merion East, that type of daunting uphill drive is one of the most exciting shots in the game, at least to me.

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

Geoffrey,

I thought the same thing but what I think we're forgetting is the topography in that area at the time.   Yesterday's 9th green is at one of the highest points of the property, and it sloped downwards towards the creek from there.  

So, although it looks to be much in play from a top-down aerial, I'm betting that perched up on that hill it wasn't much of a consideration, especially when the tee was back and too the left as originally built.

The one that concerns me is the old 12th tee and drives coming from the old 6th tee.

I will guarantee you that the pole we saw in the woods held a net at one time.  

That makes sense and had occured to me as well.  It would have to be pretty steep, but that would minimize the problem.

[Kyle Harris]

In the October, 1939 aerial, it appears that small bunker has replaced the creek along the right side of 12...

[Mike_Cirba]

In the October, 1939 aerial, it appears that small bunker has replaced the creek along the right side of 12...

Kyle,

If you blow it up, it looks as though a bunker has been added, but the creek seems to still be there.   My guess is that reconstruction from a flooding incident moved the creek further away from the right side of the green, and a bunker was placed in the gap.

[Kyle Harris]

Mike,

Is the creek bed filled with water?

Maybe it was just a drainage swale at that point?

It would be nice to have a ground level shot of the hole from around that time...[/obvious]

This all starts to point to the need to pick a certain point in time to restore to - if bunkers have evolved or were added post-Wilson that is.

Is there a general consensus that the point of a restoration is to preserve the design intent of Hugh Wilson, or to preserve the time of the "highest" architecture for the course? Do we think those points are one in the same?

[Joe Bausch]

Can you guys read/re-read Verdant Greene's April 9, 1916 article on Cobb's just before its opening?  He talks about the creek coming into play 5 times on the course (3rd, 4th, 5th, 13th, and 14th).  If correct, this makes me think he means the creek must be carried on the each those holes.  If this is true, that means #6 did not tee off across the creek and #12 was not an island green, but his description of the 12th calls it an island green.  What am I missing here?!

Now I've read Kyle's most recent post and maybe it was just a drainage swale in front of the green.

[Kyle Harris]

Joe,

Perhaps a forward tee was in front of the creek on 6, or perhaps Mr. Green didn't feel that the creek being directly in front of the tee was "in play?"

I'm not saying you're right or wrong... just seems odd as you said.

[Joe Bausch]

Mike,

Is the creek bed filled with water?

Maybe it was just a drainage swale at that point?

It would be nice to have a ground level shot of the hole from around that time...[/obvious]

Just wait.  We'll have that photo and many others in due time.  I'm very confident of that.

[Joe Bausch]

Joe,

Perhaps a forward tee was in front of the creek on 6, or perhaps Mr. Green didn't feel that the creek being directly in front of the tee was "in play?"

I'm not saying you're right or wrong... just seems odd as you said.

Perhaps, Kyle, but he counts the tee shot on #13 in the 'creek holes' and admits "...the stream is so near the tee as to induce no great shock..."  This would be how #6 would be as well, unless as you suggest, he was not counting the tee shot if only the back tee was behind the creek.

[Mike_Cirba]

Early pics, including the one in the Verdant Green article of last week show that the creek surrounded the 12th green.

Tilly's description of the 12th in 1916;

"Possibly there is not a prettier hole in the country from the purely scenic viewpoint.  The tee is built on the side of a hill.  The green is shaped like a pear with the stem facing the player.   Around the irregular shaped green flows the creek with woods to the left.   It is only 130 yards from the tee to the green and is a beautiful mashie pitch.  Like the short sixth on the west course at Merion and the famous Binneiekil hole at Shawnee it is wonderfully deceptive.   If anything, the player is apt to overplay it.  The green widens out towards the back and even if the player's ball lands in the creek it si not a hard water shot."  

I'm thinking that the ditch must have been pretty shallow at times because I have never personally faced an "easy water shot".     There is a pic of this green in Geoff Shack's "Golden Age" book.

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

From the first article Joe discovered:

"The island was made by cutting through a slurceway (sp), a short distance at one side.  The shaft was made rather to prevent the green being damaged at freshet (sp) time than to provide the island formation without which few links are now considered complete."

It sounds like it was created due to flood issues and was probably dry for much of the year.  The tee shot was played over the ditch, rather than the creek.

Interesting to note the last line of the quotation which seems to contradict the notion that the first island green was created right around this time.

[Bill Hagel]

Isn't it strange that all the bunkers are short/long of the green?  Simple cut bunkers; all on the low side (except 16, flat).  Pretty rudimentary features; I doubt that's Flynn.

That's my point. Most of the rest of Cobbs is simple (as Mike C puts it -ball saving) bunkering.  But not 17.  17 has 4 bunkers - 3 deep ones built into the slope and a smaller geen level bunker on the back left. Very similar to Flynn bunkering. I'm buying a sixpack of Smithwicks for the first one to identify who designed/built 17.  Who knows - it could have been Ernie the Engineer from the FPC (sign that guy up).  

[Joe Bausch]

From the first article Joe discovered:

"The island was made by cutting through a slurceway (sp), a short distance at one side.  The shaft was made rather to prevent the green being damaged at freshet (sp) time than to provide the island formation without which few links are now considered complete."

It sounds like it was created due to flood issues and was probably dry for much of the year.  The tee shot was played over the ditch, rather than the creek.

Interesting to note the last line of the quotation which seems to contradict the notion that the first island green was created right around this time.

Thanks for deciphering this Geoff!  From the scanned article I could not figure out the word "sluiceway", perhaps b/c I don't remember ever hearing of this word before.  A quick lookup in a dictionary confirms what you've suggested:  An artificial channel, especially one for carrying off excess water.

[Bill Hagel]

From the first article Joe discovered:

Interesting to note the last line of the quotation which seems to contradict the notion that the first island green was created right around this time.

Yes I noticed that too Geoff - as I posted the idea that Cobbs may have come before the island green at Galen Hall.  Here is where I got that info - from Joe Logan's June 2002 write up on Galen Hall (I don't know how extensive his research was):

"In 1917, as his reputation was growing, Tillinghast was brought in to add a second nine. He did, including what might be the original island hole in the United States: the par-3 15th, known locally as the "moat" hole."

[Eric Pevoto]

Bill,

Gottcha.  That is interesting re: the 17th.  It's pretty clear in the '39 aerial.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Getting back to the controversial interview with Cobb's Creek pro Horace Gamble, here's a bit of that story;

"Dissececting the interview we find that Mr. Gamble expressed the following ideas;
 
The Cobbs Creek course is overlooked by many critics and ranking players.

There are more traps at Pine Valley than there are at Cobbs Creek but most of them are artificial.

Pine Valley is a trifle harder course than Cobb's Creek.

Cobbs Creek offers interesting studies, which are entirely the work of nature.

As to the difficulties of the courses, it is almost a 50-50 proposition.

"Pine Valley is a tough one and one of the most artistic creations of golf architects in the country.   The holes are about perfect, and it takes 100 percent golf to achieve success on the New Jersey course.   It is true nevertheless, that the golf architects who laid out Pine Valley were not aided by Nature, as were the experts who planned the Cobbs Creek course."

"I should say that Pine Valley is a trifle harder course than Cobb's Creek, from an artificial standpoint, but the natural configuration of the ground at the West Philadelphia course makes it almost a 50-50 proposition."

That putting Gamble on the grid is not popular is proven by the following excerpt from a letter written by a well known golfer of this city;  

"Gamble has played both at Pine Valley and at Cobb's Creek.  In speaking to James Govan, pro at Pine Valley last summer, he told me that for natural configuration Cobb's Creek was unequaled.  Who is bettter qualified to know then the last name two?  Govan was not talking to a novice, as I have grown up in the game."

"To prove the difficulties of the Cobb's Creek course, I will give you the figures.   I have played at Cobb's Creek consistently for two years.   Last summer, while at the top of my game I broke eighty only twice.   First with a 77 and later with a 79."

"About August 15 I went to Pine Valley and did the first eighteen in 43-36 for a 79, and the second time around in 40-37 for a 77.""

[Bill Hagel]

Looking more closely at the aerials most recently posted.

From the 1928 photo (wow this is a great/clear picture):

1- no bunker left of green

2- right greenside bunker was horseshoe shaped.
    There were two pot bunkers short and left of the green
    no trees left of green (hard to believe that the big trees there today are less than 75 years old).

18 - bunkering looks essentially the same as it is today.

From the Oct. 15, 1939 photo:

4- Can clearly see the tee up in the woods where we hiked a couple of weeks ago.  It looks like that islanded area in front of todays green is bunkered.

16 - the bunker left front of (then) 16th looks a lot bigger than todays bunker.

17 - If you look at the trees that separate the (then) 6th and 16th from the 17th you can see an opening where I'm guessing the teeing ground was located (play with the brightness and you can distinguish trees from shadows).
If this is the tee - it looks to be only slightly left of the present tee location - certainly not in the area we thought it was on our fieldtrip.

[mike_malone]

 Here are some of the tee shots that were lost.

    #6 significantly uphill blind
    #9 downhill to a right to left angled fairway
     #10 slightly uphill long par 3
     #12 dropshot mid distance par 3 (and remember that#17 did not exist)
     #13 tee shot toward a green on your right but into a slope that kicks you left.

   This is why our little group is so fired up.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mayday,

Not to mention that Tillinghast said the old 12th might be the prettiest hole in the country at the time.

[Eric Pevoto]

Isn't there a pretty good photo of the old 12th in Shackelford's Golden Age of Golf?  I don't have it with me, but I'll take a look later.

[Mike_Cirba]

Isn't there a pretty good photo of the old 12th in Shackelford's Golden Age of Golf?  I don't have it with me, but I'll take a look later.

Eric,

Yes, there is.