Flynn believed that spending more in the beginning would allow you to spend less over time in terms of maintenance cost that will be far more costly in the long run than initial construction expenditures. I don't know that I accept your premise, especially circa 1929 and shortly thereafter when Flynn built a number of courses.The number of courses Flynn designed after the onset of the Depression was five. Shinnecock Hills was already started. He designed Normandy Shores, Plymouth CC (NC), Pocantico Hills, US Naval Academy and complete redesign of Indian Spring finished by Gordon after Flynn's death.
You can only recapture the additional construction costs vis a vis reduced maintainance costs over time IF the golf course survives, and survives for a long, long time.I think this concept was known to the many golf clubs and developers that hired Flynn. It is not a modern understanding.
The early architects were quite frugal and/or efficient.And it often showed. You should realize that as one of the great green keepers and agronomic minds in American golf, Flynn had a much better understanding of frugal and efficient than Macdonald, Raynor, Banks and a host of other architects. He designed with cost effectiveness in mind. Do you think his concept of saving money over time is inaccurate? I'd like to hear and have asked architects and superintendents to comment. Certainly his ability to surface and subsurface drain a golf course saves a great deal of money over time. So does the use of natural angles and natural looking tie-ins.
As for frugal and efficient, do you know how much money the bone-headed design and construction mistakes at The Creek Club cost the club? Do you know that Macdonald in an ungentlemanly way fingered Raynor? Do you know of the agronomic failure at NGLA? They made many costly errors.
Flynn openly states that he was extravagant by comparison when it came to construction.He does? Where does he state that? I believe it is a result of your interpretation rather than any actual statement. Flynn's statement in the Rockefeller letter said using more fill is more expensive than not. He was not referring to the overall expense of his golf courses compared to others.
His courses are less changed than most and his courses remain championship courses longer than most with the preplanned lengthening that is allowed.I don't know that I agree with that statement.
While I haven't played as many Flynn courses as you have, I don't find your statement applying to some of the Flynn courses I've played, such as Atlantic City, Springdale and Woodcrest.Atlantic City and Springdale were redesigns on a restricted amount of land. Woodcrest was designed as a public golf course and has been so bastardized that there is very little Flynn left. I've asked you to come to Philadelphia. There you will be reacquainted with Merion and see Huntingdon Valley, Rolling Green, Philadelphia Country, Manufacturers, Lancaster, etc. Then you'll have an idea about his elasticity and test of time record.
I do like Flynn's work/courses, but, presently, I'm not ready to elevate him to MacDonald's level.You haven't seen enough of his courses and you have a predisposition to Macdonald. That's why you need to come to Philadelphia for more exposure to Flynn and deprogramming
I don't put him on Macdonald's level either, Pat. He was much more advanced and original in theory and practice.
In your zeal to glorify Flynn, you erringly denegrate CBM-SR-CB, all of whom understood elasticity and that golf wasn't a static game.I am not glorifying Flynn at the expense of MacRayBanks, though they do pale in many comparisons. I am pointing out differences. I'll let others determine the result of those differences. Yes, these are preferred differences to me, but the fact is, the Father of American Golf fathered one trick ponies. He had talent but it was simplified and replicated by his protoges. You don't like my assessment and I don't mind. If MacRayBanks understood elasticity, where is it? If they understood golf was not a static game, where did they discuss it? If they did know it, I fail to see it exhibited in their architecture. Please explain.
Perhaps you could point to the elasticity enjoyed by the 10th hole at Merion.There is none. However, I can point to hundreds of Flynn holes that were designed with elasticity. Come down to Philadelphia. I'll show you. Afterwards, you can buy me dinner
I don't think you serve Flynn well by denegrating the triumvirate, but, that's just my opinion.I criticize the triumvirate. Maybe I cross the line into denigration now and then. It is only because the supporters of them, particularly Raynor and Banks overlook so much and accept really strange devices. However, I separate Macdonald from them and criticize him to a far less degree. I love some of his work, but not all. The work of Raynor and Banks speaks for itself. Unfortunately, there are too many deaf ears