Oakmont CC 1938 VS. 2007 (updated w/ back 9)

[John Kavanaugh]

The trees are clearly there in 38.  That does not coincide with the propaganda.

Propaganda? How so? Maybe we are looking at 2 different set of pics, but there aren't that many trees in the '38 pics. Remember, the course was completed in 1903.

A quote from Ran's own review:

"In the 1960s, Oakmont Country Club underwent a massive tree planting campaign that changed the nature of the course. Oakmont nearly became a pretty parkland course, a description that surely would have its founders Mr. Henry C. Fownes and his son William Jr. spinning in their graves."

The small trees already planted by 38 would have been huge by the 60's.  I think the Fownes boys liked their trees and would be spinning at the current removal status.

[John Kavanaugh]

#2

Look at the tree between the right fairway bunker and the green in the 1938 photo.  The Fownes were penalisists and must have wanted trees in the picture.

[David Stamm]

The trees are clearly there in 38.  That does not coincide with the propaganda.

Propaganda? How so? Maybe we are looking at 2 different set of pics, but there aren't that many trees in the '38 pics. Remember, the course was completed in 1903.

A quote from Ran's own review:

"In the 1960s, Oakmont Country Club underwent a massive tree planting campaign that changed the nature of the course. Oakmont nearly became a pretty parkland course, a description that surely would have its founders Mr. Henry C. Fownes and his son William Jr. spinning in their graves."

The small trees already planted by 38 would have been huge by the 60's.  I think the Fownes boys liked their trees and would be spinning at the current removal status.

H.C. Fownes was dead by '38 (he died in '35).


William died in 1950.


I don't think you can say that they intended that it be as heavily tree lined as we saw before last years Open, John.

[Mike_Cirba]

John,

You're mistaken in your assessment.

I'm emailing you a 1938 aerial, and if you know how to do it, please post it here for everyone.

While the Fownes family were of quite the penal bent, they didn't seem to care much for trees.

Thanks
Mike

http://www.pennpilot.psu.edu/photos1940s/allegheny_1938/allegheny_1938_photos_jpg_800/allegheny_100238_aps1887.jpg

[John Kavanaugh]

David,

I agree that they would not have liked it as heavily treed, but even treed at all is a breakthrough from what I thought the truth was even an hour ago.  Trees large enough to cast a shadow from that elevation were there long before 38.  

Know the intent of the course was to be very difficult, I am now lead to believe that the Fownes would prefer the penal nature of the trees at the time of H.C.'s death to what there is today.

[Mike_Cirba]

John,

I think our posts crossed.  Please see my post/link above from 1938.

It appears to me that the only real tree plantings of significance are those along the boundary lines of the property.

[John Kavanaugh]

Mike,

I'm still seeing the "double penalty" tree in front of the bunker on #2.  

Perhaps the Fownes built their course on open farm ground because it was cheaper to do so, not because it was their preference.

[John Kavanaugh]

I'm not saying the trees were planted that appear in 38, just not removed.  With the exception of one tree on #5 the trees in 07 are in the same places, cept bigger.

[David Stamm]

Mike,

I'm still seeing the "double penalty" tree in front of the bunker on #2.  

 

This is a possibility considering AM did this on the 10th at Pasa and there was a bunker in front of the left fw bunker on the 9th at Pebble. But I maintain that this was probably not intended as a dominant feature throughout the course.

[Joe Bausch]

Perhaps this is what you wanted Mike:

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't thing anyone who ever played Oakmont in the entire history of the course came away thinking the trees were a dominant feature.

[David Stamm]

I don't thing anyone who ever played Oakmont in the entire history of the course came away thinking the trees were a dominant feature.

My point was, John, that trees did have a much larger role on the course's strategy later on.

[John Kavanaugh]

Where do you see a difference in strategy from 38 to 07 because of the larger trees.  I do not see it.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I'm glad they got rid of the centerline bunker on #8.
That small mound in front of the green serves even better.

With the exception of #7, overall it doesn't look too bad.

[George Pazin]

Perhaps this is what you wanted Mike:

Yep, there sure are a lot of trees in that aerial.

You're really twisting hard to make your point, John. You don't need to, not everyone hates trees as much as me and BillV.

-----

Thanks for the comparisons, Ryan.

I'd think that all those who complained that Oakmont is nothing but straight narrow holes with flanking bunkers would greatly prefer the older course.

[Ryan Farrow]

#10

[Ryan Farrow]

#11

[Ryan Farrow]

#12

[Ryan Farrow]

#13

[Ryan Farrow]

#14

[Ryan Farrow]

#15

[Ryan Farrow]

#16

[Ryan Farrow]

#17

[Ryan Farrow]

#18





Have at it! I posted these all individually so you can easily quote the pictures and holes in question that you want to discuss.

Glad I could be of some use to you all.


...and thanks again to Kyle for introducing me to the Penn Pilot website where I got the old Oakmont Aerial, among others.

[Garland Bayley]

#8

Great job Ryan.

Notice how they dumbed down #8 and took out the bunker in the fairway!