[Randy Thompson]

Who says to many hands in the soup spoil the broth. I played in the pro am in 84 or 85 the week of the TPC and the course was just a couple of years old and was under going constant changes. It seemed everybody had an oppinion and a voice in the changes, basically an architects nightmere. I wonder how much of Dye´s original design remains today and if he see´s a better a course then he originally designed. I also wonder who cuts the cake about design changes now and in the future. For a while they couldn´t even decide between bermuda and bent. From the first day it opened the course was filled with controversery, in my opinion a contributing factor in the past as well as the present, to a well designed course or hole. I am surprized how well the course is accepted by most GCA posters since there is so much water in play. But, I still feel it is the best ever designed golf course in a swamp and that holds true for the original design and even more so today. Love to see an article that shows and studies all of the changes from day one.

[John Moore II]

While I am not certain of what EXACT changes have taken place at TPC over the years, I have seen some, I can say that I would think that Augusta National has had at least as many changes over the same time period, and if not, certainly very close to the same number of changes.

[Randy Thompson]

True but for different reasons. Augusta changes have been more aimed at counter acting equipment advances and re-growing some teeth. They got real nervous when Tiger shot twenty something under one year early in his carreer. In the case of TPC, it was the oposite, at least the first coulple of years, it was more of a tooth pulling experience.

[jeffwarne]

Tiger shot 18 under, breaking Nicklaus' and Floyd's record by one.

TPC has way too much water (a lot of it just there and in the way, not strategic or thought provoking),amazed that's never been a target of the changes

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:

It's a swamp.  The average elevation of the fairways is about 5 feet above sea level, and the elevation of the waste bunkers is 1 or 2.  It has to have all those canals and hazards to take the drainage off it, or it would be a swamp again in short order.

Randy:

No question that the TPC has been rebuilt more times than Augusta over the last 25 years ... I don't think there have been as many design changes, though.  It hasn't been lengthened too much, the golf holes are pretty much the same from foot to neck, and they haven't planted as many trees (or trees as big) as Augusta.  But they have REDESIGNED more of the greens -- the green designs at Augusta are considered sacred, even if they have taken out some of the back-to-front slope over the years.

[jeffwarne]

Tom,
Well that explains why the water's never been the target of all the changes.
Which makes it an construction and engineering marvel.
Doesn't mean I have to love it though (although I am a fan of many of the holes individually-including 17-a nice example of pure penal architecture)
 I've just seen too many 10 handicaps lose 8-10 balls and more throughout the round(and I'm not talking about 16,17, 18 which is IMHO a good finishing stretch)
I do think it's a good tournament and the course has carved out quite a niche as an annual tournament venue

[BCrosby]

Johnny Miller mentioned yesterday that the original course had severely contoured greens that stirred up a lot of controversy.

He went on to say that the first round of changes were to tone down greens with only a few exceptions. I assume that among greens not changed were those at 4, 5, 13 and 17.  No?  Were some greens changed that people now regret?

Bob 

[Paul Saathoff]

How much more severe were the original TPC greens that the players complained so much about and ultimately were axed because of their severity than say the greens at Augusta or Oakmont which it seems are celebrated for their severe contours?   

[BCrosby]

Paul -

That is what I was trying to tease out with my question. The TPC greens must have been some kind of extreme if tour players thought they were over the top compared with the greens at any number of top championship courses.

Bob

[Randy Thompson]

The problem was the tour players felt they were the owners and could have been, not sure how the structure was set up but I do know everybody was all over it. Once a set up plans are approved they shouldn´t allow changes in the field for the first five years without the written consent of the architect. Its like me telling my doctor how he needs to preform an operation on me, I am not qualified to do that and neither are tour players in regards to a design. Just because they don´t, GET IT, there should not be immediate changes. Medalist is another good example, a Dye-Norman course. Normans contribution was changing so much after the course opened for two years, that it lost what it originally was and as a result never matured to what it could have been. I remeber my first visit to the Jockey Club in Argentina, one of the doctor´s favorite courses. I was being shown around by an Argentine Golf Association official and he pointed out how they had resoded all the steep slopes of the bunkers and they no longer washed out like in previous years. He asked me so what ya think, good work huh. I responded, are you looking for a pat on the back because you just repainted the Monalisa...look else where! Maybe thats why I have never gotten a referal out of that organization. I am older and wiser now and when in similar situations I just say umm, yeah.....not true, but I wanna B!
 In conclusion, I would love to have Ran do an interview with Bobby Weed and reveal all of what was going on when it first opened and the following couple of years.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()