Comparing and contrasting Garden City and Myopia Hunt

[Jay Flemma]

I was reading ran's write-up of myopia and while looking at the pix and reading the article, it seemed as though - speaking architecturally, the courses shared some design features and similar terrain.

Any thoughts?  How close - if at all - were emmet and leeds?  do we know if they met or talked or ever worked on anything together?

here's ran's article by the way...

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/myopiahunt1.html

[TEPaul]

Jay:

81 hits and no responses on this thread and subject of yours on here just shows me this website has really changed from the old days. With the participants we used to have back then, they would be all over this subject and it would be some great posts and super informative. They are mostly all gone now and so few on here seem interested in this kind of really seminal comparative subject on golf course architecture of a fascinating era which was what this site was seemingly started for and once was. I wonder what's happened in the ensuing 8-9 years?

I will be on this tomorrow or the next day and do my best. Good thread and good subject, Jay!

[Jed Peters]

Jay:

81 hits and no responses on this thread and subject of yours on here just shows me this website has really changed from the old days. With the participants we used to have back then, they would be all over this subject and it would be some great posts and super informative. They are mostly all gone now and so few on here seem interested in this kind of really seminal comparative subject on golf course architecture of a fascinating era which was what this site was seemingly started for and once was. I wonder what's happened in the ensuing 8-9 years?

I will be on this tomorrow or the next day and do my best. Good thread and good subject, Jay!

Maybe there are people on this site "now" who haven't played both? Access ain't exactly easy at a lot of these courses....some like you, TEPaul, may take that for granted.

Hell, we all dream of playing the greats like Myopia or Garden City!

[Gene Greco]

Jay:

81 hits and no responses on this thread and subject of yours on here just shows me this website has really changed from the old days. With the participants we used to have back then, they would be all over this subject and it would be some great posts and super informative. They are mostly all gone now and so few on here seem interested in this kind of really seminal comparative subject on golf course architecture of a fascinating era which was what this site was seemingly started for and once was. I wonder what's happened in the ensuing 8-9 years?

I will be on this tomorrow or the next day and do my best. Good thread and good subject, Jay!

Funny, Tom.

I just posted related sentiments on another thread.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jay, both are a little quirky but in different ways.  The terrain is different and the bunkering is different.  I prefer MHC because of its more remote location and the feel of the place.  As far as golf goes, I think GCGC is the better challenge.  MHC has more average holes than GCGC. if I could join one of them, it would be Myopia Hunt Club. 

[TEPaul]

"Maybe there are people on this site "now" who haven't played both? Access ain't exactly easy at a lot of these courses....some like you, TEPaul, may take that for granted."



Jed:

There were people back then who hadn't played one or both. No matter who they were or where they came from there was a way to play those courses through the contacts and camaraderie of architectural interest we all had on here back then. Just go back to the threads and posts of 1999 or 2000 and you'll see what I mean. There are people on here now who have been on here for years who have never played some of these courses or even been to some of the courses they question the histories of and the architect legends of and the members of. 

Apparently they think if they get involved at all with these clubs or their members they might lose their independence of opinion or something or their ability to challenge or criticize architectural and historical fallacies or inaccuracies. I, for one, don't think so, but that's their choice and their decision, not mine. It didn't use to be that way on here and I never noticed anyone's opinions from back then being compromised about any golf course or golf course architecture.

What's happened with GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is probably just a function of the maturity of any INTERNET website like this one. I think it's inevitable. A bunch of us on here have been talking about it for years with each other and with Ran Morrissett. If there's some solution, I'm not yet aware of what it is.   

[Jon Wiggett]

Jay, both are a little quirky but in different ways.  The terrain is different and the bunkering is different.  I prefer MHC because of its more remote location and the feel of the place.  As far as golf goes, I think GCGC is the better challenge.  MHC has more average holes than GCGC. if I could join one of them, it would be Myopia Hunt Club. 

Tommy,

you say the the bunkering is different, what do you mean? is it the style or placement or both.

TEP,

you say 81 looks and no reply about the topic posted. You posted twice now but not on the topic itself rather you've hijacked the thread and have taken it in another direction. So, whats your opinion on the topic. I don't know much about either course other than what I have read here but I will read the write ups done by Ran and reply once I have formed a bit of an idea about them. It would be good to here some opinions about the courses from people who have first hand experience though. Start the ball rolling maybe?

[Jed Peters]

Mr. Paul:

I'm not prepared to comment on the goings on of the spats between members. Rather, I've tried to stay away from those.

Further, I don't think it's proper to compare and contrast two clubs I have (and I'm assuming other members feel the same way) never step foot on, nor heard peep about outside the discourse of this site.

[TEPaul]

Jon:

I said I'll try to post on the "compare and contrast" of those two courses tomorrow or the next day, and I would like to do a good and thoughtful job of it. I hope others will too.

Jed:

So, what do you think? Should this thread be deleted because some on here haven't played or set foot on those two courses?

[Sean_A]

Jay:

81 hits and no responses on this thread and subject of yours on here just shows me this website has really changed from the old days. With the participants we used to have back then, they would be all over this subject and it would be some great posts and super informative. They are mostly all gone now and so few on here seem interested in this kind of really seminal comparative subject on golf course architecture of a fascinating era which was what this site was seemingly started for and once was. I wonder what's happened in the ensuing 8-9 years?

I will be on this tomorrow or the next day and do my best. Good thread and good subject, Jay!

Tom P

I would like to read some well considered thoughts on these two courses because both sound and from pix look to be very cool and exactly the sorts of courses I enjoy the most.  However, I know next to nothing about either of these courses. 

To admonish myself and others for not piping up when it is well known these are difficult courses to access is getting a bit carried away.  I am sure many of us wait for an invitation that may never come and we accept this.  Still, at least I prefer to do this than to try an wangle a way on - to each is own Tom.  You may not understand it, but that doesn't mean there is no validity to this approach no matter how much we love the game and find architecture interesting.  Lesson for the day, place yourself in other folks' shoes before you judge them.

Ciao

[JMorgan]

Jay:

81 hits and no responses on this thread and subject of yours on here just shows me this website has really changed from the old days. With the participants we used to have back then, they would be all over this subject and it would be some great posts and super informative. They are mostly all gone now and so few on here seem interested in this kind of really seminal comparative subject on golf course architecture of a fascinating era which was what this site was seemingly started for and once was. I wonder what's happened in the ensuing 8-9 years?

I will be on this tomorrow or the next day and do my best. Good thread and good subject, Jay!

Tom, I just asked Pat last week to compare GCGC and NGLA. 

As to what has happened to this site, hint: Merion threads.  Good place to start. 

[Mike_Cirba]

As to what has happened to this site, hint: Merion threads.  Good place to start. 

JMorgan,

They certainly haven't helped and I'm sure the tone of them has turned some people off.   I also will take my share of the blame for that and do wish it had turned out differently.

I also believe that a lot of good contributors dropped off of this site well before then, for a variety of reasons, including probably just personal time and how much they could afford to devote to a site that is admittedly a bit addictive.   Overall, this site has had its ebbs and flows, certainly, but it's still the best place to come for those of us who are obsessive/compulsive about golf courses and architecture.

I am glad personally to see that you're back.   

[Jimmy Muratt]

Myopia and Garden City are two of my very favorite courses.  I think much has to do with the feel of both places.  Both feel like shrines and museums to golf.  As Tommy stated, the terrain is quite different.  Myopia has some significant elevation changes throughout while Garden City maximizes it's nearly flat terrain. 

Both have excellent par 4's.  The best on either course is probably #4 at Myopia, the dogleg left around the wetlands.  I would give the edge in the par 3's to Myopia, highlighted by the 255 yard 3rd and the wonderful 135 yard 9th.  The par 5's are the weakest aspect of Myopia, and not because they are poorly designed, but that they can be overpowered by the modern game. 

Two wonderful golf courses and even better places...

[TEPaul]

Jay:

I had a nice long post comparing and contrasting Myopia and GCGC and I just lost the whole thing. Damn it, I haven't done that in a while.

I'll recreate it later.

[Jed Peters]

Jed:

So, what do you think? Should this thread be deleted because some on here haven't played or set foot on those two courses?

Heck no!  Two entirely different things.

But I don't think you should be surprised or talk poorly about this website and its "newbie" (my words, not yours) members for not answering the query posited.

I think the thread is fantastic!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jay, both are a little quirky but in different ways.  The terrain is different and the bunkering is different.  I prefer MHC because of its more remote location and the feel of the place.  As far as golf goes, I think GCGC is the better challenge.  MHC has more average holes than GCGC. if I could join one of them, it would be Myopia Hunt Club. 

Tommy,

you say the the bunkering is different, what do you mean? is it the style or placement or both.

 Here is a picture of a bunker at MHC.



It is spectacular.  GCGC are a lttle more geometric.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy,

Sadly, this bunker complex isn't the original, or old bunker complex, it's a relatively new one, about 7 years old.

Someone eliminated the large original bunker guarding the right side of # 17 and added these 3 sand bunkers and 1 grass bunker.

So the example as shown in your picture isn't a good one.

The bunkering around many other greens would be more representative.

What disturbs me is that this complex has been allowed to remain, long after the parties responsible are no longer in their former positions at the club.

[JNC Lyon]

From having just played GCGC, I remember that not all of the bunkers looked like that.  GCGC's bunkers come in all shapes and size, from 4' X 4' pits left of 10 green to the long serpentine bunker fronting the green on the second.  The variety in the bunkering was one of the most impressive things about Garden City.  It had a variety the likes of which I haven't seen on my limited experience of great courses, but it still managed to tie together perfectly.

Unfortunately, I haven't played Myopia Hunt Club so it's hard to compare the two, but it seems Garden City is very well suited to the modern.  The long par fours are still brutal because of the defenses around the green and limiting distance off the tee (15 is a perfect example of this and it is a par four that will truly stand the test of time).  From what I understand, Myopia is quirky and loads of fun, but it may not have stood up as well over the century as Garden City.

[Jay Flemma]

I haven't played myopia yet, but the bunkers look a little deeper and have a different shaping to them.  How is the TERRAIN different? 

Do you get the same feel when your walking myopia as you do when walking the Great Hemptstead Plain?  That feeling of solitude and isolation?

Do you get a charge coming home to the finish like yiou do at GCGC when you see - first - the steeple and then second you turn slightly left and see 18  and the clubhouse beckoning.  Even though its tucked in the city, GCGC sure feels miles away form anything.  What kind of a charge do you get playing MHC, and especially coming home to 18?

How are emmet and leeds similar?  Different?

[JMorgan]

As to what has happened to this site, hint: Merion threads.  Good place to start. 

JMorgan,

They certainly haven't helped and I'm sure the tone of them has turned some people off.   I also will take my share of the blame for that and do wish it had turned out differently.

I also believe that a lot of good contributors dropped off of this site well before then, for a variety of reasons, including probably just personal time and how much they could afford to devote to a site that is admittedly a bit addictive.   Overall, this site has had its ebbs and flows, certainly, but it's still the best place to come for those of us who are obsessive/compulsive about golf courses and architecture.

I am glad personally to see that you're back.   

Mike,

I appreciate the kind words, and I certainly understand the passions involved, though please don't get the impression that I ever left the site. I've merely had too much work and travel over the last few months and little time to spare until very recently.

Now back to the regularly scheduled program ...

[Mike_Cirba]

James,

Someday I need you to explain to me your understanding of the evolution of Leatherstocking.

I had believed it was all built by Emmet in 1909, but later came across an article that sounded as though he added 9 and perhaps revised the original 9 around 1920.

I figured if anyone knows the skinny, it would be you. 

[Jay Flemma]

Cirba I have that actually...its 1909 for one side, 1919 for the other...to be exact:

A first nine were built by Emmet in 1909, ( 1-7, 16 and 18), along with the Otesaga Hotel.  Emmet designed a second nine in 1919.

[PThomas]

i'll bet Hammy Hearst has played them both....

[Jay Flemma]

can someone please have him pick up the white courtesy phone?

Tom P:  I'd love to see what you wrote that got zapped.  Or just call me.

[Mike_Cirba]

Cirba I have that actually...its 1909 for one side, 1919 for the other...to be exact:

A first nine were built by Emmet in 1909, ( 1-7, 16 and 18), along with the Otesaga Hotel.  Emmet designed a second nine in 1919.

Thanks, Jay....not bad work for 1909, I'd say.