News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« on: November 17, 2008, 06:13:55 PM »
I believe the one on the top is from Headingley.

The studio which produced these photos is:

R. BROADHEAD LEEDS

These contours are outrageous. Can you imagine playing these holes at today's speeds?

I am just blown away at how the push behind sidewheel mowers that were used to mow these greens could mow right to the very edge of the bunkers.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2008, 07:17:39 PM »
Those bunkers show none of the grace of later Mac bunkers.....and the lower pix has mounds that are too pointy framing the green.  I hope this was early in the career, or he fired the construction foreman!

That top green has it all - false front, punch bowl, etc. Note the golf bag right on the green. I know in Australia they still take trolleys right over the green. Its amazing how allowing that spreads out wear compared to the American way of staying on the green edge.

Also note that in the top pix, only the putter stands on the green. Were golfers that courteous as to vacate not only the line of sight, but the entire green?
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Neil_Crafter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2008, 12:36:22 AM »
Bradley
Great to see more and terrific you have found the name of the photographer in Leeds who took these shots - perhaps with some searching we may be able to find the negatives in a museum somewhere.

Top photo is in "Golf Architecture" and is not Headingley - it is the 17th green at Harrogate. The caption describes it as an entirely artificial plateau green constructed on flat land.

Bottom photo is also in GA, its the second hole at Headingley. Caption says the hummocks and bunkers entirely artificial: a two-shot dog-legged hole, the photo is taken along the line of the second shot.

Jeff, like you, it is apparent to me the relative crudity of this work, not only compared to his later work, but even to a course like Moortown, which actually predates it by a few years. Moortown 1908-10 and Headingley 1912-14, while Harrogate was from 1912. Was the Moortown site so superior to have yielded more natural results than the average/poor sites like Headingley called for much more "artificial" work. I have to admit I'm intrigued by the variance between his courses like Alwoodley/Moortown, compared to Harrogate/Headingley etc. from essentially the same pre war period.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2008, 02:04:15 AM »
Those bunkers show none of the grace of later Mac bunkers.....and the lower pix has mounds that are too pointy framing the green.  I hope this was early in the career, or he fired the construction foreman!

That top green has it all - false front, punch bowl, etc. Note the golf bag right on the green. I know in Australia they still take trolleys right over the green. Its amazing how allowing that spreads out wear compared to the American way of staying on the green edge.

Also note that in the top pix, only the putter stands on the green. Were golfers that courteous as to vacate not only the line of sight, but the entire green?

Jeff

I agree, this photo series is showing some really bizarre bunkering/mounding.  Its no wonder this stuff didn't survive as designed.  Do any of you spose that it is work like this which essentially kept Dr Mac out of the "top tier" of design until he hit Oz?  I always wondered why Dr Mac was rarely mentioned with the other big guns of the era until later in his career - at least the is the impression I have. 

I too noticed the bag on the green, but it doesn't look as though the green is cut up to the bunkers.  I think I see a sort of collar around the bunkers. 

Bradley - thanks for posting.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Mark_Rowlinson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2008, 04:54:34 AM »
Alwoodley had this sort of bunkers when first built. I don't know what sort of bunkers Mac originally had at Moortown, but the site is nothing special - Gibraltar was artificial. In fact it is quite an unmemorable course, despite its playing challenges.

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #5 on: November 18, 2008, 08:26:51 AM »
Sean -

Interesting thought about MacK's standing. I had always thought (without much reflection) that MacKenzie was in fact in the top tier of architects in Britain in the early 20's. His 1920 book "Golf Architecture" was the first of its kind and a pretty big deal. He published a fair number of articles in golf periodicals. His map of TOC was done in '23, which was a big deal. When the Field magazine editor wanted comments to Crane's rankings in '24, he interviewed Colt, Abercromby and MacK.

So the guy certainly knew how to get his name out there. On the other hand, I am not very familiar with the quaity of his pre-Oz, pre-US work. Is it possible that as of 1925 his reputation exceeded what he deserved based on his actual design output at that point?

Bob   

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #6 on: November 18, 2008, 01:58:16 PM »
"Alwoodley had this sort of bunkers when first built."


Mark:

Are you sure about that? Are there any old photos that show what Alwoodley's bunkers originally looked like?

These early Mackenzie photos are just amazing because they show an early Mackenzie style that is pretty much an exaggerated caricature of natural landforms.

Mark, do you know when the bunkers of Alwoodley were altered to basically look the way they look now and are you sure they were altered by Mackenzie? Didn't he basically get expelled from the place permanently for stealing some member's wife? By that I mean he never went back, did he?

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #7 on: November 18, 2008, 02:05:08 PM »
BobC:

You know if Mackenzie's style began to change dramatically (apparently to a much more natural look from that highly exaggerated earlier style) after WW1 and in the early 1920s I wonder if he wasn't influenced far more than anyone has heretofore realized by the styles of his short-term partners, Harry Colt and Hugh Alison. I realize they were never together much but what the hell, they were his partners! Maybe he just never really admitted that since it appears their partnership did result in some problems eventually.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2008, 02:09:07 PM by TEPaul »

Mark_Rowlinson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #8 on: November 18, 2008, 02:26:28 PM »
Tom,

I stuck a few early pictures of Alwoodley on the earlier related thread (and in the Alwoodley pictures thread). Look at the photo of the 11th, for instance. The picture of Alwoodley's 5th in MacKenzie's Golf Architecture shows exactly this sort of bunkering. I don't know when Alwoodley changed to something more like what we have today. There are lots of references in the club's minutes to alterations of bunkers, but they are never specific about exactly what changes were to be made. I fancy, but don't know, that changes may have been made following the instruction made in 1919 (I think it was - I put the correct date on another thread - I don't have a copy of the centenary book with me) that the sand in the bunkers was to be raked once a week. You can imagine what they must have been like prior to that!

I'm sure his first essays in architecture were revolutionary. The committee at Alwoodley was clearly disturbed by what it found when first it ventured out onto the course a few months after the club was founded. That was when they issued the instruction that no further construction was to be made until Colt had visited, which he did that summer. Colt stayed with MacKenzie and the details of their meeting are recorded in both Colt's book and MacKenzie's 'Spirit.' There is no record in the minutes of any action being taken following Colt's visit (or even of receiving any advice from Colt), which is why I don't think it is a Colt course. There was a further minute a year (or two) later instructing that no further bunkers were to be built until WH Fowler had visited. Again, there is no record of any changes being made as a result of his visit. He wrote an account of the course in a Sheffield newspaper and made various suggestions about how the bunkering and one or two other features might be altered, but if he sent those suggestions to the club they were not acted upon. As I've said before, we have a (probably) 1910 sketch map of the course drawn by MacKenzie showing bunkers already built and those he proposed. Clearly the detail of the course was constructed over several years - and we have such things as the new green on the 6th as further evidence. There are several old pictures of the 7th and the bunkering is in different places and in different styles in each picture. Unfortunately it's not possible to date the pictures accurately.

I hope this answers your questions, Tom.

Best wishes, Mark.

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2008, 03:16:30 PM »
"As I've said before, we have a (probably) 1910 sketch map of the course drawn by MacKenzie showing bunkers already built and those he proposed."

Mark:

I believe I've seen that if it's the one I'm thinking of. I studied it one time in 2003 for about fifteen minutes. The one I'm thinking of is pretty long and as I recall its hanging in one of the corridors in the clubhouse.

Ian Andrew

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2008, 03:36:21 PM »
I'm fascinated by the fact that I think Alister MacKenzie was the greatest architect of all - yet I look at some of his earliest work (thanks Bradley) and I see things that I really don't like.

By the way, I really liked the early photos of Gibraltar - so there are lots of examples of early brilliance - but these and a few other recent photos make me wonder if it was an evolution that leads to his later work.

Do you think there were key influences on his style that also helped shape him into a great architect? I can look at other architect’s early work and see the brilliance from the outset. With some of these photos I see the imagination - but no effort to blend the work in.

The whole camouflage - nature must be the model stuff - seems to be in the future when you look at this stuff.

Could one of you talk about his evolution as a designer?


TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2008, 03:49:37 PM »
"Could one of you talk about his evolution as a designer?"

Ian:

I don't think any of us have to be rocket scientists to notice and understand the differences of some of his earlier stuff from what came later. He was probably always into the idea of "naturalism" just that in the beginning he was nowhere near as good at doing it as he later became.

Was he influenced by something else or someone else along the way most of us have never considered before?

It occurs to me that he may've been influenced by Colt and Alison and what they'd already done. And why wouldn't he be---eg they were his partners for a time.

It may be indicative to consider that this was the same time he really did begin to change and evolve his style to a style that looked a whole lot more natural to most of us than what he did earlier.

Ian, I'm like you in that something has always told me Mackenzie may've been the best of them all but I'm always willing to reconsider. Perhaps Colt really was or even Colt and Alison or frankly even Fowler that other well-known so-called "heathland" architect. Since Park Jr landed in the heathlands early on and did a few seemingly seminal things there, and perhaps even first, I'd consider throwing him in too at the top of the heap of it all.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2008, 03:53:02 PM by TEPaul »

Tom Naccarato

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2008, 05:19:33 PM »
Ian, It amazes me that many don't understand that a lot of those photos are taken well befor the work had a chance to mature and strengthen. I mean, come on! Even a fine wine like Opus just doesn't get served as soon as it goes into the bottle, let alone the cask.

The point to this is that I like MacKenzie work in its raw, unmatured form, because I know it will get better with time--maturation.

Jeff Brauer, As Sean Tully had previously brought to us that the possibility of those pictures you see of a raw and unfettered SFGC, to be the handiwork of "Wee Willie" and quite possibly work that was done well after the fact.

To me the work there--those bunkers in particular, well I would enjoy seeing the bunkers on the hill at #12 to see what they had looked like. I'm talking about the mound that was a former rail line that cuts directly through the hole about 20-30 yards out in front of the green. Those bunkers had a blow out nature to them--at least in their placement they did. (I do in fact love holes like that/quirk at its finest!)

Getting back to Bell, it would be interesting to research more--and I say this in relation to a previous trip to the Southland, where one Dr. Mac got together with Wee Willie and Captain Thomas and suddenly the bunkers at Rivera appeared....Did that kind of work proceed Riiera, or did it come before MacKenzie met with Bell and Thomas?

Its a very interesting question.


Ulrich Mayring

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #13 on: November 18, 2008, 06:08:08 PM »
Does anyone have an opinion where the lower of those two photos comes from and what golf course it shows? Is it in "Golf Architecture"? Some of the photos on this thread were published in Golf Illustrated & Outdoor American in 1915.

Ulrich

Golf Course Exposé (300+ courses reviewed), Golf CV (how I keep track of 'em)

Ian Andrew

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #14 on: November 18, 2008, 06:11:24 PM »
Dear Tommy,

Are you telling me that those bunkers are going to mature into better bunkers without alterations to the bunker lines of the shapes of the mounds?

seriously.......

Not a chance.

You've seen enough to know that's true.

Com' on my friend - I'm calling you out on this one. :)

Ian Andrew

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #15 on: November 18, 2008, 06:13:19 PM »
Tommy,

To be fair.....Ulrich just posted two images where I completely agree with you.

These will mature wonderfully.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #16 on: November 18, 2008, 07:01:18 PM »
Sean -

Interesting thought about MacK's standing. I had always thought (without much reflection) that MacKenzie was in fact in the top tier of architects in Britain in the early 20's. His 1920 book "Golf Architecture" was the first of its kind and a pretty big deal. He published a fair number of articles in golf periodicals. His map of TOC was done in '23, which was a big deal. When the Field magazine editor wanted comments to Crane's rankings in '24, he interviewed Colt, Abercromby and MacK.

So the guy certainly knew how to get his name out there. On the other hand, I am not very familiar with the quaity of his pre-Oz, pre-US work. Is it possible that as of 1925 his reputation exceeded what he deserved based on his actual design output at that point?

Bob   

Bob

I could be wrong, but I believe that Colt, Fowler and Park Jr were essentially the top tier archies.  Other than Alwoodley and Moortown, which for some odd (other than they aren't near London which can be very significant) reason didn't seem to get the fanfare of the London courses.  I am not say Mac was a nobody, but it really wasn't until his OZ gig that he really hit his stride.  I sit fair to say that Mac was essentially a provincial archie and that may be one of the reasons he hooked up with Colt?  I can't think of a course that Mac did that wasn't in the north of England or perhaps the odd one in Ireland and/or Scotland before his association with Colt. 

TomP

I too have often wondered what Mac took away from his partnership with Colt.  Personally, I think it is very possible that this partnership went a long way toward making Mac's career a great one.

Ciao 
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #17 on: November 18, 2008, 08:08:18 PM »
MacKenzie wrote this in June 1913:

"Bunkers on an inland course should, as a rule, be made in the exact opposite way to what is customary. At the present time most bunkers have the hollows sanded and the banks turfed. I suggest that you get a much more natural appearance if the hollows are turfed over and the hummocks sanded. This has the following advantages: the appearance is much more like a seaside course; the sand being above the level of the ground always remains dry; the contrast between the white or yellow sand enables one's ball to be found more easily, and the great disadvantage and expense of scything the long grass on the hummocks to prevent lost balls is done away with."

After reading this I felt that the work which we see in these photos was work work that MacKenzie was very proud of, and that he really did think that he was on to something here. But I think we can see holes in his logic - can't we?

First of all, the sand on the hummocks and the grass in the hollows, would have been a maintenance problem. Many of these bunkers would have grown over in short order, unless they were being edged almost constantly. And while the sand may have stayed dry, it would have also disappeared on a good windy day in wintertime.

Sorry if I sound critical here, but as a greenkeeper I can just see that these wouldn't have worked very well for too long. And the mowing around them would have been even harder not less so.

So I think this early style was abandoned in part because it was not practical to maintain. Ithink what we see here is a disconnect between the artist and the maintenance guy.

However you can see hints of what is to come, and they are grand.

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2008, 08:22:50 PM »
Bradley:

Terrific quote you produced there from Mackenzie. I've never seen that one before. And very good analysis of it from you.

One thing sure seems certain from that interesting era and that is some of the really imaginative guys were sure casting around for ideas on architecture.

When Mackenzie wrote those remarks you posted (1913) I wonder if he'd ever bothered to just go out in some duneland somewhere to analyze what Nature actually does do with both sand and vegatation.

Tom Naccarato

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #19 on: November 19, 2008, 01:48:16 AM »
Dear Tommy,

Are you telling me that those bunkers are going to mature into better bunkers without alterations to the bunker lines of the shapes of the mounds?

seriously.......

Not a chance.

You've seen enough to know that's true.

Com' on my friend - I'm calling you out on this one. :)

Ian,
I guess a point I was trying to make was--and I say this very carefully--a place in Ardmore, PA called Merion Golf Club.

At Merion, they have this place called the East Course which evolved into some pretty interesting bunkers. Mind you that they had this really quirky head professional and a head greens superintendent that went beyond the normal day to day job requirements of their profession, and created--or maybe a better word would be "refined"-- these magnificent white face-like bunkers into some of the fiercest pits the sport has ever seen.

Anyway, getting back to the subject at hand, this head professional went out of his way with the head superintendent to create these magnificent pits of death which required a certain type of custom maintenance which required throwing the book away when it came to maintaining them. Those bunkers evolved into what they are today.

Refinement.
Evolution.
Freedom.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #20 on: November 19, 2008, 04:37:13 AM »
MacKenzie wrote this in June 1913:

"Bunkers on an inland course should, as a rule, be made in the exact opposite way to what is customary. At the present time most bunkers have the hollows sanded and the banks turfed. I suggest that you get a much more natural appearance if the hollows are turfed over and the hummocks sanded. This has the following advantages: the appearance is much more like a seaside course; the sand being above the level of the ground always remains dry; the contrast between the white or yellow sand enables one's ball to be found more easily, and the great disadvantage and expense of scything the long grass on the hummocks to prevent lost balls is done away with."

After reading this I felt that the work which we see in these photos was work work that MacKenzie was very proud of, and that he really did think that he was on to something here. But I think we can see holes in his logic - can't we?

First of all, the sand on the hummocks and the grass in the hollows, would have been a maintenance problem. Many of these bunkers would have grown over in short order, unless they were being edged almost constantly. And while the sand may have stayed dry, it would have also disappeared on a good windy day in wintertime.

Sorry if I sound critical here, but as a greenkeeper I can just see that these wouldn't have worked very well for too long. And the mowing around them would have been even harder not less so.

So I think this early style was abandoned in part because it was not practical to maintain. Ithink what we see here is a disconnect between the artist and the maintenance guy.

However you can see hints of what is to come, and they are grand.

Bradley

I am sure your idea of a maintenance nightmare is correct.  I also think there is a question of bunker effectiveness.  It seems to me that sand in hollows has the benefit of potentially being gathering bunkers and thus effectively play much larger than their size.  Additionally, I wonder if having so many bunkers dug in the tops of mounds is really necessary.  It seems to me that folks are either going to end up on the side of mound or over the back of it leaving a tricky shot either way.  It even gets more fun if the grass on the mounds is cut down to allow for options - including the putter.   

What is interesting is that the top photo is a style of bunkering that I would advocate and it seems to go against what Mac wrote in 1913.  The bottom photo seems to depict what Dr Mac wrote about.  I know which I prefer and it isn't even close.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #21 on: November 19, 2008, 09:31:14 AM »
"Ian,
I guess a point I was trying to make was--and I say this very carefully--a place in Ardmore, PA called Merion Golf Club.

At Merion, they have this place called the East Course which evolved into some pretty interesting bunkers. Mind you that they had this really quirky head professional and a head greens superintendent that went beyond the normal day to day job requirements of their profession, and created--or maybe a better word would be "refined"-- these magnificent white face-like bunkers into some of the fiercest pits the sport has ever seen.

Anyway, getting back to the subject at hand, this head professional went out of his way with the head superintendent to create these magnificent pits of death which required a certain type of custom maintenance which required throwing the book away when it came to maintaining them. Those bunkers evolved into what they are today."


TommyN:

I sure don't want to divert this particular thread with something else on Merion but the entire evolution of Merion East's bunkers is a long and interesting story over which the era of Richie Valentine and head professional Bill Kittleman was just one of the unique evolutionary eras that lasted for a couple of decades plus. It also seems to be a story about which there is a ton of misinformation on here. It's been told in little dribs and drabs on some of the Merion threads particularly some years ago when there were those really contentious threads on here during their bunker project.

But let's just say there is still a ton of misinformation on here. I don't know whether another thread should be started to tell the entire bunker evolution story of Merion East the way it really evolved over Merion East's entire history or not but the story is definitely no mystery here and at the club.

It is funny how things happen sometimes with information. I did not really mean for Richie Valentine to tell me the story of the entire history of Merion East's bunker evolution but he did anyway one time and it took him no more than perhaps a half hour or so. I even remember where we were standing (next to the 5th tee at GMGC) when he told it to me as we stood there waiting for our superintendent at that time (Mike Smith) to show up.

He went all the way back to what his father had told him about them in the old days when they were being built and perfected over time, to Flynn's roll in their maintenance and look, to the eventual lacy look that was really reached in the 1930s and how they were cut (with a scythe, to the later age of mechanizatized maintenance that changed that lacy look, to the daily maintenance of little collapses that he and Kittleman worked on etc. In that entire story Richie threw in a few other really hilarious stories (which he always seemed to do) about how he went about maintaining that course in a pretty novel and imaginative "little fixes" and in an "in-house" mode that often spilled over from maintenance into architecture.

The point being it was just sort of a "jury-rigged" constant process of almost daily fixing whereby in the end in the late 1990s after a few other supers had succeeded Richie the drainage and sanding in those bunkers was basically just about 100% shot.

You called those bunkers "fierce"? Well, that's a whole other story. I wouldn't really say that (and I should know since I played that course probably hundreds of times in those decades) unless one had no idea how to hit a bunker shot off of what basically resembled a hard pack dirt road----and most golfers don't know how to hit that shot, by the way.

But it's interesting and more than a little ironic that this thread and some of these Mackenzie threads have been posted by Bradley Anderson.

I do not know if Bradley wants to talk about this, at this point, but in my opinion he has some ideas (and he is also conducting his own pretty impressive historical research on maintenance practices and such) on this general subject of bunker maintenance and what might be termed annual architectural maintenance that one might call revolutionary!! It's hard to categorize it but if someone asked me to categorize it I might call it something between what we consider to be annual operations and capital operations with architecture that very well may to some extent preclude the need for the occasional restoration or rennovation or redesign "Projects" that seem to be happening to more and more courses in the last couple of decades.

My point is Merion's bunkers never underwent such a thing in the course's entire history until around 1999 (close to a century).

In my opinion, this is a massive subject and one never really explored and discussed on here or perhaps anywhere else that I know of.

But to do it correctly one really does have to be accurate and honest about the historical realities of the entire evolution of any golf course, and particularly including one like Merion East, and to date that hasn't exactly been the case on here with Merion East's bunkers!
« Last Edit: November 19, 2008, 09:42:47 AM by TEPaul »

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #22 on: November 19, 2008, 06:00:33 PM »
"As I've said before, we have a (probably) 1910 sketch map of the course drawn by MacKenzie showing bunkers already built and those he proposed."

Mark:

I believe I've seen that if it's the one I'm thinking of. I studied it one time in 2003 for about fifteen minutes. The one I'm thinking of is pretty long and as I recall its hanging in one of the corridors in the clubhouse.

I saw the original of that Alwoodley map drawn by hand by Dr Mackenzie himself when I visited.  The club historian went and pulled it out of the boot (trunk) of his car to show it to me!  I certainly hope he is never rear-ended in that car, what a loss that would be!

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2008, 07:53:16 PM »
Shit....do ya'll think designers pop out of the egg fully formed?
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

TEPaul

Re: Two more MacKenzie photos from the series
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2008, 08:03:05 PM »
"Shit....do ya'll think designers pop out of the egg fully formed?"


Paul:

Well, Hmmm, aah, yes we do think that. Isn't that what the ASGCA says they do? I believe I've heard maternity wards say to parents not just that it's a boy or a girl but, "It's a golf course architect!"