Map of Alwoodley

[Bradley Anderson]

I think this may be the map described in the other thread.

[Bill_McBride]

The one I saw was hand drawn and lettered, and done by Mackenzie back somewhere around 1910.  I almost fainted when I got to hold it!  There is a reproduction hanging in the clubhouse.

[TEPaul]

Bradley:

Do you have any idea when that plan was drawn? The reason I ask is those frequent "fairway melds". If they were from the era of the big tractor drawn gang mowers there could've been a practical maintenance reason for it rather than an aesthetic or strategic reason.

[James Bennett]

The one I saw was hand drawn and lettered, and done by Mackenzie back somewhere around 1910.  I almost fainted when I got to hold it!  There is a reproduction hanging in the clubhouse.

I have a picture of this map.  I can post it tonight if there is interest.  It includes the hand-written notes by the good Doctor, including the suggested change to make #11 play more like Moortown #17 (Gibralter - now #10 at Moortown).

The map shows Alwoodley as it was, before other bunkering changes (presumably at Mackenzie's request), eg the addition of a 'string of pearls' at the start of #13 fairway

James B

[Bill_McBride]

The one I saw was hand drawn and lettered, and done by Mackenzie back somewhere around 1910.  I almost fainted when I got to hold it!  There is a reproduction hanging in the clubhouse.

I have a picture of this map.  I can post it tonight if there is interest.  It includes the hand-written notes by the good Doctor, including the suggested change to make #11 play more like Moortown #17 (Gibralter - now #10 at Moortown).

The map shows Alwoodley as it was, before other bunkering changes (presumably at Mackenzie's request), eg the addition of a 'string of pearls' at the start of #13 fairway

James B

Bradley's map also shows #10 in its original form, at ~ 370 yards.  That was before the club purchased the adjacent property that allowed significant lengthening of #10 and relocation of #11.  That was quite a great development for the club.  #11 is really a terrific par 3, lots of back to front and right to left slope.

[TEPaul]

Bradley:

There seems to be some printing on the very top of that plan that isn't quite showing on your post. Do you know what it says?

[Bradley Anderson]

Bradley:

There seems to be some printing on the very top of that plan that isn't quite showing on your post. Do you know what it says?

Tom,

The map is from the June 1913 issue of Golfing. The writing on the top of the page is merely the name of the Magazine.

In MacKenzie's lectures at this time he stated that "the fairways should gradually widen out where a long drive goes; in this way a long driver is given a little more latitude...."

Tom I think that at this point these fairways would have been cut with a horse drawn three gang mower.

[Tom Naccarato]

Panhandle Bill is correct, there is a hand drawn version in the clubhouse, and I think its MacKenzie's original if I can remember right.

[Jim Nugent]

Tried to figure out the sequence of holes on the map.  Does the 3rd hole play across what looks like #16 fairway?

[Mike_Cirba]

James Bennett,

There's interest.

It would be great from a compare and contrast perspective.

[Tom Naccarato]

Jim, they cross.

I was told that hardly any player runs into one another. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen. Of course, I may have been mis-understanding my host as Alwoodley was colder then a witches ti......breast, and honestly that didn't work well for someone from California....

[James Bennett]

James Bennett,

There's interest.

It would be great from a compare and contrast perspective.

Mike et all

Here is the top right hand-corner, showing the new #10 green and new #11 hole (a la Gibralter) as discussed earlier.  Check Mackenzie's hand-written note.



The full map, dated 1 October 1909 I believe.



And yes, #3 and #16 cross-over.  #3 didn't originally as the tee was on the other side, but players had to walk over 16 to get to it.  The hole is lengthened by the new tee to a par 4.5 (followed by a par 4.5 in the opposite direction.  The two general winds that influence this course blow in these two directions, so producing one upwind, one downwind hole).  I have played Alwoodly three times, and have never experienced any crossing issues when playing either the 3 or 16 holes.

James B

[Mark_Rowlinson]

James, That is the map to which I have several times referred. You can see why we are not sure whether the 11th was ever moved.

[TEPaul]

Mark:

What is the truth and the dates of this story that Mackenzie co-opted some Alwoodley member's wife and took off to basically become persona non grata at Alwoodley? When did that happen and did he ever return to Alwoodley to do any architectural work there?

You see, Mark, this is essentially what the United States of America is----eg a safe haven for people who have swiped the wives of people from the other side of the Atlantic!

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Tom, All my books are in store (building work), including the Alwoodley centenary book and Tom Doak's MacKenzie book, so the detail may be wrong, but roughly it is that Alister MacKenzie and his wife were prominent figures at Alwoodley. When MacKenzie moved to the States he left his wife behind and divorced her in Reno. Those at Alwoodley (including his ex-wife) did not recognise this divorce, so when he remarried (a childhood sweetheart) he was considered to be a bigamist. He certainly did return to Leeds, for he attended the 1929 Ryder Cup at Moortown. Whether he sneaked onto Alwoodley to see the new 10th green can only be a matter of speculation. Sadly I can't give you chapter and date but MacKenzie transferred from full to country membership at some time around then, giving the reason that he was now living in London. I think he remained on the Green Committee after that, but as there are hardly any records of their meetings I cannot say whether he attended any of these. Meetings were not held at Alwoodley but at the Leeds Club, a gentleman's club in the city.

Nick Leefe may see this - he is the man to know precisely where MacKenzie was on any given date.

[Rich Goodale]

James, That is the map to which I have several times referred. You can see why we are not sure whether the 11th was ever moved.

Why do you say this, Mark.  From the routing artwork in the new World Atlas of Golf it seems clear that the current green is the "suggested new" green MacK noted on the map.

Rich

[Bill_McBride]

James, That is the map to which I have several times referred. You can see why we are not sure whether the 11th was ever moved.

From my one day visit, I recall the 11th tee being opposite the new 10th green, so think that must be the new 11th hole.  From the map it appears Mackenzie is saying "expected new 11th hole."

But since none of us was there, who really knows?    It's interesting to speculate.

[TEPaul]

"Tom I think that at this point these fairways would have been cut with a horse drawn three gang mower."

Bradley:

Nevertheless, what I'm really wondering is if those fair number of melded together fairways were simple a function of the mechanics of those mowers at the time? I'm 64 now and I've been mowing fields and such since I was around 14 and I do remember those old mowers and how you had to get off and manually disengage the mowers if you were going into an unmowed area. It seems to me it was just easier in those days to have those frequent fairway "melds" just so you didn't have to do that back then.

Matt Shaeffer of Merion noticed that on old photos of the West course where there were these wide mown swaths between holes and even through some treelining. He figured it happened that way just so the guy mowing didn't have to keep getting off to manually disengage the mowers all the time.

I even remember the old bar-lever to engage and disengage those old mowers. It wasn't that easy to do frankly. Sometimes I had to actually prop myself up on something to get some leverage to push it in and out/back and forth. I think I even did some pretty energetic and probably angry kicking on it from time to time!

I seem to recall it was pretty much the same kind of thing for equipment like some of the old hay rakes and bailers we used to have on the farm.

[Bill_McBride]

James Bennett,

There's interest.

It would be great from a compare and contrast perspective.

Mike et all

Here is the top right hand-corner, showing the new #10 green and new #11 hole (a la Gibralter) as discussed earlier.  Check Mackenzie's hand-written note.



The full map, dated 1 October 1909 I believe.



And yes, #3 and #16 cross-over.  #3 didn't originally as the tee was on the other side, but players had to walk over 16 to get to it.  The hole is lengthened by the new tee to a par 4.5 (followed by a par 4.5 in the opposite direction.  The two general winds that influence this course blow in these two directions, so producing one upwind, one downwind hole).  I have played Alwoodly three times, and have never experienced any crossing issues when playing either the 3 or 16 holes.

James B

The way Mackenzie offers the option of a tee shot across the OB corner of #10 really does make you think of #13 at Augusta, and the eventual lengthening of the hole really makes it the precursor of that wonderful risk/reward par 5.  Even the terrain is similar at the corner, as the ground is tumbling down and right to left in that area.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Yes the new 11th tee is level with the new 10th green, but the old 11th tee, which was down beside the old 10th green, remained in existence until very recently and the distance from there to the present-day green is 150 yards which is the length MacKenzie gives on his card of the course. And from that old tee there was no bunker on the direct line to the green.

A spanner is thrown in the works by another map of the course made by someone called Chapman, also in 1910. His map differs from Mac's in some detail (particularly the bunkering and several tee locations). It is professionally printed, rather than hand sketched, which makes it look more authoritative, but how accurate it is we can really only speculate. However, on his map the walk from the 11th green to the 12th tee is much shorter than it is today, suggesting that the green has been moved. But, as I said, a number of his tee positions do not accord with Mac's.

Have a look at the old picture of the 11th green (on another thread - Alwoodley pictures, for instance) and you will see that, while the bunkering style has been changed, the bunkers are in the same position as they are today.

In the minutes there are two separate entries in which it is recorded that permission was granted for the construction of a new 11th green. Nowhere is it recorded that this was ever carried out. If it was done it doesn't appear to have cost any money. Permission was granted some years before Alwoodley acquired the use of the land on which the current 10th green and 11th tees now stand.

It is not as straightforward as you might imagine.

[Bill_McBride]

But what a hole nonetheless!  I loved that steeply sloping green in two directions.

[Mike_Cirba]

James,

Thanks...that's a tremendously exciting map for us golf research nerds..

[Rich Goodale]

Thanks, Mark

You do, of course, know the hole better than I.  I must say, however, that any tee that much to the right of the current one would have to be hitting over a big hump (and, at least today, trees) to a sharply r-l slanted green.  Not a pretty sight (or hole, for that matter)......  Is it not possible that the tee you are proposing as the old one was just an alternative for the new "suggestd" one?  I think so, given that there is that "old" hole between 10, (new) 11 and 12 which can really have no purpose other than having been the "old" 11.  IMHO, of course.

Rich

[Mark_Rowlinson]

James, What is the provenance of the 1st Oct 1909 date? There is nothing in Alwoodley's archive to give a date. We reckoned on about 1910 (but Oct 1909 is almost 1910) because of the state of development of the course, particularly the bunkering. What the map shows is that the course was developed over several years.

The 6th tee appears to be on the right side of the 5th green, where it most certainly isn't today, but then the hole was later lengthened. The 2nd tee is on the right side of the 1st green (it is today on the left) and that must have been a fun dog-leg. The bunkering of the 7th is nothing like it appears even in early photographs. Look at that suggestion for an alternative tee for the 14th! What would that be like at today's 200+ yards!

Back to the 11th, Mac shows only 3 bunkers but the early photos show more...... Jean-Paul there were no trees on the old 11th. It was right out in the country.

I suggest we all meet at Alwoodley with maps and photos in hand and see if we can discover the old green site. We tried, but didn't succeed. What we did notice, though, was plenty of opportunity to enlarge a number of putting surfaces with false fronts etc.

[Peter Pallotta]

"...What I'm really wondering is if those fair number of melded together fairways were simple a function of the mechanics of those mowers at the time?"

TE -

if I'm understanding you right, and am understanding you question properly, what occurs to me is that - regardless of the REASON for the melded fairways -- the members and golfers and architect at Alwoodley must've LIKE and APPROVED of those fairwways to have left them that way and recorded them as such in the map that Bradley posted. (Otherwise, I'm guessing they would've had no problem telling the mower-driver to get off his ass and disengage the mowers!). Which, if that's the case, may mean that Alwoodley manifested at least in a few areas a very early example of the almost max Behr-ian disdain for "rough".  But I have a feeling I'm misunderstanding something, and that my conclusion is not where 'you're going' with your questions

Peter