[Mike_Cirba]

Again, it appears that not all of Ross's recommendations for the 9th were followed, if any.

The yardage today is about the same as it was back then so it's unlikely a new tee was ever built.   

Moreover, the recommendation to move the mound at the right front of the green away to allow for an easier approach from that side obviously never happened, as that mound is now a deep bunker.

It does appear that the new bunker that Ross wanted installed left of the green did get added at some point, although the positioning isn't exact...today's is more left of the green and Ross wanted left front.

What's particularly interesting is trying to understand what happened to two original Wilson features on the drawing;  the center line feature that seems to have broken the fairway into two sections, as well as the curvilinear bunker jutting into the fairway from the left that Ross has noted as "Present Sand Pit".

Certainly Ross didn't recommend their removal, yet neither feature still appears by 1920, sadly.

What is certainly preserved from Hugh Wilson's course is the green, with it's plateaus at right angles to the approach.   Indeed, it makes it one of the most interesting approach shots on the golf course on what remains a very good hole overall.

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

First of all, are you sure that's a 1920 aerial? If so do you have any idea who was flying? If it was Dallin it seems a bit early for him. I have seen some pretty early aerials from around here including a fairly low one of basically the first few holes of Pine Valley that had to be before 1918. That one appeared to be by the Curtiss aircraft company.

Secondly, that 9th hole sure does seem to be a whole lot more interesting in Ross' drawing than it appeared to be on the ground back then and certainly today. It should be noted that the primary LZ fairway area where that inline mid-fairway bunker was included is 90-100 yards from side to side. Compare that to NLGA's Bottle Hole (in-line mid-fairway bunker scheme) that is app. 70 yards wide side to side.

Like a lot of old courses it seems like someone along the way (maintenance?)decided to go with basically standardized fairway widths on that course----not a good thing for original designs and original strategies on some holes. This appears to be a good example of that problem.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I'm not sure who the airline company was but it wasn't Dallin.  The photo is marked as 1920, though, but of course I'm subject to the vagaries of the historical record keeping accurary of the folks at Seaview through changes in ownership, etc..

The reason I say it wasn't Dallin is because there is a later one that I have a poor photo of that is clearly marked "Thanks to the Hagley Museum...etc." and on that one you can see much of the sandy areas already becoming overgrown.

Oh yes...the hole in question would have been very, very cool prior to the loss of those mid-fairway features on a 100-yard wide fairway.   That would be awesome to restore at some point, although one of the bigger issues overall is the lack of length on the course.

It was 6200 yards when it was built when top players averaged 230 yard drives and it's still 6200 yards today, so a number of the holes don't play as designed, obviously, either in length, or as you mentioned, in width.

[Peter Pallotta]

Mike - thanks much for this thread, and for all you work on it. The two points you and TE make about the 9th is what I noticed too, i.e. the very wide landing zone and the centre-line hazard -- given which make Ross' suggestion of a new tee 10 yards to the RIGHT seems one of his most interesting and strategic suggestions so far.

Peter 

[Mike_Cirba]

Thanks, Peter...it helps to know someone is getting something out of this. 

Moving on to Hole #10, another fairly lengthy par four, this unusual one featuring a blind drive over a cross bunker.








The drive across the cross bunker with very little in the way of a line to guide the player.



A solid drive leaves another wind-vulnerable approach to yet another very low-profile green without much in the way of visible cues.



From the left-side bunker, looking across the green out towards the bay.



Looking from behind, the flattish green is very accessible with either an aerial or run-up approach, but falls off quickly behind.




This 1920 aerial shot shows the fairway cross-bunker, and it appears as though this hole has changed very little since that time.

[Mike_Cirba]

Per Ross's drawing, the only change he recommended here was the building of a new green something like a Biarritz, with a "plateau 18 inches in the front followed by a hollow and then another plateau 2 feet , 6 inches above the surrounding terrain".

If this green was ever built there is little evidence of it and nothing remains today with a very flattish green.

[Mike_Cirba]

Seaview is unusual as the 11th hole is only the second par three of the round, and it's a very, very good one, albeit compromised over the years.







From just in front of the tee you can see the uphill, lengthy shot required to a perched green with a bunker on the left and a steep falloff into what must have been an awesome bunker to the right.



From short right this picture gives a sense of the elevation change.   This cart path is also in an absolutely HORRIBLE position.



What's left of the abandoned right hand bunker....again note the cart path positioning.



Golfers of yore missing this green to the right would have been left looking at something like this only from sand...



The left hand bunker is no picnic either, and please note how tightly the turf is shaved so that a ball just slightly missing the green will filter into it.



Looking back to the tee, one can barely make out the Atlantic City skyline across the bay in the distance through the low, hazy cloudiness of a late December day.



One of the real joys of Seaview is the charming intimacy.   Note how well the back edge of the 11th green melds into the 12th tee in the left of this picture.




This 1920 aerial with the green to the left of the picture and the tee to the right clearly shows the glory of the former right hand bunker, which today has been inexplicably left to overgrow into shaggy, stoney wasteland.

What must have been one of the most memorable holes in the region has sadly been compromised with time.

[Mike_Cirba]

Again on the 11th it doesn't appear that Ross's recommendations to move the lefthand bunker 12 feet to the right into the green internals was followed, nor was his advice to create a depression in the back of the green.   

[Mike_Cirba]

The mid-length par four 12th features one of the most unique hazards anywhere, affectionately known as the "Snake Pit", which is a 50 yard long trench bunker along the right side which is blind to the golfer from the tee on this slight dogleg right.

Once again, the recurring theme at Seaview is that the most direct route to the flag is usually not the prudent play.







From the tee, very little is obvious except that one is drawn to the distant flag down in the right corner.   This lack of dictation from the tee across a wide open plain is reminicent of what makes courses like Garden City so special.



Jutting in diagonally from the right however, is a series of bunkers cutting into the "fair green", as well as OB cutting in diagonally, as well.



They just don't seem to build bunker combinations like this any more...



The sadistic beauty of the infamous "Snake Pit"..



The wise golfer takes the longer route away from all of that nastiness out to the left side, (skirting bunkers there as well), leaving this optimum approach angle.   Still more surprises await.



Invisible from the fairway, this right side bunker lies in wait for a shot slightly lost to that side.



The green is one of the smallest and most undulating on the course.




The 1920 aerial unfortunately has some of the green cut off on the left, but shows a splendid early view of the Snake Pit.

[TEPaul]

Mike:

If you want some comment from me please tell me first which holes are those that George Bahto posted photographs of on post #49  that have those elongated berms?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

These features sort of pop up here and there somewhat randomly throughout the course, but the pics of George's I can clearly indentify is his fourth of first 5 pics shows the mounding encircling the sides and back of the 16th green.

Then, in his two pics below that one, I believe the one he has marked as the 5th is probably mislabelled and I believe it's actually 17.   

George...can you help?

[Mike_Cirba]

It is difficult to ascertain whether any of Ross's changes to the 12th were implemented.

Certainly it seems his first recommendation to build a green where the front is raised up 2 foot 6 inches and the back raised 4 feet with backing mounds to provide definition was not done.

Similarly, his dictate to make all the sand in the right hand greenside bunker visible was not followed.

Also, he wanted the tee raised so that a clear view of all of the fairway could be seen, which seems never to have happened.

So who is then responsible for the cool Snake Pit bunker?

It's hard to say.   While Ross has a large rightside fairway bunker drawn on his map, and numbered, he does not use language he used on other drawings when he wanted to "add new pit", or "expand existing mound or bunker".

Instead, it just says, "Large Sand Bunker kept entirely below surface".   Did he mean to build a new one, or just to keep it hidden while making other features like the greenside bunker and the rest of the "fair green" more visible?   Was he drawing an expansion of an existing bunker?

The pre-Ross hole description advised staying left and warned "a slice is expensive", but doesn't detail exactly what that punishment would entail.

The bunker drawn on the diagram starts closer to the tee but ends at exactly the point of today's at about 220 yards.    However the bunker drawn on the Ross diagram doesn't look like the bunker combinations that were built down the right side...they are much wider and conventional.   And, we know from the 1920 aerial that something that looked like the Snake Pit (with a nearby egg bunker) existed by that time.

We'll likely never know...however it's still a cool feature.

[Mike_Cirba]

The next two holes at Seaview are two wonderful, back to back par threes, one measuring over double the distance of the other.

When one walked off the 14th green at Seaview with the original hole sequencing, he would have just played 3 par threes in the last 4 holes, a very unusual configuration, but a worthwhile one as all of the holes are quite good.

Beginning with the diminutive 13th, the proverbial short pitch to the well-protected green, made troublesome by ever-present sea breezes just waiting for a ball slightly mis-hit, or hit on too high a trajectory.







From the tee, the challenge of pitching to the table-top green is clear.



The view from just short and right of the green.



From right of the green, one can see how quickly the green falls off on all sides.



Long is definitely wrong..



The backing bunker runs the breadth of the green..



Walking to the 14th tee, the backing mounds are evident.



This 1920 aerial with the tee to the left shows a green and bunkering much like today's, with just some bunker "shrinkage" evident in today's aerial.

[Mike_Cirba]

Ross's recommendations for the 13th were to essentially almost encircle the green with sand by moving the right front bunker closer to the direct line of play (it appears the back bunker and right side bunker were on long continuous bunker at that time), and create a running depression in the back of the green.  He also wanted to add 15 feet to the back of the green which was not done.

None of those proposals seem obviously to have been followed, although it may be that the right front bunker was brought more into the line of play in front and perhaps the back of the green raised a bit, but it's nothing that's easily determined today..

[Mike_Cirba]

It's difficult as modern golfers to put ourselves in the shoes of players in 1914 with Haskells and Hickory.

The 14th hole illustrates those differences very clearly, if we can use our imaginations and think about a time when with fairways often unirrigated, the ball would often roll out a third as far as one could carry it.

Thus, the 14th would have been known back then as a "risk/reward" par three, with the golfer either making a heroic carry over sand which would then allow the ball to run the rest of the way to the green, or bail out left, necessitating at least one more shot, and a trickier angle.








From the tee, the challenge is obvious;  either carry the bunker on the direct route to the hole on this lengthy 230 yard par three, or avoid it by going left.



The right hand bunker that must be carried by anyone attempting the direct route.



A weak, pulled drive to the left ending in this bunker leaves a host of problems awaiting.



The person who bails left has this touchy approach remaining.



As opposed to the person who successfully takes on the carry bunker, which creates this clear run-up to the hole.



Another bunker out to the short right of the green for the "almost good" drive that tails away.



Looking back to the tee, the strategy is simple, obvious, yet effective and on fast running courses, still timeless.



The 1920 aerial shows the tee left and the green right.

[Mike_Cirba]

Dammit...if I don't do one other thing here on GCA I'm going to finish this f*ck*ng thread!! 

I'm feeling a bit like the overpretentious early 80s metal band who puts out a triple-album with synthesizer flourishes, thumping bass, wall of sound production, soaring guitar leads, lyrics about mystical places and mythical creatures, and after spending 8 straight drunken and stoned months in the studio are too self-involved in their own project to realize that it sucks!   


In examining proposed changes to the 14th, something hit me like a ton of bricks that I'm guessing some others may have noticed previously (I'm a bit slow sometimes), but there are enormous differences in the sizes of greens on the Ross drawings versus what exist today.

If anyone has any doubt that Golden Age greens have shrunk considerably, I give you exhibit A;

The first column is the Ross drawing.   Where he proposed a new green I point that out, and where he suggests adding green space I mention that, as well.

The second column is the length of each green front to back today.

1 - 35 yards   28 yards
2 - 33 yards   23 yards
3 - 40 yards (proposed new green)  28 yards
4 - 25 yards (proposed changing green orientation and adding 15 feet)  29 yards
5 - 40 yards (proposed new double punchbowl green)  27 yards
6 - 40 yards (proposed new green)  24 yards
7 - 40 yards (proposed adding 15 feet to back)  27 yards
8 - 25 yards  24 yards
9 - 40 yards  28 yards
10 - 30 yards  24 yards
11 - 37 yards  28 yards
12 - 36 yards (proposed new green)  28 yards
13 - 25 yards (proposed adding 15 feet to back)  19 yards
14 - 40 yards  29 yards
15 - 25 yards (proposed new green)  27 yards
16 - 35 yards (proposed new green)  24 yards
17 - 48 yards (propsed adding 12 yards to back)  28 yards
18 - 35 yards  26 yards

[Mike_Cirba]

Specific to the 14th, it seems at one point that at the time this was drawn the green started about at the beginning of the left-hand greenside bunker and then ran diagonally up behind it, for almost 40 yards.

That's the only way I can see to explain the Ross drawing.

It also seems his recommendations were not followed.   For the large crossing bunker, he seemed to want to extend that one about 20-30 yards further towards the green.   He writes "face must not be raised so high as to hide the green."   Today, the bunker still ends at around the 170 mark from the tee, and not at the 200 yards that Ross proposed.

Ross also wanted the left greenside bunker extended back further and closer to what was a back left shelf that is no longer green today.   He also wanted that face stiffened to hold the ball so it wouldn't run out onto the narrow portion and that doesn't seem to have occurred either.


Still, it looks like what was in place as the original green was much, much cooler than what exists today, and if there is a mysterious and sad loss at Seaview over the years, it seems less about the evidence not supporting the supposed Ross origins and heritage and more about the loss of a set of greens that were compared favorably with the best in America at that time they were built.   

[Bradley Anderson]

So who is then responsible for the cool Snake Pit bunker?

Mike,

While doing some research on Connellan I discovered this 1913 quote:

"Nearly fifty new bunkers are to be
put in on the Wykagyl Country Club
course at New Rochelle. Work will
be commenced as soon as the weather
permits, under the supervision of Wm.
Connellan, the greenkeeper, who has
just returned from a trip abroad with
many new ideas on bunker construction."

A little over a year later, Connellan would become the first superintendent at Seaview. So I guess you have to include him as a possible candidate for some of the mystery work there.

In his own advertisements of that time he states that he builds bunkers. Here we have a man who was maybe the most talented greenkeeper of the time (he certainly was the most talented at self-promotion) and he is actually sent abroad to study ideas on bunker construction to be used at Wykagyl.

He is a fascinating character from this era. He will later team up with the professional (Wilfred Reid),  that Geist brought from abroad to fill out his dream team at Seaview, to form their own design firm in Michigan. I am very interested in Connellan and Reid because they did some work at the course that I care for.

I guess one would also have to include Reid as a candidate for some of what is at Seaview, because he had done some design work as well.

[Mike_Cirba]

Connellan and Reid are certainly candidates, Bradley...thanks for the reminder.

Although I did come across something the other day that seemed to indicate that Connellan left after about a year there, heading midwest.   I'll see if I can find it.

[Bradley Anderson]

Connellan and Reid are certainly candidates, Bradley...thanks for the reminder.

Although I did come across something the other day that seemed to indicate that Connellan left after about a year there, heading midwest.   I'll see if I can find it.

Mike,

That doesn't surprise me. It is my impression that Connellan was a very ambitious guy. And the owner of Seaview seems like he may have been an extremely difficult man to deal with.

[Mike_Cirba]

Bradley,

Here it is...

"Mr. Boyd Carrigan, Seaview's general manager, tells me that greenkeeper William Connellan will have the course in very fine condition, and that the putting greens will be a revelation to those who have not already seen them.  They are excellent."  - AW Tillinghast January 1915

"Huntingdon Valley has seen some very active green-making since the close of the last summer.  The work on the greens has been directed by William Connellan, who asserts that another season will show a marked improvement in turf quality." - AW Tillinghast March 1915

"WILLIAM CONNELLAN, for some time greenkeeper at Wykagyl and afterwards at Seaview, has given up his position at the Absecon course and engaged in general work as consulting greenkeeper and golf contractor.  This should appeal to all clubs who are building courses for  undoubtedly his great experience should enable him to build efficiently and economically." - AW Tillinghast October 1915

[Bradley Anderson]

Mike,

Sorry, I don't want to interupt your flow here, but I also found out this about Connellan.

One of Connellan's special skills was in building greens from sod. He may have been brought to Seaview strictly for making the greens playable in very short order - for the grand opening.

He developed an amazing ability to sod greens very quickly and effectively. He could take all of the sod off a green, create greensmix from material near the green, recontour the surface, and put the sod back in less than a week. The green would be playable two or three weeks later.

[TEPaul]

Mike:

Regarding my question in post #84 and your post #85, do you understand why I'm asking the question?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I've just been basically writing a thesis paper over the past week. 

Any grey matter that I may have left at this point is pretty smudgy. 

Pray tell?

[Bradley Anderson]

Tom,

The extensive road building on this golf course would have generated at least 10,000 yards of fill. That might also explain the presence of so much mounding. They might have even used the excavant from the road construction to cap the salt contaminated fill.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()