How long did the ODGs spend on site?

[Kyle Harris]

How long did the ODGs spend on site?

Great than or less than a week?

[TEPaul]

Kyle:

It would be almost impossible to generalize on something like that. But as an indication it seems that most recognize that as a group Ross's Rhode Island courses are a cut above since he lived in Little Compton, R.I. in the summer and nothing in R.I. is far away. 

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle:

It would be almost impossible to generalize on something like that. But as an indication it seems that most recognize that as a group Ross's Rhode Island courses are a cut above since he lived in Little Compton, R.I. in the summer and nothing in R.I. is far away. 

Tom:

Check your PM. I think it'd be nice to have a discussion regarding the golf courses that obviously had a lot of architectural attention (Pinehurst, Merion, Pine Valley) and those that had little to none. It seems there's a critical point in there between an architect mailing in plans and spending a week or so on site...

[Kirk Gill]

I've always wondered about the amount of time that  Donald Ross spent on-site while designing the three courses of his (that I know of)  in Colorado. I'd posted quite some time back wondering if he had ever been on-site during the creation of Wellshire, and it appears that he WAS on-site, according to those who responded to that earlier post (Mark Fine was one, if I remember correctly, who had a lot of knowledge regarding Ross' time in Colorado). I believe that someone posted that he came up to work on Wellshire during his time in the state desigining the Broadmoor course down in Colorado Springs. The other Colorado course of his that I know of is the Lakewood Golf Club. For what it's worth, the Donald Ross Society lists the dates for all three courses, with Lakewood listed as 1916, the Broadmoor as 1918, and Wellshire as 1926, however I don't know enough (and haven't researched enough) to say if this means that he made more than one trip to Colorado, or if it just took different amounts of time for the various courses to open. I'd love to hear from the experts on this.

It seems as if, of the three, the  Broadmoor is the most highly-regarded, but I'd be interested in the opinions of those who have played all three. It would also be interesting to find out how much time Ross spent on-site working on each course, and then to compare that with just how good each course was when he was done with it. In other words, did more time on-site equate to a better course.

[Jeff_Mingay]

There's an interesting case study presented by Essex and Roseland, in Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

Ross designed Roseland in 1926. The course was constructed by a local contractor who had never build a golf course before. The course is pretty good, but by comparison, the feature shaping and tie-ins are a bit harsh and abrupt.

Essex was built a couple years later under the supervision of John Gray, a Scot with experience at golf course construction and green-keeping. There's an absence of harshness and abruptness about Essex.

Ross was on-site to layout both courses. It seems he also made at least one, but maybe even a couple visits during construction. The quality of Essex, by comparison, is attributable to the man in-charge of supervising the construction work, in absence of the golf course designer.

I presume this is also the case elsewhere, within Ross' massive portfolio.

[Kirk Gill]

Jeff, that is interesting stuff. I suppose the amount of time any designer spends on-site, and the effect that has on the quality of the resulting course, is most certainly mitigated by who exactly went about building said course. I don't suppose that it is common these days for architects to turn over their projects to unknown or untrusted builders. That certainly doesn't seem to be the case with Tom Doak or C&C, but apparently it was a lot more common back on the earlier days.

[Phil_the_Author]

One of the major deciding factors that determined how much time the ODG's spent on a particular site was what the club was willing to pay them to do. For example, many clubs paid the architect to route and design the course and leave the rest to them, while others paid them to manage the project from start to finish.

There were a number of projects where Tilly did routing and design (including leaving plasticene models of joles &/or green complexes) and others built the course and many projects where Tilly managed every aspect including using his own work crews and equipment.

For example, when building 5 Farms, Tilly ordered a rather expensive tractor for the job that the club wouldn't pay for. He simply sent it to another job that he was doing on Long Island and billed them.

As far as time invested in routing and final design, there were some projects where Tilly spent as little as a day doing this (including staking the course) and waited for drawings based upon this to be sent to him for the final design which he mailed back, to one job that I am familiar with where the owner, after he had already informed Donald Ross that he would design the course, went to New York the 2 weeks before work was to begin and brought Tilly back with him who routed and designed the course on the spot and directed the beginning of the project before leaving a crew in charge to do it.

The bottom line is that the designing process wasn't always integral to the building process in those days.

[Anthony Fowler]

I think it'd be nice to have a discussion regarding the golf courses that obviously had a lot of architectural attention (Pinehurst, Merion, Pine Valley) and those that had little to none. It seems there's a critical point in there between an architect mailing in plans and spending a week or so on site...

I think we should be cautious in concluding that these courses are great because the architects spent a lot of time on site.  Although there is probably some positive effect of architects spending a lot of time on site, the reverse causation story seems even more likely. 

It is possible that the architects spent a lot of time on these courses because they were great courses from the start.  It is possible that great land and great fortune led to great courses which made the architects want to spend more time on the course improving it and learning from it.

It is certainly not the case that if Ross had spent as much time at some of his weaker courses as he did at No. 2, that those courses would be as great as No. 2.

[Kyle Harris]

I think it'd be nice to have a discussion regarding the golf courses that obviously had a lot of architectural attention (Pinehurst, Merion, Pine Valley) and those that had little to none. It seems there's a critical point in there between an architect mailing in plans and spending a week or so on site...

I think we should be cautious in concluding that these courses are great because the architects spent a lot of time on site.  Although there is probably some positive effect of architects spending a lot of time on site, the reverse causation story seems even more likely. 

It is possible that the architects spent a lot of time on these courses because they were great courses from the start.  It is possible that great land and great fortune led to great courses which made the architects want to spend more time on the course improving it and learning from it.

It is certainly not the case that if Ross had spent as much time at some of his weaker courses as he did at No. 2, that those courses would be as great as No. 2.

Anthony,

I'm not looking to make that correlation. With those three examples, however, we do know pretty much exactly how each of the courses evolved under the care of the respective architects.

[Jeff_Mingay]

The bottom line is that the designing process wasn't always integral to the building process in those days.

Phil,

For some contemporary architects the design process isn't always integral to the building process either. Like in the old days, this never produces the best results.

[TEPaul]

"Tom:

Check your PM. I think it'd be nice to have a discussion regarding the golf courses that obviously had a lot of architectural attention (Pinehurst, Merion, Pine Valley) and those that had little to none. It seems there's a critical point in there between an architect mailing in plans and spending a week or so on site..."


Kyle:

For many years on here I've been saying it's obviously not just coincidental that those courses those known architects took so many years on have always been considered some of the best in America and the world. Of course, I'm talking about the likes of Pine Valley, Merion, NGLA, Oakmont, Pinehurst #2 and also including such as Myopia and GCGC.

[Dave_Miller]

"Tom:

Check your PM. I think it'd be nice to have a discussion regarding the golf courses that obviously had a lot of architectural attention (Pinehurst, Merion, Pine Valley) and those that had little to none. It seems there's a critical point in there between an architect mailing in plans and spending a week or so on site..."


Kyle:

For many years on here I've been saying it's obviously not just coincidental that those courses those known architects took so many years on have always been considered some of the best in America and the world. Of course, I'm talking about the likes of Pine Valley, Merion, NGLA, Oakmont, Pinehurst #2 and also including such as Myopia and GCGC.

Tommy:
How could you forget Charles River   Ross not only lived down the road on Beacon St. he also served as construction manager as well as architect and you saw his membership certificate hanging in the Clubhouse.
Best
Dave