[Ross Waldorf]

Hey, everyone. I thought for my first attempt at a thread I'd ask some of you SoCal and George Thomas types if anyone could help me understand what remains of the Thomas (and Bell?) layouts in Griffith Park.

I haven't played there in a few years, but it was always obvious to me that there is some very cool golf on both courses, but that the Golden State freeway (among other things) has caused some really major changes to have been made there. Not to mention stuff like the gorgeous concrete ponds like the one on Wilson number 4.

Even an old lurker like me knows that this has to be a Tom Naccarato-type question. I've seen a few of his rants about Ojai, and I totally get where he's coming from. Now THAT is an obviously great golf course that's been totally screwed up by redesigns . . . It's still fun to play, though, because the bones of greatness are still evident.

Anyway, anybody have any interesting tidbits about Wilson or Harding?

[Lynn_Shackelford]

Welcome Ross.  I don't know when you started playing the Wilson course, but the old 4th was similar to the 10th at Riviera.  Obviously there was no water and the green was about 1/4 the size of the current one.  The more longer and left you went the better the angle for the second pitch shot.
By the way the old 3rd was fantastic.  A long narrow green that if missed short left or short right you surely would roll down away from the elevated green.  There were numerous bunkers that have been removed over the years to "speed up play."  Of course when the bunkers were there, I trust they were 4 hour rounds.  Now they are 5 hour rounds.  Typical, they didn't address the real reason for slow play, carts and the players, the bunkers weren't the problem.
The long 11th par 3 was a Seth Raynor type green.  225 yard built up on a volcano like setting.  I think the Harding was adjusted more for the freeway than the Wilson.  That concrete pond you refer to on the Harding was a long par 4 in its day, now a silly par 5.  My son Geoff has some old pictures, aerials actually showing the holes and bunkers, but I don't think it is in any of his books.  However I believe THE CAPTAIN has some old Griffith Park pictures.
The clubhouse, an old WPA project, is pretty cool, but in looking in on another post, it doesn't appear politically correct at this time to think that was a positive, or more importantly that we should be addressing something golf related in this day and age.  I guess golf has become an unnecessary activity in the 21st century.  Anyway, welcome aboard.

[Bill_McBride]

You also don't want to get TN started on La Cumbre in Santa Barbara, another George Thomas/Bell Sr course that has been laid to waste by the philistines (at least according to TN, Geoff Shackleford has done some work there and I'm going to get a look in February).

[Forrest Richardson]

Mark Fine and I have a very good picture of Griffith compiled from a variety of sources. In essence, Thomas' work remains...but it is hard to find among the changes. An interesting tid-bit is that an old, abandoned 18th hole remains in the woods below the old clubhouse site.

We recently completed an analysis of the current 15th hole of the Wilson course for possible funding to demonstrate work being considered by Keep It Classic. If contributions are realized, the 15th hole (a par-3) will be restored back closer to its original (Thomas) version as a short one-shotter to a green guarded by a swale and a deceptive bunker well short. The hole was lengthened in the 1930s and the 14th green significantly relocated.

The freeway, as mentioned, thwarted much of Griffith's work near the LA River where Thomas had holes interacting with the sandy soils and jagged shoreline.

As Lynn mentions there are two images in The Captian — one of a photo of a Harding fairway and the other is, I believe, the old 6th hole (now long gone).

[Sam Kestin]

Mr. Waldorf,

Growing up in Southern Cal, I played a great deal of high school golf out at ole' Wilson and Harding. It's hard for me to tell you what remains of Thomas/Bell's original design for those courses, as I haven't done a great deal of research into what aspirations the pair had for their work at Griffith Park. I can tell you, however, that what remains is hardly the soulful golf experience enjoyed at nearly every other Thomas/Bell course I've ever played. The only courses I dreaded more in my high school golf rota were Encino/Balboa @ the Sepulveda Golf Complex and this P.O.S. named DeBell in Burbank.   

I don't really know much of the history of what they've done (on purpose or by accident) to the layout at Griffith Park over time, but I highly doubt that what's there now looks a whole lot like what was originally planned for the course. Take the 11th hole on the Harding Course as an example...

Based upon a drawing of the original plan in Thomas' Golf Architecture in America (pg. 84), the hole was supposed to border the Griffith Park complex on the eastern side (in a dry riverbed that has been eliminated thanks to the Santa Ana Freeway...more on that shortly...). The architects had hoped to make it a medium length two-shotter with a standard Thomas/Bell options tee shot.

The riverbed was to separate a short-left fairway from a long-right fairway. From the safer short-left fairway, the riverbed would need to be carried on the approach. From the aggressive long-right fairway, the riverbed would more greatly influence the tee shot but reward successful efforts with an approach angle devoid of any carry requirement.

What exists today on the property Thomas/Bell intended to use for the double-fairway concept are the 11th and 12th holes. The 11th hole is a completely vanilla dogleg right with a bunker short/right of the green placed, seemingly, at random. The 12th hole is particularly amusing, as it is another vanilla dogleg-left. The rainbow sprinkles on this hole, however, come in the form of a giant mesh fence that prevents errant shots from finding I-5.

The mesh fence is a unique design element and really adds intrigue to the 12th (roll eyes). For example, one would never think that a tactic like the one I used in high school could ever prove to be a good idea...but without fail, every time, I'd play my tee ball on 11 off the fence as hard as I possibly could, chalk up another fairway in regulation every single time time and never really have to hit more than a middle/short iron in for my approach. A bunch of my teammates similarly engaged in such a tactic, and similarly never had too much trouble with the 12th.

Thomas/Bell would definitely need an Advil or a tall glass of something if they ever hovered over the Santa Ana Freeway in one of those Eyewitness News Traffic Choppers and watched our squad play such nonsense shots across the land they had originally routed for their double-fairway hole (the only hole at either Wilson or Harding that they deemed worthy of a sketch in Golf Architecture in America).

I'd venture a guess the hack-job done to the old 11th at Griffith Park is probably Exhibit One of 20-25 holes across the 36-hole layout that sure as s--t aren't all they used to be or could have been. That having been said, with some money and effort the place could certainly be spruced up and "restored" (however people define that term) to some semblance of its former self.

With the California budget in the dumps and Gov. Last Action Hero in office calling emergency sessions because we're basically fresh out of money, I think a redesign of a public golf course by the freeway is probably pretty far down on the list of our fair state's economic priorities. Donations might get it done, but the economy being so rough usually depresses the overall charitable mood. 

Sam Kestin     
 

       

[Ross Waldorf]

Thanks so much for the comments, everyone. I must say, it's a real pleasure to be introduced to this board with such interesting bits of information.

Lynn:
I moved to Los Angeles in 1993 and did most of my Griffith Park golf probably between then and about 2000, probably most of it nearer to '93. I grew up and remain a public golf guy, so those were two of the courses that made sense for a newcomer to LA. I haven't seen that particular book of Geoff's, but I certainly know of him and his work -- in fact, I have the good fortune to call Rustic Canyon my home course, so I'm a pretty happy guy. Anyway, speaking of 5 hour rounds, I'd say that my main reason for ditching the joys of Wilson and Harding was probably what a zoo it tended to be out there when you went out as a single and wait-listed it, so I mainly switched to playing Santa Anita before Rustic got built.

Very interesting comments about Wilson's fourth, third and 11th -- and yes, I was pretty sure that bizarre par 5 on Harding with the pond (if memory serves, it's the 7th) didn't look like that in the old days.

Bill:
Yeah, I'm sure I don't want Tom going berserk on me about La Cumbre (a course about which I really know nothing at all). But I really do understand why he gets so upset about Ojai. I remember the first time I played it and got to the so-called "lost holes" (now numbers 16 and 17). Without knowing the gory details about the par 3 (Thomas's old 3rd), it was just so obvious that the new hole was a cheap sort-of copy, just because it feels like you left the golf course and were suddenly transported to some weird generic hole from 1988. Just looks and feels all wrong.

And by the way, for people who have never played the Ojai Valley Inn -- as screwed up as it is, I'd really recommend that if you're in the area you go and play it. Because the place does have that classic feel in fits and starts throughout the round, and it's just a nice place to be. There's a real charm out there, in particular when you play the holes on the old back nine that crisscross the barrancas. You just have to kind of sigh quietly when you get to all the stuff that's obviously reworked (which is pretty much all over the place).

Forrest:
Good luck on doing that work on 15 at Wilson. Hope you have the chance. And on a separate note -- I enjoyed your work at Olivas Links (that's yours, isn't it?). Plus, my father lives at Coyote Lakes in Arizona, which I believe is also a course you did. And I must say, it's a neat little place, in particular given what I assume must have been some tight restrictions on what you could do.

Sam:
Please, call me Ross -- you're just way too polite! Nice stories from your high school days about Harding. And it's funny -- that's just the kind of info I was looking for, since it's obvious that 11 and 12 there have just been butchered from whatever was originally intended. It's so interesting how these things come across when you play these kinds of places -- because, for example, it seems apparent to me that the green on 10 must be somewhat like the way it was in the old days, just because it seems like such a cool greensite. But then the next two are just nuts. I need to have a look at Thomas's book, but I haven't run across a copy yet.

Thanks all. Appreciate the thoughtful input. Perhaps we'll run into each other at some point. Cheers.

[Forrest Richardson]

I am confident the Keep It Classic organization will be successful in their fund raising for Griffith — but it will take time. There appears to be a willingness at the City management level to bring back design and hallmarks of the courses.

Thanks for your nice comments about Olivas and Coyote Lakes. Olivas has a good following now and Coyote continues to do good business while many courses are struggling in that region.

[Ross Waldorf]

That's good to hear about Griffith Park, Forrest. Sounds like a very cool organization. I imagine that in some places a true restoration won't be possible, given that the land has been really altered. But I would think that plenty of good work can be done to the areas of the course (or courses) that still retain Thomas's original routing. I'll keep my eyes open for news of KIC's progress. Good to hear that the City folks are interested.

And re: Coyote Lakes -- it doesn't surprise me that the course does good business. It's very reasonably priced, and does an excellent job of working for the people who probably play it the most -- locals, retirees, etc. I just thought that it was way better than one would expect given that it's one of those development courses with housing pretty much wall to wall. In particular the back nine, where the holes mostly run next to each other between the housing, instead of having to run holes through corridors with housing on both sides. It's really sporty and fun. And some of the greens are kind of wild for a course like that -- you can find yourself with some cool putts out there.

[David Stamm]

Ross, welcome to the site. In the '80's the city of LA decided to rebuild all the greens. Instead of hiring an actual architect to perform the work, they came up with one "template" and used them on all the greens! Every green supposedly measures 25 yds from front to back because of this. If memory serves, I believe Tommy N said to me once that Willie Watson or Billy Bell might have been in charge of the construction crew there during construction.

[Forrest Richardson]

Ross,

If you e-mail me with your contact e-mail I will forward some of the documents we have. I am not good at posting images (yet.)

[Ross Waldorf]

Thanks, David. As to your comments about the greens -- really?! Jeez, that's brilliant, just brilliant . . .  Were those greens that hadn't been changed because of earlier renovations still in something like their original form when the 80s work was done? Wow, that's a sad tale. Perhaps the work that Forrest mentioned in an earlier post might get done, though. We can always hope.

[Mark_Fine]

As Forrest stated, we have gathered a ton of great information about the property and its history (thanks in part to many others who have shared their knowledge and past findings).  A big part of these kind of projects is data collection.  It takes time and patience and can be frustrating but very rewarding as well.  As things progress with the project, I'll make sure we post updates (with some photos as well). 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()