[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I just recently stumbled upon some old photos of Durand-Eastman in Rochester from the mid-30's and the course looked very impressive. The use of the rough terrain and bold bunkering were quite striking. I have no idea what the course is like today, has anyone seen it?  

I think that some of RTJ early work might be under appreciated as a result of his later assembly line methods. I know Champions (fka Winding Hollow-1947) is the most underrated course in Columbus and perhaps in Ohio - and I'm sure there are more out there. I wonder if the man's success damaged his creative output.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Based on what I've seen, the RTJ-pre 1950 stuff looks much more interesting, with some wild features as you mentioned.

One of his cooler courses is Green Lakes State Park near Syracuse, built as a WPA project in the 30's, and one of his first.  I believe John V has played there, and really enjoyed it, as well.  

I wonder if the Stanley Thompson influence wasn't still in his veins at that time.  The Dunes Club, which he built in the 40's is still probably his best by many accounts.  

Perhaps, when all was said and done, his general repitition and formulaic design style that followed was mostly indicative of the fact that the game grew too fast for him to keep up given his ubiquitousness popularity and vast body of work, making it impossible to maintain freshness and long-term interest.  

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Mike
I'm thinking the same thing about the Thompson influence. In fact he was still partner of Thompson's when Durand-Eastman was built. The course appeared to have some of the most extravagant bunkering of that era - a la Thompson.

If I were taken out to Champions - here in Columbus - without any prior knowledge and asked to identify the architect, I would've guessed Thompson.

I would agree that some point his production was so high that he reverted to a tired formula - possibly as a result of the Open at Oakland Hills. I wonder why he suffered from heavy production and Ross did not. Different kinds of formulas I'd guess? Or perhaps a better suporting cast?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I think the ultimate difference between Jones and Ross was philosophy.

While Ross focused on playability for all golfers, while still providing challenge for the best players (particularly at the greens), Jones's thinking seemed to have evolved over his career.

In fact, and probably beginning around 1951 with his massive revisions and "toughening" of Oakland Hills, Jones turned to the DARK SIDE.  

In fact, an argument could be made that his work with the USGA for that US Open ultimately corrupted his design style for the worse, and started the DARK ages of design.

From that point forward, Jones seemed much more intent on building long "championship" courses, with fairway bunkers pinching in each side of the fairway at 250 yards, with patterned bunkers guarding most openings to huge, multi-leveled greens, dictating the aerial game, and with conscious use of water hazards to create what he termed "heroic" design.  

Much of the early sophistication and classic training under Thompson (Yoda?) went by the wayside, and ushered in the "signature" course in its wake.  

[John Foley]

Tom & Mike,

Durrand-Eastman is one of those "I've gotta get out there and play it" courses I've not gotten to yet. Being here in Rochester, It's something I will get to soon and try and take some pics. From what I understand, manitenace is shoddy, much of the course has been overgrown and geen-sizes lost.

I also think that Thompson was listed as the Architect in the Toronto Terror book, but how much work he actaull did vs RTJ I'm not sure of.

The terrain looks good from the few holes I have seen.

[BCrosby]

Mike Cirba -

Bullseye.  

The "monster" course syndrome from the early '50's ushered in a Dark Ages of gca that we are just now recovering from. For the movie version you cast RTJ and Dick Wilson as the knights errant and the USGA as the Prince of Darkness.

But I've always believed there's another twist to the story.  In many respects RTJ's reputation was first established when Robert Tyre Jones (hereinafter"Bobby") hired him to design Peachtree in '46 or '47.  Overnight RTJ became the preeminent American architect.  

It's pretty clear that Bobby's marching orders to RTJ were to build a "modern championship" course.  

What I believe he meant by "modern" was that this was going to be the first major course built since the Depression without budgetary restrictions for the purpose of challenging the new game played with steel shafts.

Bobby won the Grand Slam with hickory shafts in 1930. Immediately thereafter steel shafts took over.  Coincidentally The Great Depression hit at the same time.  Golf course construction immediately ground to a halt and didn't resume until after the end of WWII.  

Thus, as of '46 or '47,  no new course had been built based on the extra distance and accuracy that steel shafts afforded.  I think Bobby planted the notion with RTJ that Peachtree was to be the first championship course to be designed with the challenge of steel shafts in mind.  

RTJ's solution was the heroic/monster course.  

That seed was planted at Peachtree. RTJ and his friends at the USGA it took it from there.  Within a couple of years it grew to became the plant that ate golf course architecture.

All of this should should familiar.  Changes in equipment dictate changes in golf course design.  Courses become "obsolete" and new courses, built to meet the games of the longer/stronger players, violate all the old design rules.  Etc., etc.

The lesson - to mangle Georges Santayana - is not to repeat history.  RTJ's and the USGA's response to the advent of steel shafts is the kind of response we should not repeat. Making courses harder, more heroic, more like monsters is a dead end.  It is the Dark Side.  It is The Atlanta Athletic Club.

The alternatives are not so clear.  I just hope and pray (and am beginning to believe) that there are bright, courageous architects out there who are up to the challenge presented by the new power game.  

They would be helped along the way if they understand how architecture botched these challenges in the 40's and 50's.

Bob  



    

  

[Mike_Cirba]

Bob,

Wonderful post, and I had forgotten about Peachtree as a seminal moment in young Robert Tranakin Skywalker Jones's career.

As far as not repeating history, some months ago I started a thread in which I asked "which architect is going to save golf?".  I would have been better served to have titled it "which architect is going to save golf course architecture?", because in it I argued that some inventive designer is going to have to come up with a better mousetrap, without resorting to the Dark Side of total penality.  The advances in technology are even more pronounced right now than they were between 1930 & 1950, and I'm hoping that some architectural genius, either current or future, will lead the way by simply coming up with something no one has thought of before.  Looking back is fine, but progress...real progress, is better, if someone figures out how to do it.  It's why I asked Steve Smyers for his ideas on how to provide both challenge and playability in his courses when a 450 yard par four is drive and short-iron for top players on the recent thread.

Two weeks ago, I talked here about a new course I had played in NJ where the designer clearly let fear and emotion turn him to the very darkest side I've ever seen.  After the round, the four of us were discussing it, and decided that we wouldn't play there again even if they paid us to, despite the beautiful property, scenic overload, and fine conditioning.  

We would have been safer and had a better time in a stinking Tatooian barroom.

So, we have RTJ as an example (Rees....I AM your father! sorry...couldn't resist), but what will present day designers learn from courses built a long time ago.  Hopefully, some young Luke Skywalkers will lead the charge in ways most of us can't even imagine yet.    

[Yancey_Beamer]

I have played RTJ's Midvale G&CC in Rochester NY.
This was designed with Stanley Thompson and at that time they shared an office in Rochester.
The course is quite playable but is unique in that the greens are rectangular and the bunkers are long and narrow.  
No oval greens or free flowing bunkers.          

[Yancey_Beamer]

Also, designed in 1931.This was his first course.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I looked an aerial of the D-E GC and there is little evidence of the bold bunkering that I saw in the old photos.

I think Trent Jones would make for an interesting study: the early Thompson influence, the 50's and 60's movement, his son's output and styles. Maybe some kind of trilogy.

[Yancey_Beamer]

In 1967 on the advice of the professional RTJ was brought in to revise Eugene CC which was a Chandler Egan design. The course had small greens and small tees and both were quite worn. Also there was the question of reversing the course so that each tee became the site for a green complex and each green the site for a set of tees.This was done.Last month I played ECC with a member who has played the course for 50 years.The green complexes are magnificent.The course is a delight.When we finished the member noted that the previous course was"ordinary" but post revision the course became"macnificent".I believe this represents RTJ at the height of his powers.

[joey o]

I live in Rochester and have played Durand many times.  There are NO bunkers on the course today...but it remains a wonderful golf course.  The routing is superb, a great collection of holes.  Because it is run by the county, it costs only 5 dollars (with a pass) to play, so is one of the greatest bargains ever.  I am interested if it will ever be renovated to its original state (bunkers and all) though i know its unlikely.  I love playing Durand, while out there you know you're playing a great golf course.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()