News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Rank the Raynors
« on: May 09, 2002, 10:37:06 PM »
I've only played a few courses designed by Seth Raynor.  I know I haven't seen his best.  For those who have seen a few of his courses, could you do me a favor and put them in an order.

1. Somerset
2. Mountain Lake
3. Minnesota Valley
4. Midland Hills

A frequent knock from architects is that some golfers judge the course they've played almost solely by who designed it.  Just like there are bad courses designed today by Fazio, Nicklaus, and Palmer, there are also some excellent ones.  I've seen some less than inspiring courses that are attributed to Seth Raynor.  I've also played Somerset, which I love and very few others seem to speak very highly about.

If I see it nearly unanimous that Shoreacres and Yeaman's are considered better than Mountain Lake, it will go a long way to help me understand how good they are.

I don't think I've seen any more of Raynor's work.  My list of 4 appears above.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2002, 05:37:02 AM »
NGLA
Fishers Island
Creek
Mid Ocean
Piping Rock
Sleepy Hollow
Westhampton
Blind Brook
Fox Chapel
Brookville
Everglades
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2002, 05:56:02 AM »
TEPaul,

Why does Everglades have such a different look from some of the others, acknowledging that it is in Flat Florida.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Nick_Ficorelli

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2002, 06:21:38 AM »
Yeamans belongs in there  somewhere
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2002, 06:53:24 AM »
Tom,

You're not ranking courses, are you?  ;)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Davenport

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2002, 07:14:15 AM »
Mike,
Accusing the Doyen of ranking?  tsk, tsk... I believe Tom is merely stating his preferences for those he has played.  Ranking would involve compiling quantifiable characteristics such as the plasticity of the transient mounding that decorates the grounds.  I wouldn't believe the Doyen has it in him to stoop to such levels!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2002, 07:23:00 AM »
Those are probably the ones Tom has played.

Other good Raynors (granted several of these in this thread are Raynor/McDonald) include (abovementioned Yeamans Hall), CC of Charleston, Shoreacres, Camargo, Yale, CC of Fairfield, Lookout Mountain, St. Louis.  Not sure how much Raynor is left at Waialae in Honolulu (same with Fairfield).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2002, 07:26:37 AM »
Not much Raynor left at Wailae - plenty left at Mid-Pacific, though (also on Oahu).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2002, 08:17:54 AM »
Nic Fic...
"somewhere"?  From the tone of your post, it sounds like the only Raynor you've played.  Either that or you forgot the names of the others.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #9 on: May 10, 2002, 08:20:04 AM »
Tom:

I wish you'd have seen Mountain Lake.  My guess is it fits in the middle of your list.  I'd love to know if Somerset would be above or below Mid-Ocean, The Creek, and Piping Rock.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #10 on: May 10, 2002, 08:20:49 AM »
I would consider Chicago a Raynor, after his 1923 reroute and remodel, and it is very good.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #11 on: May 10, 2002, 08:26:47 AM »
John - i've played Mtn Lake a bunch of times and I would say that it is well below the three you cite (PRC, TC, MOC). Anxious to see Silva's restoration. It is pretty short, not that that should be a knock on architecture, but it doesn't have the overwhelming architecture that The Creek (another shortish Raynor) has.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2002, 10:47:56 AM »
The courses in Hawaii are just a shell of themselves and Raynor never saw the finished products as he died 4 months after doing the routing of Wailae.  Banks worked off of Raynors plans.  The course has been revised many times, the old 1st torn up for what is now the old Hilton hotel.  I would love to Brian Silva come in for a full scale restoration, what an amazing place for a great course.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2002, 11:16:16 AM »
The Raynor courses I listed are the only Raynor courses I've ever played. Rankings not really my thing but, Geewhiz, if I  did rank courses (which I tried to do there) without PLAYING them first Pat Mucci would be all over me like all the ticks in a 10 acre hayfield in July!

John Conley:

Shows how bad I am at ranking--I had to go to Raynor in C&W and pick out his courses I have played and Mountain Lake is sure one of them and I missed listing it. I like Mountain Lake a lot, but you're right, I would put it right about the middle of that list.

My Raynor experience is certainly not that complete and I recognize there's a bunch of them out there that would be in the top half of my list, I'm sure! Yeamans, Shoreacres, Yale etc!

MikeC:

Don't worry I won't be getting into ranking--that was very hard work and I had to take a nap immediately afterwards.

Pat:

I don't know why Everglades is different except to speculate that the purpose of the course is so much different than the other ones. It's site location even when built is right in the middle of town and it's as close-coupled a course as one could find anywhere--sort of like the Breakers, but better. It's a little members-use course only more for the putter around than the others.

Without question Everglades does have a unique distinction in golf though--as there can't be a course in the world from which it could be any easier to take out a Rolls Royce windshield!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

john stiles

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2002, 12:12:45 PM »

Where does Morris County, Wanumetonomy fit in with the list ?   I have seen favorable threads re: great Prichard restoration on MC but have seen very little (none by GCA last 500 days) on Wanumetonomy. I have not seen photos, plans, etc. and have not played either course.

For those more accomplished Raynorphiles who made it west  ......how about Monterey Peninsula .... where is it at on the list ?

Best wishes for good weather at Mountain Lake as that is all they now need ...... Silva's restoration at Lookout Mountain (Raynor plan, Banks constructed/finished) was very good, in my opinion, with some 'restoration' work hopefully remaining to be completed.

As a final sidebar .......there is the 9 hole Hotchkiss course at Hotchkiss school in Connecticut where Raynor met Banks.

I played it so many years ago,   pre-Raynor addiction,   that I can only remember a few holes but cannot put them in any order ( ie Alps, Biarritz, etc.)  I seem to remember a par 3 slightly downhill which might be the Redan and a shorter downhill that might be a Short.   Do not remember any Biarritz ??  Any help out there with the holes at Hotchkiss ?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

George Bahto

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2002, 06:20:15 PM »
john - i'm restoring the hotchkiss course
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2002, 08:02:15 PM »
John Stiles,
.....and George is doing a great job of it, too!!

We have a reverse redan green on our 410+ opening par 4, /also an unrecognizable leven, fixed as best as could be done by George/ an alps/ a short/ a green on our 6th hole that he just loves to putt on/  a road hole closing par 5 that gets much attention and has been vastly improved, in the second-shot landing area, by GB. the downhill par 3's type escapes me at the moment but has a green with a 5' "mountain" built in the back left third of it. Plays around 188 from the back tees. I hope GB will fill you in with more info.

The course has seen some changes over the years but the greens, although shrunk by triplex mowing, are pretty much as Raynor built them. The lowest score I know of is a 62, even at the short yardage of just over 3,000 for the nine, 6,000+ for the 18.      
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Biarritz

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2002, 03:17:10 PM »
It is very difficult to rank Raynor courses because they are all virtually the same holes with different topographies. Out of the courses that I have played Yeamans, Creek, Piping Rock, Fishers Island, CC of Charleston, Mid Ocean, Yale, Fairfield, and NGLA here is my take:

Best Redan- NGLA
Best Short- Yeamans
Best Biarritz- Creek, Fishers
Best Eden- Yeamans
Best Double Plateau- NGLA
Best Principle Nose- Creek
Best Knoll- Yeamans
Best Alps- Fishers, NGLA
Best Road Hole- Yeamans, NGLA
Flattest Land- CC of Charleston
Least amount of Raynor- CC of Fairfield
Best Cape- Mid Ocean
Best Short Par 4's- Yeamans
Best Topography- Fishers
Best Vistas- Fishers, Creek
Most Natural- Yeamans, Fishers

1- Fishers
2- Yeamans Hall
3- Creek
4- NGLA
5- Mid Ocean
6- Piping Rock
7- Yale
8- CC of Charleston
9- Fairfield

I might even flip flop any of these because they are all good. Fishers Island is a special place. Yeamans Hall since Doak's redo is Raynor's Greatest Hits.

Why can't todays architects build courses more along the styles of old?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Nick_Ficorelli

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2002, 06:18:04 PM »
John:
mentioned yeamans only because it hadn't been mentioned at that point....no tone intended
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2002, 09:48:20 PM »
Nick:

I haven't played it, but did mention it.  

Tom Paul must not have played it, or it would have made his list.

You named it, but no other Raynor courses.

I was trying to get an idea where people rank the Raynors they've played in relation to another.  Nobody seems to have seen the three in Minnesota, and I haven't seen Shoreacres or Yeamans.

Can you give me your list?  My post was a serious inquiry.

P.S.  Played with Wigler yesterday.  Made me think of you in the Motor City.  I hope to make it to SoCarol later this year.  We'll see.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2002, 10:05:08 PM »
Sounds to me that Yeaman's would be high on my list but I've never played it or even been there. All the courses on my list I've played at least five times and some many more times, like Piping where I grew up.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Coral_Ridge

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2002, 11:28:06 PM »
TEPaul, since I respect your opinion (shear number of postings), and because I am curious, what is your favorite golf course?  Not even necessarily a Raynor course.  Forgive the thread creep on this and certainly don't rank any golf courses.  Just tell me your favorite golf course.  For whatever reason.  Might it be Piping Rock?  

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2002, 06:29:18 AM »
Coral Ridge:

I wouldn't say I have a favorite--and that probably wouldn't be that interesting anyway, but here are the courses I do know that I respect the most architecturally and the general reasons why. I have respect for architecture particularly if there's a difference to it somehow, a logic to it that I can understand somehow and probably ultimately something I might loosely call "taste" which has something to do with what works for me about it with where it is.

NGLA:

Probably the most interesting course and architecture in the world to me for its unique architectural style that works incredibly well for golf and a variety of golf shots. I would cite as my overall feeling about it something Bill Coore said about it; "I can't believe they had the imagination to build some of those holes and the guts to actually do it."

Pine Valley & Merion:

Two courses I would list together for the reason that I think they are the two courses in the world that have 18 holes that show the greatest variety and are the highest quality architecturally that can be found overall in an 18 hole course. Looked at another way what I might consider the weakest hole at either of these two is better architecturally, for some particular reason, than the weakest hole on any other of the great courses in the world. Every single hole on both these courses was burned in my brain from the very beginning and that's something I cannot say of any other courses--even NGLA.

Cypress Point:

Probably the most beautiful architecture in the world, ever!--and I don't just mean the setting. There are a few holes in the middle of the front nine that are not memorable to me, but I believe Cypress may have been the point where architecture reached it's zenith of using and blending with, in every single way, the lines and and the nature of it's particular site. It's ironic that it opened at what appears to have been the height of its architecture (from that point the architecture appears to have devolved downward). In other words the day it opened may have been the most mature and the best it ever was--highly unusual in architecture. Again, I see Cypress as the zenith of what man can do architecturally with nature and the fact that it opened in 1928 just preceding the financial crash and that I don't think architecture reached that point either before or since I think is highly ironic!

Seminole:

A course and architecture that probably has the greatest spectrum of "playability" to it that cannot be seen, or easily seen. It can be a championship course to test the best without a single one of the best saying it's "over the top" and about two days later it can be a relatively friendly "members" course. I've seen that happen many times and that's saying a lot to me about the quality of it's architecture. It does not have 18 good holes though. Some are really great and some have just one thing about them that keeps them sort of in the game.

Shinnecock:

Probably the golf course in the world that seems to have the most of it all! I don't think Shinnecock would lead the world of architecture in any one single element or aspect of architecuture but when you put it all together the general strength of all its architectural elements and aspects would probably put it on top in the opinion of the most people, and would in my opinion.

There's one example at Shinnecock, however, that shows the delicate balance of all things to do with golf architecture and the perception of it. If nothing at all was altered about the golf course except that the nines were turned around the golf course would not even come close to the top of the list overall, in my opinion!

Oakmont:

For top flight players the equal to Shinnecock for the strength of its architecture. Shinnecock's architecture has more elasticity to be "membership" friendly, as Oakmont seems to be the course in the world that stays closest to championship "playbability" all the time.

Royal County Down:

Hard to explain but for it's difference somehow. To carry off degrees of blindness and occassional narrowness in the use of its features like it does says a lot. Without question some of the most amazing bunkers in the world.

Port Rush:

Both the Dunluce and the Valley course seem to me to be some of the best natural golf ground in the world and the courses on it use it very well.

Maidstone:

If I had one course to play every day for the rest of my life it would be Maidstone! It doesn't matter to me if the one great asset of the course is its variability due to the wind! I don't care if it can be very easy one day and real hard and interesting the next with the wind. If it wasn't a bit of a lamb without the wind it would be impossible with it--and that shows true amalgamation of architecture with the natural elements to me!

Others I respect:

Huntingdon Valley; A real shot makers course because of  almost constant uneven lies.

Pacific Dunes: Lots of variety, great setting for it, wind interest and variation, par skewing at it's finest, and a great old/new direction for American architecture!

Rustic Canyon: Although I haven't seen it built I think I know enough about it to say it's an example of real subtle sophistication in architecture and the fact that it's at the affordable public level makes it that much more interesting.

Others:

Fishers Island, Misquamicut, Riviera, Merion West, Lancaster, Lehigh, GCGC, Somerset Hills.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2002, 06:35:34 AM »
Tom,

That's a fabulous descriptive essay, and I'd enjoy seeing others take your lead to describe to us their favorite courses and the reasons why.  

I'll do likewise when I get a bit more time in the near future.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rank the Raynors
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2002, 07:43:04 AM »
Tom:

That is a great post.  I even read it!  ;)  I'm afraid it may be lost on this thread.  Can you cut and paste it to another thread you start?  Call it "Where I'm coming from: My favorite courses" and note in the intro that you were asked to move it for more visibility.

It sheds a lot of insight on where you've been.  I've certainly never seen you expound about that many courses so far from National.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »