News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2009, 04:03:30 PM »
JimK:

Maybe he did say "topped shot bunkers" instead of "top shot bunkers". I can't lay my hands on that 1927 GMGC master plan right now but if he did say "top shot bunkers" instead of "topped shot bunkers" I'm afraid I won't be able to ask Donald Ross why he didn't say "topped shot bunkers" instead of "top shot bunkers" or if he did say "top shot" bunkers if he thinks, on some reflection, that the term is pretty meaningless.

One of the reasons I remember him using that term in that 1927 GMGC master plan report is because I started using the term on here when GCA began (because they were all removed from GMGC on the recommendation of Wayne Stiles in the 1940s). After a while I began to wonder if I had come up with the term myself and so I checked that Ross GMGC 1927 master plan report and saw he used the term in 1927.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2009, 04:12:53 PM by TEPaul »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2009, 04:27:41 PM »
TEP,
You can have your little war with TMac, my question was real. Of course, you don't have to answer it.
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2009, 04:38:14 PM »
"....my question was real. Of course, you don't have to answer it."


JimK:

I know your question was real. So was my answer to your question. How else do you expect me to answer your question than how I did answer it? If Ross used the term "top shot bunker" instead of "topped shot bunker" in that 1927 GMGC master plan what difference does it really make if either you or me think the term "top shot bunker" is pretty meaningless?

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2009, 06:46:02 PM »
Tom,
Why wouldn't Ross have called these fore bunkers 'topped shot' bunkers. I can't see why he would have use the term 'top' shot as that's pretty meaningless.

C'mon, Jim. Isn't it obvious he called them that to get people to quit playing the game because they just didn't have enough ability.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2009, 07:27:55 PM »
The concern about the topped or foozled shot was a factor back in the 1890s - a different era. Back then it was considered a very poor shot that should be punished. The craze toward the Tom Dunn type courses with their cross hazards and ramparts at regular intervals was in response to that philosophy. In those days it was more difficult to get the ball airborne with the combination of the guttie and awkward wooden golf clubs. In the teens and twenties I don't recall any architect expressing a concern with the top shot.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2009, 10:29:06 PM by Tom MacWood »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2009, 08:20:06 PM »
Well Tom, why don't you lay your hands on the Master Plan, find the passages where Ross called them top, topped, or fore bunkers, then scan and post it for everyone to see?

It would be an interesting bit of history to see how bunkers of this type were described in that period and it would add much to the context of how we view the era.

Surely, that's not an unreasonable request.
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2009, 01:54:48 AM »
As I have never seen a Ross with these topped shot bunkers I am curious about them. Ross seems to be somewhat known for these type of bunkers out east, but in the midwest I didn't hear anybody talking about them.  Did these bunkers cover the entire fairway or were more to the side with space to get past them?  I ask this because Ross tended to have very generous fairways I have never seen a really big Ross bunker no matter the position. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield, Alnmouth, Camden, Palmetto Bluff Crossroads Course, Colleton River Dye Course  & Old Barnwell

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2009, 02:17:25 AM »
"Well Tom, why don't you lay your hands on the Master Plan, find the passages where Ross called them top, topped, or fore bunkers, then scan and post it for everyone to see?

It would be an interesting bit of history to see how bunkers of this type were described in that period and it would add much to the context of how we view the era.

Surely, that's not an unreasonable request."



JimK:

Well, it's probably not an unreasonable request in your opinion if someone asked you to do that but the fact is I've never done that on here (haven't you noticed? ;) ) and I don't even know how (for someone who has posted on here as much as I have over the years I'm actually remarkably tech unsavy). In the past if something really important came up that I had and I thought it needed to be put on here I would get Wayne to do it because we work together all the time and he lives nearby and he is tech savy. But as of the last year or so Wayne has no interest at all in doing a thing for this website because of what a couple of clowns on here put him through on those Merion threads, and I have to admit I sure do understand that and frankly endorse his opinion and his postion on that completely.

That 1927 GMGC Ross master plan in which Ross mentioned top shot bunkers is around here in my office somewhere and when I find it I would be glad to transcribe for you word for word the sentences in it from Ross where he mentioned top shot or topped shot bunkers at GMGC. Alternatively, I believe I made available to Bob Labbance, both Ross's 1927 GMGC master plan when he mentioned those top shot bunkers AND Wayne Stiles' 1940s GMGC master plan when he recommended the removal of all of them as Bob wrote a book on Wayne Stiles. Perhaps Bob Labbance put both master plans in his book on Stiles and you and MacWood could both view it that way. However, if you are or have become anything like MacWood and Moriarty and start accusing me of transcribing it wrong or getting it wrong because of a vivid imagination, as MacWood just did yesterday on this thread, or doctoring and altering documents as Moriarty has accused me of doing on here, well then, JimK, I look at that as your problem and not mine!


Or, there's even another way to look at this question of whether Ross did or did not refer to those bunkers as top shot or topped shot bunkers. Have you noticed how Tom MacWood, as he always seems to do on here, prefaced his contention that Ross never used that term and that it's a modern invention with the words "To my knowledge?" Persumably he said that and makes that contention because he has never read anywhere that Ross used that term and apparently in his particular mind if he has never read something himself he seems to automatically assume it could not have existed or happened and he certainly does seem inclined to never take someone else's word for it, at least not mine or someone like Wayne Morrison on a subject like the history of Merion's architecture about which Wayne arguably knows more, at this point, than anyone else in the world. Therefore, I will simply say "To my knowledge" Ross did refer to those bunkers as top shot or topped shot bunkers because I have read in that 1927 GMGC master plan that Ross referred to them that way.


I hope that answers your question.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 02:38:05 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #58 on: August 24, 2009, 02:49:39 AM »
"As I have never seen a Ross with these topped shot bunkers I am curious about them. Ross seems to be somewhat known for these type of bunkers out east, but in the midwest I didn't hear anybody talking about them.  Did these bunkers cover the entire fairway or were more to the side with space to get past them?  I ask this because Ross tended to have very generous fairways I have never seen a really big Ross bunker no matter the position."


Sean:

Frankly, I've never tried to do a study of where or when Ross used those top shot bunkers. I do know they were on most every one of the par 4s and par 4s of my club's course----Gulph Mills Golf Club, Philadelpiha, 1916 and I do know they were on a few holes at Aronimink, Philadelphia, 1929. Some, perhaps all of the ones at Aronimink were restored in the last 5-6 years.


Most of this top shot bunker style and placement by Ross were pretty short from the tees (generally about 100 yards) and due to that they were generally in the rough before the fairway and mostly they were in various sets of 2-3 bunkers in a perpindicular line across the line of play.  


PS:
Also, Sean, on another subject from your remark above----eg where I come from, came from, around here (the east----NY, Philly, Florida) we don't say "out east." When we mention the eastern USA we refer to it as "The East." We refer to the West as "out west," we refer to a city like Boston if we are in say Philly or NY as going "up to Boston" and if we are in Boston and going to NY or Philly as going "down" (or in any of those places going to say Florida as going "down south" and if we are in the west going to the east we say going "back" to The East. These are all American colloquialisms, I guess, and Eastern colloquialisms because I believe I'm aware that no matter where the hell you are in GB if you are going to London you say you are going "Up to London." I think I have also heard that all GBers will tell you no matter where you are in GB if you ask them how to get to where The Magnificent Rich Goodale lives----"What the Hell would anyone want to know that for?" I even had 3 1/2 GBers ask me in 2003 if Rich Goodale was even "necessary?"

On the other hand, even though pretty rare, some do say, if they are in New York City going to say Southampton or East Hampton that they are going "out east." But then if you are say in Southampton or Easthampton and going to New York City in most every case everyone says you are going "In to New York." And then there are the people from Maine who say the damnedest things this way which I frankly have no explanation for at all. Occasionally, if you happen to ask them how to get somewhere from wherever in Maine they might even say: "You cahn't get theya from hea," which in some cases, in my experience, seemed to be actually a truism!
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 03:46:38 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2009, 03:17:41 AM »
Patrick:

You asked me if I thought all those top shop bunkers originally at GMGC was something like the sign at Bethpage Black notifying players how difficult that course is.

No Pat, I don't believe I WOULD say that about all those top shot bunkers originally at GMGC but I do believe I will not argue about whether you think that should be true! However, Patricio, I will tell you something that your question just put me in mind of which might actually make GMGC as rare as a Hound's Tooth (or is it a Hen's Tooth?) in the evolutionary world of golf course architecture, at least as to its original difficulty.

That is when the course opened in the late teens it was actually over 6,700 yards which was in fact about a hundred yards LONGER than it is today from the tips and even after we added about 250 yards to the tips in the last 5-6 years. How many golf courses can you say THAT about??  ;)

I also believe, Patrick, which your remark also put me in mind of, that for perhaps seven or more decades my club probably dedicatedly tried to make the golf course play less hard than it originally had. But I think that has all done a pretty fair "about face" in the last ten years or so, and certainly since I got involved in our latest restoration project. NOW, we are pretty much into totally trying to torture little old ladies and men and other high handicap players and other "duffers."

Frankly, I think we should have a new term for it. I thought about "Strategic Duffer Waterboarding" (or even "Duffer Demolition Zones") but that doesn't seem to sound right for a golf course. How do you like the term "Rendition Restoration?" I think that one has a nice alliterative ring to it, don't you? In the next green committee meeting I'm going to recommend that we keep a statistic of how many little old ladies and men have to be taken off the course in a stretcher in any given month. Of course, the more the better which would indicate we are on a successful path to our ultimate goal.

Would you at least agree with me, Mr. Mucci, that most of these little of ladies and men in American golf these days should be considered the TRUE golf architecture terrorists of the future?
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 04:03:38 AM by TEPaul »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2009, 06:24:08 AM »
As I have never seen a Ross with these topped shot bunkers I am curious about them. Ross seems to be somewhat known for these type of bunkers out east, but in the midwest I didn't hear anybody talking about them.  Did these bunkers cover the entire fairway or were more to the side with space to get past them?  I ask this because Ross tended to have very generous fairways I have never seen a really big Ross bunker no matter the position.  

Ciao

Sean
Ross varied the size and location of the bunkers and on which holes he used them. Very rarely did they stretch across the entire length of the fairway, often they would favor one side of the fairway or the other, usually to the side of the the preferred line. Some times he would use a couple of bunkers in combination. On semi-blind holes they were very common. He also used them on par-3s.

You will find them most often used with Ross's designs in the teens. Colt used them as well, and that may be where Ross got the idea. Colt called them carry bunkers and made sure they were not too far from the tee so that they would not be too demanding for most golfers, and those who could not carry them would have to go around them.

There appears to be a number of reasons why they were used, which is why the term top shot bunker is a misnomer. Their primary use was to create interest for the average golfer. Colt said there was time when all courses were being designed only for the very best golfers, the Braids & Taylors of the world, and there was little or no thought given to the average golfer. Colt believed features like the carry or fore bunker should be  included to create interest for the average fellow. They were also used as directional guides, especially on blind or semi-blind drives, but they could also be used to confuse the golfer. Creating visual interest and giving visual definition was another purpose; to break up a level or uninteresting or ill defined landscape.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 09:05:56 PM by Tom MacWood »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2009, 07:19:08 AM »
Next time just say "No" and save yourself the typing.  ;)
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2009, 07:48:37 AM »
Tom,

From memory, I don't recall your sources for the notion that Colt was Ross' inspiration for the fore bunkers. Could you cite a source?  From the Ross courses I have seen, I would generally agree that he moved away from straight across bunkering to more angled fw and hazards as he wrote in Golf Has Never Failed Me and that his work of the 20's was more sophisticated that way than his work in the teens.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2009, 10:39:33 AM »
Mr. Jeffrey:

I agree with you when you say at least 'cite the source,' as this-----eg "You will find them most often used with Ross's designs in the teens. Colt used them as well, and that be where Ross got the idea"-------is quite the statement both grammatically and otherwise, don't you think?  

Wherever it "be where" Ross got the IDEA, from Colt or somewhere else, and misnomer or even "pretty misleading" or not, Ross did use the term in a 1927 GMGC master plan. ;)
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 10:43:22 AM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #64 on: August 24, 2009, 10:50:02 AM »
TEPaul,

There's no denying that the attempts to appeal to the entire spectrum of golfers has resulted in dumbed down or less challenging architecture.

As for the challenge to little old ladies, the kind that typically outlive their husbands by decades, the dilema presented by top shot bunkers and other hazards off the tee are easily remedied, not by removing them, but by creating forward or angled tees for the "ability challenged".

Donald Ross didn't craft 14 top shot bunkers by accident or coincidence.
He had a very specific purpose for designing and constructing those features.

Today, many clubs have requirements that must be met before allowing Junior golfers on the golf course.
One of those requirements is being familiar with Etiquette, another is a minimum playing standard.
Junior golfers must demonstrate certain minimum skills to the professionals conducting the Junior clinics prior to being allowed on the golf course.
Perhaps, Ross's 14 top shot bunkers served the same purpose.

How else do you explain the existance of 14 top shot bunkers ?

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #65 on: August 24, 2009, 10:57:33 AM »
"As for the challenge to little old ladies, the kind that typically outlive their husbands by decades, the dilema presented by top shot bunkers and other hazards off the tee are easily remedied, not by removing them, but by creating forward or angled tees for the "ability challenged"."


Patrick:

In our Hanse restoration project in the last 7-8 years we did create new forward ladies tees for all our grandmothers and little old ladies and a whole horde of them verbally abused me for being part of a project that made the damn golf course TOO EASY for them! To that I simply said: "Well then don't use those new forward ladies tees, just use the old ladies tees which are longer and more challenging." They all thought about that for a while and simply said nothing other than they thought I was a very RUDE man to say something like that to them!
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 11:00:06 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #66 on: August 24, 2009, 11:04:02 AM »
"Donald Ross didn't craft 14 top shot bunkers by accident or coincidence.
He had a very specific purpose for designing and constructing those features."


Patrick:

Is that right? Have you been talking to Donald Ross lately about what his specific purpose was for designing top shot bunkers on app. fourteen holes at GMGC? If so why don't you tell me what his specific purpose was? For some years I've been sort of partial to Geoff Shackelford's interpretation of one of the reasons he created them.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #67 on: August 24, 2009, 01:43:48 PM »
Jeff
Ross and Colt collaborated in 1913 & 1914.

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #68 on: August 24, 2009, 09:00:44 PM »
"Jeff
Ross and Colt collaborated in 1913 & 1914."


Mr Jeffrey Brauer, Sir:

Would you call that response the citing of a source that Colt was the inspiration for Ross's fore or top shot bunkers?!? I certainly wouldn't. It appears to be just another typical Tom MacWood "logic stretch." No wonder the man thinks HH Barker designed Merion East simply because he found he took a train from New York to Georgia in December 1912.   ;)

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #69 on: August 24, 2009, 09:10:23 PM »
"Jeff
Ross and Colt collaborated in 1913 & 1914."


Mr Jeffrey Brauer, Sir:

Would you call that response the citing of a source that Colt was the inspiration for Ross's fore or top shot bunkers?!? I certainly wouldn't. It appears to be just another typical Tom MacWood "logic stretch." No wonder the man thinks HH Barker designed Merion East simply because he found he took a train from New York to Georgia in December 1912.   ;)

TEP
Thats not surprising. Your understanding of golf architecture history doesn't go much beyond what you've read in C&W. 

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #70 on: August 24, 2009, 09:27:13 PM »
"TEP
Thats not surprising. Your understanding of golf architecture history doesn't go much beyond what you've read in C&W."


Tom:

Talk about a hackneyed remark!  ;) How many times have you used that pathetic reponse on here over the years?  ::) The fact is I have more direct information about architects, direct club records and direct club and architectural information right here in my office and direct access to clubs by a factor of about ten than you will ever see or have in your lifetime in Ivory Tower Ohio or with your dependence on Mike Hurzdan's library.   ;)

The defensive ruminations of the jealous outsider looking in never really became anyone Tom, and it doesn't become you either.   :(

You want so much to be respected as a researcher/writer/historian by someone, by anyone, don't you?   ???

If so, again, I suggest you get out and get on the road and make the necessary connections some of us have in one way or another over a good number of years. In the meantime your stock is plummeting precipitously. both on here and elsewhere, but what is one who knows better left to do but advise you of this?  :-\
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 09:29:18 PM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #71 on: August 24, 2009, 10:00:07 PM »

"Donald Ross didn't craft 14 top shot bunkers by accident or coincidence.
He had a very specific purpose for designing and constructing those features."

Patrick:

Is that right?

Yes, it is.

Unless of course, you feel that Donald Ross was like the 95 year old man who married a 31 year old woman.
On the honeymoon he arranged for a two bedroom suite.
At 10:00 that evening, after a long wedding day, ceremony and reception the groom said to his young bride, "we're both tired after a long day, go to bed in your room and I'll see you in the morning.
At midnight there was a knock on her door, it was her 95 year old husband who came in and made passionate love to her.
Upon leaving he said, "Goodnight, I'll see you in the morning."
At 2:00 am there was a knock on the door, it was her 95 year old husband who came in and made passionate love to her.
Upon leaving he said, "goodnight, I'll see you in the morning."
At 4:00 am there was a knock on the door, it was her 95 year old husband.  Astounded, she asked him how he had the strength to make love to her three times within four hours.
Shocked, her 95 year old husband said, "you mean I was here twice before ?"

Like the 95 year old husband, Ross visited himself on those holes 14 times.
That's no accident or coincidence.
He had a specific purpose for replicating top shot bunkers, not twice, not five times, not ten times, but 14 times.


Have you been talking to Donald Ross lately about what his specific purpose was for designing top shot bunkers on app. fourteen holes at GMGC?

Yes, as a matter of fact I do speak to Donald Ross.
Not quite as frequently as I speak to Charles Blair Macdonnald, but often enough where we've become quite chummy.

Ross told me, on repeated occassions, that he was neither drunk, hallucinating or suffering from memory loss when he designed, crafted and built 14 top shot bunkers at GMCC.  He stated that one intended purpose of crafting all those bunkers was to punish a descendant of one of the founders, Drexel Paul's.  A great grandson or great, great grandson or something like that.  
I could see where the conversation was heading so I tried to divert it to other topics.    


If so why don't you tell me what his specific purpose was?

Other than the purpose mentioned above, he may have had several reasons, but, the one thing we know is that the repetitive use was no accident.
You don't repeat a feature 14 times without having a specific purpose for introducing that feature, especially when you know which type of golfers are most likely to interface with it.


For some years I've been sort of partial to Geoff Shackelford's interpretation of one of the reasons he created them.

I don't know if Geoff's interpretation is GMCC specific, or general in nature.

I do feel that Ross's top shot bunkers were part of the golfer's examination, a minimum entrance standard of sorts.


P.S.  An 89 year old man marries an 87 year old woman.
       They decide to live in her house.
        On their wedding night, the wife calls downstairs to the husband.
        "Honey, why don't you come up stairs and make love to me"
        To which the husband responds, "I can only do or the other"
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 10:02:23 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

TEPaul

Re: The Strategic and Penal schools
« Reply #72 on: August 25, 2009, 09:14:36 AM »
Pat:

Very funny story but not very good factual architectural history. On the latter point it seems like you must be colloborating with Tom MacWood these days! Did you happen to notice what he said when asked by Jeff Brauer to cite his source for his contention that Colt inspired Ross's fore or top shot bunkers?

UN-believable! And the man actually told me I have a VIVID imagination! ;)

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back