[David_Tepper]

There is a nice aerial photo (circa 1955) of the Harding Park, Olympic Club and SFGC courses in today's SF Chronicle:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/g/a/2009/09/02/Presidents_Cup.DTL&object=%2Fc%2Fpictures%2F2009%2F08%2F31%2Fsp-hardingpark02_0423185927.jpg

Lake Merced, another fine course, is just out of the bottom of the picture.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Examining the Lake Course as close as possible with this picture, a few interesting things caught my eye.

-  can't see any bunkering near the green on #1

-  is there a small bunker on the left side of #4 about 200 yds off the tee?  There is a small white something-or-other.

-  you can see the tree in the right side of the fairway on #7

-  #8 at this point was shrouded in trees...not visible

-  fairway bunker on the left side of #9...right where the fairway opens up

-  is there a fairway bunker on the right side of #11, just past some trees that come between #11 and #14?

-  #12 sure looks short and hard to see because of the trees

-  is that the old fairway bunker at the right side of the bottom of the hill on #18?  Maybe just a blemish in the photo.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Drat, either Photobucket or the site here shrunk my picture.  But there is definitely a fairway bunker left on #9, and I'll leave it to some photo technology folks to determine if my observations re: fairway bunkers on 4 and 11 are correct.

[Kevin_Reilly]

On further review (conference call on mute...so time to do this...), it appears that there are also bunkers on the left side of #14 and the right side of #16 (in the driver landing zone).  This picture must have been taken before RTJ's work on the course for the '55 Open.

[JLahrman]

Kevin/David,

Do you know how many fairway bunkers the Lake course had prior to the 1955 US Open?  I didn't realize that there had been any others.  One of the first things you always read is that the course only one fairway bunker, I just assumed it had always been that way.

[Joel_Stewart]

Over the year from 1927 to 1954 the superintendent Sam Whiting had numerous fairway bunkers throughout the course.  Its been my belief that when the club hired RTJ Sr. to modernize the course prior to the 1955 Open, Whiting quit although I haven't been able to get anyone to confirm this.

Some of the bunkers that existed include,

Bunker on the right of #6.  The current lone fairway bunker is not an original bunker but placed in by Jones in the 50's.

Bunker on the left of #9 which the outline can still be seen

A series of 8 to 10 bunkers to the right of #10.  These probably existed for only a few years in the 1940's.

A sandy waste are type bunker to the right of #11

A bunker at the corner of the dogleg on #14 which the outline is still there.  In todays game it would be useless but could be moved back 50 yards and then would be in play.

Bunkers to the right on #16

Bunkers both left and right on #17

A large blind bunker on the right at the bottom of the hill on #18 and a bunker built into the hill visable from the tee to the left.

The current superintendent/dictator has no interest in restoring any of these bunkers.  Too much work.   

[Matt_Cohn]

So how is it that RTJ made a reputation of building fairway bunkers on US Open courses, but when he came to Olympic he took them all away? Is that an accurate statement to start with?

[Joel_Stewart]

-  is there a small bunker on the left side of #4 about 200 yds off the tee?  There is a small white something-or-other.

-

I forgot about the 4th hole.  Yes there was a small bunker on the left but the main bunker which you can see in the above photo was a large bunker built into the face of the hill on the right.  Next time you play the course you can see the outline easily, most players walk through it.   The current strip bunker on the right was not an original bunker.   The bunker described must have provided some nice intimidation as you hit your second shot that bunker was quite visable.

Matt:  Good question but you never know what his marching orders may have been?   I went through RTJ Sr. files in Florida and sadly there are no notes to reflect on what his thoughts may have been.  To me it appears that his main objective in the early 50"s was to lengthen and tighten up the course.

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

In the article that was posted in the "Resurrecting Merion" thread, there was a reference to discussions that the Merion members had in the 90's about which version of the East couse they would target for their restoration (i.e. what date).  They picked 1930 (details are included in that article). 

If we're to apply the same argument/discussion to the Lake, what's the most appropriate and optimal version (i.e. date) that this course should be presented?

Leaving the changes to 7 and 8 out of this, should we be talking about installing all of those bunkers which have been gone for 50+ years?  Should fairways be widened in spots like left side of #9?  What else was done in '54 or '55 by RTJ that erased the Watson/Whiting design?

[Anthony Butler]

Strange that Lake Merced GC is the only one of the four courses in the area not overlooking the actual lake. 

[Matt_Cohn]

Strange that Lake Merced GC is the only one of the four courses in the area not overlooking the actual lake. 

LOL, yes. Admittedly Daly City GC doesn't have the same ring to it...

[Joel_Stewart]

If we're to apply the same argument/discussion to the Lake, what's the most appropriate and optimal version (i.e. date) that this course should be presented?

Leaving the changes to 7 and 8 out of this, should we be talking about installing all of those bunkers which have been gone for 50+ years?  Should fairways be widened in spots like left side of #9?  What else was done in '54 or '55 by RTJ that erased the Watson/Whiting design?

Wayne:  

No easy answer.  The bunker on the left of #9 and the right of #6 would not come into play these days except for really bad golfers and horrible shots.  With that said they do provide some guidence mentally and they would be pretty to look at.  I think Jones probably took them out becuse they didn't come into play.

If I had to choose a style I probably would choose the rough edge lacey look from the 1940's.  Some people like Gib think we should go back to the style of the late 1920's.  Every hole would have to be looked at individually.

Regardless, I'm against restoring any bunker if they are going to look like the horrid new ones.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Are there many pictures from the 40's available besides this one from 1946?



This shows the problem with taking a point in time as the objective...no one would want the trees from that era.  SF Club in the 40's also had groves of young pine trees between holes.  Can you take something away as significant as groves of trees and cherry-pick the attributes you like?   Probably, but for example I think the missing tree on the right side of #7 changes the tee shot on the hole a great deal so not every tree is a bad tree.

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

Are there many pictures from the 40's available besides this one from 1946?

This shows the problem with taking a point in time as the objective...no one would want the trees from that era.  SF Club in the 40's also had groves of young pine trees between holes.  Can you take something away as significant as groves of trees and cherry-pick the attributes you like?   Probably, but for example I think the missing tree on the right side of #7 changes the tee shot on the hole a great deal so not every tree is a bad tree.

Good point.  Maybe the question is "which version of the course" does one strive for?  In case of the Lake, is it the early Watson/Whiting design... is it the late 40's/pre-RTJ... is it the course after RTJ "modified" it for the '55 open, which I assume is the one we've basically known for over 50 years, with slight variations in bunker shapes, maintenance efforts, etc. up to 2009.  Just curious.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()