[JNC Lyon]

JNC
It is extremely unlikely Ross was anywhere near Minneapolis in 1910; I doubt anyone in the Twin Cities had ever heard of Donald Ross in 1910.

From Links article, "White Bear’s official history includes the diary entry of a member recounting a 1910 meeting at which Ross (but not Watson or Vardon) discussed plans for the front nine. Further supporting Ross as the designer is the biography Discovering Donald Ross, which places him at the club in 1912 and 1915. The front opened in 1912 and the back in 1916."

Tom?

That is what I was referring to....the story makes no sense on a number of levels. Ross dabbled in golf design prior to 1911, but only around Pinehurst and a relatively small radious around Boston (Oakley GC). The one exception was a day trip he made to Chevy Chase (where his friend George Sargent was the pro) while traveling from Pinehurst (winter job) to Oakley (summer job). Ross was not a nationally known name in golf architecture in 1910.

Ross spent three months of 1910 overseas for the purpose of studying golf architecture, and starting in 1911 began dedicating himself to architecture, but even then rarely traveled west. There is no record of him being any where within 1000 miles of St. Paul in 1910, and the club has no record of him ever being on site.

IMO the diary story is bogus.

Tom MacWood,

You seem very unwilling to trust historical accounts from the clubs in question.  Yet you base your entire "Watson, not Ross" theory on one newspaper article written by the WBYC president.  Saying "the diary story is bogus" is equivalent to saying "the club fabricated their history."  This is a very strong accusation to make, and, justified or not, careers have been ruined by such statements.

There is most definitely uncertainty about the extent of Ross's involvement with White Bear Yacht Club.  However, Brad Klein's book, the Donald Ross Society, the Links Magazine article, and the club history and website all argue that there was some involvement.  It is hard to believe that all of these sources are either horribly or fabricated the history of WBYC to keep the Donald Ross name on the course.  Furthermore, the Tufts Archive likely does not possess much history on the WBYC because of the club fire that claimed the early documents on the course.

Furthermore, what evidence do you have that persuasively supports Watson as the sole designer more than the evidence that supports Ross?  You are relying on club histories that support Watson while throwing out any club histories that support Ross as an architect of the course, let alone the secondary sources that (with the exception of The Golf Course, which supports neither architect) all give Ross a hand in the design of WBYC.   Although Ross had not designed many courses up to that point, Pinehurst was had been a prominent resort for over a decade, no?  Surely the wealthy, golf-crazy St. Paul families that started WBYC may have heard of it?  For that matter, how well-known was Willie Watson in 1910?  I agree, the timeline matches up with Interlachen well, but I'm wondering if Brad Klein and others pulled the 1912 and 1915 dates for Ross's involvement out of thin air?  There must have been some justification for these claims

On a different note, I think it is critical to discuss these early club histories.  While some might find it obscure and unimportant, ignoring the details of early golf course histories would serve to reject the importance of the Golden Age architects to today's game.  I think most people can agree that understanding the great classic courses is critical to playing today's courses and understanding the game as a whole.  I am glad that we can constructively discuss these histories on here.  I hope to keep things civil and refrain from personal attacks.  Otherwise, such debate is useless and counterproductive.

[Tom_Doak]

JNC Lyon: 

As I have stated before on a different thread, I have no dog in this hunt.  I don't really know whether Donald Ross was ever at WBYC or not, and neither does the club.  Based on those facts, I was disappointed to see myself quoted by the Ross Society in Jason's post.  I have always thought there were a number of great holes at the club but I don't know if they are Ross's, in fact, my quote was meant to say that there are really a number of holes there that are nothing like I've seen of his work elsewhere.  However, I have no proof it isn't his work, either.

But what I really wanted to address was your quote above:

"On a different note, I think it is critical to discuss these early club histories.  While some might find it obscure and unimportant, ignoring the details of early golf course histories would serve to reject the importance of the Golden Age architects to today's game.  I think most people can agree that understanding the great classic courses is critical to playing today's courses and understanding the game as a whole. "

The problem with this whole topic is that most people have a very narrow list of the "Golden Age architects," so there is a tendency to want to ascribe every old course to Ross instead of Watson, Mackenzie instead of Alex Russell, etc., so the course will be more easily accepted in the pantheon of great Golden Age courses.   If WBYC really IS a Watson course instead of Ross, it would probably get less attention and have less chance of making the top 100 lists, even though it is the exact same course.  And so it becomes a self-perpetuating thing, and the next club researching its history is that much more likely to dismiss the lesser-known guy and ascribe all the genius to the Big Name.  History is written by the victors, or those who wish to claim victory, anyway.

For that reason, I applaud Tom MacWood's efforts to find out more about what Willie Watson and Herbert Strong and H.H. Barker and even Tom Bendelow really DID build.  There may not be room for them on Mt. Rushmore but it does not disqualify them from having done some great work.

[Tom MacWood]

JNC
Anyone who has spent time studying the history of golf architecture will tell you club histories are often wrong. That is not stay there are all wrong or that they are all entirely wrong, the majority have many of the facts right, but very often they do not have all facts right. In the case WBYC the club historians make no pretenses, IMO they are refreshingly honest, they admit they do not know who designed their golf course because they have almost no info (due to a fire), but they believe what little evidence they have points to Ross. This what the club historian wrote about the 1915 map:

"The Map by Mark C. Mammel, MD, Historian WBYC

The maps shows the golf course of the White Bear Yacht Club in 1915, the year the course transformed from 9 holes to an 18 hole layout. No one knew of its existence for quite a long time. In the last few years two originals have surfaced. The first turned up in Australia, at a garage sale. It was probably brought there by Yacht Club member Dick Driebe, who started 3M's Australian branch in 1954. In returned to the States in 1973 with another 3Mer who then gave to Dr. Tom Nichols, a Yacht club member. The second copy never left Dellwood. Three summers ago Mrs. Peter Flolliott, one of the club's long time members and an outstanding player as a young woman, , found another copy of the map in the attic. I suspect it was put there by her father, a prominent St. Paul physician and member of the club. Knowing my interest in the club's history she gave it to me. The reproduction was made from Dr. Nichol's map, Mrs. Flolliott's copy is displayed at the Yacht club.

The actual map is 30' x 55', and drawn to be viewed vertically. The ink is blue like a blueprint. Along the left side in large fancy letters is the legend 'Map of the Golf Links of the White Bear Yacht Club' then in smaller letters below 'in sections 7 and 18, T. 30 N R 21 W. Washington County, Minnesota. T. Milton Fowble, St. Paul MN March 1915.' At the top of the map reads 'Plan of Landscape Development and Subdivision of Residence Sites by Charles H. Ramsdell Landscape Designer, form the original study.' It is a formal contour map with 100 foot grid and elevations marled at each corner of the grids. Contour lines show the hills and valley's of the terrain. It shows are 18 holes, with the tees and greens, almost as clearly as where they are today. Notable changes include the 8th green, which was rebuilt in 1971, then again in 1995, the 10th hole, which originally could be played as a 451 yard dogleg right from a tee by the current cart barn or as a 343 yard from near the current tee, and the 13th green, which was originally the 'punch bowl' hollow to the left of the current site.

The evidence we have points to Donald Ross as the designer of the course. As the maps shows member over the decades have had the good sense to to make only a few changes in the course layout. In spite of dramatic advancement in maintenance technology, club with hit harder and balls the travel father, the course is still a good test of the player's skill (and patience)."

I have no doubt Ross was involved at WBYC at some point, the magazine article says that he was involved and so does the pamphlet the survived the fire, but both of those documents also claim that Watson designed the course. So based those 2 documents how does one conclude Ross designed the course? Is there other evidence that suggests Ross designed the course?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

You seem very unwilling to trust historical accounts from the clubs in question.  Yet you base your entire "Watson, not Ross" theory on one newspaper article written by the WBYC president.  Saying "the diary story is bogus" is equivalent to saying "the club fabricated their history."  This is a very strong accusation to make, and, justified or not, careers have been ruined by such statements.

I do not base my entire theory on one article. By the way it is a magazine article not a newspaper article, and it was written by the commodore of WBYC (equivalent to club president), and it was written only ten years after the course opened. I do believe the diary story is bogus, and anyone who knows Ross's history and the timeline of his career, would tell you it makes no sense what so ever. I never said anyone fabricated anything.

There is most definitely uncertainty about the extent of Ross's involvement with White Bear Yacht Club.  However, Brad Klein's book, the Donald Ross Society, the Links Magazine article, and the club history and website all argue that there was some involvement.  It is hard to believe that all of these sources are either horribly or fabricated the history of WBYC to keep the Donald Ross name on the course.  Furthermore, the Tufts Archive likely does not possess much history on the WBYC because of the club fire that claimed the early documents on the course.

When you are trying to document the history of someone as prolific (and lengthy) as Ross you are forced to rely upon clubs to a certain extent. Some times that info is accurate, sometimes its not. We all make mistakes. The Ross society, and the other architect societies, are constantly updating and correcting their lists, why do you find it necessary to introduce the inflammatory words of 'horribly' and 'fabricated' to a perfectly normal and innocent process of on going research and discovery?

Furthermore, what evidence do you have that persuasively supports Watson as the sole designer more than the evidence that supports Ross?  

The strongest evidence that supports Watson is the article written by the commodore of the club and the WBY pamphlet that survived the fire. You also have Watson's connection to the Twin Cities (he began his career at Minikahda in 1899) and the fact he was very active at the time designing courses in Minnesota and the midwest. The same evidence that supports Watson as the designer, is the strongest evidence supporting Ross's involvement (in a secondary role). I have seen nothing else that sheds any further light on Ross's involvement. In fact the club has some doubts Ross was even on site (by the way I think it is very likely he was on site at some point). I've spent over decade researching and studying Ross's career, and IMO his pamphlet is the most important artifact that exists (that is also true with Tilly, Colt, Mackenzie and Park IMO). Ross does not list WBYC, and there is a very good reason for that, he did not design the course. Other than the article and the WBYC pamphlet this is the strongest evidence to support Watson.

You are relying on club histories that support Watson while throwing out any club histories that support Ross as an architect of the course, let alone the secondary sources that (with the exception of The Golf Course, which supports neither architect) all give Ross a hand in the design of WBYC.   Although Ross had not designed many courses up to that point, Pinehurst was had been a prominent resort for over a decade, no?  

I'm not relying on anything other than what the facts gathered to date tell me. Club histories are only as good as the facts behind them, club histories by themselves are not facts. Pinehurst was a prominent resort, and Ross's career began to take off around this time, but the same could be said for Watson. Pasadena, where Watson was based, was also a very popular resort, especially with midwesterners, and his career was also taking off.

Surely the wealthy, golf-crazy St. Paul families that started WBYC may have heard of it?  For that matter, how well-known was Willie Watson in 1910?  I agree, the timeline matches up with Interlachen well, but I'm wondering if Brad Klein and others pulled the 1912 and 1915 dates for Ross's involvement out of thin air?  There must have been some justification for these claims

I seriously doubt Ross would have been known to many in St. Paul in 1910, especially as a golf architect. Its well documented the original nine was laid out in 1912 and expanded in 1915. These dates were not pulled out of thin air, and at the time they believed Ross was responsible. I believe they are wrong on the Ross part. I'm not here to embarrass anyone, I'm simply sharing the new information I have found, and making the case that Watson should rightfully be given credit.

I'm not sure how well known Watson would have been in St. Paul in 1910. He began his career in 1899 at Minikahda before moving to Pasadena so I would assume he was somewhat known. But the important date is 1915 when the course was expanded. In 1915 Watson had designed Minikahda, Hotel Green, Annandale, Altadena, Interlachen, Thousand Island (NY), Midwick, Westmorland (IL), and Toledo. He had also carried out redesigns of Ravisloe, Evanston, Homewood (Flossmoor) and Onwentsia in Chicago. A number of these were major redesigns. He was very prominent in Chicago and the midwest in 1915. He also advertised heavily in the magazine The Golfer, which was based in Chicago and focused on midwest golfing activities.

On a different note, I think it is critical to discuss these early club histories.  While some might find it obscure and unimportant, ignoring the details of early golf course histories would serve to reject the importance of the Golden Age architects to today's game.  I think most people can agree that understanding the great classic courses is critical to playing today's courses and understanding the game as a whole.  I am glad that we can constructively discuss these histories on here.  I hope to keep things civil and refrain from personal attacks.  Otherwise, such debate is useless and counterproductive.

[Niall C]

Sometimes I think our GCA.com historical buffs get lost in the weeds of time and the then quality of "community news" items the find that they believe supports their theories.   

While I can only speculate, I just wonder if many of these stories written about new or remodelled golf courses that were in fact merely new facilites in a just burgeoning game of golf in that 1910-20 period, weren't completely error ridden.  Let's face it, the common readers of those stories in those days, 'barely knew" what the heck golf was, nor any of the lore or history of it coming over from the 'old sod'.  Possibly the news story writers didn't know or give a darn whether some "Scotsman" brought in to design some upper class oddity that was a golf course in those days, was named Watson, Foulis, Bendelow, Ross, etc.  Maybe, they just plugged in a wrong name reported to them by some member of the club, who himself didn't really know who the 'Scotsman" was or equally didn't really give a darn.

Maybe, the only folks that get all worked up about these attributions are people that fancy themselves great historical researchers of golf course architecture.  Not that such is a bad thing to be.  But,  maybe these modern researchers want to be correct way more than the original club founders cared about these matters, and that is where all the misinformation or unable to really ever know the exact facts phenomena ocurrs.  They didn't care if they got it right in their stories in 1915, and many of you care too much now.

RJD

Interesting theory. If it were true that the writers of such articles were clumsy or incompetent or just didn't give a toss about accurracy in giving credit for a course design, it still begs the question where they got the wrong name from given there ignorance in the matter.

Personally I think it fr more lightly in most cases that any number of designers/pro's/greenkeepers had a hand in changing a course over the years and perhaps naturally the club is going to go with the best known. The important thing is not just knowing who was involved but trying to find out excatly what they did, otherwise it is a pointless exercise in dishing out credit for something that might not be there work.

Niall

[Tom_Doak]

The important thing is not just knowing who was involved but trying to find out excatly what they did, otherwise it is a pointless exercise in dishing out credit for something that might not be there work.

Niall

Niall:

You had me to the very end there.  But, do you really believe you can find out exactly who did what?  Ninety years after the fact?

In the case of WBYC, whether Donald Ross or Willie Watson or someone else laid out the course, there was another guy who did the shaping of the greens, who did some wild work.  How would we ever know to what extent that work was his own, vs. Ross or Watson's instructions?  You could ask seven different people about the 15th green at Old Macdonald and get probably five different answers as to who did what on it, and that was built only a few months ago and you have lots of eyewitnesses.  In the end, the answer is always just who you choose to believe, is it not?

[Niall C]

The important thing is not just knowing who was involved but trying to find out excatly what they did, otherwise it is a pointless exercise in dishing out credit for something that might not be there work.

Niall

Niall:

You had me to the very end there.  But, do you really believe you can find out exactly who did what?  Ninety years after the fact?

In the case of WBYC, whether Donald Ross or Willie Watson or someone else laid out the course, there was another guy who did the shaping of the greens, who did some wild work.  How would we ever know to what extent that work was his own, vs. Ross or Watson's instructions?  You could ask seven different people about the 15th green at Old Macdonald and get probably five different answers as to who did what on it, and that was built only a few months ago and you have lots of eyewitnesses.  In the end, the answer is always just who you choose to believe, is it not?

Tom

I take your point when you get right down to the micro level of design and what actually happens in the field. However when you are discussing classic courses, who originally designed them, who designed the revisals, who decided bunkers should be added or filled in etc, when you are talking about that kind of design, basically the broader/bigger decisions if you like, then I think it is possible to give credit where its due. The problem is finding a paper trail for for something that could have happened a century ago and thats when things become contentious as second hand accounts in newspapers/magazines are used as evidence.

Niall

[Jay Flemma]

...exactly.  The paper trail could be faulty.

White Bear yacht club's historian has reached out to me and will be sending me an opinion from the club on this issue this week.

[Jason Thurman]

After playing White Bear Yacht Club last week, I had a hard time getting it out of my mind and eventually found this thread. I found Tom MacWood’s argument compelling, as I had the thought several times during the round that “This just feels more rambunctious than most Ross courses I’ve played.” I wondered whether Watson’s involvement might be part of the reason why, or if it was simply a function of the course’s wild topography.

Of course, Tom MacWood is no longer with us and it sounds like we don’t have clear documentation to really know how much of the work at White Bear was done by Ross vs. Watson vs. whoever else. But the course still deserves more discussion here, and if nothing else its routing is completely unique within the Ross canon.

It’s no secret that Ross was a master of finding intuitive routings and draping holes gently over the land in completely sensible ways. It’s noteworthy, then, that White Bear’s routing feels so unintuitive. The holes don’t sit on the land sensibly at all. In fact, they almost seem to be at combat with the land. While you can always count on a hilly Ross site producing at least one or two par 3s that play from one hilltop to another, White Bear traverses from one hilltop to the next by simply rumbling its longer holes over the peaks and through the valleys. The course lacks Ross’ trademark longer holes that wind downhill off the tee through valleys as seen on 4 at No. 2, 5 at Hyde Park, or 4 at Beverly. Instead, White Bear’s holes cling to the sides of hills on the edges of valleys creating unusual reverse-camber fairways. Virtually every shot is played from an uneven stance, and walking the 6400-ish yard but unbelievably undulating course borders on strenuous despite its short transitions from green to tee. One gets the feeling that you could route a roller coaster down the middle of the fairway from 1 tee to 18 green and that it would be a thrilling ride that would reach its destination without ever running out of steam. There’s almost an “FU” quality to the way the course attacks slopes and even roads that would normally create routing issues. Nowhere is this more apparent than at 5, where confronted with a road and a giant hillside to traverse alongside the property boundary, the course seems to scream “Screw it! Bomb your driver over the cars and then figure out a way to hit a good shot off the hillside without falling.”

Simply put, I’ve never played anything like it. White Bear Yacht Club’s lack of inclusion on rating lists is confusing, as is its lack of discussion on this site. It might be the most compelling Donald Ross-attributed course I’ve played. Its topography is unmatched among the courses of his portfolio that I’ve seen, and the rollicking quality of the course makes it more fun to play than any of his other offerings that I’m familiar with. I have no evidence to support the thought, but I see a lot of things in White Bear's routing that make me think it can't be pure Ross. This is pure conjecture on my part, based only upon what's on the ground. I look at the way he moves uphill and downhill at Beverly and No. 2 by going straight up and down the predominant slopes of the course, and I look at his lack of reverse-camber holes at other sites and compare that with the plethora of holes at White Bear that seem like they’re clinging to the hillside to avoid falling off. I’ve played about a dozen of his courses and seen nothing like the routing at White Bear, even compared with other hyper-hilly sites like French Lick. What other courses in Ross’ portfolio have similar routing features?

[Jim Franklin]

Jason -

As for inclusion on any lists, I know I tried to play there years ago and the pro at the time (I have heard he has since left, but not 100% sure) told me I could play one day, but then changed his mind and said a different day due to a tournament. Well I initially could not make that day and said thanks, maybe next time. Well my schedule freed up and I called him back. He told me he had a tournament that day now, but I could have played the day before. Plainly obvious that they do not care to be rated. I am not losing an sleep over it. I have heard wonderful things about WBYC and would love to play at some point. The one god thing about that experience is that I as able to play Northland CC instead. It was fantastic.

[Rick Shefchik]

For those reading this thread for the first time, it might be worthwhile to catch up with the information that has come to light in the intervening six years. No one has any better idea today who did what at White Bear Yacht Club, but we know Ross visited there in 1916, thanks a Sept. 1, 1916, article in the Minneapolis Tribune that said Ross was in the Twin Cities (to begin his redesign of Minikahda as well as supervise the completion of Woodhill) and was headed to White Bear Yacht Club "with a view of rearranging it. He probably will go to White Bear Monday or Tuesday."


Backing up a little -- and speaking to Jason's point about the unusual topography of WBYC -- there is this 1930 reminiscence from original WBYC member William Peet, regarding the initiation of the golf course by club founder Lucious Ordway: “With his usual vision, he had bought forty acres north of the railroad track to protect the rear of Dellwood and probably in the back of his mind to provide a playground of some sort for the Yacht Club. It was the God-awfulest forty you ever saw, full of hills, valleys, stumps and underbrush, with absolutely no promise of a golf links, but it served as a starter. We bought the Arkell seventy acres adjoining on the East and subsequently eighty more North of the Stillwater Road [Dellwood Road] and all of us lived at the lake went to work to raise the very substantial sum needed to make this wild and unpromising land a real golf links."

The most prominent local golf writer of the day, the Tribune's George Rhame, didn't think much of the original 9 holes: "A word about the course – it is at present made up of only nine holes, with a total of 2800 yards...It is affectionately known as a ‘goat course,’ and it is deserving of the name. The only level spots upon it, worth while, are the putting greens, and some of them are not on the level...The White Bear course has no bunkers, nor does it need any. Lucky is the man who playing it for the first time, can equal bogey 40 for the nine holes. From start to finish it is a chase after the pill, which if care is not taken, will often lead to rough grass in unexpected valleys. Anyone looking for sporty golf can find it on the links of the White Bear course. Eventually it is intended to cut down some of the ‘mountains’ and fill in the ‘fathomless’ pits. It will also within the next two or three years, be enlarged to an 18-hole course. The club is the owner of the necessary amount of land."

If Watson indeed designed the original 9 holes, as the 1925 pamphlet indicates, it was apparently in need of some improvement. Head pro Tom Vardon, who took the job in 1916, was also given credit by the club, along with Watson and Ross, for developing a first-class golf course.

Regarding the Minneapolis Golf Club, Willie Park made two visits to Minneapolis 1916 to lay out the golf course, the second on Nov. 15, according to the Minneapolis Tribune: "Mr. Park went over the club’s property near St. Louis Park in the afternoon and today he will start the work of mapping the full 18-hole links. He plans to stay here at least two weeks and will supervise the early work of construction. It is planned to rush the construction work so that the course will be ready for play by the middle of next summer. Until the new course is ready the temporary nine-hole course at Golden Valley will be used."

The course was finished by the middle of 1917, but Park did not return to oversee its completion. The club hired head pro William D. Clark from the Omaha Field Club and gave him the responsibility of finishing the course. The Bendelow confusion appears to have resulted from the fact that the Minneapolis Golf Club's original site was in Golden Valley, and the club did hire Bendelow in the late summer of 1916 to design its course there, but then most of the members voted to move the club to its current location in St. Louis Park in the fall of 1917. Park had apparently already been hired by the Hyland Homes company to design an anchor golf course for a new housing development there, and Hyland lured MGC to take over the site. Bendelow went ahead and designed the first 18-hole course for the Golden Valley Country Club, which remained at MGC's original site.

Ross was hired by MGC in 1920 to re-route its course, because the clubhouse was being moved to the opposite side of the property. On June 24, 1920, the Minneapolis Tribune reported that "J.A. Hunter, president of the club, stated that Donald Ross, golf course architect, will be in Minneapolis in September, and will make suggestions for the rearrangement of the course to harmonize with the proposed location of the new clubhouse." His re-routing plan was found in the Tufts archives a dozen years ago. It matches exactly the layout of the course today.

That's what we know now. There are still many holes to fill.

[Criss Titschinger]

I'm waiting for confirmation from the club about showing my photos. I had a fairly grey and wet day when I played, so I don't know how well the photos will turn out anyway. I haven't downloaded them off my camera yet.

What I can say is that the 5th was the most intimidating tee shot I've ever hit in my life. The road below the tee is about 40 yards away, and it's a relatively busy road. They did build a small burn to help stop worm burners, but there are still power lines that can shoot a ball straight down on passing traffic.

The first time I stepped up to the tee, I had to back off because I was getting rattled by the traffic. When I realized it wasn't going to stop, I finally pulled the trigger and hit my best drive of the day.

Some greens, like 16, I would say suggest some form of Ross influence.

3 was all that and a bag of chips. One of the smallest green sites I've ever played, and certainly one that wouldn't work on a public course with more traffic on it. Nothing more than a Sand or Gap wedge for most players, but it requires all the accuracy you have.

[Jason Thurman]

Thanks Rick. That's excellent information to know. Do we know what holes/area of the property comprised the original nine likely designed by Watson? Or where the original clubhouse that burned was located?

[Rick Shefchik]

The original nine was south of Dellwood Road, beginning where the pro shop is now. When the course expanded to 18 holes north of the road, it appears the existing holes were integrated into both the front and back nines. The clubhouse that burned in 1937 was a massive, hotel-sized structure on the shore of the lake, essentially where the current clubhouse is now. It was considered a white elephant, and club lore holds that it was intentionally torched by the members.

[Dan Kelly]

The clubhouse that burned in 1937 was a massive, hotel-sized structure on the shore of the lake, essentially where the current clubhouse is now. It was considered a white elephant, and club lore holds that it was intentionally torched by the members.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Rick, but ...


(1) Club lore holds that a former Attorney General of the United States, a member of WBYC, was seen carrying a gas can on the night the white elephant burned to the ground.


(2) Club lore is supported by the fact that, remarkably, the club's trophies (if not the architectural records detailing Mr. Ross's involvement) all came through the fire unscathed.

[Rick Shefchik]

Dan, you are not wrong. The existing trophies that pre-date the fire were all removed "for cleaning" a night or two before the fire. (Pity the filing cabinets with the club's business records didn't also need a cleaning.) Additional tales from the fire: some club members happened to be out in their boat with a movie camera the night of the fire to capture it on film. And when the local fire department tried to draw water from the lake to douse the blaze, a number of members dragged the hoses out of the lake and back onto shore.

[PCCraig]

Jason & Criss,

I'm glad you both were able to make arrangements to play arguably the best golf course in Minnesota; White Bear Yacht Club. While most typical golfers hear "Minnesota Golf" they think of Hazeltine (or maybe Interlachen), White Bear personifies the under the radar quality of golf in Minnesota. Although I wouldn't quite say it's gone completely unnoticed by the different ranking panels, as I believe its been firmly located on GW's Classic list for years and Darius Oliver's Planet Golf website lists it as a Top-100 (~40?) in the world. That being said, it's certainly underrated. That's likely because for a long time is was a pretty sleepy club located in the relative far northeast suburbs of St. Paul, with an older, quiet, membership not prone to self-promotion either within the Twin Cities or as part of a Golf Digest list. So I think a large part of why it's so underrated is that over a long period of time not that many golf "industry" people could or would play it. Either they would come from out of town and just try to hit up Hazeltine and Interlachen over a couple of days, they didn't want to drive up to the northern suburbs to play a 6,400 yard course, or they just flat out couldn't get on.

I think a lot of that has changed in recent years as the club has opened itself up to the world a bit in an effort to gain some younger members. Over time, a lot of the "money" in the Twin Cities, be it personal or corporate, has moved west of the river and closer to the heart of the urban metro. The club has a new website (where it touts its magazine ratings), they built a big new pool/tennis complex on the lake, etc. and apparently they have done a good job getting a bunch young families to join (heck - there is even a drone tour now: www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLh0XXFfor8).

As for the whole Watson vs. Ross argument that usually pops up when this course is discussed...well, I don't really care all that much. But if I had to guess I would say that Watson likely routed and/or built a majority of the course, with Ross perhaps consulting at some point while he was in town with a whole lot of "help" from Tom Vardon who was pretty active locally from a design perspective (he was called in a couple times in the 1920's to T&C for advice on a few holes according to our club minutes). The golf course certainly doesn't resemble any other "Ross" course I've ever seen, despite the similarities between the 14th green at WBYC and the 17th (I think) at the Ross course at French Lick. Overall, I think Ross probably gets too much credit at White Bear, likely because he is the biggest "name" of the bunch of architects who worked on the course in its early years. Either way, it's really not that big of a deal to me as what is there now is fantastic.

Other local GCA guys can speak more to the "evolution" of the course over time, but from what I hear JC Urbina is now consulting with the club and he has done a bunch of "clean up" work recently mostly consisting of widening the fairways in spots considerably (there is a huge hill/ride on the right side landing area of #10 that is now all fairway) and tree removal (all the trees were removed right of #4 so now the vineyard next door is visible). I also heard that this fall they were going to redo a bunch of their tee boxes as they have become "crowned" over time and need to be redone.

I think one knock on the course is that the land is pretty swampy and it doesn't drain very well. I personally have never seen it play super firm and fast. When it rains the course can be a bit of a wet slog.

Anyway, I've been lucky enough to have played the course a decent amount over the last couple of years after a family member joined, so I thought I would do a quick hole by hole to aid in the discussion of the golf course (as compared to who designed it). Hopefully Criss will post his pictures up here soon as well.

Hole by hole:

#1 - The coolest part of this hole to me is the neat teeing area wedged between the golf clubhouse and a little putting green which sits on essentially a small cliff overlooking the lake and the road below. The first 5 holes at WBYC are super tough and for an "easy" 6400 yard course it packs a big wallop right out of the gate. The tee shot is dramatic in that it is down hill and you see the intimidating green complex waiting for you at the end of the hole. For most players, the tee shot is straightforward but you want to hug the OB right to get the best angle into the green, which is partially blind. The green is a neat one as it slopes away from the big mound short of the green, but then it slopes hard back to front at the back part of the green.

#2 - I think #2 is a great representation of WBYC and its rollicking property and fairways. The fairway slopes are huge and dramatic, and the green sits wonderfully on a ridge with the 3rd tee closely above it. Typically, it's a driver-mid iron for most players.

#3 - A super neat short par-3 that usually plays about 115 yards. There is a massive drop off left of the green. The right side of the green is obscured by a large bunker/mound. Shots that come up short can actually bounce forward off of the mound. Anyway you shake it if you miss the green you are in for a hard par or bogey...if you hit a good wedge then its typically an easy two-putt or birdie.

#4 - I actually think this tee shot is pretty awkward and the hole could use some serious tree clearing on the inside of the dogleg on the tee shot. If you hit anymore than a 240 yard drive you need to take your driver over the trees and the OB below it to find the "A" position. Right now the trees kind of aim you toward the bunker and it turns the hole into a longish three shot hole.

#5 - Awesome hole. The tee shot is super cool as you hit under power/phone lines and over a very active highway. The best line is to hit a driver as close to the bunker/OB right as you can get so you can have a flat lie and see the green for your second shot which is usually at least a mid-iron (4 or 5 iron). The green sits up against the OB and the slopes on the green are pretty severe. A "layup" short left of the green leaves a super fun up and down. 

#6 - A fun little downhill par-3 with a nice lake backdrop.

#7 - A short par-5 with a pretty awkwardly narrow tee shot. The fairway is squeezed in by some really long rough on the right. I think the hole would be a lot more fun if the landing area was widened considerably. The hole is reachable in two but the green on the 7th is awesomely severe and depending on the pin location it can be a nearly impossible up and down if you don't leave yourself a perfect angle for your approach shot.

#8 - A tough longish par-3 that was designed by Tom Doak & Co.

#9 - A super fun par-5. The hole is dominated by a massive mound/ridge short right of the green which you can try to use to get to the green in two. A fun hole.

#10 - You climb back up that hill on #9 to find the 10th tee, a short par-4. If you can hit a decently long tee ball, the 10th is typically a easy wedge into the green, which has a false front and is generally steeply sloped back to front.

#11 - An awesome world class par-3. The green is insanely sloped from back to front and that slope on the back part of the green dominates the way you play the hole as you use it as a kickpad/backboard in order to try to get close to the pin. If you go a little too long, there is a very shallow bunker on the top that is so shallow you can either try to hit a bunker shot or putt the ball out of the bunker and down the slope (the 2nd option being the best, in my opinion).

#12 - A world class short par-4 which has one of the coolest tee boxes I've ever seen. It's tiny and sits between the back bunker on 11 and the highway. The entire hole falls away from the player, including the green which is severely sloped away from the fairway so much that you aim for the very front of the green and hope the ball runs down near the pin. You won't know where your ball is until you get to the green.

#13 - A longer uphill par-5 through the trees. Some cool fairway undulations but generally I think it's a pretty straightforward hole.

#14 - A neat little short par-4 with an awesome two tiered green. This is another hole that I wish they could clear out all of the trees inside of the dogleg, adding the option of trying to drive the green. Right now its kind of a forced layup with an iron off the tee, then a mid-iron into the green. Given the cross bunkers ~60 yards out I think this hole was designed as a short strategic hole, but I think it's lost a bit of it. Again, the green on the 14th is awesomely severe.

#15 - A super tough long par-4. There is a little "catchers mitt" in the uphill fairway on the right that you can try to hit it to which leaves the best angle and lie into the green. Anything hooked off the tee to the left is in a really tough spot. The green, for such a long par-4, is very severe (did it used to be a par-5?) and is bisected by a ridge/slope. You can be 15ft away, pin high, in two and essentially be playing for bogey because there is no way to get your ball within 15 ft of the hole if you're on the wrong side of the green. Cool hole.

#16 - A short par-5 with a super awkward landing area if you try to hit driver. There is wetland left and bunkers/fescue right and a fairway that slopes toward the wetland. If you can manage to find the fairway up  there you can easily reach in two, but it's pretty awkward so I've started hitting a 3-wood or 2-iron off the tee. Another great green.

#17 - I think this one is tied with #8 as my least favorite on the course. It's a pretty but penal hole with the pond and the pine trees behind the green, but there isn't a whole lot to it other than to hit a long iron to the small green and hope. The green is pretty flat (well compared to the others) and not super noteworthy. 

#18 - I like #18 more than most people. I think the totally blind tee shot over a rock is a lot fun. And I think the view from once you climb the hill, with the lake and its sailboats behind the green/clubhouse, is one of the best views on the course. The 2nd shot and the 18th green are kind of anticlimactic, but that's fine after all the dramatic stuff you just saw.

I would be curious to hear Jason, Criss, and other's thoughts on the course and specific holes as well. Favorites, least favorite, etc.

[BHoover]

I guess since I now live about 20-25 minutes away, I ought to check out WBYC.

[Dan Kelly]

I thought I would do a quick hole by hole to aid in the discussion of the golf course (as compared to who designed it). Hopefully Criss will post his pictures up here soon as well.

Thanks for the hole-by-hole.


You will note that my initial post in this thread has a link to pictures of all 18 holes:

http://s175.photobucket.com/user/kellys17_photos/library/White%20Bear%20Yacht%20Club%202009?sort=2&page=1

Sort by "Newest First" to go from 1 to 18.

[Jason Thurman]

Pat, you’re right that Darius Oliver is a big fan of White Bear. I spent a few minutes speaking with him about the course when we were discussing Minnesota golf back in August. He raved about it like no one I had ever heard before, and I initially dismissed him as a lunatic. Then he complimented me on how well I had hit my 3 wood and said a few nice things about my home course, and I realized he must instead be a genius. I put White Bear on my must-play list at that point, and I’m very thankful I did. As you mention, the only knock he had on the course was that its climate and turf don’t always produce excellent conditions. It was a waterlogged blast when we played it, and I can only imagine what it would be like when playing fast and firm. It really reminded me of a soft Kingsley Club in the conditions we saw. That’s the only other place that I’ve seen fairway contours remotely as bold, and truthfully, I think White Bear’s slopes are probably even bolder than the ones at the site of the last West Team Midwest Mashie victory all those years ago.

My favorite hole on the course is 17 since I birdied it, but 5 is right there with it. Walking up the 5^th fairway after the drive over the road, I realized my cheeks were starting to hurt from the goofy Mickelson smile that had been plastered on my face since the first tee shot and that was hitting its apex as I climbed the hill to take a look at where the green was. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a hole routed with such blatant disregard for the “unfair!” “unplayable!” slope that dominates its corridor. The result is one of the most fun holes I’ve ever seen – a genuine contender for my favorite par 4 in the world. 1 is also among the 5 best opening holes I’ve played.

But where do you stop? 3 is a wonderfully delicate par 3 that just clings to a shelf at the edge of the property. 7 is as good from inside 125 yards as any hole I’ve played. The ridgerunning approach to 9 is a great risk/reward moment even if you’re not in a position to reach the green. The 11^th green might have been the coolest 6000 sq ft in golf if we had only played it on a dry day. I didn’t like the row of hedges off the tee on 12, but once you get to the fairway it’s arguably better than the 5th. I’m actually glad that I popped up my driver on that hole, because hitting a 3 wood from 260 over the fronting bunkers right at the pin was the most fun moment of the round. 15 is another favorite – one of the only places on the course where a single dominant ridge in the fairway provides most of the interest and a bit of clarity rather than the undulation and confusion present in most of the course. 16’s green looks like someone spilled it out of a milk bottle and seems to still be settling into its final position even as you’re approaching it. And the tee shot on 18, which would be out of place almost anywhere else, feels like a fitting climax as the final peak on the course before a straightforward approach gives an opportunity to set up a birdie if you can make a confident swing over the rock.

Truthfully, if weather, cost, and logistics were no issue, White Bear might be the course I’d most like to be a member at. I can’t imagine ever tiring of playing a place with so much fun rolling over its hills.

[DMoriarty]

Regarding the history of WBYC, it has come up periodically with lots of allusions to a mystery about who designed the course, but to my mind there isn't much mystery, and there is little or nothing new being presented here.

In 1925, the club itself indicated that Watson had designed the course.  A map exists from 1915 showing the Watson course very much as it is today. This was before Ross's visit.  Likewise a pamphlet from the club (from late 1917 or early 1918) indicated that Watson was responsible for the plan, and that Watson's plan was developed with the help of advice of Vardon and Ross.  The 1925 statement makes clear that the original plan required very little modification, and the 1915 map backs this up.

As for the quote about the original "goat course" if I recall correctly that quote is from around 1912, which is long before the Watson plan was fully implemented, and it is not even entirely clear to me that it refers to the same 9 holes at all.

No doubt, like many clubs, this club would like to call its course a Ross course, but the facts (at least that I have seen) don't back this up.  It is frustrating to see how far people will go to try to keep these legends alive despite pretty clear evidence to the contrary.

By the way, it sounds like a great golf course.

[Rick Shefchik]

David,


George Rhames' "goat course" quote was from September 1913.

[DMoriarty]

Rick.  But it unlikely that this quote was referring to the final iteration of Watson's plan.  (Wasn't there some sort of course there before Watson?)  It was reported (by the club) that the course was very much a work in progress and was not completed until around 1916 (or perhaps even later), and to my mind it is extremely misleading to disparage Watson with the quote. 

The 1915 map reflects Watson's plan, and was before Ross's involvement.  As you have noted in the past, that plan largely reflects what is on the ground today.  So why keep propping up the Ross involvement?  Sure he may have had some influence at some point, but unless Phil Young and David Scott-Taylor forged that 1915 map, I just don't see the mystery here about who initially designed this course. 

[Rick Shefchik]

David, in my earlier post this week, I said no one has any better idea who did what at WBYC than when the thread originated. I thought it was germane to mention the newspaper article from 1916 that noted Ross's visit to the club, since that had not come to light when Tom MacWood was discussing this in 2009.


I don't think I've disparaged Watson. The Rhame quote probably reflects quite a bit more on the quality of the property than it does on the quality of Watson's original efforts there. But clearly, the course underwent significant improvement between 1913 and 1926, when the club hosted the Western Amateur.


Of course there's still some mystery here: Did Watson put the first 9-hole course on the ground in 1912, the one Rhame refers to, or did Watson design something new to replace it? Why was Ross asked to come to the club? How much did Vardon have to do with the course's improvement? I don't know the answers, and don't suppose I ever will, but I certainly don't consider the earliest years of WBYC a closed case.
 

[PCCraig]

David,


Where is this 1915 map?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()