News:

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


Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« on: October 13, 2009, 11:08:31 PM »
~

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2009, 07:02:26 AM »
A couple of observations, not a single Ross course is represented and only one par-4 below 400 yards. This golf course would be a handful for the average Joe.

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2009, 07:19:44 AM »
NO 8 at St Andrews?  Shurley Shome Mishtake!
Let's make GCA grate again!

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2009, 07:52:58 AM »
NO 8 at St Andrews?  Shurley Shome Mishtake!

It's hard to understand #8 rather than Eden #11 given the choice.

#4 Lido was the Channel Hole from Littlestone?

Anthony Gray

Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #4 on: October 14, 2009, 10:49:57 AM »


   No Road Hole or the 18th at Pebble.

  Anthony


Gary Slatter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #5 on: October 14, 2009, 10:57:29 AM »


   No Road Hole or the 18th at Pebble.

  Anthony



Didn't I recently see you working at the Old Course?
Gary Slatter
gary.slatter@raffles.com

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #6 on: October 14, 2009, 11:05:14 AM »
Anthony,

What is it about #18 at Pebble?

Chris_Clouser

Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #7 on: October 14, 2009, 11:12:19 AM »
Ok, I'll ask the question.  All of those holes are from top championship courses or the best courses around the world with the lone exception of the first hole on the list.  What makes the hole from Cleveland so good? I've never seen it so I don't know.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #8 on: October 14, 2009, 12:11:15 PM »
Chris
Its a good hole, but I don't believe its the best hole on the course. IMO that would be the par-4 17th, which has made some eclectic lists as well. RTJ had the 17th on his 18-hole ideal course. The 15th is no doubt more difficult than the 17th, which is less than 400 yards. The 15th features a diagonal line of bunkers built into diagonal ridge, which creates a segregated fairway effect. The diagonal line of bunkers and the segregated fairway are two of Flynn's favorite ploys.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #9 on: October 14, 2009, 12:26:59 PM »
Tom,

Any chance you have a picture of the hole?

Curious about the diagonal line of bunkers ploy, I can't think of any other Flynn's with it, but I might have the wrong image in mind.

thanks

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2009, 12:53:21 PM »
Jim
I don't have a picture. It is similar to the 13th at Cascades except there is a more pronounced ridge where the diagonal bunkers lie at TCC-Cleveland.

Chuck Brown

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #11 on: October 14, 2009, 04:17:14 PM »
Not one hole from CPC, which gave Jones the idea to hire dr. Mackenzie?!? 
 
7000 yards of this composite.  Mr. Jones could sure step on it with driver when he was called to do so.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #12 on: October 14, 2009, 04:20:08 PM »
#16?

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #13 on: October 14, 2009, 04:38:54 PM »
Tom, 

This hardly seems like a course for a broad spectrum of golfers of differing abilities.   About how many bunkers would have been on this course?    How many forced carries?

When was this list created?
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Jim Nugent

Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #14 on: October 14, 2009, 04:43:24 PM »
Tom, 

This hardly seems like a course for a broad spectrum of golfers of differing abilities. 

Was Bobby describing a course for golfers of differing abilities, or his own ideal course, for him? 

Chuck Brown

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #15 on: October 14, 2009, 04:47:38 PM »

TEPaul

Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #16 on: October 14, 2009, 04:58:07 PM »
"A couple of observations, not a single Ross course is represented and only one par-4 below 400 yards. This golf course would be a handful for the average Joe."



I guess the very first question I would have with that list of holes above labeled "Bobby Jones' Ideal Golf Course" is; is THAT list of holes one Bob Jones had in mind for the average Joe or did Jones see it as an IDEAL course for top-flight tournament golfers only? There most certainly is a difference----a big difference----and it seems like Bob Jones was one of the first and perhaps the best to recognize THAT difference.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #17 on: October 14, 2009, 05:06:53 PM »
Tom, 

This hardly seems like a course for a broad spectrum of golfers of differing abilities.   About how many bunkers would have been on this course?    How many forced carries?

When was this list created?

That was my impression too. It was created in 1936.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #18 on: October 14, 2009, 05:10:36 PM »
"A couple of observations, not a single Ross course is represented and only one par-4 below 400 yards. This golf course would be a handful for the average Joe."



I guess the very first question I would have with that list of holes above labeled "Bobby Jones' Ideal Golf Course" is; is THAT list of holes one Bob Jones had in mind for the average Joe or did Jones see it as an IDEAL course for top-flight tournament golfers only? There most certainly is a difference----a big difference----and it seems like Bob Jones was one of the first and perhaps the best to recognize THAT difference.

TEP
It was claimed ANGC was Jones' ideal course, and one of the reasons it was considered ideal was due to the fact it accomodated all levels. This course seems to be the antithesis of that idea.

TEPaul

Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #19 on: October 14, 2009, 06:13:18 PM »
"TEP
It was claimed ANGC was Jones' ideal course, and one of the reasons it was considered ideal was due to the fact it accomodated all levels. This course seems to be the antithesis of that idea."



Tom MacWood:

I realize ANGC was Jones' ideal course, but ideal for whom in Jones' mind? In the case of ANGC he considered it to be ideal for all golfers but that does not necessarily mean the ANGC architectural model was the one and only ideal course he contemplated. A course like that one listed above which is over 7,000 yards (and when---in the 1920s and 1930s?) is definitely not for the average Joe golfer but still it is entited "Bobby Jones' Ideal Golf Course." That its not for the Average Joe golfer (as he claimed ANGC was (as well as for the expert who should be allowed to break its par if he played perfectly) should be pretty clear to any of us on just raw length alone, don't you think?

We also know that given Pine Valley's top ranking at the top of the lists pretty much always that it was considered it to be the ideal course (or architecture) but for whom? Obviously, PV was designed to be only ideal to challenge top golfers and tournament players and that is precisely what Crump had in mind and said he had in mind when he designed it and built it. He didn't even want the Average Joe level of golfer to come there for Goodness Sakes and he certainly said that too!

Maybe you think there only can be only one single ideal type of course or architecture and that it must be for everyone. I don't think that was necessarily the way most of those architects thought about it. Golf courses and their architecture have always been far too broad and far too little standardized to be that.

And don't forget, with ANGC, even if I'm not that up on its entire history (as Bob Crosby is), it seems when Jones conceived of it the course was intended to be for a fairly national general membership including all levels of golfer and certainly ones who were pretty well heeled and probably weren't very good golfers. When he first conceived of its design model I don't know that he exactly contemplated the Masters Tournament and all that it would eventually come to represent. We need to keep that in mind too with the original Jones architectural concept of ANGC.

Furthermore, I certainly hope that because Jones said ANGC was ideal for all golfers and assuming this composite course (above) was apparently not ideal for all golfers (certainly not for the Average Joe golfer) that you are not now going to try to tell us that you think Bob Jones was also a hypocrite or changing or selling out his architectural principles as you have just implied on here about Mackenzie and you have implied in the past about A.W. Tillinghast.
 
« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 06:21:25 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #20 on: October 14, 2009, 07:43:03 PM »
Tom,  

This hardly seems like a course for a broad spectrum of golfers of differing abilities.  

Was Bobby describing a course for golfers of differing abilities, or his own ideal course, for him?  

You use the term "ideal" in the above sentence much more narrowly than the way the term was used in reference to golf courses.   Courses weren't ideal to certain types of golfers.  They were "ideal" because they were the best possible representation of certain golf course principles and concepts, and these principles and concepts did not have limited application depending upon the ability of the golfer. This was especially so of Mackenzie courses, where a large part of the "ideal" was that a course could be challenging, interesting, and enjoyable to golfers of wide abilities, including duffers and experts.  This "ideal" comes up again and again in the descriptions of what they were trying to accomplish at Augusta, which was meant to remain playable and enjoyable for all while still challenging the best in the world.  

In short, Augusta was ideal precisely because one need not designate a type of golfer that it fit best.   By this standard, Jones's 1936 "Ideal Golf Course" seems to have been far less than "ideal" in the sense that it was usually used in the genre, and by Mackenzie himself.    

TomPaul claims that there were many different "ideals" depending upon the quality of the golfer.     For the reasons above, he again demonstrates his ignorance of this period of golf course architecture and of Mackenzie in particular.

TEPaul also tries to claim that Pine Valley was considered to be an "ideal golf course" but fails to provide any basis for his claim.  In fact, the biggest criticism of Pine Valley was that no matter how good a course it might have been for the better golfer, it was NOT IDEAL precisely because it was too hard for the rest.    So if anything Pine Valley was the exception that proves the rule, and perhaps the beginning of a school of design that tended to judge quality based on in part on difficulty rather than playability and enjoyment for a broad spectrum of golfers.    But Augusta was very much not of this school.  At Augusta, ideal meant playable, interesting and enjoyable to the entire spectrum of golfers.

TEPaul also guesses that the Masters was an afterthought, but the reality was that the Masters tournament was being comtemplated from the year the course opened at the latest.  
« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 08:43:17 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #21 on: October 14, 2009, 08:03:04 PM »
I love this thread.  It should be retitled "Golf Club Atlas participants all know more than Bobby Jones."

Consider Jones the golfer.  How many great modern golfers would choose a course full of short par-4's?


J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #22 on: October 14, 2009, 08:12:34 PM »
   Tom,           I would! ;D                         Jack

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2009, 08:15:52 PM »
I love this thread.  It should be retitled "Golf Club Atlas participants all know more than Bobby Jones."

Consider Jones the golfer.  How many great modern golfers would choose a course full of short par-4's?

Tom,  I don't know more than Bobby Jones, and I try to defer to him when it comes to the creation of Augusta.  But his 1936 "ideal" golf course is interesting when compared to the "ideal" golf course he and Mackenzie built a few years before, don't you think?

As for "Jones the golfer" he wasn't exactly like the stereotypical great modern golfer, was he?   How many great modern golfers would create a course with little or no rough?  How many would actually strive to make a course that was challenging, interesting, and enjoyable to all skill levels, including the duffers?    How many would create a course where the challenges were subtle and often ill-defined?

If "Jones the golfer" was like great modern golfers, then it is very difficult to imagine how he could have had much to do with the resulting course at Augusta National.   But if we consider Jones the man then it is easier to understand, isn't it?   And moreso if we also consider his partner?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 08:17:56 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bobby Jones' Ideal Course
« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2009, 08:33:22 PM »
point of clarification, at the time he put out this list, weren't the nines reversed at ANGC so #3 as he puts it would be #12 today?
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back