Interested in opinions on The Biarritz style at Yale and Fishers

[DMoriarty]

An undated photo of Yale's 9th by Edwin Levick (1869-1929) from the NYPL.   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave,

Great picture, thanks.

Try hitting a low runner into that green, irrespective of where the hole is cut.

Not exactly the shot of choice for the prudent golfer.

[George_Bahto]

Jim N: there is no way of knowing because of the lack of information - we've been trying to figure it out for years.

In my personal opinion - repeat, MY PESONAL OPINION  ........ in early years the Macdonald Biarritz holes wee referred to as "Macdonald's Folly" and the "Valley of Sin Hole"

Given CB's love of TOC, I believe he CBM used the swale influence of 18-TOC, using it preceding a (single) green. I can't verify it - perhaps someday some information about the original green at Biarritz, FR will surface.

As I stated earlier, due to the nature of the approach and green area of the original hole, I think the green and its approach had to be much longer than it was wide

[Bill Brightly]

I think the old picture of Yale's clearly shows that the front section was fairway, a safe play or the conservative player to approach the green/. I would love to know who came up with the idea of making a putting surface out of the approach area. It is a perfectly fine hole playing to the front section, just not a Biarritz.

Posters keep asking if the original Chasm hole in front had a similar green. I don;t know the answer, but from George Bahto's research I bet it did not. I believe that C.B. Macdonald comined the "chasm" feature of the tee shot in France with a swale the he liked someplace else, and he decided to combine the feature on his Biarritz holes. He then taught that concept to Raynor and Banks.

I think it is very cool that Fishers has eschewed fairway irrigation and their Biarritz plays much like it did in the Golden Age. I wonder if Fishers has consider maintaining the front section as a putting surface. I would love tohear Donnie's response.

[Jud_T]

George-

Thanx for the responses. Very educational stuff.....

[Donnie Beck]

Bill,

There is way too much slope to ever drop the front to putting green height.  A ball would never come to rest on the front section.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill Brightly & George Bahto,

If you look at the picture David Moriarty posted, you'll note how steep the back tier at # 9 at Yale is.

While it may have made an interesting putting surface in the 40's, it doesn't make for an interesting putting surface at today's speeds.

The back tier is a steeply sloped green.
With today's speeds hole location is a problem, as is putting on the slope.

I don't know the date of David's photo, but, if it was taken during or slightly after the aftershocks of the depression, or, during or after WWII, cost might have been the overriding factor in not mowing the swale and first tier to a putting surface, rather than the architect's intent. 

The Biarritz at Fishers Island has a unique feature not found amongst many, if any, Biarritz's.
Namely, a spine, running from 6 O'clock to 12 O'clock.
That spine seperates the back tier and provides a smaller target relative to hole location and a far more difficult putting surface on the 2nd  tier.

The only time I've seen a similar feature in a template hole is the Redan 3rd green at The Knoll, which has a spine running through the mid section of the green.

[DMoriarty]

Patrick,

The listed photographer (Edwin Levick) died in 1929 so it is fairly likely that the photo was taken before then.

[V. Kmetz]

I cannot myself, figure a way to post the image but these are the coordinates to use for a Google Earth/aerial photography apps you may have to view an overhead of what was most likely the "Biarritz" hole:

43 degrees, 29' 33.55" N
1   degrees, 32' 54.11" W

This will have you directly over the perspective of the painter of Mr. Bahto's posted image

A Wikipedia entry on the town of Biarritz didn't promise much, but delivered this little nugget:

"The golf course, near the lighthouse (Le Phare), was created in 1888 by British residents."

If you achieve a view of the area, you will see an existing golf course immediately to the SE, you may be able to make out the lighthouse (even in flat photography) approximately 500 yards WNW of the coordinates above.

It seems fairly obvious that at some point over 122 years, the course eschewed the Chasm hole (for development opportunities in a wealthy, resort town?), conglomerating to its SE.

None of that may help us see what CBM saw or was copying in incorporating the concept into his design, but:

1. intersecting his comments on model golf holes in "Scotland's Gift..." pg 184:  "15. 210 yds  Suggested by the 12th Biarritz, making sharp hog's back in middle of course.  Stop 30 yards from hole bunkered to right of green and good low ground to the left of plateau green."

along with

2. the general appearance of the painting and dimensions from aerial photography of the presumed site

plus

3. the Biarritzes primarily designed/located by CBM (he was the only one of the MAC/Raynor/Banks trio to actually see the Dunn hole?)

as opposed to

3a. those primarily/solely produced by Raynor/Banks...

a few things seem to come in focus...

A.  the "Carry Chasm" part of the shot seems mostly advantageous for its visual inspiration, not as a "shot value" of the hole.  I conclude this because it appears that the "Carry Chasm" part of the Dunn original was at most 60-80 yards, and because the CBM-titled efforts (that I'm aware of) don't have the prodigious (140 - 160) carries that the Raynor ones have, if they even have penalty carries at all.

B.  the balance of mystery and camouflage of the Valley of Sin-style trough fronting the "green" ("rear portion" where approach is mowed as green) seems to be the effect(s) most on CBM's mind for the shot.  The extra-long geometric rectangle of the entire complex laid over heaving ground adds a perverse sense of the rational to what is usually an irrational experience of fortune and anxious anticipation of result.

C.  In the albeit flimsy survey of Google Earth topographical features and the perspective of the painting, I get the feeling that the original was played ultimately from "flat to flat," briefly across the chasm, perhaps 10-12 feet uphill, made slightly more so by the "plateau" green he references in "Scotland's Gift,"

D:  Theoretically (but maybe practically) speaking, I think Raynor's 5th at FI is probably "closest" to replicating or capturing his boss and mentor's original sight of the Dunn hole at Biarritz.  This is in the single most general sense I can infere.  The chasm carry is significantly longer and the ground along the left is more foreboding as well as it being (I suspect) a fair more amount uphill than what CBM saw.  But the vast sea to the right, the "perch to perch" general feel of both shots, and the visible (but still mysterious) drama of the target contours probably have more symmetry between the Dunn hole and any in the MAC/Raynor canon.

E:  Whether this is all idle speculation or cogent commentary, I have experienced a new appreciation for the MAC/Raynor oeuvre - even though my regard of their work was of the greatest respect already.  Even if I'll never see absolute proof of the original, and never know if one of them got it more right in any one Biarritz entry, we still have these great holes - we call "Biariitz."  We can play around with what we like...have the front be part of the green, have it not; we can make it a anxious hit across and near a wondrous hazard or it can be on a flat plain with perspective skewed in that manner.  Even if we elect to feature NO bunkers paralleling the sides of the rectangular plateau of green and have closely mown grass for 40 yards around, we still have the lesson and the fun of landform alone as a legitimate, enjoyable, essential challenge of play.  Though hundreds of other noteworthy holes - too numerous to mention, but Augusta's 14th green does come to mind - demonstrate the landform-first concept, there's something so...ridiculous...about a large  trench in the middle of the target area (whether its fairway or green).  Then you think, "Geez, someone designed this!" and this calibrates with the deep rectangular appearance of the target plaza and thin bunker lines of the sides.  That is the soul of the "engineered style;" where the rational tools like compass and T-square are noticable in trying to capture the irrational and ridiculous fortune of St. Andrews and the vintage links .

I really thank everyone for their contributions to date, and their patience to endure my speculations.

cheers

vk   

[V. Kmetz]

Just an update from way back...

Jud Tigerman suggested I check out the 12th at the Ch. Banks-designed Tamarack CC in Greenwich CT for an example of an unheralded and superb Biarritz...

Boy was he ever right on...what a beautiful Biariitz style.  I'll try to post some pictures in the near-future. 

I haven't played Tamarack in 25 years, and back then playing any private course was a stolen privilege and furthermore I did not possess and comparative or qualitative faculties.  But in the latter years of my golf education, I had heard the course renovations (1999-2002?) were spectacular.  I was supposed to play it in July 2003, but that fell through and I hadn't given it much thought until Jud's comment. 

All I have got to say from my two-hour walking tour today is that it will be the first private course I will seek the privilege to play in 2010.  Because it is just down the street from where I often work, I felt a little stupid for not having played it a dozen times in the last years.

I admit an absolute and complete bias for the CBM-Raynor-Banks "family tree" of architecture.  I like the GB-European hole models; I like the elements of geometric and engineered style; I like broad, large greens with dramatic swells; I like sharp grass platforms looming over the large plain of a hidden sunken bunker; I like the humor of ridiculous contour ner a green complex.  All of these elements are the most stimulating to my golf sensibilities and Tamarack seems to have it all.

Again, i did not play the course today and hadn't played it in 25 years so I can't speak with the experience of a couple of rounds...maybe it stinks...but I sure can't wait to try and find out.  Visually, and intellectually it is everything a course of this "School" of architecture should be. 

Collectively, the one-shot holes seem as strong as any of CBM or Raynor groupings; the 3rd Eden is akin to Fisher's 11th imported to a Parkland style; the 7th "Redan" owes a lot to 13 Yale, though this one has a cleaner, defined "look'.  The 12th Biarritz is a close cousin to Raynor's Westhampton version (but unique in this precise setting) and the 15th "Short" has all the technical elements with a nice quiet corner at the northern edge of the property.

Can't wait to play it and test out all this premature praise, but man - it looks like a winner!

cheers

vk

[Jud_T]

VK-

thanks for the props!  Tamarack is an unheralded gem at this point.  I have had the good fortune to play it several times a year as one of my best friends is a member.  This is certainly the best biarritz I've played, and I've played a bunch of 'em.  The course might even deserve a full-blown Ran writeup...

[V. Kmetz]

JT:

It certainly does deserve a profile.  i have a lot of writing projects on my plate, golf and otherwise, but if members like the Siwanoy profile I have coming up, I would certainly like to play this a few times and give such a piece a fair crack. 

Visually, I was stunned.  My hazy memories of this place were at a time when golf was just young-man slashing through the bowling alley trees of the 1940s - 80s era courses, but to see it today, I cannot believe the ardent Banks-Raynor-CBM notables on the board don't jump up and down about this course.  The topography has engineered drama, but outside of 6, 8 and 17, it isn't a bad walk.  the tree removal from the pines of my hazy memories is shocking and wonderful.  Views of golf everywhere, interesting landforms, the template holes, i mean how could George Bahto not be talking about this course everyday?

But again, I must play it a few times before i give it the true review...but oh how promising!

cheers

vk

[Jim_Kennedy]

Here is a 1930s aerial of Tamarack's Biarritz. You can see the steep drop off on the side, the narrowed run-up in front, the long flanking bunkers and the three bunkers on the line between the tee and the green. Much of the flankers are gone in a modern aerial view, and so are two of the fronting bunkers. 

[Jud_T]

VK-check your messages....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Here is a 1930s aerial of Tamarack's Biarritz. You can see the steep drop off on the side, the narrowed run-up in front, the long flanking bunkers and the three bunkers on the line between the tee and the green. Much of the flankers are gone in a modern aerial view, and so are two of the fronting bunkers. 

Jim,

What a great looking aerial.

Do you know why the flanking and fronting bunkers were removed, and when.

Was the entire footpad mowed to green height ? or just the back tier ?

[Bradley Anderson]

Bill Brightly and others:

Concerning the idea of the front section of Biarritz greens being putting surfaces:

Biarritz holes have been a favorite of mine from the "git-go" of my Macdonald - Raynor - Banks research.

When I first began researching and visiting their courses beginning in the late 1980's only a few courses had putting surface before the "Valley of Sin" swale; Yale, Mid-Ocean, Chicago Golf come to mind (there were a few more). To me it was a striking feature, totally different from the Biarritz on my hole I'd been plain for  so many years, so I encouraged other clubs to go down the road of a "double-green" bisected by the swale.

I had (and have) to this time been able to determine what the original Biarritz green was like but given the time line (1888), the ball, the golf clubs, certainly the firm ground and the differential in the height on the Chasm hole, tee to green, I would suspect the green (or the approach to the green) was long and narrow (a cliff on the right). The original hole was 220-yards - the carry over the Bay of Biscay reported to be 160 or so yards, which leaves 60-yards beyond the Bay to the middle of the green.

but concerning whether the Biarritz holes by Macdonald Raynor were ever meant to be a double green and  given that the Yale-9th would be the poster-child for Macdonald-Raynor orginal interpretation, a few months ago friend Tony Pioppi turned up the following information from the Yale archives stating the "green proper is behind a deep groove in the approach" - to me - verifies these hole were never intended to have the double-green.


a portion of the article:

Special to The Courant
The Hartford Courant; Aug 16, 1925 - page B4
New Haven, Aug. 15, 1925

Yale to Open Probably Most Unique and
One of Largest Golf Courses in United States


The ninth hole is over the northwestern end of the Greist pond and has it original on the Biarritz course in France.   
   
The green proper is behind a deep groove in the approach which is of about the same area as the green. The approach is bunkered heavily on the right and left and the fairway is the lake. This hole is one of the most interesting of the course and is deceptive because of the full water play although the hole is not a long one.
   

George,

I believe that many of the greens that Raynor built had a cinder layer directly under the putting surface, and in those instances where there is a cinder layer in the putting green construction, there are no cinders under the turf in front of the biarritz swale. Now if there are biarritz greens with cinder layers out there, in the turf in front of the swale, then perhaps those holes represent a version of the hole that was meant to be maintained as putting turf before the trough. That would be an extraordinary find.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Patrick,
I don't have solid answers to your questions but if I was to hazard a guess I'd say the drainage. In the modern aerial the upper flanking bunker stops short of the swale and doen't continue to the back of the green. That's the wide end of the swale.
On the lower side, the narrower end of the swale, the flanking bunker stops, but a small bunker remians just past the swale.
Again, it's just a guess but I think drainage had something to do with it.

If you look at the 'first' section of the footpad, the one before the swale begins, you'll notice that the color is darker in this section then the one after the swale. This usually means longer grass when looking at these old aerials, although sometimes it has to do with  angle. These two surfaces are on the same plane so i think it's more likely length of grass. 

I will look for the 1965 aerial to see if the bunkers were removed by then.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
Here's 1965. As you can see the upper bunker was mostly gone, like today, and two out of the three that were short of the green are also missing. The lower bunker had a small section filled in, right by the swale. It looks like both sections are mowed at the same (or nearly) height at this time. The little areas of 'white' in the bunkers are snow, also seen bordering the woods.

I think you can make out a horshoe feature on the back section in both the '34 and '65 aerials, although it seems much clearer in the '65 photo. Nothing definite, but it looks like one to me. It's "U" shape is a bit lighter than the rest of the surface.
 

[George_Bahto]

George,

I believe that many of the greens that Raynor built had a cinder layer directly under the putting surface, and in those instances where there is a cinder layer in the putting green construction, there are no cinders under the turf in front of the biarritz swale. Now if there are biarritz greens with cinder layers out there, in the turf in front of the swale, then perhaps those holes represent a version of the hole that was meant to be maintained as putting turf before the trough. That would be an extraordinary find.
[/quote]

Bradley - you're right, in many cases Raynor used that cinder layer, both mostly to locate the edges of the green and partly forf drainage

I was with the super at Shoreacres, Tim Daves, as we probed to see if the fron section ans swale were to be green - no trace of any cinders. The same at Piping Rock where Rich Spear has probed the front to see if there were cinders - none.

I think I'll ask Scott Ramsey to prob Yale's front section

[DMoriarty]

George,

Whigham's statement (quoted in your book) makes it clear that the front section wasn't intended to be part of the green, doesn't it?

I posted this on the other thread, but might be more appropriate here.  Below are Merion's 17th, the plasticine model of Lido's Biarritz, and Piping Rock's Biarritz.   The Lido's was listed at 220 yards, while the white line and yellow line of the other two are each 230 yards.   

Look how crazy the first section (the "hogsback") was at the Lido.   

[Bradley Anderson]

George,

Bradley - you're right, in many cases Raynor used that cinder layer, both mostly to locate the edges of the green and partly forf drainage

I was with the super at Shoreacres, Tim Daves, as we probed to see if the fron section ans swale were to be green - no trace of any cinders. The same at Piping Rock where Rich Spear has probed the front to see if there were cinders - none.

I think I'll ask Scott Ramsey to prob Yale's front section

George,

I think that would lay to rest any questions regarding the grassing intent of the biarritz hole. If that section was intended to be kept as putting surface, it would have cinders under it, as apparently that material was being used as a standard layer in Raynor's construction of putting surface. Personally, I think maintaining that section before the trough at putting green height does nothing to detract from the fun of playing that hole. But it certainly adds to the cost of maintaining it.

I was with Tim Davis one day on the front of 17, and he was showing me how he traces the putting green perimeter with a soil probe. I just love that kind of stuff.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I'll tell you why I think some of those huge flanking bunkers on original biarritz holes were lost or obsoleted over time. That would include both flanking bunkers before the swale at Fox Chapel's biarritz, apparently Tamarack's and others. I think it was the very same reason some of the huge bunkers completely encircling other Macdonad/Raynor greens such at the Short (17th) at The Creek were partially lost over time.

It has to do with basic practically as unfortunate as it may be because golfers just did not want to walk through those bunkers to depart the green and they sure didn't want to walk all the way around them---given the fact that those flanking bunkers on either side of most biarritzes ran for just about 80 YARDS!!!

And what probably REALLY exaccerbated this problem and was responsible for the obsoleting of some or parts of these kinds of massive flanking and green encirling bunkers?? The onset, beginning in the 1950s and really increasing in the ensuing decades---of THE GOLF CART!!!!  

In the old days you could walk straight up a biarritz and exit the green at the back if you were a walking golfer but if you were riding it's a whole different deal, unfortunately.

[TEPaul]

Bradley:

By cinders are you talking about charcoal? If so, there was apparently a whole different reason or at least a double reason for that.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
I’ve looked at all the Biarritz holes in Ct for the year 1934 along with some of the plans in George’s book and most of the bunker configurations are different. 
-For instance, at The CC of Fairfield there were no bunkers at the ends of the swales, 3 separate bunkers on the left side of the hole and 4 separate bunkers on the right, with the cross bunker in front. 
-At Yale GC the left side bunker stopped just past the swale while the one on the right  stopped short of it.
-Piping Rock’s was full along the right side, but separated into two on the left side and starting  at the back plateau
-Southhampton’s looks to have been full on both sides.
-St.Louis looks like 3 separate bunkers on the left and none on the right. 

It seems that it could be drainage in some cases, the advent of carts in others (although the there were walking corridors between some of these bunkers that predated carts by a few decades), and maintenance must have had some influence.

One other possible reason is that the shot of choice was a low fade, if I read George correctly, and the back bunkering at Tamarack may not have been getting much use, so the club may have seen it as a small loss.

[Bill Brightly]

We have an aerial photo from the 1940's at Hackensack (Banks) which show the front left bunker removed, and it is very easy to see the outline of the old bunker. The front right portion was removed a year later. Story is this was a cost cutting measure during WW II, and I always suspected that it came from Tillinghast's USGA advisory visit.

I've posted this 1930 picture before, but I just love it, so I'll post it again: