The Biarritz question was posed because I thought it would be worth establishing the template concepts used at NGLA and when he might have seen them. Even though Brancaster, North Berwick, Prestwick, etc aren't mentioned in his book, we know he went to these places.
David, He did mention going to NB, but I agree that we obviously cannot rely on his book to figure out everything he saw, because he does not give us a full account of his golf and travels in Europe. Somewhere CBM wrote about playing in France with HJW while studying golf holes for NGLA. So he most likely would have seen the famous hole at Biarritz then. But there are also a few holes at N.B. that could have influenced the design. I think there are two different concepts related to the Biarritz, both found in CBM holes but not always what we would think of as the Biarritz.
Now, as far MacKenzie and Macdonald comparisons, while both claim to have thought St Andrews to be the very best, I don't think AM went out of his way to try and duplicate anything from the UK, while CBM would look for the best areas of the property to implement a template, and if substantial earth had to be moved, he would.
David, I think you may be confusing Macdonald with Raynor, or at least confusing what CBM accomplished at NGLA with later work where Raynor was more heavily involved. So far as I know, CBM did not move substantial dirt to implement any templates at NGLA. Depending on how one counts, there were only between two and four holes at NGLA that even approximated holes from abroad. Of these, they all contained substantive differences (improvements in CBM's eyes) from the originals, and more importantly, they ALL FIT THE LAND. As for the rest (and even for the supposed copies) CBM applied an amalgamation of different strategic concepts
as they fit the land. It is true that when it came to building the Lido, CBM did try to be "a Creator," trying to build a landscape of nothing, but even he ultimately admitted that he could not match nature in this regard.
You've got to remember the timing and the oft stated goal of NGLA. He wanted to change the focus back onto the fundamental principles found in links golf, and so it made sense for him to explicitly identify the strategies of his holes with holes abroad. His holes were examples intended to teach us what a good golf hole was, and examples intended to teach us where to look for good golf design. At the time it may not have been enough to merely build the course. Linking the principles to holes that were already considered to be the best in the world gave the holes at NGLA legitimacy as exemplars that could be studied and followed, whether the names of the holes were used or not.
And in a very real sense all of the same concepts from NGLA are present throughout AM's work (at least the work I have seen;) not that AM was explicitly copying golf holes from CBM or the holes abroad. Rather he was just applying basic strategic concepts as they fit the land, and
that is exactly what CBM was advocating. Both were incredibly advanced at using the existing landscape to bring out fairly fundamental yet sophisticated strategic problems in the golf course. Note that AM was an admirer of CBM's work at NGLA and thought it better than Pine Valley, and that CBM obviously liked AM's winning hole since he used it at the Lido (and since it was similar to a hole CBM had always wanted to build, but hadn't got the chance
because he had never had the right land for it.) Obviously, AM had a very different aesthetic style and he was very creative and original, and he mastered the use of slopes as a strategic concepts, but using slope strategically was one of CBM's great strengths as well. Both at their bones represented
strategic golf course design at its best. CBM just put names old to his holes, while AM did not. But the same bones are there.
As CBM wrote in SG:
The National has fulfilled its mission, having caused the reconstruction of al the best known golf courses existing in the first decade of this cnetury in the United States, and, further, has caused the study of golf architecture resulting in the building of numerous meritorious courses of great interest throughout the country. If one takes a look at the discussion while Augusta National was under way, it was often presented as if it would be an "ideal" course made up of copies of great holes from St, Andrews and elsewhere. AM ultimately clarified that while the holes were largely inspired by the strategic principles found in holes abroad, it did not contain actual copies. This was a perfect realization of what CBM was advocating and hoping for when it came to American golf. In fact in CBM's obituary, H.J. Whigham praised AM's Cypress Point, not as a CBM course, but as the type of course made possible by NGLA, and the type of course CBM wanted in America.
[One thing I find fascinating about the construction photos of CP is H.J. Whigham's presence in the construction photographs. Not saying or even implying that he or CBM were at all involved in the design, but the course was certainly meant to be in the same
school of design as what CBM advocated, thus the later praise by HJW. Also, Raynor as the first as the first choice of designer hints at the same thing (although I wonder if whenever Raynor got a job if he really wasnt the second choice.)