[JNC Lyon]

RTJ2 view of his father's courses being "strategic" rather than "penal" is very different from the common perspective.  Surely most people on this site and in the golf architecture world identify Trent Jones with the popularization of penal architecture.  Trent Jones courses' tend to limit players to an aerial attack rather than providing ground and aerial options.  However, his best courses do contain a good deal of strategy.  Crag Burn, outside of East Aurora, NY, is a great example of Trent Jones' strategic architecture.  Sure, the par threes are all of the penal variety, but the long holes force the player to make decisions on many different levels.  From the dual fairway at the ninth to the drivable par four third, Trent Jones builds holes with a tremendous amount of thought and charm.  However, it is ridiculous for RTJ2 to imply that his father somehow revolutionized strategic architecture in America.

Crag Burn is very notable for its strategic.  Seven Oaks, my second home course at Colgate, contains a considerable amount of strategy and classic architecture.  Yet the course is overwhelmingly penal to play day after day.  I find that when I am not either striping it or putting out of mind, I will end up making a ton of bogeys.  I will get to the end of my round and ask myself, "where did all of those shots go?"  It is an exhausting course to play at times, especially in competition.  While it is a very solid course, it does not have the inherent fun of Oak Hill West, Teugega, Monroe, CC of Rochester, CC of Buffalo, Leatherstocking, or any other upstate NY classic layouts.

It is most bewildering when RTJ2 makes his assessment of Ross the architect.  Ross only rarely built crowned greens.  I can only think of one green in the 36 holes at Oak Hill that can be considered "crowned"  Ross built a variety of classic greens that both repel shots and accept shots with ease.  Ross courses also provide a perfect mix of penal and strategic architecture (as RTJ does at Crag Burn).  Finally, most importantly,  Ross was far and away a better router of the golf course than Trent Jones.  While I like the courses at Crag Burn and Seven Oaks, I remain unimpressed by the routings.  Crag Burn's routing is good but inferior to some of its classic Buffalo neighbors.  Seven Oaks' routing is very average. 

I am guessing that RTJ2 does not have enough experience with Ross to make the judgments that he does.  His lack of appreciation for Ross architecture also explain his abysmal routing and use of the land at Turning Stone's Kaluhyat Golf Course.

[Matt_Ward]

Steve:

The time frame you mention really pales in comparison to so many other decades for notable courses coming forward and still being thought of in a big time way.

I'm not downplaying the fanfare RTJ brought to the idea of a design as a full time career -- clearly he shaped the career side in many ways -- but in terms of a batting average of all his courses there are few I have played and just as few which are thought by many to be really top of the line stuff.

One of his best I have played is Mauna Kea. Gets little love here on this site because all the C&C butt boys just swoon over The Plantation Course at Kapalua. Unfortunately, places like Mauna Kea are more exception than the rule.

JNC:

I too share a real like for Crag Burn -- again, it's the overall location that has caused the course to lack a real following from a nationwide perspective. Place the course nearer to NYC and it would likely be a far different story.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ronald,

Before bed, I reread the article and perhaps this is what you want us to discuss:

“Follow the land, follow the land.” That was always his mantra. “Don’t change the land.” When he learned how to design, during the Depression, there was no money, and the technology wasn’t there to do much even if the money had been. So the routing was everything; the land itself was supreme. Now, for much of our modern era, the land has been nothing. You wanted to build a golf course in the swamps, you cleaned up the swamps. You wanted a mountain course, you moved the mountains. It was a completely different approach, almost the reverse.

My personal take on RTJ isn't that much different than Matt's, (i.e. some repetition)  save that when I play one of his courses now, I am usually quite impressed by the kind of cool stuff he did, particularly in green contouring.  But, all of his courses are now striking me as very traditional, too, despite how radical they were when originally built.

And most of his course don't really scrape the land the way most here envision, even though we recall the many big lakes, etc.  But, tell me, of Spyglass, Hazletine, Peachtree, Bellrieve, etc., which ones don't seem to follow the natural countryside to you?  Even in experimenting with big earthmoving, when required, I don't get the sense that he rearranged land to any great degree, other than to build his trademark tees, bunkers and greens.

My first post was admittedly what I wanted to discuss - my long held idea that the designs of the 50-70's almost had to evolve the way they did as a reaction to the times, the equipment, etc.  I also am of the notion that most of us hold too short a view - those that think today's fads and trends will last forever or be treated more kindly in the future, as say, beehive hairdoo's - are most likely mistaken.

My local business columnist had an article reviewing all the predictions made over the decades.  In his view, only "Future Shock" made the grade as far as business predictions from 1970 or so until now.  Most others are hilariously wrong.  So, I won't offer my take on the future here, just comment that looking back, it won't be what we think it will be.

My only real question on RTJ is why did they name some accounting software after one of his golf courses?

[Jeff_Brauer]

As way of disclaimier, I will add that a few of my most profound professional moments involved meeting RTJ, Rees, and Bobby.

I met Rees first, as a then 24 year old apprentice to Killian and Nugen attending his first trade show.  Rees saw Dick at the airport and we all shared a ride in together.  He treated me like an equal, which of course was far from the truth.  We also got into a nice discussion about how the double row irrigation systems constrained clearing widths. I learned he had the same problems we did, and that he was considering going to the then unheard of triple row system!  Quite a coup!

Bobby told me one night when I was membership chairman that his dad wanted to have breakfast with me, and I was honored, even if the main point was to convey his displeasure at some particular issue.  But, he had a way of making me feel important, and I presume it was a key to his success.

When I was President in 1995, I had dinner with RTJ and Junior during the Ryder Cup and was enthralled as the old man discussed his renovations at Oak Hill many years before in great detail.  Before he came down, Bobby said "he doesn't always get the details right at his age" and one of the first words out of his mouth were, "Bobby probably told you that I don't get many details right at my age, but I was there, and he wasn't!"  My guess is that he might not have remembered what room he was staying in that night, but could recall details of long ago projects!

And as Pete Dye is fond of saying, if it weren't for RTJ, we couldn't charge the kind of fees we do.  When his went up, so did everyone elses!

So, I disagree that he wasn't one of the greatest, both for what he did and how he did it.  Saying that he had some lesser courses is probably not the fair way to judge him in the context of his times, since he did so much work that has affected golf history.  For that matter, saying he is repetitious isn't fair either.  What other signature architect hasn't diluted their portfolio with endless housing projects and semi bland resort courses across the globe?

[Matt_Ward]

Jeff:

Your last post is tapdance city at its best.

You missed your calling -- contact Barack and let him know you can serve as his press secretary.

RTJ was a great marketer -- of RTJ.

He had plenty of the most well-connected / well-heeled people you can ever imagine as clients.

Frankly, the bulk of his work is as exciting as watching paint dry on a wall.

No doubt he did create a number of exciting layouts but his role was more of a door opener for what the profession has since become. For that he deserves mega points of gratitude. On the flip side -- the small number of really stellar courses that are still notewothy is indeed shocking given the resources -- both $$ and sites -- that the man had to work with.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I doubt he spent a minute worrying about opening doors for others!

As I postulated, we will just have to see how many of the current crop of Fazio, JN, Pete Dye, and others remain on top 100 lists in the future to compare.  Or how many are softened after being found "too tough."

Even if they outshine RTJ eventually, and some will, he remains the one who most transitioned gca from what it was to what it is, as you mention.  But, he must have done a lot right for others to build on his shoulders, don't you think?  BTW, if someone like CC eventually passes him in tournament courses or top 100 courses, it will most likely be because they are able to command enough fees (both because of Ben's reputation, coupled with the higher fee trend he started) to get back to more of the "liesure class" gca, where the sole source of income isn't design fees, or that they are high enough that they can be selective in their projects.  I believe that Trent, after surviving the depression, probably didn't ever consider turning down a reasonable project.

[Ronald Montesano]

Jeff, where exactly is "Quickbooks Golf and Country Club"?  Oh, wait a second, you mean Peachtree!!  I'm a little slow.

We are getting there.  I like what JNC said about the importance of routing.  I don't particularly like the routing at Glen Oak, but I'm not disheartened by what he did at Seven Oaks nor at Crag Burn.  I think that he was handcuffed at Crag Burn by A)  the site of the clubhouse; it was already there...the old stables and everything and B) the land is flat as wood.  I also don't think that 5 and 12 are nearly as penal a par three hole as are 7 and 17.  When I play there, I can't wait to get past the later two holes, yet I look forward to the almost-redan feel of the other two. Oh for an angled bank or two!

I can add Tanglewood Park West Course to the non-traditional layouts...that one just kills you with bunkers in front of greens and in wickedly pinched drive zones.  He even used trees to eliminate options off the tee in some cases.  For balance, put Durand Eastman, his earliest work, outside of Rochester, in the traditional column.

Steve, sorry for the psychoanalysis crack...New Orleans' defense score a touchdown, putting me six points down to my opponent...fortunately, my kicker saved me in the end.

[Ronald Montesano]

Play these five RTJ courses in New York state and you'll see a side of the man very different from the splashy (bunkers and water) and penal (bunkers and water directly in the way of the progress of the ball) architect:

Green Lakes State Park
Durand-Eastman
Crag Burn
Anglebrook (disclaimer:  based on heresay alone...I hope to play it next season.)
Seven Oaks

[Tom MacWood]

Whatever his sons' attitude was toward their old man I don't think it matters because he had two distinct advantages over them - talent and working with/for Stanley Thompson.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ronald,

I was thinking traditional in terms of how much the landscape was altered to create a golf course.  Your last post seems to equate tradtional with the amount of bunkers in front of greens and the demand of the aerial game.

No doubt RTJ created courses that favored/required mostly an aerial game, or at least that is our vision of him.  I believe that after WWII, advances in distance were as alarming to him as they seem now and his designs sought to toughen up the courses.  For that matter, it was obvious that the running game was confined to the football fields of America, and decided not to design for it, giving us a new paradigm.  That was not a wholly unsupported POV, nor is it today, except for the fact that it also nicely accomodates the 90% of golfers who need a little space to run it up on the green.

It would be interesting for some historical researcher to catalog the tendencies for gca's of different eras in some really well measured ways, such as the average width of fw opening to greens, separated by length of shot, etc.  A comparison of Ross or Tillie to Jones or Dye or Nicklaus, etc. might be quite instructive.

[PCCraig]

It's amazing how little earth RTJ moved at places like Point O' Woods and Bellerive.

[JNC Lyon]

Play these five RTJ courses in New York state and you'll see a side of the man very different from the splashy (bunkers and water) and penal (bunkers and water directly in the way of the progress of the ball) architect:

Green Lakes State Park
Durand-Eastman
Crag Burn
Anglebrook (disclaimer:  based on heresay alone...I hope to play it next season.)
Seven Oaks

When you play Durand Eastman, keep in mind that all of his bunkers have been removed over the years.  The original bunkering was spectacular.  I would love to see a restoration, but of course it probably will never happen.

I will have to check out Anglebrook.

[TEPaul]

 "If someone has proof that he was looking to make a contribution to the advancement of golf, I'd love to learn more."


Ronald:

Oh no, even if RTJ probably wasn't in the slightest opposed to making money and lots of it, there is little question he created pretty much of a paradigm shift in golf course architecture. To tell how all one needs to do is just look at his golf courses compared to what came before him.

[Ronald Montesano]

Can you elaborate on the paradigm shift, Tom?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ronald,

The article mentions some of the paradigm shifts - one is to International Work.  Bobby credits his dad with taking gca out of US regionalism, but I don't know if that is true - Ross, Tillie, etc. all worked nationwide.

Design wise, I credit RTJ with being among the first to utilize widespread irrigation, which led to irrigation lakes, which lead to bigger cuts and fill quantitiies than in the pre WWII era (typically, that is. Courses like Lido did have some massive earthmoving before that, but RTJ recognized that earthmoving was really pretty cheap and used it more to build bigger greens and tees.  His scale was pretty amazing compared to most work)

The other paradigm shift I see was the embracing of designing for the aerial game, as noted before, and the use of long tees to make concessions for the average players who played daily.  I would also say that RTJ believed in defending par at not only the greens (with wild contours) but at the fw with lots of bunkers and narrower fw, and at the tee, with ever greater length.  He probably defended it in the parking lot!

I believe some of the negative vibes RTJ gets here is primarily from the defending par notion, which took out much of the ground game for average players.  He also tended to build bigger greens than had been built before to accomodate the rolls he liked to put in them.  They made a lot of sense for a growing number of players for maintenance reasons, but I know that many prefer the smaller scale we associate with Golden Age courses. 

That said, in reality, the GA guys built greens almost as big at RTJ, and they had shrunk over the years while his were new.  I view RTJ greens as very much upholding the traditions of the Golden Age!

[Ronald Montesano]

Jeff,
What would be examples of these big and wild greens?  Did he design differently for public versus resort versus private?

[Ed Oden]

He also tended to build bigger greens than had been built before to accomodate the rolls he liked to put in them.  They made a lot of sense for a growing number of players for maintenance reasons, but I know that many prefer the smaller scale we associate with Golden Age courses. 

That said, in reality, the GA guys built greens almost as big at RTJ, and they had shrunk over the years while his were new.  I view RTJ greens as very much upholding the traditions of the Golden Age!

Jeff, this is an interesting comment.  I love wild contours.  On the other hand, I also prefer fast greens.  Obviously, these concepts are often at odds.  But large greens, if well done, can accomodate both.  Peachtree is a prime example of how to do so to near perfection.  Their greens are among the best I have seen.

Ed

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ron,

I haven't played many more RTJ courses than the ones I listed in the earlier posts.  (Add Montauk Bay, Hilldale (a chicago housing course) and a few others) so I am not an RTJ expert. I would say his private greens were probably wilder than public, but I am not sure it was universal.

I thought Haznat had pretty wild greens, for one example.  Peachtree seemed a little more sedate (but not flat) but that may be because Haznat was specifically designed as a US Open course, no?  His greens at Oakland Hills (while mostly add ons to Ross greens) are also pretty wild.  But, its the Monster!

As Ed says, RTJ did a nice job of accomodating more play that his courses were experiencing by building bigger greens and more contours but with interspersed flatter areas. (again, at least in general) 

No design style can incorporate everything and you give some to get some.  Big greens lose small scale, obviously.  Harbor Town has a different charm (and possibly more charm that can be had only in smaller scale golf courses) than a brawny RTJ course.  But, the RTJ style accomplished what it set out to accomplish.  And, it set it self apart from both the Golden Age and most of his contemporary competitors, albeit some of that might be in his master marketing.

I wonder if he would have ever gotten as famous if he trotted out "Just like the Golden Age!" as his marketing slogan as opposed to "new and improved, bigger and bolder!"  I feel like his approach happened to be a perfect fit for his times.

[Mike_Young]

I have always liked RTJ courses....one of my favorites both routing wise and strategy wise is Heather in michigan.......the thing that has always stood out to me on his courses was the transition to bulldozers....IMHO most of his greens were flowing shapes form a dozer with hardly no internal contours and all contours beginning outside the greens ad flowing thru...and his bunkers seemed to be designed for dozer construction....of course many here will not like that but it worked and IMHO it can be maintained in many cases much more economically than some of what we see today....same goes for Wilson and Lee....
I do think he was extremely competitive with guys such as Joe Lee and Dick Wilson and may have gone over the top on occasion....but that did not mean he was in it just for the money..... 

[TEPaul]

"Can you elaborate on the paradigm shift, Tom?"


Ronald:

I sent you an IM on the subject.

[BCrosby]

Mike -

Your comment about RTJ and dozers is interesting. I think that has a lot to do with the look of his courses and why they don't look like GA courses. If RTJ wasn't the first to use bulldozers, he was one of the first not to try very hard to hide it. You see it, for example, in his big scooped bunkers.

I've always seen P'tree as a RTJ transitional course. In '48 RTJ seemed to have one foot still back in the GA and one foot in the 1950's. The 1st and 3rd holes could both be GA holes. They also seem out of character. Almost all the other holes look like they are from a different era. Big, smoothed (dozed?) fairways, huge scooped bunkers, big greens.

All that said, I enjoy RTJ courses. They don't appeal to my eye, but they are challenging and fun to play.

Bob    

  

[Stewart Abramson]

Let's say we've got no one other than RTJ Senior who spanned that period, although Dick Wilson, Joe Finger and Joe Lee were doing courses in the 1950s.  We had George Fazio, Pete Dye, Desmond Muirhead in the 1960s and 1970s...who else?

William F Mitchell designed and renovated more than 200 courses between 1950 and 1973 in more than a  dozen US States and also did work in Canada and Portugal. I've read an old article by Geoffrey Cornish referring to Mitchell as one of the top GCA's of that period in addition to RTJ. Mitchell, like Cornish, was based in New England.  I think Mike Nuzzo recently did some work on a WFM course as did Gil Hanse. Don't want to threadjack, but can anyone advise where I can find out any info about WFM? I tried ASGCA, of which he was a member, but never received a reply.

[David Stamm]

I like some of RTJ's courses, such as Pauma Valley. I would not characterize his greens as interesting as the GA courses, but fun. I have played another course of his, Mission Viejo CC, that was not the greatest and frankly was poor in spots. Spyglass Hill, while good, could have been so much better IMO. One of the issues I have w/ his courses is the tenedency to build alot of his par 3's in the 190-220 yard range that seem to require the same shot. Spyglass not withstanding, he doesn't seem to trust that a short par 3 can be a sufficent test and therefore the variety lacks. Also, short par 4's with multiple options is something that he doesn't do that I think his courses suffer from. I think overall, his courses are good, but tend to be too formulaic.

[TEPaul]

"What would be examples of these big and wild greens?"


The example of big and wild RTJ greens I know the best is the London Hunt Club. Not all the greens are that big but one in particular is the green on the interesting par 5 10th hole that is a full 80-90 YARDS in length (that's 240-270 feet) that is set at a diagonal. I never thought all that much about club selection to various pins on greens but that one sure got our attention! 

[BCrosby]

Maybe the biggest, wildest green I've ever played is the 10th at Peachtree. The irony is that - given its size - there are relatively few pinnable areas.

Bob

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()