What's missing in this photograph? Why?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kyle Harris,

You said,

It sure would have some stabilization issues when that high traffic area got compacted enough so that no turf could grow on it

Look at the photo below and look how wide the right side approach is.

As to high traffic, this is Pine Valley, not Dyker Beach.
What high traffic ?
And, I would think that any superintendent seeing wear and tear in a given area would direct golfers elsewhere.
Are you saying that the superintendent was negligent in caring for this area ?

[Kyle Harris]

Patrick,

One man's apathy is another man's negligence. Your question implies the superintendent/membership cared.

[JMorgan]

"A rather detailed article published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on January 4, 1914 specifically mentions the tree planting in order to "shield the fairways." 

JMorgan:

True indeed but as you can see there're a few pig headed or block headed contributors on here who just discount or completely avoid considering things like that as it doesn't seem to support their historically uninformed points and perspectives.

JMorgan,

If we've learned one thing from GCA.com, it's how UNreliable newspaper accounts are.

As to Ben Sayer's alleged comment, how can you even post that he "supposedly said".
It's pure third party or more, hearsay.

TEPaul & JMorgan,

Crump and Pine Valley must have been a century ahead of Northrop with stealth technology.
How is it that those trees are invisible in the aerials of 1922, 1925, 1928 and 1938 ?   ?   ?

Please look at the 1925 photos of Pine Valley that appear in Geoff Shackelford's book on pages 53 and 66, along with the others

Where are the trees that were allegedly planted to "shield" the fairways ?

Where are the trees that currently choke off air circulation, are invasive to bunkers, lines of sight and lines of play ?

To refresh your memories, which are clearly empty, please look at the aerial chrono's of the 12th hole as contributed by Jamie Slonis.
It will show you how the trees became invasive and it wasn't vis a vis some tree planting program categorized as "stabilizing.

Since when does perfectly level ground need stabilization ?

Can someone post the two 1925 photos that appear on page 53 and 66 in Geoff's book.

TEPaul wants you to believe his theories versus your own eyes.

Pat, 

I'll let you and TP duke this one out since I already have my mind made up and your exchanges are much more entertaining.  But keep in mind that you're essentially saying John Arthur Brown, President of Pine Valley and a member of the Club from 1918 until his death didn't know what he was talking about when he used that very article to summarize, in part, the planning and building of the course in the club history, in addition to Club records and his own memories.  Plus, accounts from several founding members, including Simon Carr.  And then to dismiss all of these accounts because they are potentially "unreliable written accounts" on one hand while citing another written account derived from some of these same written accounts -- The Golden Age of Golf Design (in more than several posts to bolster your positions in other discussions, I might add) -- as if that book was delivered to your doorstep by Moses through Geoff, when he -- and no offense, he did what authors do -- got his information from these readily accessible, self-same sources ... you're speciously trying to fit facts into your own preferences if I do say so.  That Sayers quote is also in Club records. 

[TEPaul]

"Please look at the 1925 photos of Pine Valley that appear in Geoff Shackelford's book on pages 53 and 66, along with the others
Where are the trees that were allegedly planted to "shield" the fairways?"


Pat:

If you're really interested in the evolution of Pine Valley and particularly the tree planting program that they referred to as "stabilizing the course" what you need to do is learn how to do research and that pretty much requires reading and understanding the historical information in that evolution. Apparently you're doing neither for some reason.

The aerials on pages 53 and 66 are from 1925. The "stabilization program" took place between 1927 and 1932 in which 3,000-5,000 trees PER YEAR were planted. For starters have you actually considered that 1927-1932 comes AFTER 1925 and not BEFORE?  

By the way the trees planted in that "stabilization" program were seedlings and obviously very small when they planted them. They cost $6.00-$8.00 per 1,000!!

That's 3,000-5,000 trees planted PER YEAR and according to the club 70% of them took. That would be 10,500 to 17,500 trees or are you going to say you don't believe that either? Of course I never said that was the last time Pine Valley planted trees, it wasn't, but we are talking now about that "stabilization" program between 1927-1928 that Warner Shelley mentioned in his Pine Valley history book. By the way, Warner Shelley would probably know first hand as he was probably there then. I remember him and he lived a good long life but he was a member at PV for close to 60 years.

I've been over all this with you a number of times in the past few years. It's from Pine Valley's own history and records but if you choose not to believe it that's your problem and not mine or Pine Valley's. For your own sake you should probably henceforth just keep quiet on this issue instead of opening your mouth which just shows how uninformed you are despite my constant efforts to point out the history of the course.  



"TEPaul wants you to believe his theories versus your own eyes."


I'm sure there's nothing wrong with your eyes or anyone else's on here, but first to understand this evolution it helps to get the chronology right on the evolution.  





"Since when does perfectly level ground need stabilization?"


Level ground? Did you say you've actually been to Pine Valley? If so, is it your obsevation that Pine Valley is all level ground?

On some of the ground that may be fairly level where trees were replanted may be some of those areas that Crump originally cleared to look at prospective hole corridors but never used. I've explained where some of them are to you before too but I guess you didn't understand that either.

I've also explained to you where some of the very unlevel ground is where sliding sand necessitated stabilization which was done with trees or terracing and vegetating the terracing.

[archie_struthers]

 

TEP in many hours spent  with Mr Shelley , Doc Dyson and many of the older members in the late 70's and early 80's I never remember a conversation about the origin of the DA...it was if it was always there, but of course the pictures prove otherwise


never knew Eb Steiniger to comment on architectural features although he often talked about various cultivars and grasses ....he had a particular affection with zoysia , which I'm sure he thought could be hybridized into a supergrass

Have to respectfully disagree with your contention that no architectural discoveries about the Valley have ever been made on the site in that the work done by superintendent Dick Bator has been well chronicled here, his work went past agronomy and involved serious work on the bunkers that altered the playing characteristics of at least two holes with physical changes

..we've discussed it here..  the front of the greens on #2 and #10 were both changed rather dramatically to keep balls from rolling off the greens into the bunkers....not big architecture but definitely architecture...

[Rick Sides]

The evolution of the DA is  an interesting topic.  If you look at the two black and white pictures at the start of this thread, you can see clearly that grass/sod was added to the 10th hole probably to stabilize the sand from washing out as it is prone to do since the 10th green sits up on a plateau.  Ironically enough, there is a par 3 at my home course that also sits on a plateau and I have noticed within the past two years, especially with the intense, heavy rains we have had this past summer, there is actually a pit forming at the base of the hole very similar to the D.A.  I don't know how far apart these two pictures were taken, but if you think about it, the D.A. could have formed in a relatively short period given the fact the rain would run off the green into this collection area.  I honestly don't believe this bunker was ever planned or constructed.  I think nature planned it and Pine Valley embraced it.

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

I have noticed within the past two years, especially with the intense, heavy rains we have had this past summer, there is actually a pit forming at the base of the hole very similar to the D.A.  I don't know how far apart these two pictures were taken, but if you think about it, the D.A. could have formed in a relatively short period given the fact the rain would run off the green into this collection area.  I honestly don't believe this bunker was ever planned or constructed.  I think nature planned it and Pine Valley embraced it.

There are a couple of maintence crew members there that are third and fourth generation employees. When I asked the older generation (before they retired) how the DA evolved, the answer was that it was created by a washout, the powers that be at the time liked it, left it and it then matured over time into the bunker we have today. Even with the modifications to divert water around it, it still washes out on a regular basis and I can't even imagine how bad it washed out when everything funneled to the front.

[TEPaul]

There's our new PV "on-the-ground" expert!

Rick:

Thanks for that post. From that it does make sense that a depression or pit began to develop early on in that area. That area (the original sandy lowest before that green) is mentioned in the records of the club as one of the many areas that was very susceptible to insability and sliding (particularly the area in front of the green and on down towards the beginning of #18. Matter of fact a lot of the left side of #18 was apparently prone to sliding. I see some on here call it a myth that the DA may've first begun to develop from a depression or whatever but I generally find these kinds of old myths, as some people call them, have some basis in fact or they probably wouldn't have been a story in the first place.

[TEPaul]

"Have to respectfully disagree with your contention that no architectural discoveries about the Valley have ever been made on the site in that the work done by superintendent Dick Bator has been well chronicled here, his work went past agronomy and involved serious work on the bunkers that altered the playing characteristics of at least two holes with physical changes."


Archie:

I don't know where I said something like that or why but if I did I'm well aware it's not true. My general focus on the architecture of Pine Valley has always been up until about the early 1930s but I'm well aware of the rest of the architectural history including other things done in later years including by such as Dick Bator, Fazio, and even John Arthur Brown (he apparently created the back tee on #8) and Ernie did have a few very short tees built as well as trees planted. There has been some tee lengthening on some holes too at various times including in the last ten years or so. Actually almost all the holes have had some teeing lengthening even if only slightly. #2 and #17 may be the only ones that haven't. Perhaps #8 and #5 too.  I think Dick made some of those bunkers to the left above #15 green too. And Dick did plant those obnoxious cypress trees or whatever they were between the 18th tee and #10 green. There as a few other things done too but nothing of any large architectual significance even though the 1927-32 massive tree planting program certainly wasn't the only time trees were planted at PV. Some of those sort of ornamental trees planted on #4 and #6 and a few other places are an example but some of them were removed in the last decade or so. This is why I feel PV is a course that was not much tampered with at least compared to some other signifcant courses and architecture.

[Tim Nugent]

Patrick M, the experience I have with sand sites is it is not the topography of the site that leads to sand movement, it is the wind blowing the sand that causes the biggest problems (granted an west-east slope will wind erode faster).  If you study the evolution of Dune formation, you will see how something vertically small, like Beach Grass, can be instrumental in catching and despositing blown sand.  My guess is that the trees were being planted to deminish the verocity of the wind and thus, it's erosive effect.
Blown sand not only is a problem for the area it erodes from but can be detrimental to downwind turfgrass.  Much like the areas between bunkers and greens, sand buildup on turf can be a major factor in the turfs decline.

TEP, I wound tend to agree with you.  Just look at it from a Soils Mechanics point of view.  You have a situation where a steep slope abruptly changes to a much flatter slope.  Since we all know that water travels downhill and the steepr the slope, the faster it travels, it makes sense to assume that where a slope flattens, there will be a highly saturated area - more water entering than can leave.  Even after a rain event and the surfaces dry, there will still be subsurface water draining into that area due to the porous nature of the sandy soil.  And once the protective turf "carpet" has been breached, the combination of surface and subsurface runoff can move a lot of sand particles (which don't have the cohesion of clays) in a short period of time.


And as to the assertion that tif foot traffic was an issue, the supt. would just redirect players, HUH???  To where?  That's pretty much the access point. Although I believe back left be used, golfers generally don't like to backtrack.

[TEPaul]

Tim:

It appears the majority of the original instability problem with Pine Valley was related more to water than to wind. They had a couple of rain events early on (even some of the dates are mentioned and are part of the record of the club) did a lot of damage to the course. But since Pat Mucci (now apparently our new geology expert) doesn't believe any of it perhaps it never happened and is no more than Pine Valley myths or lies. It seems to me there are a few on this website who believe many of these significant clubs and their memberships did a whole lot of purposeful lying or just making up of stories out of whole cloth.  

Whether that highly unusual and famous bunker first began as a sand depression or semi-pit due to water collection or whatever (even if it was orginally turfed on top, I certainly can tell you at some point the club definitely turned it into a formal bunker. Check out its steep earthen sod vertical walls. That part of it is certainly not something that could occur naturally on that massively sandy site.

[Tom MacWood]

One the primary objectives of the PV project was to build a golf course that could be played in the winter. According to Simon Carr, in a January 1915 article, new trees were planted on the north side of tees and greens for protection from the winter winds. This article is also the source for the photo showing the 10th green sans the Devil's Arse. I don't know when is the earliest photo of the 10th showing the DA, but it shouldn't be too difficult to find.

http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1915/gi4j.pdf

[TEPaul]

I believe that particular photo mentioned sans the DA is the earliest photo of that hole. I say that because it is the only one I've ever seen that shows how part of that orginal fronting bunker had sand swept all the way up to the green surface-----a construction method and style that would clearly not able to endure due to its verticality. The same was the case originally with the bunkering in front of #2 and #18. All of them were grassed down with separated bunkering remaining well below the green surface. According to PV's history it looks like William Flynn made the fix on all three. Maybe he made the DA in the process but that was not specifically mentioned as far a I know. Flynn did work at PV for a number of days a week for something like six months or more. If it wasn't Flynn it was probably Jim Govan who was the pro/clubmaker/greenskeeper at PV at the time and Crump's close collaborator and shot-tester in the years Crump worked on the course. From the records it looks like Govan worked with Flynn on the course when Flynn was brought in to finish it off and work on the problematic agronomy.

By the way, I don't believe that particular photo could've been taken later than the late fall, early winter of 1914. At that point, probably only eleven holes were in play, although it's possible #11, #16 and #17 may've been opened up too at that time. I'll check the records on that.

I guess it is also possible at that point that all that sand piled to the right of the right bunker could've been from Crump's idea to have a green to the right of #10 green which would've been his 6th green in an early routing iteration, even though I don't believe Crump got that far with clearing and rough shaping holes as he had with #1-4 before Colt first got there.

[Tom MacWood]

The earliest photo I've been able to find showing the DA is 1923. Here is a letter from Alan Wilson to Howard Perrin from 1921 where he mentions a new bunker at the 10th. CH Alison's written report does not mention adding the bunker at #10, but there were drawings attached to the written report where he illustrated his proposed changes along with detailed notes. I suspect there was a drawing of the 10th included with his report and the DA was added between 1921 and 1923.

[archie_struthers]

  


Since we've been talking Pine Valley, one of my favorite subjects, TEP is right in that short of trees and vegetative growth , very little in the way of substantive changes have been made over the years to the golf course......The old picture of three green is pretty awesome , as you can see it shows the white sand of the bunkers in front of the 6th fairway in the distance ...way way cool!

However it's really interesting that superintendent Dick Bator was given such a license to do the kind of work he did , and a credit to the powers that be , notably head potentate Ernie Ransome to see the brilliance of Bator and allow it to flourish. Of course if there was ever a place where Bator could flourish it would have been at Pine Valley, where you didn't have to worry too much about him strangling a member or upsetting a group of women golfers with his language.

The question remains whether Bator, given the force of his personality actually theorized the changes needed to #2 and #10, which are indeed significant.  The changing of the fronts of both greens to keep balls from returning into the front bunkers, one being the DA and  the "spectacles"  that looked at your second shot on two , under the guise of water management . Surely the run-off on both holes during the big storms is tremendous and often the DA was completely filled , but the way the holes play changed rather dramatically with the changes. The stark terror putting down the hills on both holes no longer impacts the brain like it used to!

Don't think that Tom Fazio or any architect of note was nvolved in this process, but will check it out now that the question is back in front of us.






   

[Mark Molyneux]

I think my first view of the DA came during a Crump Cup, several years ago. One of the top amateurs (Pat Tallent?) hit a ball into the front right bunker on #10. He walked down to the DA, considered his options (including coming out backwards away from the green surface), then told his caddy to pick it up. At that point, he walked back to the tee to hit his 3rd.

I'm wondering if anyone on this string has managed to play out of the DA... I'm not talking an up-and-down; just out... in say the past 10 years.   

[TEPaul]

"The changing of the fronts of both greens to keep balls from returning into the front bunkers, one being the DA and  the "spectacles"  that looked at your second shot on two , under the guise of water management . Surely the run-off on both holes during the big storms is tremendous and often the DA was completely filled , but the way the holes play changed rather dramatically with the changes. The stark terror putting down the hills on both holes no longer impacts the brain like it used to!"


Archie:

That's a good point and I agree with you. Perhaps Bator just added some material to the beginning fronts of those greens, raised them up a bit and gave them a bit of a "Bob Hope nose", if you know what I mean. You're right, compared to the way they once were balls do not so easily just come right off the fronts and into those bunkers below. With the greenspeeds they run even though they sort of fixed it some years ago maybe they should just give the right front of #5 a bit of a "Bob Hope" nosejob too.

[TEPaul]

"I think my first view of the DA came during a Crump Cup, several years ago. One of the top amateurs (Pat Tallent?) hit a ball into the front right bunker on #10. He walked down to the DA, considered his options (including coming out backwards away from the green surface), then told his caddy to pick it up. At that point, he walked back to the tee to hit his 3rd.:


Mark:

I've seen a number of golfers who obviously know that course well, play stroke and distance from the tee before even bothering to go look at their ball in the DA.


"I'm wondering if anyone on this string has managed to play out of the DA... I'm not talking an up-and-down; just out... in say the past 10 years."

Sure they have but it definitely ain't easy. One of them was actually Tommy Naccarato in his one and only time at PV. But the story is waaay better than that because he stood on the tee and asked his caddie exactly how far it was to the DA. When the caddy asked him why he wanted to know that, TommyN told him because he WANTED TO hit it into the DA. and so he did and got it out forward in one shot. Obviously the caddy said; You want to do WHAT?

I heard that was virtually the end of that caddie and he was last seen around one of the New Jersey State mental insitutions. Naccarato did the same thing from the front way below LuLu's #4 and got it up and down. That isn't as hard as the DA but some feat nevertheless.  

PS:
I guess I've played PV hundreds of times and I have tried to hit shots out of the DA but I can proudly say I've never gotten into the DA in regulation play. Now don't talk to me about the far end of the left greenside bunker the way it USED TO BE. That was the thing that really got into my head on the tee and if you were smart you'd just putt the ball down to the front of the bunker and then go from there.  Archie just told me one time when he got in there he just played the ball backwards onto the 18th tee and went from there. Maybe that's why Bator planted all those obnoxious cypress trees between the 18th tee and the 10th green which have thankfully gone to see their maker.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

Thanks for the additional information.

Are you suggesting that Hugh and Alan Wilson added the DA?    

Personally, I think God just sent a little mini tornado one night, or perhaps sent the Jersey Devil over to spin in place like a whirling dervish, and in five minutes that spooky little creature did the erosionary work of roughly 2000 years of a glacial pothole.




More Info on the architect;

http://theshadowlands.net/jd.htm

[Tom MacWood]

CH Alison is responsible for the bunker, and a number of other changes.

[TEPaul]

"CH Alison is responsible for the bunker, and a number of other changes. In the letter Wilson is simply agreeing with Alison's suggestions."


Even though Wilson’s letter to Perrin that includes the committee's report items on Alison’s proposed plan mentions on #10---"10th Hole---complete as suggested. (bunker at green)," Alison's actual hole by hole report that includes various hole drawings for proposed green redesigns and other items like the breaking up of bunkering and the redoing or removing of mounds etc did not include or suggest a bunker on #10.

In his course plan that included suggestions on 17 of 18 holes (nothing was suggested for #14) all Alison said in his plan on #10 was:

"10th Hole. It is suggested that the banks which partly hiade (sic) the bunkers in front of the green should be removed."

That's all Alison said for #10 in his report, and so if he did recommend the DA he must have done it verbally which seems unlikely for Alison given he recorded in his plan everything that PV voted to do (the committee voted to accept a number of Alison's suggestions and do them but they also voted to table some items and not do others. Actually PV approved a few of Alison's suggestions and for some reason either never did them or did them later with someone else such as Maxwell----eg the 8th green redesign).

In the committee report on Alison's plan what was said on #10 is thus:

"10th hole. Remove banks in front of the bunker at face of green."

Nothing was suggested by Alison or the committee about building a bunker.

On that note of what Alison actually did suggest for the 10th hole in his plan, I was telling someone today who really knows PV we can probably see just what Alison was referring to in his report to PV on #10 and how his suggestion was excecuted in that stagger of photos on this thread.

It looks to me like Alison was suggesting the removal of the top of that bank between the tee and the green. If one looks carefully at the photo in question (the black and white from the tee----which was arguably taken in 1921 (I’ll explain later the reasons for that which can be seen in that b&w photo)).

If you look at the next color photo of the hole taken many years later you can’t miss that the top of that bank between the tee and the green has been reduced down. particularly on the right, so the bunkering in front of the green is much more visible from the tee as Alison was suggesting. You can also see that the slight swale between the tee and that bank is there no longer meaning they probably pushed the material from the top of that bank back towards the tee. One can also see in the B&W that the path to the green actually inclines for a way and it certainly doesn't in the color photo from the tee; it actually goes slightly downhill. It's possible the path was moved slightly left but nevertheless the ground to the left of the old path is lower now than in that black and white in that area of the right side of that bank that was blinding the bunkering in front of the green and does not longer.

It’s certainly more than possible that Alison recommended the DA but nothing in either his report nor Wilson’s itemized letter to Perrin says so. Consequently, there is no proof at this point from those reports that Alison recommended the DA itself. Therefore, part of the statement at the top of this post----viz "CH Alison is responsible for the bunker," is potentially historically inaccurate.

It can also be pretty well documented that although the so-called 1921 Advisory Committee of which Alison was actually a member, wanted Alison to be on hand to oversee the work that was approved from his plan. It is clear to see that Alison could not be around----it appears he was opening an office and in the midwest at that time, and so someone apparently oversaw the work from his plan. It may've just been Govan himself but some think it was Flynn and perhaps with an assist from George Thomas to carry out Alison's drawings or some of them----eg some think Flynn/Thomas may've overseen the construction of the new right ninth green. So, if that is true as has been reported by the likes of GeoffShac, I believe, it is probably also reasonable to assume it may've been either Thomas or Flynn who recommended the DA as it seems they were working with the course in that year overseeing the execution of Alison's plans.

What is probably the most logical history of the DA is that long time story that it just evolved on its own due to wear and tear and a depression in that area and was then eventually formalized as a deep pit bunker (see Tim Nugent's post #17 and what soon to be super Eb Steineger told Tim's Dad about the DA. That might even indicate the DA did not even appear and get formalized until Eb Steineger got to PV which I believe was around 1925).

When someone says what post #70 did----"C.H. Alison is responsible for the bunker" (the famous DA) considering Alison's own plan makes no such suggestion but something quite different and considering the committee's report on Alison's plan uses the same words as Alison's plan on #10 in their approval of Alison's suggestions for #10, this is how myths and rumors and inaccurate architectural history gets disseminated to the public, not to even mention this is how inaccurate legends get created. I'm not so sure Captain Hugh Alison would want to be remembered as the man who suggested the creation of the famous Pine Valley Devil's Asshole bunker, but for his sake he can rest easy as at least his very own plan and the Pine Valley Committee report on #10 suggest no such thing.  

[TEPaul]

I would also say that in that B&W photo from the tee in Post #3 that shows a massive amount of sand behind #10 green is the beginning of the project to redo the 17th green and other features on the 17th which took place in 1921. That would therefore very likely date that b&w photo of the 10th from the tee to 1921 when that work was done.

The other thing that struck me about the 10th hole after analyzing that photo of the 10th from the tee is that the green surface itself may be quite close to original natural grade (close enough that all they needed to do is put topsoil on the top of it to grow grass) which would mean they just went DOWN and reamed out around it to a large degree (a technique by the way, that the likes of C&C use often----eg going down off natural grade around something like a green rather than transporting fill in and going up from natural grade). All that sand fill to the right of the right bunker would also indicate that, as well as some of the fill for the 17th behind.

[Sean Leary]

One of the best shots I have ever seen was from the DA. We played early the year they added a new tee, and the caddy gave us the distance from the old tee. Anyway, my friend hits inthe DA and it buries. Takes him almost a minute to find it. Caddie wants him to go back to the tee, but he says what the hell. Comes out perfect and lips out to 6 inches.

[Matt Schmidt]

First time posting...the DA made me do it!

In September I watched my nephew, coached by his caddie, hit a full swing hybrid (215-yd club) out of the DA.  The ball popped off the front bank, went up 20 feet in the air and settled 10 feet from the pin.  It was amazing.  And he made the putt.

Unfortunately, he initially lacked confidence in his caddie's instruction and first tried to flop a lob wedge out...when that failed he played the shot as he was advised to, and it's something I won't forget.  Would've been a fantastic three, but he was pretty happy with the four.

[TEPaul]

Three pages into this thread have we come any closer to conclusively answering JMorgan's question in the initial post of this thread he started?

"Assumed this famous feature was there from the beginning; well, nope; perhaps talked about here before, news to me if so
when did it appear, and why?"


Probably. What we know so far is it was not in the first photo which has been variously dated as 1914 and 1916. 1914 would be accurate as we see this same photo in an early 1915 article.

As to when the DA first appeared as a formal bunker we can't seem to pin it to a specific date. I do see it on a Dallin Aerial that also shows the infamous "pimple" on the 18th green so the DA was certainly there before 1928 when the "pimple" was removed by John Arthur Brown. It appears we can take it at least two years previous to that---to 1926 via an article In Golf Illustrated of Aug. 1926 that shows it in something of an evolving state (photograph on this thread). There's an undated photo of the 10th on page 60 of his "Golden Age of Golf Design" that shows the DA evolving and would seem to be after (for a particular visible reason) of the photo (on this thread) from the tee of the hole that GeoffShac notes is circa 1922 (more likely 1921 from club records and other evidence in that photo) where unfortunately the low right side can't be seen which appears to be Alison's concern and suggestion in his 1921 course plan and suggestions.

As to whether someone designed and called for the DA or whether it just began to appear on its own due to wear and tear as super Eb Steineger apparently claimed to the father of one of our contributors and then was formalized we still can't seem to be sure.

Keep searching the stagger and chronology of all availbable photos and aerials and maybe we can narrow its origination date down some more. I suppose it's very possible that the DA was there before Alison became involved but unfortunately we don't seem to have photograhic evidence of the hole between late 1914 and 1921.

Or do we? As far as I know the earliest Dallin aerial of PV was 1924 but I guess I should check that with the Hagley (there is a 1917 aerial of PV but it only includes some of the 1st and 4th.