Bayside: Dr. Mac's only New York City course

[Joe Bausch]

This April 1931 article from the Daily Eagle shows the anticipation for the coming Bayside golf course in Queens.  I've read about this course in Daniel Wexler's book "Lost Links" (or maybe it was in "Missing Links", I forget).

It is interesting to hear that it appears that it will be constructed in just 4 months time, and that it is planned to have only 7 bunkers.  I think the drawing in Wexler's book also shows a very small number of bunkers.

(click on the article below to expand it if your browser doesn't automatically do so!)

[Mike Cirba]

Joe,

I love the way Dr. Mac's thinking seemed to evolve to much less dependence on bunkering with ANGC and Bayside.

More and more I'm finding myself questioning the need for any particular bunker, and I'm thinking a true minimalist starts with the idea that a course needs no bunkers and works from there.

[TEPaul]

That newspaper description of the Bayside course sounds like it was lifted directly out of Mackenzie's and Behr's side of the debate they had with Joshua Crane.

At that time MacKenzie had also become particularly fixated on extreme economic efficiencies in construction methods and time.

[Tom_Doak]

I am not sure that MacKenzie's change of style had so much to do with the Behr/Crane debate, as it did with recognizing the seriousness of the Depression.

He wrote extensively about Bayside in THE SPIRIT OF ST. ANDREWS, and most of his writing concentrated on how efficiently the work was going to be done, how machinery could make it easier, how many jobs the course would provide, etc.

The only person I know who ever saw Bayside was Robert Trent Jones.  He told me when he was a student at Cornell he went down there and spent a day walking around with MacKenzie.

[Neil_Crafter]

Joe
Nice article find. Mackenzie must have had a bit of a press day the day of April 21 1931 onsite at Bayside, as we have an article from the NYT from April 22 discussing the project and the journalist mentions meeting Mackenzie on site on the 21st.

Would have nice to have had a personal tour from Mac around Bayside! Not likely now for two main reasons.......

Here's a couple of pics that people might find of interest re Bayside:

Caterpillar advert re Bayside courtesy of Tom MacWood


Bayside High School aerial with golf course beyond

Looking from golf course to Bayside High School


Postcard of 18th green and Clubhouse


Advert for Golf Course with Mackenzie mentioned, courtesy Tom MacWood

[Tony_Muldoon]

Thanks guys.


Bayside High School aerial with golf course beyond

I count 6 bunkers in this section alone.  All look to be in a similar style, so is it possible it was constructed with more?

[Neil_Crafter]

Tony, I reckon I can count at least 9. I don't think that article was accurate with only 7 bunkers. I've checked the other articles I have on Bayside but they make no mention of precise bunker numbers.

[Marty Bonnar]

I've just counted 35 bunkers on the drawing in the Wexler, including A MONSTER with islands on #5

That's the 13th fairway and green nearest the school.

and quote:
""for Bayside was infinitely better than any public course still in play in New York or, arguably, most any other major American city".

Praise, indeed.

FBD.

[TEPaul]

"I am not sure that MacKenzie's change of style had so much to do with the Behr/Crane debate, as it did with recognizing the seriousness of the Depression."


TomD:

It would seem that Mackenzie's concentration on economic efficiencies (reliance on machinery rather than manual labor) during this period would certainly have a lot more to do with the realities of the Depression years than something to do with the Crane debate. However that article above does mention two architectural aspects that at least Behr wrote about prominently during his participation in the Crane debate-----eg contouring and undulating fairways and such for more uneven lies (something Crane objected to) and very little to no rough (Crane was a real advocate of rough to separate bad shots from good shots----eg "control").

[Tom_Doak]

TE:

I think the artificial undulations were meant to replace some of the difficulty lost by removing bunkering ... perhaps a result of the Crane debate, perhaps not.

However, you are certainly right about the other point.  Up until that time, I don't believe there had ever been a serious proposal for eliminating rough from golf courses ... and eliminating the rough certainly doesn't make the course more difficult.  [In fact, it goes against the grain of trying to reduce costs also, unless Dr. MacKenzie was able to create some efficiencies in maintenance that I don't know about.]

[JESII]

My grandfather went to Bayside high school and grew up caddying at the golf course...even told a story about running into Babe Ruth in the locker room one day and talking for a minute or two.

[TEPaul]

"[In fact, it goes against the grain of trying to reduce costs also, unless Dr. MacKenzie was able to create some efficiencies in maintenance that I don't know about.]"


TomD:

Probably not necessarily back in that day. First of all, there was obviously no such thing as artificially irrigating rough areas as there is today on some courses. Second, without that, rough areas were probably far less lush generally and I think what they did back then is to just take those big tractor drawn gang mowers out in the rough area and mow them quite often. I think that's one reason on some of those old aerials it can be very difficult to distinguish the rough from the fairways (it is far easier to do on more modern aerials).

It was actually easy to do with those old tractor drawn gang mowers; I know because I used to use one on the farm on Long Island I grew up on. There was a lever on the side of the gang mowers and you'd just pull them back a little and set the blades a bit higher.

I think that's what Behr and Mackenzie were talking about with their proposed "no rough" philosophy. That is also what Behr and Mackenzie liked about TOC----it was often very hard to tell where the fairway ended and the rough began and that might've gone on for quite a distance. They mentioned that.

As far as contours and undulations in fairways I don't really know what Crane felt about that but I certainly do know what Behr and Mackenzie thought or said Crane thought about that because they both wrote it. So did others. They claimed Crane wanted to flatten fairways because they felt he did not think that was the place to have randomly uneven lies.

As Bob Crosby said in his good essay, it was certainly not just Joshua Crane and his individual ideas the likes of Behr and Crane were after; it was more  that Crane just happened to have provided them with a really convenient target to  go after in print to express what they thought was going wrong with or could go wrong with golf and golf architecture.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom P:

There have been suggestions that Crystal Downs was like that in the old days ... all of the land was gang mowed at, say, 3/4 of an inch, with no distinction between fairways and roughs.  I don't know if that was right from the beginning [designer intent], or a reaction to the Depression; it sure looks like it has some fairway definition in the 1932 film I've looked at.

[TEPaul]

"There have been suggestions that Crystal Downs was like that in the old days ... all of the land was gang mowed at, say, 3/4 of an inch, with no distinction between fairways and roughs.  I don't know if that was right from the beginning [designer intent], or a reaction to the Depression; it sure looks like it has some fairway definition in the 1932 film I've looked at."


TomD:

I just think it can be difficult to pick up the distinction between fairway and rough on those old aerials when it comes to just the various heights of grass.

That is basically proven by the obvious distinction we can see on those old aerials with the light and dark sides of the fairway cut. It's all cut at the same height but it's just that on one side the grain is pushed up and looks dark from the air and on the other side it's pushed down flat and looks light from the air.

It's an intersting renaissance that so many courses today are using that old fashioned tractor drawn gang mower up and back or light and dark fairway side pattern. Obviously in the last 10-20 years a lot more people have been looking at a lot more old aerial photographs of courses than they ever have before.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
I don't find the evidence that the Crane debate had a major effect on Mackenzie's later style very convincing. The Doctor's dramatic transformation was driven my economics, and was done in conjunction with Wendell Miller. Some of Mac's most heavily bunkered courses came right before, during and right after the Crane debate (Melbourne, CPC and Pasatiempo). The Scarlet was not a sparsely bunkered golf course.

I also wonder if you may be misinterpreting Behr. What were his golf courses like in practice. How many bunkers did his most prominent designs have, and did they contain rough?

[Tom MacWood]

Neil
Those are some great pics of Bayside, the one is reminiscent of Jockey Club.

[Tom MacWood]

I don't believe the figure of seven bunkers is accurate. An article in the NY Times from the same time said the course had 19 bunkers, and I tend to believe that number is more accurate. Based on their size and form there were a number of non-Mackenzie bunkers in the later Wexner aerial.

Speaking of aerials here is one of the old truck garden being transformed into a golf course.

[Neil_Crafter]

Tom
yes the mounding in that view from the course to the high school is certainly reminiscent of the mounds at the Jockey Club.

Nice photo there - do you have a source and date for it. And being Australian, I am ignorant as to what a truck garden is. Can you explain?

[Marty Bonnar]

Neil.
I believe we English speakers call them: 'Market Gardens'
FBD.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
I don't find the evidence that the Crane debate had a major effect on Mackenzie's later style very convincing."


Tom MacWood:

I know you don't; you've made that very clear on here. I don't find your point that you don't find an effect on Mackenzie from the Crane debate very convincing. I think that probably has to do with the fact you're not as familiar with the writing of Max Behr on the subject as you could be and the close connection of that writing on MacKenzie's philosophy of that time.

I think that is why Bob Crosby reprised that subject----eg it was not that well understood back then for various reasons although certainly not unimportant.

Apparently, you don't understand that either which might have something to do with the fact you did not even read or understand Bob Crosby's essay very well which is proven by the example that you didn't even notice he mentioned that Behr's "sport/game" distinction preceded the debate. And further to that when I pointed it out to you it seems you are incapable of admitting your mistake or misunderstanding and instead only thought to blame it on your WORD application or some other such total nonsense!

[Tom MacWood]

Neil
I believe the picture came from a Scott's Seed pamphlet. I didn't know what truck garden was either, but from what I gather it is small vegetable farm where the produce is taken away to market on cart or truck, and sold. I think it is usually in or near a city.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
I wonder if you may be misinterpreting Behr. What were his designs like in practice. How many bunkers did his most prominent courses have, and how did he treat rough on those courses?

[TEPaul]

"TEP
I wonder if you may be misinterpreting Behr. What were his designs like in practice. How many bunkers did his most prominent courses have, and how did he treat rough on those courses?"


Tom MacWood:

Why would I be misinterpreting Max Behr in his articles? I do know how to read and unlike you I understand what I'm reading and I've read all Behr's articles dozens of times over the years. I'm not misinterpreting what he wrote and said.

Do you actually think that something Max Behr may've done with a golf course changes what he wrote in those published articles? What Max Behr wrote in those articles in response to Crane is what is part of the Crane vs Behr/Mackenzie debate, not Behr's courses.

You're on an argumentative fishing expedition as it seems you usually are on this website, and that includes your so-called "counterpoint" essay or essay within an essay or whatever you call that thing you wrote in response to Bob Crosby's excellent essay "Joshua Crane." I've read that particular essay of yours a few times now and the best anyone could say about it, in my opinion, is that it's largely peripheral to the subject of Crosby's essay.

[Neil_Crafter]

Marty - a market garden - why didn't they say so in the first place! I thought a truck garden was somewhere trucks were parked overnight or something similar. The truck bit threw me.

Nice pic thanks Tom.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Smarter guys than me but....

Why does the headline call it a bunkerless course when it say in the first PP that it has 7 bunkers, and there is other evidence that it has more?

Why is it called a roughless course when the aerial (granted, not from that article) clearly shows fw about 25-30 yards wide and a light rough cut all the way around?

If the course early on had such rough, did Mac really implement his philosophy of no rough?  Did he intend to, but the Owner over ruled him?  Or was it marketing fluff he didn't really believe?

For that matter, I don't see where this course had either artificially created fw undulations or undue flattening.  From the pics, it seems as if the lay of the land was the lay of the land, and the course was what the course was.  To be honest, in looking at the first photo, right above the HS, you can see lots of color variations in the roughs, which look to me like micro contours left over from the truck farm (the definitions give are correct, btw) The fw nearest the school has very little color variation, and hence probably less contour. That suggests to me that the fw may have been smoothed considerably to be flatter, if not flat, than the roughs.

They were probably using those cats, which the ad says were to build greens and "rolling character", which does suggest ADDING fw contours but the pix don't necessarily show that, if I am viewing them right.  And the fw at the right does show what appears to be  a drainage swale....