[Neil_Crafter]

JC
It would appear that Mackenzie did green plans for all 18 holes - sadly though they don't seem to have survived - but Maxwell built them all it would seem. Of course we have no way of knowing how diligently Maxwell stuck with what Mackenzie had sketched out or whether he made slight or even radical changes to them. Tom D knows Mackenzie greens better than anyone and I'd be happy to go with his list of those he thinks have the most Mac-like characteristics.

[JC Jones]

JC
It would appear that Mackenzie did green plans for all 18 holes - sadly though they don't seem to have survived - but Maxwell built them all it would seem. Of course we have no way of knowing how diligently Maxwell stuck with what Mackenzie had sketched out or whether he made slight or even radical changes to them. Tom D knows Mackenzie greens better than anyone and I'd be happy to go with his list of those he thinks have the most Mac-like characteristics.

Neil,

Sounds like a fun case study to me!!

[DMoriarty]

Maxwell had quite a bit to do with Crystal Downs.  There is even a story (unsubstantiated, because no one has ever dug up a routing plan for Crystal Downs) that Maxwell re-routed the last two holes, which is only funny because David M. brought up #17 as an example of MacKenzie's genius.

That is funny.  Shows what I know.  Genius or not, the 17th sure doesn't seem like a hole that would jump out at the router, whether it be MacKenzie or Maxwell.
_______________________________________________

JC,

Speaking of the 17th, some people don't like it much, some don't like the middle of the back nine and/or the 18th, and I doubt anyone really likes the long uphill walk between 11 and 12.  Those are about the only criticism I ever hear about the course.   If we work on your initial premise (that MacKenzie routed the course) then it is MacKenzie who must be responsible for these shortcomings (if they are shortcomings.) Now obviously this might not actually apply at Crystal Downs, because the initial premise may not be quite right but it may be worth considering anyway.   Perhaps the person who should get the most credit is the one who would get the blame if things go wrong.   Usually that is the person brought in to design the course and the person who had final say. 

I am not sure I totally buy this myself, but thought it might be worth considering.

[Tom_Doak]

 Perhaps the person who should get the most credit is the one who would get the blame if things go wrong.   Usually that is the person brought in to design the course and the person who had final say. 

I am not sure I totally buy this myself, but thought it might be worth considering.

David:

I used to bring that up to my associates now and then if they were starting to feel too good about a green they had built -- "Yeah, but remember that ridiculous bunker you built in the middle of the 14th fairway, that I had to take out?"  It is important to foster a culture where guys are not afraid to throw out a good idea, but far different to just let them do whatever they want and be happy with it.

MacKenzie was sort of in between.  He knew he would likely never get back to see some of these courses, so he drew up fairly elaborate greens plans, and spent as much time as possible with the guy who was going to oversee them being built, trying to stress to them what it was he was trying to achieve.  At the same time, in Australia, he basically wrote a letter to Kingston Heath that his plans for the new bunkers were all schematic, and it was important for the club to give the Morcoms freedom to alter the plans as necessary to fit their eye.  That's about the best you can do without being able to go back ... explain your ideas, and give the associate freedom to make it even better.  Today, because of jet travel, we do the same thing the other way around.

P.S.  Incidentally, I have the topo for Crystal Downs in my office, and I have often looked at that 17th hole, wondering if I (or anyone else) would have seen it.  It is sort of a rigged game since the topo only shows the narrow corridor for #11 and #17, and not the rest of the ground to the right of #17, where MacKenzie supposedly wanted the hole to go.  But, in the corridor they did use, it's pretty easy to see there was not much else you could do with the routing, other than making #17 a par-3 hole and then having a long walk to the next tee.  The topo is so severe that there just weren't any other options, at least back in those days.

[DMoriarty]

Tom,

Given their willingness to use a long walk earlier in the nine, it seems that a par 3 and a walk would have been well within the range of possibility.  

Surely you have considered what Macdonald's alternate finish would have been.  Will you tell us about it?  

_________________________________________________________________________________________

..., but you know C.B; he was kind of an uber-snob in some ways and probably felt anything west of Chicago was outter space and that the coast of California was just something akin to bunch of Indians trying to breed with some Chinese immigrant fishermen people or else a bunch of no-count reprobates sifting silt in creeks looking for some quick BLING.

In my years of reading this site, that might be the funniest sentence I have ever read.

I understand why some might find funny TEPaul's portrayal of CBM as a bigoted snob, but to me it is just his latest tired effort to trash CBM's reputation.  Since TEPaul has never offered much if any support for his various gossipy junior high school trash talk, maybe his comments are more a reflection on TEPaul himself than on Macdonald. I do find it funny that TEPaul, of all people, would call CBM an uber-snob.  After all, it is TEPaul who likes to pretend that CBM wasn't quite of the same class as TEPaul's own.  Come to think of it, TEPaul has also often portrayed CBM as a bitter, petty, self-centered and angry drunkard.   Maybe I am on to something.

TEPaul wrote the following just above what you quoted . . . .

Morse also tried to get Macdonald to do Monterrey Peninsula, I believe it was, but CB turned him down flat. And that would not have been unusual for CB at that time considering he had been in his approximately two decade long architectural "renunciation mode" for close to a decade at that point for all but the very biggest of the big time Captains of the Universe.

What a bunch of horseshit.   TEPaul, Wayne, Cirba and a few others have long tried to pretend that Macdonald turned his back on the game and became bitter and hateful toward about everything to do with it.   This is just the latest example.   Problem is that they have never offered anything to support their trash talk.  Apparently, they think if that if they just continue to run CBM down, people will believe them.

When was this supposed "two decade long architectural 'renunciation,'" anyway?   According to Geoff Shackelford's excellent book on Cypress, the project began in earnest in 1924, with Raynor being hired that same year.  According to Bahto's excellent book on Macdonald this is what he was up it the 1920s. . . .

1920-1921. Macdonald and Raynor designed and built Ocean Links.
1921-1922. Macdonald and Raynor designed and built Gibson Island Club.
1922-1923. Macdonald and Raynor designed and built Creek Club.
1922  Macdonald and Raynor designed and built a practice course for Eddie Moore.
1922 Macdonald and Raynor designed and built 9 hole course for H.P. Witney.
1922-1923. Macdonald and Raynor helped plan Women's National Golf & Tennis Club.
1922-1924. Macdonald and Raynor designed and built Mid Ocean.
1924-1925. Macdonald, Raynor, and Banks designed and built Deepdale.
1923-1926. Macdonald, Raynor, and Banks designed and built Yale University Golf Club.
1928.  Macdonald published Scotland's Gift.
1930.  Macdonald turned 75 years old.

Maybe I am crazy, but this hardly sounds like Macdonald was in the middle of a "two decade long architectural 'renunciation.'"

TEPaul's portrayal of CBM refusing the Cypress job because he was too bigoted to work for Samuel Morse?  More horseshit.  CBM (who was from Chicago which was considered part of the West at that time) was NOT a professional course designer.  He was an amateur with a career unrelated to golf.  CBM was also almost 70 years old, with children and grandchildren, and had neither the time nor energy to help everyone who asked for help with his golf courses.    TEPaul's comments not only misrepresent CBM, they also betray an ignorance about the West in general and Samuel Morse in particular.  

I'm not saying CBM was a saint.  None of us are.  But he certainly deserves better than to be mocked and ridiculed without basis, especially by someone like TEPaul who pretends to be legitimately interested in the history of the game.   At the very least, TEPaul and his cronies ought to back up their never ending negative portrayals.  Either that or they should shut the hell up.

[JC Jones]

Moriarty,

Thanks for your contribution to the Crystal Downs discussion, please don't bring the CBM debate to this thread.  Thanks.

[JC Jones]

P.S.  Incidentally, I have the topo for Crystal Downs in my office, and I have often looked at that 17th hole, wondering if I (or anyone else) would have seen it.  It is sort of a rigged game since the topo only shows the narrow corridor for #11 and #17, and not the rest of the ground to the right of #17, where MacKenzie supposedly wanted the hole to go.  But, in the corridor they did use, it's pretty easy to see there was not much else you could do with the routing, other than making #17 a par-3 hole and then having a long walk to the next tee.  The topo is so severe that there just weren't any other options, at least back in those days.

Tom,

If #17 went to the ground to the right, I would think he would have been stuck coming home.  That ground is much higher (where the fortress house is for sale now) and I would think that would make the transition down to where #18 green currently is even harder.  Unless he would have put #18 green up closer to the pro shop (but my memory is that would require serious cutting into a hill).

[TEPaul]

I think the topographical realities of the sequence of holes #10-12 and #16-18 at Crystal Downs is an excellent object lesson in the realities and potential obstacles of routing golf holes if close-coupling (close geen to tee commutes) is of some necessity.

All things considered I feel the routing team of Mackenzie/Maxwell did a very decent job of overcoming those topopraphical realities and obstacles in that area with particularly holes #11 and #17 which are memorable albeit perhaps a bit quirky (the steep 11th green and the entire 17th hole).

In this vein, I'm reminded of a remark Bill Coore made during the consideration of the so-called Ardrossan Project that was also on beautiful but complicated topographical ground. He said generally the key to a great course is not how well you use the fairly obvious topography but how well you resolve the obstacles and complications of the occassional 2-4 instances of the topographical areas that are anything but obvious in how to use for golf. The example he used was the 8th at Easthampton, and later perhaps the 10th at Friars Head.

[DMoriarty]

Moriarty,

Thanks for your contribution to the Crystal Downs discussion, please don't bring the CBM debate to this thread.  Thanks.

I understand your concern, but I didn't bring CBM into this thread.  TEPaul did.   It is important we have an accurate understanding of who these guys were and what they did, so I will continue to correct TEPaul's fictions and gossip about CBM where ever I notice it.

That being said, TEPaul's fantasy about CBM's two decade long architectural "renunciation mode" is so outrageous it probably deserves its own thread.   I'll leave it alone on this thread and start another when I get a chance.

[TEPaul]

"I'll leave it alone on this thread and start another when I get a chance."



Please do.

JC Jones asked you, not me, not to start a debate about CBM on this thread. I didn't do that, you did. All I did is mention the fact that he turned Morse down in California and a humorous remark about perhaps why. Obviously you didn't think it was funny but apparently Dale Jackson did (as I suppose he wouldn't have said so if he didn't) who apparently isn't as touchy about Maconald as you are.  

Now back to our regularly scheduled programing: Again, JC, my feeling is Crystal Downs should be called a Mackenzie/Maxwell which I believe it pretty much always has been.

Here's a thought JC. What do you think it would've been like if Makenzie/Maxwell did a dramatic short drop shot par 3 for #10 followed by and extremely uphill but remarkably short par 5 for #11 that might climb all the way to the top of the ridge near #12 tee? I mean everyone has to go that way anyway so why not play it all?

After all, if Mac could do back to back par 3s at Cypress why not do an uphill one (#9) followed by a dramatic downhill one (#10) at Crystal Downs?

[JC Jones]

Here's a thought JC. What do you think it would've been like if Makenzie/Maxwell did a dramatic short drop shot par 3 for #10 followed by and extremely uphill but remarkably short par 5 for #11 that might climb all the way to the top of the ridge near #12 tee? I mean everyone has to go that way anyway so why not play it all?

After all, if Mac could do back to back par 3s at Cypress why not do an uphill one (#9) followed by a dramatic downhill one (#10) at Crystal Downs?

Tom,

That is a very interesting idea.  Of course the rumor is that MacKenzie forgot the 9th hole and that Maxwell had to add it in later after construction began so that may have figured into the equation.  And, this is all assuming that he routed Cypress and not someone else....

I think it is also interesting to speculate where 18 would have gone had MacKenzie been able to go to the right of where #17 currently is.

[Mike Cirba]

.

Here's a thought JC. What do you think it would've been like if Makenzie/Maxwell did a dramatic short drop shot par 3 for #10 followed by and extremely uphill but remarkably short par 5 for #11 that might climb all the way to the top of the ridge near #12 tee? I mean everyone has to go that way anyway so why not play it all?

After all, if Mac could do back to back par 3s at Cypress why not do an uphill one (#9) followed by a dramatic downhill one (#10) at Crystal Downs?

Tom,


When I suggested this exact same thing  for a proposed 18th at Cobb's Creek with remarkably similiar landforms you thought the topogrpahy was too severe to work?!?    

Neil,

Thanks for that great definitive information.

[Neil_Crafter]

You are welcome Mike.
As for the assertion that Mackenzie may not have routed Cypress Point, well I think Tom has covered that pretty well, but I would like to add the influence of Robert Hunter who was Mackenzie's partner west of the Rockies. Like Maxwell at Crystal Downs, I am sure Hunter was involved in the routing process at Cypress, just like he would have been at the Meadow and Valley Clubs too.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
When I suggested this exact same thing  for a proposed 18th at Cobb's Creek with remarkably similiar landforms you thought the topogrpahy was too severe to work?!?     "


Mike:

Each piece of complicated topography presents its own unique obstacles and potential solutions. The fact is trying to use the remaining ground at Crystal Downs after a drop shot par 3 for #10 for perhaps a short very uphill par 5 to around where the 12 tee is, is virtually nothing remotely like trying to use the 18th at Cobbs in the manner we disgusted that time. The two are entirely different problems with entirely different solutions (if they are even solvable) due to entirely different topography.

With what you proposed for #18 at Cobbs I just thought it might be too far to get a tee in there in a good location that would make a down turbo-boost with the fairway close enough but I believe you informed me it was actually closer than I thought it was.

[TEPaul]

"I think it is also interesting to speculate where 18 would have gone had MacKenzie been able to go to the right of where #17 currently is."


JC:

In my opinion, making recommendations even for the sake of discussion like that would be a big mistake as the only thing one would be doing is probably solving some of the ultra complexity of the way the present tee shot is on #17 at the expense of a really great golf hole----eg #18. Also there is nothing at all wrong with that 17th green and where it is----the only controversial point with the 17th hole is that tee shot is sort of strange and obviously potentially dangerous---eg balls just shooting into the woods on the left.

I wonder if anyone has ever thought of trying to use some of the land to the right of the present fairway for more fairway area somehow. Frankly I never even looked up that way even though I've played that course about 25 times over the years. If it is too right to left steep up there then it probably couldn't or shouldn't be used or considered that way but if it isn't it might be an interesting thought.

 
 
 

[Tom_Doak]

JC / TE :

The longtime pro, Fred Muller, told me many years ago that he'd heard MacKenzie's original 17th hole was supposed to play well to the right of its present line (right of that house you are talking about, JC) and up to a green so that the 18th tee could be on the bluff overlooking the lake, way above and to the right of the present 18th green.  Then, the 18th would have been a short par 4 back down across the current fairway with a green up into the hill where they store carts, somewhere below the 10th tee.

This has always been hard for me to visualize, since Crystal Downs was planned as a development from prior to MacKenzie's arrival, and it's very hard to imagine how / where the development road to the right of #17 would have connected toward the clubhouse -- it seems that both #17 and #18 would have had to cross it.  If that was indeed MacKenzie's plan, it probably would not have gone over so well with the developer (who would want no road crossings and another home on the bluff), and it's possible he would have asked Maxwell to come up with a different plan.  However, none of us have ever seen an original plan, so this is all quite speculative.

[TEPaul]

TomD:

Interesting what you said there but that is just impossible for me to visualize. Had someone perhaps pointed out all that land to me in my time out there I might have had some inclination of the potential pros and cons.

I have said on here and would continue to say that the art of routing golf courses, particularly on very good topography (which in and of itself can be inherently complicated and routing complex), is an art that perhaps 99.9% even on here do not really understand. I think almost no one can really understand these things until and unless they have had a certain amount of experience out there on sites trying to route those kinds of sites and clearly not 1% of the participants and contributors to GOLFCLUBATLAS.com have had that type of experience on those kinds of sites.

[JC Jones]

Tom D,

Very Interesting.  My initial reaction is to agree with you regarding the housing development's effect on the routing.

I'll check it out in a few weeks and report back with a fresh perspective.

[Neil_Crafter]

Tom
As the client - Walkley Ewing - was there with Mackenzie and Maxwell when they did their routing, one can only imagine that the three of them talked about where houses etc would go and that the planned holes took the housing needs into account. Now if you can only find that plan............

[Tom MacWood]

From what I understand it took several years for CD to be completed, and Maxwell and his construction man Woods were involved during the entire process. I believe this includes a period after Maxwell and Mackenzie partnership dissolved. Maxwell and Woods were both involved with U of Michigan too, and you have the map at Michigan that is clearly drawn by Maxwell. To my knowledge Mackenzie never mentioned CD or Michigan in any of his writing or advertisements, and there is strong evidence that Maxwell worked independently while partnered with Mackenzie.  IMO the evidence point to those courses being Maxwell's.

Don't CD and Michigan have more in common with Prairie Dunes than they do with Mackenzie's work at the time?

[JC Jones]

From what I understand it took several years for CD to be completed, and Maxwell and his construction man Woods were involved during the entire process. I believe this includes a period after Maxwell and Mackenzie partnership dissolved. Maxwell and Woods were both involved with U of Michigan too, and you have the map at Michigan that is clearly drawn by Maxwell. To my knowledge Mackenzie never mentioned CD or Michigan in any of his writing or advertisements, and there is strong evidence that Maxwell worked independently while partnered with Mackenzie.  IMO the evidence point to those courses being Maxwell's.

Don't CD and Michigan have more in common with Prairie Dunes than they do with Mackenzie's work at the time?

Tom MacWood,

How can the plan for UofM "CLEARLY" be drawn by Maxwell when Ron WHitten's research suggests that Maxwell didn't and couldn't draw plans?

Also, considering Maxwell came to Michigan directly after doing Old Town, perhaps those courses have more in common?

[Sean_A]

From what I understand it took several years for CD to be completed, and Maxwell and his construction man Woods were involved during the entire process. I believe this includes a period after Maxwell and Mackenzie partnership dissolved. Maxwell and Woods were both involved with U of Michigan too, and you have the map at Michigan that is clearly drawn by Maxwell. To my knowledge Mackenzie never mentioned CD or Michigan in any of his writing or advertisements, and there is strong evidence that Maxwell worked independently while partnered with Mackenzie.  IMO the evidence point to those courses being Maxwell's.

Don't CD and Michigan have more in common with Prairie Dunes than they do with Mackenzie's work at the time?

Tom MacWood,

How can the plan for UofM "CLEARLY" be drawn by Maxwell when Ron WHitten's research suggests that Maxwell didn't and couldn't draw plans?

Also, considering Maxwell came to Michigan directly after doing Old Town, perhaps those courses have more in common?

JC

There are two distinct course maps of UofM which are clearly of different hands.  I believe Maxwell routed a course and then Dr Mac made some changes - hence the two maps.  That isn't to say that either of them drew the maps though I think it plausible that Dr Mac drew the second one.  Although the final map does have Maxwell's signature and his office address on it, but it also includes Dr Mac as a designer (presumably co-designer). 

Ciao
Ciao

[Chris_Clouser]

JC,

Typically Maxwell did not draw plans but his brother-in-law, an engineer by trade, did.  There were several plans drawn by Dean Woods for Maxwell's projects.  So in a sense Whitten's statement is correct, if not 100% accurate.  But even Maxwell did some simple line drawings over his career, including the original University of Oklahoma course routing that hangs in their clubhouse to this day. 

As for the U of M map, Maxwell routed the course and in 1929 a routing map was produced, either by Woods or someone else in Ann Arbor.  My personal belief is that Maxwell hired someone to do the map in Ann Arbor but there is not a name on it anywhere, just a date (1929).  This routing was then altered by Mackenzie to reflect very much what is in place today at U of M, at least from a routing perspective. 

Also, Old Town was done nearly a decade after Maxwell's first routing at U of M.  So I'm not sure where you got your information on the timing of U of M and Old Town. 

Personally I am fine with Maxwell and Mackenzie each receiving credit for both U of M and CD.  There is no evidence that suggests either course was done solely by either man.  As for determining who should have primary or secondary attributation, that is for people with much more time and far less greater things on their table to argue.   

[JC Jones]

Chris,

Thanks for your input and this discussion prompted me to finally buy your book, which I am very much looking forward to.

My comment regarding Old Town and Michigan was with respect to Crystal Downs (Doak informed me that Maxwell did Crystal Downs right after Old Town) and the (obviously) false assumption that Maxwell would have been involved with UofM and Crystal Downs at about the same time given the 1929 date of the UofM routing.

[Tom MacWood]

From what I understand it took several years for CD to be completed, and Maxwell and his construction man Woods were involved during the entire process. I believe this includes a period after Maxwell and Mackenzie partnership dissolved. Maxwell and Woods were both involved with U of Michigan too, and you have the map at Michigan that is clearly drawn by Maxwell. To my knowledge Mackenzie never mentioned CD or Michigan in any of his writing or advertisements, and there is strong evidence that Maxwell worked independently while partnered with Mackenzie.  IMO the evidence point to those courses being Maxwell's.

Don't CD and Michigan have more in common with Prairie Dunes than they do with Mackenzie's work at the time?

Tom MacWood,

How can the plan for UofM "CLEARLY" be drawn by Maxwell when Ron WHitten's research suggests that Maxwell didn't and couldn't draw plans?

Also, considering Maxwell came to Michigan directly after doing Old Town, perhaps those courses have more in common?

JC
Its clearly Maxwell's plan because he signed it, and its clearly not Mackenzie's plan because his name is misspelled.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()