Private club architecture---public or municipal architecture and the architects

[Tim Gavrich]

"Our Raynor course has always been open to the public even though it's owned by the school, and our players have always been welcome at Publinx events."


Jim Kennedy:

Since you said it, not me, would it be too much to ask you what you mean by 'our Raynor course?'

TEPaul--

I believe Jim Kennedy was referring to the golf course at Hotchkiss School in Lakeville, CT, originally designed by Raynor.  A few holes have been altered due to new buildings on the campus, but there's some neat stuff still out there.

[Kevin_Reilly]

There's that public nine-hole course in the Napa Valley (Northwoods, yes?) that claims to be a Mackenzie course.  Was it formerly private and therefore ineligible?

Northwood was privately owned to start, and by some accounts was built for use by the adjacent Bohemian Club.  The history is a bit fuzzy as to whether the course was supposed to be exclusively for use by the club, but that strikes me as unlikely since the club's summer encampments take place over just part of the year.  But in any event, in the early year it was not a municipal or "public" course in the purest sense.

[TEPaul]

Tim Gavrich:

Thanks for that info. That is the course that "Steamshovel" Banks was a teacher at when Raynor came in there to do work at the school's course, was it not?

And is that where Jim Kennedy works now or do you think he would prefer me or this website not to know that?  

[TEPaul]

Kevin:

Thanks for your info too. I know a bunch of members (or participants) in and with the Bohemian Club and that organization should be considered in some semblance as about the polar opposite of public or municipal!! 

[Tom MacWood]

Who on this website or on this thread who speaks of Sharp Park and who tries to do so with some modicum of understanding or authority has actually gone to that golf course and tried to speak to its historians and to analyze the history and architectural evolution of that golf course on site?

Have you Moriarty?

Have you MacWood?

And if not, why not?

It's one thing to sit at one's computer and find and post pictures and to try to pass oneself off as some authority on something but it's another thing entirely, and a far more important thing to actually take the time and make the effort to go on site and do some personal research work with the golf course and the people left who know it best.

Yes, I've played the golf course. I used to live less than mile from it. Why?

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

I'm glad to hear that. You asked why I asked that question of you? I asked it because there have been so many instances on this website when you've tried to appear to have some kind of expert or comprehensive knowledge of golf courses you have never seen. Amongst others that would include Merion, Pine Valley, Aronomink, Myopia, Seminole etc.

[Tom MacWood]

Studying and documenting history is not site sensative...if it were I could have never written my essays on Alison & Japan and Crump & PV.

[TEPaul]

"Studying and documenting history is not site sensative...if it were I could have never written my essays on Alison & Japan and Crump & PV."

I can't comment much on the accuracy of your essay on Alison and Japan because I've never been to Japan and all I really know first hand of Alison's architecture in detail is what he did at Pine Valley.

Your essay on Crump was essentially about him and not anything about the course which anyone familiar with it does not already know, including all three of its history writers and a number of members and friends of the club. But I suppose for people who don't know much about the place or have never been to it your essay on Crump was fairly informative.

However, to do a detailed architectural creation story of the golf course and the details and nuances of its architecture and how it came to be definitely takes a real familiarity with the course and the material about it in its archives of course one would most certainly have to see it in person (and probably many times) to have that kind of real familiarity.

[Dan Herrmann]

Back to the 1st post, keep in mind that not all architects of munis were great architecture.  Case in point is Western NY's William Harries.  

I grew up playing Harries designs, the best of which would be a Doak 4.  The others would be in the 1-2 range, but were PERFECT for a kid working his way through college with no money.

They weren't horribly difficult, there were no forced carries, they provided good golf at a great price.  In other words, they were successful.

When I got to the first tee at Brighton Park GC, I knew I wasn't teeing up at Merion.  Hell, the tee markers were the top half of bowling pins painted blue (men's) or red (women's) acting as tee markers.  

Again, the designs were perfect for most of us who didn't have the ability to play privates.

I'd hazard a guess that most munis fit into the same category.  There are a lot more "FDR (in Philly)" type courses than there are Bethpage-quality complexes.  In fact, NY State Parks may have Bethpage, but they also have Harries' Beaver Island, and they have a lot more Beaver Island's than they have Bethpages.  

--------------------
PS - I did some quick Google'ing on Sharp Park and found that it's been targeted for closure (not good!).    See http://golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/sharp-park or http://sharppark.savegolf.net/index.php   

[David Stamm]

Behr did indeed do a public facility, the Westwood pay as you play GC. William P Bell did a few as well, such as Sunset Fields, Willowick, Brookside (with Tillie) and San Clemente. George Thomas poured alot of his own money into completing the Griffith Park courses.

[TEPaul]

"George Thomas poured alot of his own money into completing the Griffith Park courses."

DavidS:

Is that right? That's good to know; I wasn't aware of that or what you said about Behr. The list seems to be getting longer of those who did do some public courses. Perhaps the best list to do would be one with those who definitely never did do a public course. What about Travis or Emmet? On Macdonald/Raynor I'm pretty sure they never did or at least not Macdonald. I wonder why?

[Tom MacWood]

Behr also designed Montebello Park, which was one of the last courses I added to my list of public courses.

[Tom MacWood]

Emmet designed Salisbury Links and Travis designed East Potomac Park.

[Mike Cirba]

I've played Salisbury #4, which hosted a PGA tournament in the 20s (today's Eisenhower Park Red course), and it's quite good, probably a solid Doak 5, but I believe that one was private when the course opened..

The other courses Emmett built there don't exist anymore, and most of the land is taken up by two RTJ Sr. courses, which are pretty lackluster.

East Potomac Park is a mystery to me.   It was originally designed by Travis, and couldn't get built right away because of WWI, so Robert White got it built just after 1920, but a more dull golf course I've not seen.

The property itself is simply dead flat, and the out and back routing is uninspiring.   I guess at one time you could play the course in either direction, which is pretty cool and seemed to be sort of a fad for Travis, but the holes are so uninteresting you'd have to wonder who'd want to?

The only really exciting thing about EPP is that you get to aim some shots at the Washington Monument, and the Jefferson Memorial.   Other than that, it's basic golf, perhaps generously a Doak 2, and I have to wonder if it changed or lost a lot of bunkering over the years?

I sure didn't see much signs of former greatness, or even goodness, however, in what remains.

[Tom MacWood]

I'm referring to Salisbury Links which later became Cherry Valley CC. Have you played it?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

No, I haven't played it.   I thought you were talking about the NLE Salisbury #1 course designed by Emmett that hosted that 1925 US Public Links tournament.

My understanding is that the original Emmett public course at Salisbury Links went private by 1918 or so, and then went through significant revisions such that it was a much different course even before 1930.

If we want to go way back to Emmett and short-lived stints as public courses, we should probably just use the example of Island Golf Links, today's Garden City GC.

[Tom MacWood]

I don't think so.

[Mike Cirba]

Why Tom?   What's the deal with Salisbury?

Are you saying the course that became Cherry Valley is the same one that hosted the Publinks?

[Tom MacWood]

Publinks?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

The 1925 US Public Links tournament was held at Salisbury CC, designed by Emmett, on the #1 course.

By that time, 4 courses existed at Salisbury, including today's Eisenhower Park Red course, which was course #4.

In news descriptions, the course was described as flat, with smooth greens and the articles also said that bunkering was not problematic. 

Given the land I saw where those courses existed, I can vouch for the first part.

[Mike Cirba]

I don't think so.

Tom,

I'm really not sure why you continue to try and pose as some expert on public courses when it took you several weeks with all of the Hurdzan Library resources at your fingertips (not to mention two 1950's Travel Guides, sort of that era's "American Golf Guide" by Herbert Pedroli and Mary Tiegren) to just put together a dubious list with no detailed justifications or architectural understanding of what you think were significant public courses of that era.  Humorously, that list still includes many courses that are simply awful.

Continuing down this path is not helping your credibility.

You are confused by the history of Salisbury, as you are confused by the history of many of these course you know only from your crammed days of recent study trying to bone up on public course history in some ridiculous effort to prove me wrong, but I guess that's what spins your prop.  

In any case, the following article should clear up the matter of Salisbury for you.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

Here's some more about Salisbury from 1916.

There's also some good stuff about Emmett's course at Meadowbrook.

Now, what was it I was mistaken about again?

I really wish you'd just open your mind and work with us instead of against us, Tom.

[TEPaul]

Instead of having this thread devolve down into some of the petty arguments the others on public courses and their architects did I'd love to see the following from the initial post on this thread discussed:

"Now that there are some threads containing lists of public or municipal course architecture and architects, it might be an interesting indicator and discussion subject to do a list of significant architects in America (or architects with signficant courses) who got involved in public or municipal golf architecture and those who never did, and perhaps some of the reasons some did and others never did."

For instance, who were the significant architects of the Golden Age (for starters) who never got involved in a public or municipal golf course and why do you suppose that was the case?

[Tom MacWood]

If we want to go way back to Emmett and short-lived stints as public courses, we should probably just use the example of Island Golf Links, today's Garden City GC.

I don't think so. I don't think Emmet and Hubbell's eighteen hole course was ever public. The original nine may have been, I don't know, but even it was for a few weeks IMO it would be idiotic to consider a public golf course.

I'm not confused. The Salisbury Links was one of the best public golf courses during the period of 1900 to 1936, which relates to your original foolish claim. One could argue SL was the first elite public course in the country.

[Mike Cirba]

Nice lie...er...try, Tom.

That's why there is no point discussing any of this with you.

Have a good day.