[Ran Morrissett]

Break Ross's work into three phases: pre World War I, between World War I and the Depression, and after the Depression. Which is your favorite? Certainly his style changed/evolved with time, so major differences exist.

Personally, I am sucker for variety with some unconventional features laced in so some of his earlier works like at Essex County and here at Wannamoisett are real favorites. For instance, it is a great delight to see that Ross's quirky bunkers (elevated and cut into two artificial mounds) guarding the first green have been restored by Ron Forse since I was last there in 1986. Overall, Forse is quite pleased with the 'thoroughness' of the work they have accomplished  during the past three years and the updated course profile reflects the quality of his work.

Different from the direction that other New England clubs have gone in recent times, the folks at Wannamoisett still like the color green. Perhaps this is because the course is in a tight suburban setting and they want a park-like feel? I don't know but the key is that they like it green AND firm. Only a few places like Augusta National pull off that combo but so too does Wannamoisett, thanks largely to their unusually sandy soil and to their hard working Green Keeper Mark Daniels and his crew.

The new profile dwells on the variety of Ross's placement of the greens at Wannamoisett. The sophisticated, grand sweeping green contours found at Aronimink and Mountain Ridge aren't present but these highly interesting greens pack quite a punch and have held the best amateurs at bay for decades (no doubt in part due to the firm playing surfaces).

When taken as a set, where do you rank these greens within Ross's body work? Surely near the top?

Cheers,

[Ben Sims]

Ran,

Thanks for updating Wannamoisett.  It's one of the few profiles I have wanted more of.  It's good to finally see it fully realized.  As weird as it sounds, I think it takes just as much skill--maybe even more skill--to effectively route and place golf holes into a site like Wanna's.  I personally enjoy reading and studying about how archies like Ross, Wilson, and Tillinghast put such dynamic holes into places like Wannamoisett, Merion, and SFGC just as much as how Bill Coore sought the routing for an expanse like Sand Hills.

Thanks again. 

[Mike Hendren]

Thank you Ran.  I continue to believe that Ross' work is somehow under-appreciated by this site's cognoscenti.

Mike

[hick]

Thanks Ran. Does this mean the Newport CC profile is coming soon.

[Niall Hay]

Sure hope so! Played Newport CC multiple times this spring and thought it was awesome. Felt the most Scottish feel of any course I've played on the condition level. Just a great experience....can't wait to see pics from Ran or someone else...

[Dan Herrmann]

Thank you Ran.  I continue to believe that Ross' work is somehow under-appreciated by this site's cognoscenti.

Mike

I agree - can you imagine what GCA would be today without Ross's influences?

[Charlie Goerges]

I enjoyed the profile and the course looks terrific.

I was puzzled by one item though, and it was this phrase regarding the 9th hole:

In 1916, it was a risk/reward par five but when the scorecard was changed from a par five to a four after World War Two, the hole became a beast.

How does a hole become a beast by going from a par 5 to a par 4? It may be harder to make a par, but whether playing a stroke-play round or a match, the par has absolutely no significance. They could have made it a par 2 or a par 7 and still the hole would have been no easier or more difficult.

[Mike Sweeney]

In 1916, it was a risk/reward par five but when the scorecard was changed from a par five to a four after World War Two, the hole became a beast.

How does a hole become a beast by going from a par 5 to a par 4? It may be harder to make a par, but whether playing a stroke-play round or a match, the par has absolutely no significance. They could have made it a par 2 or a par 7 and still the hole would have been no easier or more difficult.

Well that is simply not true. The US Open has always been a Par dominated event. There are a number of players (North, Strange, Simpson, Janzen, Irwin) that were arguably great US Open players and and only good to very good professional golfers. Clearly it is a different psychology to play the US Open than say the Brown Deer tournament.

It is no different for the everyday golfer. Doubles really piss me off, bogeys I can accept (always remember Tom Huckaby say "Just another Bogey in the the life of Tom Huckaby" and he can smoke me.

[Willie_Dow]

The Northeast Amateur, played around this time of year at Wannamoisett has ushered in some of our great playing pros.  They have always posted the best of comments about the wonderful greens.  Their winning scores will attest to the difficulties of the setup for this annual event.

Not having the facts available here, perhaps someone can fill this in for us ?   

[JLahrman]

Well that is simply not true. The US Open has always been a Par dominated event. There are a number of players (North, Strange, Simpson, Janzen, Irwin) that were arguably great US Open players and and only good to very good professional golfers. Clearly it is a different psychology to play the US Open than say the Brown Deer tournament.

It is no different for the everyday golfer. Doubles really piss me off, bogeys I can accept (always remember Tom Huckaby say "Just another Bogey in the the life of Tom Huckaby" and he can smoke me.

Isn't your statement about North, Strange, etc. more about the setup of the courses rather than the pars placed on the holes?  Do you think they wouldn't have won their US Opens had the courses been playing as Par 72s rather than Par 70s, assuming nothing else about the courses had been changed?

[Charlie Goerges]

Well that is simply not true. The US Open has always been a Par dominated event. There are a number of players (North, Strange, Simpson, Janzen, Irwin) that were arguably great US Open players and and only good to very good professional golfers. Clearly it is a different psychology to play the US Open than say the Brown Deer tournament.

It is no different for the everyday golfer. Doubles really piss me off, bogeys I can accept (always remember Tom Huckaby say "Just another Bogey in the the life of Tom Huckaby" and he can smoke me.

Isn't your statement about North, Strange, etc. more about the setup of the courses rather than the pars placed on the holes?  Do you think they wouldn't have won their US Opens had the courses been playing as Par 72s rather than Par 70s, assuming nothing else about the courses had been changed?

Exactly! A hole doesn't become harder just because you reduce its par. It may become harder to make a par, but if par (and protecting it) was all that mattered don't just make it a par 4, make it a par 3 or even a par 2.

[Mike Sweeney]

Isn't your statement about North, Strange, etc. more about the setup of the courses rather than the pars placed on the holes?  Do you think they wouldn't have won their US Opens had the courses been playing as Par 72s rather than Par 70s, assuming nothing else about the courses had been changed?

No.

I think if the USGA used the true par as a number of courses (Winged Foot and Bethpage), I think you would have different US Open champions 50+% of the time.

[Charlie Goerges]

I'll give you that point Mike, but only because there are enough pros stupid enough to be sucked in by meaningless numbers!

[Mark McKeever]

Profile looks awesome Ran.  Thanks for the update!  I cant get enough of that third green!

Mark

[Gerry B]

played there 3 weeks ago - a real gem as is essex county

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()