[TEPaul]

As for that Darrow drawing, there are some differences in it with the other evidence of Mackenzie's design drawings. The first is on the inside from cover of Geoff Shackelford's book which is dated February 1926. That one is a non-topo map that looks to be a property or plat map. The one on the back cover is a topo (contour) map and is dated March, 1926. Both essentially have the same stick routed holes on them.

However, that Darrow drawing, which appears to be in a form of illustrative three dimensions shows the proposed 16th green as much longer than built, and the reason for that seems to be the front of it is in an area where there may never have been any "terra firma" so to speak.

It looks to me like the first 20 yards or so of that green in that Darrow drawing did not even exist as land! It is also worth noting that the tee for the par 3 on the Darrow drawing is considerably to the right of where the par 3 tee is on the stick hole maps on the front and back covers of Geoff Shackelford's book.

There is another drawing of the land in Neil Hoteling's book that appears to be a blueprint with the same stick routed holes on it. That one is from the Pebble Beach archives.

All in it seems the question of what Raynor did there with a routing is still very much unanswered, as it has been for so many years as various people have asked the same questions this thread does.

By the way, Neil, who is Tim Ratliff?

[Tom MacWood]

If you take Dr AM at face value on page 135 of "The Spirit of St Andrews",
It would appear that Raynor and Hollins engaged in a debate over the 16th hole.
A debate that hinged not only on what par for the hole should be, but a debate that included the configuration and location of the hole.

If that's the case, and Dr AM built the hole as decided by Hollins and Raynor, did Dr AM adopt all of Raynor's routing ?

In other words, once the 16th tee and green was sited in their current location, where else could the 17th and 18th holes go.
Certainly the 17th tee had to be near the 16th green.

And, if the tee for # 16 was established as the current tee, certainly the green for # 15 had to be nearby.

It would appear that holes 16, 17 and 18 were predetermined by Raynor's routing.

It would also appear that the 15th green/hole was predetermined by Raynor.

If either is the case, is it probable that Dr AM's routing was merely Raynor's routing with some tweaking ?

I would add the location of clubhouse was likely predetermined too. That present location is the most logical and ideal spot for it IMO.

Lewis Lapham's account is interesting. He discusses being involved in finalizing four or five of the tees in 1927, including sixteen. He also speculates about the routing.

I don't know anything about Outerbridge, but from an architectural point of view I wouldn't recommend his book.

[TEPaul]

"I don't know anything about Outerbridge, but from an architectural point of view I wouldn't recommend his book."


Tom MacWood:

Why not? Do you think that one is another work of fiction and fantasy for the purpose of trying to promote the iconology and idolization of someone else who does not deserve the architectural attribution and praise given to them?

[TEPaul]

I should also add that right around the same time Cypress Point was being conceived (1924-25) Macdonald was asked to be the lead architect with Raynor of the Monterey Peninsula course (Dunes course). I have not seen them but according to Neil Hoteling's book on Pebble Beach the corporation minutes (presumably the Monterey Improvement Company) indicate the company's frustration with trying to get Macdonald on site.

Had he come, he may've been the ultimate designer of Cypress Point too but as I have suspected which seems to be backed up now by a few other sources, he apparently felt, at that time, he was done with golf and golf course architecture.

[Neil_Crafter]

TE
It's Gordon Ratliff. He wrote an In My Opinion piece here on GCA on the subject of Woodside Country Club.

Can you tell me the page number from Hotelling's book that you are referring to? Took a look through and couldn't find it. Thanks.

[TEPaul]

"Can you tell me the page number from Hotelling's book that you are referring to? Took a look through and couldn't find it. Thanks."

Neil:

It's on pges 69 and 70.

[Neil_Crafter]

TE
I have the softback edition of the pebble beach history and believe me there is no plan on pages 69 and 70. very odd. What edition do you have?

[TEPaul]

"What edition do you have?"

Neil:

Neil Hoteling has done two books on Pebble Beach and the history of the Monterey Peninsula. The second one was published in 2009 and is the one I'm referring to.

Would you like me to quote the passage I'm referring to about Macdonald? I wish I could scan it and link it on here but I don't know how to do that. If you're referring to the blueprint of CPC I mentioned that's on page 76.

[TEPaul]

Neil:

In the Marion Hollins biography there is also some correspondence in which Hunter mentions in a letter to Morse that he has shifted the routing of holes #12, #13, #14 and #15 to better accommodate Morse's plan for the road that Morse wanted to maintain for the benefit of the public. Hunter mentions a man by the name of Stafford resited the 14th green. It's hard to say when that correspondence was written but if I had to guess I would say it was 1927.

Personally I've always felt if that clubhouse would've been sited a bit farther back such as where the parking lot is today, the 18th hole could've been a dogleg left with a green that came in under the clubhouse and beside #17's fairway and behind the tees of #16. If they did that they would not have given up much of anything with an awesome view and the parking lot could've been basically sited in the area where the 18th green is today and much nearer the beginning of the driveway.

[Bill_McBride]

Personally I've always felt if that clubhouse would've been sited a bit farther back such as where the parking lot is today, the 18th hole could've been a dogleg left with a green that came in under the clubhouse and beside #17's fairway and behind the tees of #16. If they did that they would not have given up much of anything with an awesome view and the parking lot could've been basically sited in the area where the 18th green is today and much nearer the beginning of the driveway.

There was a drawing or overlaid aerial on this site not long ago that I think showed this could have been accomplished even with the clubhouse as currently located.

I think the hole played around the cypress trees that currently litter the fairway!   

[Neil_Crafter]

TE
I was blissfully unaware of Neal Hotelling having done a second book on Pebble. I will have to track it down. Thanks for the heads up. I must also get myself a copy of the Hollins book as well.

[Tom_Doak]

I agree with Tim, the sketch doesn't seem to bare any relationship to what is actually on the ground. ... 

I think it highly possible that some of the two routings would be very similar especially given that we know Raynor had a hole routed where the present 16th is.  How much is similar - who knows.  I think a guy like Doak might be able to make some educated guesses given the 16th and its surrounding holes and what he knows about Dr Mac designs.  It would be very interesting indeed to see the possible alternative routings that Dr Mac may have considered.

Ciao

Sean,

To me, speculation about the routing plan would be a disservice.  Most of the courses we design have several different iterations, and trying to reverse-engineer them would be impossible for anyone who wasn't there at the time.

As an example, I just went and looked at a new site a couple of weeks ago, with a preliminary routing in hand, despite the fact I had never seen the site.  If the course ever gets built, it is likely that only a couple of holes from that routing would survive.  But if someone dug up that routing 75 years from now, they might make a bunch of poor conclusions about what it meant, because they don't know exactly where it fell in the process.

The plan Neil has printed seems as though it was done to show to prospective members ... A strong possibility since Marion Hollins was keen to move the project forward and Seth Raynor had just died.  I am sure there would have been some pressure on MacKenzie and Hunter to produce a routing after their first visit, with caveats about being able to change it upon further study.  And if you gave them three days on site, I'm sure they could have come up with this, without looking at Raynor's plan at all if they didn't want to (and if the client didn't insist on it).  In that scenario one can imagine that the exact points for the tee and green at #16 might be a little bit off. 

One further note ... Though the 16th at Cypress Point is 219 yards or so, that is to the middle of the green.  The actual carry across the ocean is no more than 200 yards even from the back tee.  But since the hole was repeatedly described as "a carry of 200 yards" it is possible they just used that number for this scorecard.   

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

One further note ... Though the 16th at Cypress Point is 219 yards or so, that is to the middle of the green.  The actual carry across the ocean is no more than 200 yards even from the back tee.  But since the hole was repeatedly described as "a carry of 200 yards" it is possible they just used that number for this scorecard.
   

How would they have measured the carry in those day? For many years Swinley Forest thought they had a 6200 yds course and when they finally measured it properly, it came in under 6000 yds.

[Alex Miller]

I am not familiar with all of the history of CPC and wonder how Raynor was selected originally. Was he the biggest name at the time or was there a special connection between Hollins and Raynor?

[Ken Moum]

One further note ... Though the 16th at Cypress Point is 219 yards or so, that is to the middle of the green.  The actual carry across the ocean is no more than 200 yards even from the back tee.  But since the hole was repeatedly described as "a carry of 200 yards" it is possible they just used that number for this scorecard.
   

How would they have measured the carry in those day? For many years Swinley Forest thought they had a 6200 yds course and when they finally measured it properly, it came in under 6000 yds.

Until realtively recently, surveyors used a surveyor's chain to measure distances, which is VERY accurate. 



But they would have used triangulation to measure across a chasm.

That said, I think golf courses have, for decades, been optimistic about their yardages.  My uncle, an engineer, once used a chain (in the 1960s) to measure a golf course and anyone who played it thought it played longer than any similar course they'd seen. He said that was because most courses lied aobut their yardages...

K

[Tom_Doak]

One further note ... Though the 16th at Cypress Point is 219 yards or so, that is to the middle of the green.  The actual carry across the ocean is no more than 200 yards even from the back tee.  But since the hole was repeatedly described as "a carry of 200 yards" it is possible they just used that number for this scorecard.
   

How would they have measured the carry in those day? For many years Swinley Forest thought they had a 6200 yds course and when they finally measured it properly, it came in under 6000 yds.

Donal,

They have had proper surveying equipment going back to the 1920's or before ... A proper transit has two little marks on the lens so that you can read the diffence on the measuring rod and multiply by 100 to calculate the distance between you and the rod.  And I know they had those back then, because I'm pretty sure that the transit we've used to build greens at Yeamans Hall is the very same one that Raynor used to build them the first time!

[TEPaul]

Ken Moum:

Early surveying equipment like that photograph you posted was effective even though it sure is a withering prospect to consider that they originally surveyed the entire country with equipment like that. Lots of man-hours for sure! But even with all the time and distances and man-hours the equipment wasn't the underlying problem, it was the hooch some surveyors carried around with them perhaps under the notion they needed it to keep warm or something.   

[Bill_McBride]

I am not familiar with all of the history of CPC and wonder how Raynor was selected originally. Was he the biggest name at the time or was there a special connection between Hollins and Raynor?

I think Raynor designed a women-only course for her on Long Island.  Also, Raynor was connected to CB Macdonald who was connected to most of the big money on the East Coast.  That big money was her prospective club members and real estate purchasers at Pebble Beach.

[Niall C]

Donal

I've not played Swinley but I have walked it and from what I recall it has a few dog-legs (could be wrong about that mind you). It could be back then they had the dog'leg points a shorter distance off the tee which would have made the holes longer. These days the dog-leg point would be further on which would shorten the hole. Centre of fairways also move depending on fairway edges which again depends on mowing patterns which probably would have chnaged a fair bit over the period.

I think those are more likely reasons for the change in distance than the surveyor gettign the distance wrong. Mind you being a Chartered Surveyor myself, I probably would say that 

Niall

[TEPaul]

"I am not familiar with all of the history of CPC and wonder how Raynor was selected originally. Was he the biggest name at the time or was there a special connection between Hollins and Raynor?"

Alex:

Among other things Marion Hollins' father was a founding member or NGLA and Marion was no strranger to that golf course. Even though Devereux Emmet seems to get most of the architectural attribution for Marion's Womans National on Long Island, Raynor and Macdonald apparently did lend their help and advice to it. So did Flynn later when he worked on The Creek Club. Womans National and The Creek were always very close and when Womans National began to struggle in the depression The Creek Club actually took it over.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Donal

I've not played Swinley but I have walked it and from what I recall it has a few dog-legs (could be wrong about that mind you). It could be back then they had the dog'leg points a shorter distance off the tee which would have made the holes longer. These days the dog-leg point would be further on which would shorten the hole. Centre of fairways also move depending on fairway edges which again depends on mowing patterns which probably would have chnaged a fair bit over the period.

I think those are more likely reasons for the change in distance than the surveyor gettign the distance wrong. Mind you being a Chartered Surveyor myself, I probably would say that 

Niall

Niall,

I don't recall the exact details, but I have a copy of the centenary book " Swinley Special One Hundred Years of Harry Colt's 'Least Bad Course' ", so I'll check what it says on this.

[Niall Hay]

Neil_Crafter:
Here is the 1926 plan for Cypress Point, as drawn up by San Francisco artist Albert Darrows, based upon a sketch that Mackenzie provided him with. I expect the plan came out of Mackenzie's first visit to the US and to Cypress in Jan to March 1926.

How it differs from Raynor's plan is very hard to say, but as Hollins was there with both of them, its fair to say she had her influence, so some holes would be routed the same. And the final on the ground routing differed from this routing too.



As for 16, here's an enlargement showing the hole as Mackenzie first sketched it. Please note the rear tee that is shown giving the dotted alternative line of play as a two shot hole. The card on this plan shows the hole as a 200 yarder, so perhaps when Hollins made her shot it was not as long a carry from the rear tee today. From what I have read, Mackenzie was not all that confident about the hole as a par three, and in an early article on the course, published in The Fairway magazine in November 1928 (and Golf Illustrated UK) he lists the hole with a championship length of 350 yards, compared to the regular length of 240 yards. Geoff S in his book suggests that Mac was keeping his options open, and if play as a long par 3 was too problematic he would then lengthen the hole to a two shotter by building that championship tee so that the hole could play at 350 - presumably there was enough space between 15 and 16 to allow for that.

So, Mac's first iteration for 16 was a shorter hole, some 40 yards shorter in fact. And Hollins shot across the chasm may well have been played from ahead of where the current back tee sits, making the carry less that 200 yards.

Neil, do you still have these?

[Neil_Crafter]

Niall, yes I still have the Darrows plan, the posting I did of it still comes up on p1 of this thread. Why?
Neil

[Mark McKeever]

What a sweet tee box on 18!!

Mark

[Alex Miller]

Here is the 1926 plan for Cypress Point, as drawn up by San Francisco artist Albert Darrows, based upon a sketch that Mackenzie provided him with. I expect the plan came out of Mackenzie's first visit to the US and to Cypress in Jan to March 1926.

How it differs from Raynor's plan is very hard to say, but as Hollins was there with both of them, its fair to say she had her influence, so some holes would be routed the same. And the final on the ground routing differed from this routing too.

Have the differences between holes 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 13 from this plan and their current formation been discussed? Perhaps we are distracted by the more famous holes, but there's some pretty dramatic differences in the rest of the course.

5 looks like a great tough par 4. I think 6, 7, and 8 work well in their current formation. 12 looks like a very fun par 5 and 13's greensite appears to be in the same spot though with less ornate bunkering.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()