News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« on: January 09, 2011, 10:02:37 AM »
Are there any of the old great courses with greens that remain untouched?  I realize compaction due to mowing and years of top dressing have lessened many of the original undulations, but I am wondering how many sets of greens are out there that remain, for the most part, as they were built.

*Note = untouched defined as no major restorations/redos where heavy equipment has been used to dig them up and resurfaced in any way, even if they laser surveyed and precisely reinstalled.

The only ones I have heard that might be in this camp are Cypress Point, National Golf Links of America, Crystal Downs, Fishers Island, Merion, Shinnecock Hills

I have played many of the international courses, but I am just not sure if they have been altered much....probably not.

My GUESSES in parenthesis...

Pine Valley (Maxwell, Fazio)
Cypress Point
National Golf Links of America
Royal Melbourne
Shinnecock Hills (post Flynn)
Merion (post re-rout for the road)
Royal County Down
St. Andrews
Royal Dornoch
Oakmont
Royal Portrush
Crystal Downs
LACC (Hanse, Shackleford, Wagner)
Muirfield
Ballybunion
Riviera (Crenshaw, Fazio)
Augusta National (Fazio)
Pebble Beach
Prairie Dunes (Coore)
San Francisco (Doak, Urbina)
Kingston Heath
Seminole (Wilson)
Winged Foot (Jones??)
Royal St. George's
Pinehurst No. 2 (Diamond Head, Nicklaus, Jones)
Fishers Island
Bethapge (Jones)
Piping Rock (Doak)
Creek Club
Garden City (Doak)
Eastward Ho!
Bel Air (Phillips)
Valley Club (Doak)
Shoreacres
Peachtree
Oakland Hills (Jones)
Mountain Ridge (Prichard)
Pasatempio (Doak)
Chicago Golf Club


As I was thinking through this it hit me.....is the novelty of saying a green is a "true original" (where it is smaller and flatter than originally built due to compaction and top dressing) worth missing out on a great restoration where a green could be taken back to its original glory (see many of the recent LACC pictures)...probably not!

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2011, 10:41:02 AM »
While playing Highlands Links this year, putting out on 18, it occurred to me that this course might be the poster child for what you ask, Chip. But, I do believe that there was some work done to at least one of the greens, if not more. But, certainly the closer there, is reminiscent of days long gone. Maybe Ian will see this and comment educate-ably.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2011, 11:58:47 AM »
Interesting question, but I doubt that any club that has been well capitalized over the years has completely resisted the urge to tinker with their putting surfaces.  In my rather limited experience, most of the clubs with a very original look to their greens could tie their restraint to one of two factors:  First, a lack of cash.  Or, second, the presence of another course or two that got all of the attention.

I'll cite three from Chicago.  Olympia Fields at one time had four golf courses.  Currently it has two, the North and the South.  The North was the fourth course built and it hosted the US Open in 1928, I believe.  Over the course of time, its greens were altered on several occasions, usually for trying out a new seed.  A few of the greens have been rebuilt as well.  The South Course consists of 15 holes from the original #1 course, two from the other courses that were eliminated and one entirely new hole.  I am pretty sure that as of the time of the recent renovation three years ago, those original greens were untouched, save for expansion that was meant to bring the greens out to their original size and shape.  The North Course got all the attention, while the South just stayed the way it always was, with some limited exceptions.  As the North Course struggled with the decisions to regrass the greens, the South greens were always very consistent.  In retrospect, some of the well-intended mischief on the North did it no favors while benign neglect served the other course quite well.

Another example is Medinah, which has three courses.  The #3 course has been redone more often than Joan Rivers' face and there's just no way to recognize the original greens.  Which is just fine, actually, because that course seems to exist for two reasons: To host professional tournaments and to be the money maker for the club's revenues from greens fees.  The Number 1 course is probably going to get renovated after the 2012 Ryder Cup.  A handful of the original greens were completely altered in a way that is inconsistent with the original look of the place and it will be fun to see a consistent design there.  The interesting observation about Medinah, a place with nothing but money over the years, is that the #2 Course has been largely ignored in terms of updating, as the membership kept fiddling with the championship course and occasionally tweaking the main members' course, #1.  the #2 course has been known as the "Women's Course", but it is a charming and eminently playable and tight routing with terrific old time Tom Bendelow greens.  Benign neglect also seems to have helped here.

Then, there's an old course in south suburban crete, Lincolnshire, that is a Tom Bendelow design.  The club has probably never been flush with money and their greens, to my recollection, are relatively unscathed, with a bunch of small, frisbee-shaped surfaces with severe back to front and occasional side to side pitch.  A fun place to play old time golf.

Shoreacres may be representative of another form of benign neglect, in a way.  It has always been an old-fashioned, quiet kind of place with a decidedly non-meddlesome membership regarding messing with the golf course.  Tom Doak has done some minimalist retooling of the place, so it would be interesting to learn if those greens had been significantly altered in prior decades.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2011, 12:09:11 PM »
I would be surprised if Lawsonia has had any significant work.

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2011, 12:35:33 PM »
I presume you refer to the U.S. only?

There are many great courses in Britain and Ireland where the greens have remained relatively untouched. However, even here there would be far less than you may think. Most of the great links have been tinkered with constantly over the years.

Then again it depends on your timeframe.

My club only has two of its greens in the same position as when they were first built. But apart from major alterations to two and minor alterations to two others by Hawtree in the last decade, all but one haven't changed since the 1920's.

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2011, 01:29:15 PM »
Chip,

Ron Prichard did NOT alter the greens at Mountain Ridge, he recaptured the putting surfaces back to the original foot pads.

The internal contouring remains the same.

The only two greens that may have been altered since 1929 are the 3rd and the 7th.

At Preakness Hills, a nearby golf course, the 5th green was expanded slightly, the 15th green altered about 30+ years ago and the 13th green altered about 8 years ago.

The alteration of the 15th and 13th were for the far, far worse.

The original greens were spectacular.  Unfortunately, the club listened to an architect 30+ years ago regarding the 15th green and unfortunately, the club, or rather those in charge are responsible for altering the 13th about 8 years ago.

Both holes would be far, far, far better with the original greens.

I would imagine that many courses in the Metro NY area have all or most of their original greens with little or no modifications

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2011, 01:39:14 PM »
Ally

I certainly wasn't trying to exclude international courses.  As I said in my post, I have played many of them, I just don't know too much about which ones have been changed and haven't been changed.  Certainly we know about places like Turnbery and Waterville, but I simply don't know how much places like Murifield or Royal Dornoch have changed their greens over the years.

Pat

Nothing on the greens at Mt Ridge have changed since Ross (other than the two expansions you mention)?  #1, #8, #11, etc are amazing undulating putting surfaces...

Chip

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2011, 01:56:28 PM »
Chip,

I think you have to consider two items.

First, in 1929 green speeds weren't the challenge, contouring was.

Second, greens built in 1929 were "push-up" greens which were far easier to construct, especially in 1929.

The contouring in # 1, # 2, # 4, # 5, # 6, # 8, # 11, # 12, # 13, # 15, # 16 and # 17 is rather special.
When you combine that contouring with the slopes, it presents a rather unique and enjoyable challenge.

And remember, you played there on a day where it had been raining the entire day and the greens were still fast and firm.

Approach and recovery shots HAVE to find the appropriate LZ on those greens, and in order to do that, tee shots have to be properly positioned.

It's a wonderful golf courses that examines every phase of a golfer's game.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #8 on: January 09, 2011, 02:28:27 PM »
Are there any of the old great courses with greens that remain untouched?  I realize compaction due to mowing and years of top dressing have lessened many of the original undulations, but I am wondering how many sets of greens are out there that remain, for the most part, as they were built.

*Note = untouched defined as no major restorations/redos where heavy equipment has been used to dig them up and resurfaced in any way, even if they laser surveyed and precisely reinstalled.

The only ones I have heard that might be in this camp are Cypress Point, National Golf Links of America, Crystal Downs, Fishers Island, Merion, Shinnecock Hills


Chip:

From your list just above, I know that in the past forty years:

Cypress Point redid the eighth green to supposedly restore it (I don't know who changed it).  And there are several greens at Cypress where the topdressing has changed them enormously ... look at an old picture of #7 and compare that to what you find today.

Also, National added a bunch of space to the back of #1, incorporating what used to be the second tee.  And I believe Karl Olson also changed the 16th green so it wouldn't hold water and freeze in winter.

I would add Oakmont to your list ... that's always been my best example of a course where the greens were untouched.

As for some of your parentheticals, generally speaking, I have only touched those greens at places like Garden City or Pasatiempo where another architect had already changed them.  I've tried to keep my hands off any of the greens that are true originals.  However, I can tell you that the longer I've been around, the more convinced I am that the prevalence of sand topdressing in the past 20-30 years has pretty much made this a moot point.

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2011, 02:46:18 PM »
All of the greens at Royal Melbourne West were completely relaid around 10 years ago to get them back to their original state.
Cave Nil Vino

Gene Greco

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2011, 04:58:34 PM »
Also, National added a bunch of space to the back of #1, incorporating what used to be the second tee.  And I believe Karl Olson also changed the 16th green so it wouldn't hold water and freeze in winter.
[/quote]

Tom:

     I believe Karl also added the right, posterior plateau on #11 in about 1993 or so.

I also believe the right portion of Eden was extended just a couple of years ago by Salinetti.

       Gene

       
"...I don't believe it is impossible to build a modern course as good as Pine Valley.  To me, Sand Hills is just as good as Pine Valley..."    TOM DOAK  November 6th, 2010

JR Potts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #11 on: January 09, 2011, 05:44:41 PM »
Interesting question, but I doubt that any club that has been well capitalized over the years has completely resisted the urge to tinker with their putting surfaces.  In my rather limited experience, most of the clubs with a very original look to their greens could tie their restraint to one of two factors:  First, a lack of cash.  Or, second, the presence of another course or two that got all of the attention.

I'll cite three from Chicago.  Olympia Fields at one time had four golf courses.  Currently it has two, the North and the South.  The North was the fourth course built and it hosted the US Open in 1928, I believe.  Over the course of time, its greens were altered on several occasions, usually for trying out a new seed.  A few of the greens have been rebuilt as well.  The South Course consists of 15 holes from the original #1 course, two from the other courses that were eliminated and one entirely new hole.  I am pretty sure that as of the time of the recent renovation three years ago, those original greens were untouched, save for expansion that was meant to bring the greens out to their original size and shape.  The North Course got all the attention, while the South just stayed the way it always was, with some limited exceptions.  As the North Course struggled with the decisions to regrass the greens, the South greens were always very consistent.  In retrospect, some of the well-intended mischief on the North did it no favors while benign neglect served the other course quite well.

Another example is Medinah, which has three courses.  The #3 course has been redone more often than Joan Rivers' face and there's just no way to recognize the original greens.  Which is just fine, actually, because that course seems to exist for two reasons: To host professional tournaments and to be the money maker for the club's revenues from greens fees.  The Number 1 course is probably going to get renovated after the 2012 Ryder Cup.  A handful of the original greens were completely altered in a way that is inconsistent with the original look of the place and it will be fun to see a consistent design there.  The interesting observation about Medinah, a place with nothing but money over the years, is that the #2 Course has been largely ignored in terms of updating, as the membership kept fiddling with the championship course and occasionally tweaking the main members' course, #1.  the #2 course has been known as the "Women's Course", but it is a charming and eminently playable and tight routing with terrific old time Tom Bendelow greens.  Benign neglect also seems to have helped here.

Then, there's an old course in south suburban crete, Lincolnshire, that is a Tom Bendelow design.  The club has probably never been flush with money and their greens, to my recollection, are relatively unscathed, with a bunch of small, frisbee-shaped surfaces with severe back to front and occasional side to side pitch.  A fun place to play old time golf.

Shoreacres may be representative of another form of benign neglect, in a way.  It has always been an old-fashioned, quiet kind of place with a decidedly non-meddlesome membership regarding messing with the golf course.  Tom Doak has done some minimalist retooling of the place, so it would be interesting to learn if those greens had been significantly altered in prior decades.

Don't I at least get a cite here as you are taking all of my material?  ;)

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2011, 06:46:51 PM »
I don't think Oakmont greens are untouched.  I know Art Hills did at least a few of them, with 7 and 12 coming to mind.   I recall Forrest Richardson thinking that Jack Snyder may have done many back in his day, but am not entirely sure of it.  

I would classify Shoreacres as untouched.

Sometimes the best places to look for those is those small town courses that never had much money.  I think there are some untouched Maxwell greens in the Midwest.

That said, I doubt there are many that haven't been modified in contour via topdressing, replanting, etc. over the years and have gone truly "untouched."
« Last Edit: January 09, 2011, 06:48:50 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2011, 07:16:09 PM »
Also, National added a bunch of space to the back of #1, incorporating what used to be the second tee.  And I believe Karl Olson also changed the 16th green so it wouldn't hold water and freeze in winter.

Tom:

I believe Karl also added the right, posterior plateau on #11 in about 1993 or so.

Gene,

That's not true.

That tier always existed, it just wasn't mowed to green height.
I credit Joe McBride, as a result of some suggestions from me, for having the back tier RESTORED.


I also believe the right portion of Eden was extended just a couple of years ago by Salinetti.

The bunker was filled in, and the right side mowed to green height, but, that area of the current green was always there.

If you knew about and understood the prevailing winds at NGLA You would have known that ;D


       
[/quote]

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2011, 07:54:52 PM »
I don't think Oakmont greens are untouched.  I know Art Hills did at least a few of them, with 7 and 12 coming to mind.   I recall Forrest Richardson thinking that Jack Snyder may have done many back in his day, but am not entirely sure of it.  

I would classify Shoreacres as untouched.

Sometimes the best places to look for those is those small town courses that never had much money.  I think there are some untouched Maxwell greens in the Midwest.

That said, I doubt there are many that haven't been modified in contour via topdressing, replanting, etc. over the years and have gone truly "untouched."


Art Hills really re-worked some greens at Oakmont?  I have an analogy for that, but my wife advises me not to use it.

Gene Greco

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2011, 08:23:07 PM »
Patrick:

   Why didn't you ask the locker room attendant for some heart while you were away? ;)

The point is that these areas did not exist as "puttable" areas for many years. The area posterior right on #11 was not simply mowed down to green height but, as you state, it was restored. So I stand corrected.

(In 13 years on this website and 'Traditional Golf' have you EVER stood corrected)?

Anyway, do you (Or Uncle George if you there) have knowlege or memory of the following areas being restored in a similar manner?

a. Back left of Road Hole
b. Back of Bottle
c. Front of Shinnecock




"...I don't believe it is impossible to build a modern course as good as Pine Valley.  To me, Sand Hills is just as good as Pine Valley..."    TOM DOAK  November 6th, 2010

Mike Cirba

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2011, 08:24:22 PM »
Cobb's Creek.

Thankfully no one ever had money to mess with them.

Other than lost greenspace and sand bunker buildup, the only rebuilt greens seem to be 3, 4, and 5, and 6, all due to recovery from flooding.

Kyle Harris

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2011, 08:27:53 PM »
Cobb's Creek.

Thankfully no one ever had money to mess with them.

Other than lost greenspace and sand bunker buildup, the only rebuilt greens seem to be 3, 4, and 5, and 6, all due to recovery from flooding.

Don't forget the front of 17.

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2011, 10:08:45 PM »
Patrick:

Why didn't you ask the locker room attendant for some heart while you were away? ;)

WHY ? ;D


The point is that these areas did not exist as "puttable" areas for many years. The area posterior right on #11 was not simply mowed down to green height but, as you state, it was restored. So I stand corrected.

(In 13 years on this website and 'Traditional Golf' have you EVER stood corrected)?

Not that I recall


Anyway, do you (Or Uncle George if you there) have knowlege or memory of the following areas being restored in a similar manner?
Reclaimed or expanded might be a more accurate definition.

To me, restoration conotes a physical reintroduction, whereas many of these alterations are merely the product of mowing or agronomic practices while the underlying topography remains the same


a. Back left of Road Hole
b. Back of Bottle
c. Front of Shinnecock

Add the front of # 18 to that list.


Mike Cirba

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2011, 10:12:46 PM »
Kyle,

I don't think it was touched in the rebuild, but I may be wrong.

It probably needs it.

Kyle Harris

Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2011, 10:14:00 PM »
Kyle,

I don't think it was touched in the rebuild, but I may be wrong.

It probably needs it.

You know, I can't put my finger on whether it was or not, either. I seem to remember the very front portion was rebuilt along with the bunkers.

Looks like we have an excuse to go play it.

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2011, 01:11:39 PM »
The best greens I have seen are Prairie Dunes, Riviera, Mt Ridge and Ballyneal.  Anyone know how much Prairie Dunes may have changed over the years?

The most perplexing greens I have ever played are Crystal Downs, have they changed materially over the years?

I have heard (which is probably not true) that Ben Crenshaw was asked to help restore the greens at Cypress Point and declined...like I said, probably urban legend.


Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2011, 01:16:13 PM »
I would be surprised if Lawsonia has had any significant work.

Shel:

There has been some speculation -- Dan Moore knows this area well -- that the 2nd green (the hole with the blind drive over the gull-wing bunkers) is not original, and may have been put in place post-World War II, after the course was fallow for a while.

I've always wondered about the 9th green -- the closing par 5 on the front nine -- because (similar to #2) the green pad is so much unlike the rest of the course, actually sitting down a bit from its surrounds. But, that's just speculation on my part.

Others have been expanded a bit in recent years, notably the long par 3 10th, but I think back to the original size and green pad, under renovation work led by Ron Forse.

I think the rest are originals.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2011, 01:18:30 PM »
Chip:

Crystal Downs' greens have not been altered, and they won't be, for as long as I'm around to lie down in front of a dozer.

Bill Coore has subtly softened a couple of the greens at Prairie Dunes in recent years -- #2 for sure.  But, like the work we've done at a couple of courses, I doubt that Perry Maxwell himself would be able to tell what Bill did, if he were around to have a look.  If you are trying to be sympathetic, cutting 3-6 inches of slope out of a green is unnoticeable to most parties.


Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Great Greens that Remain Untouched*
« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2011, 01:49:45 PM »
Chip:

Flossmoor has I believe a bunch of original greens that are untouched, and the course dates to 1899. The routing has been changed a bit -- e.g., the 3rd hole now used to be 18, but the clubhouse was moved, so the starting and finishing holes were changed. But most of the greens, from what I learned visiting there two years ago, are originals, and they are pretty cool greens -- often very simple, small ovals at grade with the rest of the land. Some details in this thread:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,41166.0.html