[Garland Bayley]

Chris,

Is there a chance that this a Doak/Tiger codesign?  Trying to read the tea leaves.  You mention Doak and then you mention "out of the woods".  Not sure if that was a double entendre?

How about a Kelly Blake Moran design?


I hear the A&W team of Ian Arther & Mike Weir is available.

Grow up.

So someone who often takes on the demeanor of the anti-Doak, wants to squash ideas that might lead to something other than getting a Doak course at his club. Nice John!

From the reports you read on this website, Kelly Blake has clearly shown that he can bring something interesting and different to the table.

However, if you like what Doak and C&C bring to the table (both of whom have courses in the Sand Hills), you can get philosophically like minded architects with Ian and Mike.

Garland,

I'm curious, if you can be serious for a minute, would you hire either one of those guys to go with your Nicklaus course if you were interested in building a successful club of national members?  Ballyneal and Dismal are two completely different types of properties, the fact that Doak built a course in a Colorado some 3 hrs away has nothing to do with this project.  Thank God the people of California weren't so petty when Mackenzie was on the scene.

Of course I would. Was/is Prairie Club interested in building a successful club of national members? Look who they hired.

EDIT:

I recon the people of California should have just asked other architects to jump on a plane and see what they could do for them back in the day.

[John Kavanaugh]

Exactly.

[Kyle Harris]

JC Jones:

Where are you getting the idea that Hugh Wilson opened a finished Merion to play? How about Pine Valley? I think your comparison falls short in a few of these examples as the courses were never opened under the pretense that they were complete. In both cases, severe agronomic issues still hampered efforts to complete the golf course as play went on. In fact, I think it could reasonably be argued that many of the openings in that era were indeed "soft openings."

[JC Jones]

Kyle,

We aren't talking about agronomic issues here.  We are talking about major architectural changes to the golf course (i.e. re-building greens, moving holes, etc.). 

[JESII]

JC,

I believe Merion was opened with very few bunkers built. The idea was apparently to see where they should go after observing play for some time.

[JC Jones]

Jim,

That is what I understand to be the case as well.

[Pete_Pittock]

I've known about the site for about three years and seen some pictures of the property. Have not been there. That's all I can say.

Is the site similar to Sagebrush at all?  I heard about this project a while ago. I think there was supposed to be two courses....

Sean,
Have been to Sagebrush, but not to Brewster area so can't answer your question with a definite answer. Based solely on the picture in the article the location seems to be on the east side of the lake on SR17 where to lake turns frow E-W orientaton to N-S. And the topo maps don't have too many lines. If I had to guess, I'd say Brewster would have lesser gradient.

[Will MacEwen]

Pete - I assume this projects as a private course?

[Kyle Harris]

JC,

I believe Merion was opened with very few bunkers built. The idea was apparently to see where they should go after observing play for some time.

JC,

This. There were a number of course you are listing that were opened to play under the pretense that further architectural changes would be made when time and resources allowed.

And a lot of the architecture changes were driven by agronomic issues, especially in the early going. When you're re-grassing an area, that is prime time to make a change.

[JC Jones]

Kyle,

Not this.  I'm not talking about adding bunkers.  Holes and green complexes at Merion, Pine Valley, ANGC, etc. were not completely re-done or moved because they happened to be re-grassing. 

[Garland Bayley]

Exactly.

Mike Kaiser you are not!

You are overlooking the possibility of an international club with all those Cannucks coming down to play in the balmy October/November and February/March weather.

[Pete_Pittock]

Pete - I assume this projects as a private course?

Will,
I doubt it

[Brad Isaacs]

The first time I played Ballyneal was June 08 and 9th hole hasn't changed since then. If that waste area on the left has changed, I can only think it was by nature. Other bunkers have had thunderstorm issues and have evolved but not a lot.

I played the "out of the box" Castle by DMK and completely understand the need for change, and was dissapointed of DMK because I love Bandon dunes. It also, has had some changes such as left on 16 which were probably needed with the winds that are prevalent there. This is not a major change to what was trying to be done with a hole.

Change of course is inevitable but there are some things that are minor and the others that make you shake your head. Common or uncommon sense should prevail. When a hole has major change in it's philosophy from the designers original intent, something wrong happened, designer or perhaps even owner screwed it up.

[Jim Colton]

Brad,

The 9th fairway was bunkerless. They added them after the 2008 season. I probably have some pics somewhere. Kyle H's photo tour was from 08 so would have the old version.  I like it better without the bunkers.

Hole # 9 “362 yards”

Don’t be fooled by the modest total yardage. This hole is a tough one to par. The fairway is somewhat narrow relative to those found elsewhere on the course and pinches in dramatically past the second bunker seen on the right side, 260 yards from the back tees. Laying up to the wider part of the fairway (or playing into a stiff wind), one is left with a semi-blind, severely uphill approach. The tippy top of the clubhouse is seen to the left.


The fairway slopes towards the middle from either side, but this can add to the difficulty of the second shot as the ball is likely to be above or below one’s feet if their drive isn’t straight down the middle. Shots will not bounce onto the maintained turf from the edges of the bordering dunes.



Looking back, there is plenty of room past the narrow bit of fairway. With a helping wind, long hitters can blast one close to the green. While this particular green is fairly benign relative to some of Ballyneal’s other offerings, it features subtly defined shelves to challenge longish putts. Mound found short and right left of the green can repel indifferent approach shots, while bunkering at the rear and left rear prevent one from bailing out.


Encroaching thunder storms can make for spectacular sunsets in this neck of the world.


Discussion of the 9th's playing characteristics can also be found in the following thread.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35391.0.html

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

Not this.  I'm not talking about adding bunkers.  Holes and green complexes at Merion, Pine Valley, ANGC, etc. were not completely re-done or moved because they happened to be re-grassing. 

Care to prove that? I find that to be an incredibly authoritative statement.

In fact, didn't the transition to Bentgrass at Augusta coincide with several changes to the putting surfaces?

[JC Jones]

Perry Maxwell was not alive in the 1981 when Augusta made their transition from Bermuda to Bent.

[Kyle Harris]

Perry Maxwell was not alive in the 1981 when Augusta made their transition from Bermuda to Bent.

He wasn't the only one to have made changes to the greens. That's one smelly red herring

[JC Jones]

I clearly stated it was the Perry Maxwell changes to #7 and #10 that I was talking about.  You could also talk about the changes to #16 if you wanted to, but those weren't grassing issues either.

[Kyle Harris]

I clearly stated it was the Perry Maxwell changes to #7 and #10 that I was talking about.  You could also talk about the changes to #16 if you wanted to, but those weren't grassing issues either.

Fair enough. Your premise still contains flaws and not based in contemporary writings. Several architects' M.O. at the time was to improve later. Flynn wrote extensively that his preference was to bunker a golf course after opening. You can't simply move the goal posts to exclude one change over the other. The changes at Merion, for example, were predicated by the availability of land not previously available. Furthermore, none of us can speak from authority that an agronomic issue did not open the window to other changes. It stands to reason that during a time when the golf course is otherwise closed more work could be accomplished. The Piper and Oakley letters seem to suggest this about the second and eighteenth greens at Pine Valley, for example.

With Augusta, while I am not nearly as familiar with the history, I do not think one can judge the notion that a hole was "improved" or just changed for sake of change. Who directed Perry to make the changes? Why? Who saw the deficiencies of the hole and were they actually deficiencies or just matters of taste?

[JC Jones]

The goal posts were never moved.  It was clear what type of changes I was talking about from the beginning.

Related question, are the changes to the Castle Course ones of necessity or ones of taste?

[Kyle Harris]

The goal posts were never moved.  It was clear what type of changes I was talking about from the beginning.

Related question, are the changes to the Castle Course ones of necessity or ones of taste?

No idea. Won't even pretend to know.

[Garland Bayley]

I clearly stated it was the Perry Maxwell changes to #7 and #10 that I was talking about.  You could also talk about the changes to #16 if you wanted to, but those weren't grassing issues either.

And I clearly stated that ANGC did not pay MacKenzie for his work there, so I doubt he consulted with him on the need for any changes. And we all know how a green committee is perfectly capable of screwing up a course.

[JC Jones]

I clearly stated it was the Perry Maxwell changes to #7 and #10 that I was talking about.  You could also talk about the changes to #16 if you wanted to, but those weren't grassing issues either.

And I clearly stated that ANGC did not pay MacKenzie for his work there, so I doubt he consulted with him on the need for any changes. And we all know how a green committee is perfectly capable of screwing up a course.

So?

[Garland Bayley]

The goal posts were never moved.  It was clear what type of changes I was talking about from the beginning.

Related question, are the changes to the Castle Course ones of necessity or ones of taste?

Kidd put in "mohawks and eyebrows" at the Castle Course and at Tetherow. While I think they could be useful if done under the right circumstances, they were over done and penal. It was clear it was necessary to take some out at both courses. Kidd also knowingly pushed the extreme on some of his greens at the Castle Course during construction as the book about its construction points out. Out of necessity he had to come back and tone down some of them.

[Tim Nugent]

"...Kidd also knowingly pushed the extreme on some of his greens at the Castle Course during construction as the book about its construction points out. Out of necessity he had to come back and tone down some of them."

Okay, lets play Devil's Advocate.  If DMK wanted to push the greens to an extreme, I would think that this was not approved in a vaccum. If it worked, great, if not, well they can always be toned down (just hope they weren't USGA). But, I doubt one ever would go into it thinking, let's start with "Toned Down" and we can always push it from there. That will never happen. (see "if it ain't broke, don't fix it").

There have been times when I've had discussions with owners where I was unsure if something would pan out and was told "go for it".  Conversely, I've also "gone for it" - because that's what they said they wanted and after the fact, even though I and some other enlightened members liked the finished product (and it was what they asked for) some then decided they really didn't like it and wanted it changed. (see "be careful what you ask for, you just might get it".)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()