[Ronald Montesano]

http://www.golfweek.com/news/2011/may/02/rediscovering-raynor-north-shore-polishes-gem/

If this has been threaded before, let me know and I will remove.

[PCCraig]

A very neat article for many reasons:

1) I thought it was really cool that Tom D. decided which Raynor features he liked and wanted to keep, and which holes he could put his own spin on

2) I thought the quote from Tom about the difference between 1915 and 1922 Raynor designs and their hazards was really interesting. At Shoreacres, Tom & Co. kept all the hazards in place, even if they are out of play for most golfers these days (I'm thinking of the right fairway bunker on #3 in particular which is probably ~150 yds off the tee). Forgive my lack of Raynor knowledge...but what changed from 1915 to 1922 and why it's ok to move bunkers on a 1915 Raynor but not a 1920's Raynor?

3) I'm glad to see the club is doing better and that it's membership is growing, in part because of its newfound Raynor history and the work that Tom did there. 

[Colin Sheehan]

What "Sign of the times"? The club has annual dues at $17,000/year.  I bet that places the them in the top half of one-percent of clubs in America.

[Ronald Montesano]

No joke...I know people that don't make $17K a year.

[PCCraig]

What "Sign of the times"? The club has annual dues at $17,000/year.  I bet that places the them in the top half of one-percent of clubs in America.

Sure, but North Shore is on Long Island near NYC and $17M a year is very inexpensive compared to what other clubs in the area cost.

[Dan Byrnes]

Wow dues of 17k are cheap compared to other Westchester and Long Island courses?  I had no idea dues were that high in the area. 

Dan

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

5 years ago it was 24K with a 3K assessment

[PCCraig]

Why does anyone care about the dues when the work done there is far more interesting?

[Adam Clayman]

Pat, The implication is that Raynor knew more in 22 than 15. Nowhere did it imply moving features for today's length was off limits. Maybe Shore Acres was a different mandate? Less free reign?

When I met Steve Shaffer at Mountain Ridge, he discussed how he had wanted to get there to take the "before" pictures.

Steve,
 Did you get them?

Is there documentation from someone else?


I assume the 5 year reference was to Sebonack? Was Jack too busy? 

Mark Hissy, WTG dude!

[jeffwarne]

A very neat article for many reasons:

1) I thought it was really cool that Tom D. decided which Raynor features he liked and wanted to keep, and which holes he could put his own spin on

 

Isn't that the justification for every renovation that's ever been done anywhere?

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I prefer John Paul Newport's article in the WSJ. At least he mentioned yours truly as the one who discovered that Raynor was hired by the club.  

Adam,

I did not get to NS before the work was started. Perhaps Tom Doak took before pics. I know construction pics were posted here a few months ago.

[Mike Sweeney]

5 years ago it was 24K with a 3K assessment

5 years ago my still first wife thought I was a genius. 

[Joe Bausch]

5 years ago it was 24K with a 3K assessment

5 years ago my still first wife thought I was a genius. 

Reply of the spring right there ladies and gentlemen. 

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Agreed that Mike has made the reply of the Spring

Starting Thursday, I will be driving by the club every day.  I have been playing there a few times a year since 1995.  I have posted pictures in the past and posted some construction pictures last fall.  I'll make it ojt there in the next few days and take some current pictures.

[Tom MacWood]

The primary reason why the course is unique in comparison to Raynor's other courses is the input of Robert White, not his inexperience at the time. White's input is also why the course was so highly regarded in the day. Doak's rational for redesigning the course is BS IMO.

[Jud_T]

Tom M,

I assume the idea is not simply to have a soup to nuts accurately restored museum piece of a middling early Raynor, but rather to have a really good course that people want to join and play today which retains as much of the character of the original course as makes sense...One can't judge the results until one plays the course.  If it were being dug up by an unsympathetic hack I'd have more time for your opinion...

[Tom MacWood]

That is the rational given for every redesign of a significant old course. Ken Killian, Rees Jones, Tom Fazio, Ted Robinson, Martin Hawtree, etc have all said the same thing. If the design is unique, it should be preserved and protected IMO. North Shore was a unique design, due to the impact of CBM, Raynor and White. It had some of the boldest greens those gents ever created and it featured free form bunkering, which was unusual for CBM & Raynor.

[Adam Clayman]

When you pay 12.5 m I believe you get to decide on how to alter what you bought.

[Jud_T]

Tom M,

I agree in theory, but unfortunately it's not a rare bird that we can put on the endangered species list, it's an economic enterprise that costs hundreds of thousands to maintain each year that doesn't appear to have been cutting the mustard.  So you'd rather it simply fall into disrepair, get sold to a developer and plowed under or limp along as a shadow of it's former self?

[John Kavanaugh]

No joke...I know people that don't make $17K a year.

Really, how do they like their soup?  $17K/year, no initiation fee is a bargain.  Get over it.

[Tom_Doak]

That is the rational given for every redesign of a significant old course. Ken Killian, Rees Jones, Tom Fazio, Ted Robinson, Martin Hawtree, etc have all said the same thing. If the design is unique, it should be preserved and protected IMO. North Shore was a unique design, due to the impact of CBM, Raynor and White. It had some of the boldest greens those gents ever created and it featured free form bunkering, which was unusual for CBM & Raynor.

Tom:

All but one of the bold greens (the former 17th) are preserved, and a couple that had been plowed over in the fifties or sixties are restored as best we could guess.

North Shore is not unique because you managed to create some controversy over who is most responsible for the design.  You do that all the time!     I never saw it on a list of courses that anyone thought worth preserving ... and if it had been on such a list, it would be bankrupt now and in the midst of rezoning for a development.

 

[Mark McKeever]

A before and after photo spread could be really neat.

Mark

[Bill Brightly]

The primary reason why the course is unique in comparison to Raynor's other courses is the input of Robert White, not his inexperience at the time. White's input is also why the course was so highly regarded in the day. Doak's rational for redesigning the course is BS IMO.

This is total crap. In 30 years MacWood will be posting news articles about Doak courses, calling into question who gets design credit, perhaps he'll want Pac Dunes changed to a Doak/Urbina course. I can see it now "so and so helped lay out Stone Eagle..." Etc. etc.

The fact is the HEAD guy gets the credit, including credit for putting together his team. Period.

[Joe Bausch]

Doak's rational for redesigning the course is BS IMO.

Tom, 'rational' or 'rationale'?

One little letter changes this sentence!

[Jerry Kluger]

I think what you have to keep in mind is that North Shore is not NGLA in the sense that it was not preserved/maintained as originally designed over its entire life.  The fact that it was believed to be a Tillinghast design certainly drives that point as any attempt to restore features would have been done with the underlying thought that Tillie's work should be referenced in determining how to do the work. I would speculate that new members will not been influenced to join the club because of its architectural history but by how the course looks and plays today and that the architect who did the work also did Sebonack. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()