Geometric shaping of early US courses

[Thomas Dai]

Please enhance my knowledge.

The current thread about The Redan at North Berwick - http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,59480.0.html - and it's naming after a famous/imfamous historical fortification and relationship to other fortifications, like star forts etc, has me pondering geometrical shapes in golf course design, particularly as I recall a comment somewhere, I cannot remember where, along the lines that trained engineers tend to think in straight lines and sharp angles whereas artists tend to see curves and arcs.

I'm not aware of any particular or deliberate geometric element to UK courses of the late 1800's-early 1900's, please tell me if there are, but there seems to be courses from the early days of US golf where geometric shaping played a significant part.

Now I've read that although CB MacDonald wasn't an engineer, that Seth Raynor was, having a civil engineering degree from Princeton University and working in C-E until starting work in golf with CBM.

I've (unfortunately) not seen the course with the naked eye, just in photos and video's, but NGLA has always appeared somewhat geometrical to me (no slight intended). In addition, there was a recent thread including a high quality course flyover video on the very impressive course at the Westhampton Country Club where several of the holes particularly the par-3 3rd, but also the par-4 13th, the par 4 15 and the par-3 17th seem very geometric.

I did enquire on the Westhampton thread as to the background of early US course designers/constructers and whether the folk who designed/built courses such as it had military engineering backgrounds or even general engineering backgrounds as some of the features seem very, well, 'fortification' like.

In addition, I'd be interested to know if the sort of equipment or lack of, or the heaviness/lightness of the soil had any impact on the approach of the early designers/constructors? For example, the use of early steam shovels, drag-pans etc.

I'm not 'having a go' at any course or any designer or any sort of course by the way, I'm just trying to learn more, so any help or historical detail you can provide would be much appreciated.

atb

[Jim_Kennedy]

This might help:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,58384.0.html

[DMoriarty]

Tom, interesting questions and issues, and unfortunately not that straight-forward to discuss, as was covered a bit by the thread linked by Jim.

I may come back to more of the issues, but I did want to touch on one of your initial assumptions:

"I'm not aware of any particular or deliberate geometric element to UK courses of the late 1800's-early 1900's, please tell me if there are, but there seems to be courses from the early days of US golf where geometric shaping played a significant part."

I think there was plenty of this type of architecture in the UK if one ventured inland, but like in the US the style has apparently been largely wiped off the map.   Here are a few examples from early Mid-Surrey.  The first is from a Golf Illustrated article in July 1899.  The second is from Golf Illustrated, January 1903.   Note that the description of inland bunkering (by Hutchinson, I believe) sounds like it is more of the Victorian and Penal schools than the Strategic school, and the photos seem to back this up.



_________________________________________________

[Jim_Kennedy]

The Colonial CC in Tannersville NY is old and has a few remaining throwback features, such as the stone wall in the foreground that crosses the 1st fairway:  



...and the large berm protecting the approach to the elevated green on the drivable 9th:  



Obvious, but fun.

[Patrick_Mucci]

GCGC has bunkers similar to this

[Thomas Dai]

Jim and David and Pat,

Thank you for your responses and photos and for generally expanding my knowledge. In particular the first photo of (Royal) Mid Surrey is quite amazing. I would never have imagined a feature such as this on any golf course. I wonder how it was built? Men with shovels, horses and carts or some form of mechanisation?

atb

[Jim_Kennedy]

What to do when you don't want to raise a Cop:

http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/GolfIllustrated/1914/gi4n.pdf

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thomas,

There are several aspects of geometric architecture that I enjoy.

One is "proximity" between putting surfaces and bunkers.

Many of the photos I've seen have the green and the bunker immediately adjacent to one another.
That allowed for far more challenging hole locations versus the bunker offsets of today.
Even long distance putting was influenced by hole locations close to the bunker's edge

I also liked the challenge presented by a deep bunker with a fronting berm.
It had to have an enormous impact on the golfer's mind and game.

Today, they would be deemed "unfair", too demanding.

I agree with Melvyn, that the game has been watered down to accomodate more of the lowest common denominators.

[Thomas Dai]

Jim, that's some wonderful old GI photos you've linked too. Thanks. The cow chewing away over the fence in the first photo is amusing. A real throwback. These days there's a good chance there'd be an expensive house positioned there.

Pat, I go along with you (and Melvyn), the game has indeed been watered down. It's one of the reasons I now occasionally play hickory golf, although the very occasional game at a more modern course does provide a bit of variety (plus perhaps confirming what's been 'lost'). Thanks also for the mention of GCGC, just been reading Ran's review etc.

Any suggestions for other courses I should read up on in this respect would be welcome.

As a general aside, how important was the stream shovel in US (and other area) golf course development?

atb

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Geometric in a different sense - flying over golf courses in the US it becomes apparent that many golf courses were laid out on square or rectangular sites.

[DMoriarty]

Mark,  Interesting observation.  Perhaps this dates back to the the US Geological Surveys which divided the land into 1x1 mile (640 acre) sections, then subdivided into quarter sections, then quarter-quarter sections, etc. 

At least some of the better US golden aged courses don't follow this pattern, perhaps because with NGLA it became popular to seek out and purchase land specifically for golf, and (where possible) to shape the purchase to land needed for the course.  This as opposed to trying to shoehorn a course into convenient land which might or might not be suitable for a golf course.

[Sven Nilsen]

Thomas:

I think you're going to find that most of the early rudimentary geometric designs in the U.S. were done by Scottish pros plying their trade here, or as Travis dubbed it the "Willie Dunn System":

http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1920/ag2333f.pdf

Garden City, and NGLA were actually part of the transition to a more natural school of design, a school that would influence the entire body of work done leading up to and during the Golden Age over here. 

For those early courses, the equipment available was certainly a factor in the outcome.  Most courses were created with a great deal of efficiency, thus basic layouts that followed a very simple pattern.  NGLA was a drastic shift from this, and although CBM and Raynor may have used straight lines in their designs, those lines were made with a purpose. 

The word I think of when seeing a CBM or Raynor course is "abrupt" as opposed to "straight."  They built bold features, features that required a great deal of earth moving.  Features that dictated the way a hole should be played.  If there's an influence of an engineer in any of their work, I see it more in the technological advancements they made as opposed to any prediliction towards linear visuals.

Hope this helps,

Sven

[DMoriarty]

I generally agree with Sven, but would add that Garden City predated NGLA by around a decade, and it originally had many of the features often associated with the geometric/penal/Victorian  school(s).  That said, the changes made at Garden City (particularly the 1908 changes) were aimed at making the course more strategic.  

Also, while NGLA looks "geometric" by todays standards, it was (as Sven suggests) a huge departure from what had been going on at the time.  And it didn't necessarily look as geometric then as it does today.   Here are a few early photos of NGLA . . .

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mark,  Interesting observation.  Perhaps this dates back to the the US Geological Surveys which divided the land into 1x1 mile (640 acre) sections, then subdivided into quarter sections, then quarter-quarter sections, etc. 

At least some of the better US golden aged courses don't follow this pattern, perhaps because with NGLA it became popular to seek out and purchase land specifically for golf, and (where possible) to shape the purchase to land needed for the course.  This as opposed to trying to shoehorn a course into convenient land which might or might not be suitable for a golf course.

Plus, many of those GA courses were built in the northeast where land was parceled out using metes and bounds, not sections.

[Thomas Dai]

Thank you Sven for your thoughts. I shall attempt to think in terms of 'abrupt' as opposed to 'straight' in future!

The link you provided is most interesting. One thing in the Walter Travis article that caught my eye was the wording - "In those days Willie Dunn had ceased to figure and his successor, although credited with laying out some hundreds of courses all over the country, really had no genius for the work. Donald heeded my advice . . . and golf has been tremendously benefited by his many very fine creations since."

Nice to see the early NGLA photos David. Thank you for posting them.

Metes and bounds Jim. Something more for me to look into!

atb

[DMoriarty]

I don't know for sure but I assume Dunn's unnamed "successor" was Tom Bendelow.

That Travis piece has always struck me as odd, particularly the part about how almost all of the ideas for the improvement of Pinehurst No. 2 were his.  

It might be worth mentioning that Travis had done some early work with Dunn.

[archie_struthers]

 

I've always felt that one of my favorite architects ,William Flynn,  was completely enamored with geometry. In fact , I see triangles all over his courses, whether it be Lehigh, Philly CC, Indian Creek et al .  The greens complexes are often diamond shaped , with  triangular noses .
Either he got some inspiration from geometry or the ancient Egyptians,   Hmnnn?

[Philip Caccamise]

Jim- Is that the course at the base of Windham?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Philip,

No, it's a couple of miles west of Hunter Mtn. Has the most beautiful view of some of the Catskill's highest peaks from the first tee.
Perhaps you are thinking of Windham CC, or perhaps the very plain valley nine at Christmans, both on the northern side of Windham Mtn.

[Tommy Naccarato]

Another great course with many natural and unnatural features, built later and which was assisted by Harry Vardon in its layout is Sandy Lodge, located north of London.