Will YALE heed Brad Klein's advice ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

In the 09-27-03 edition of Golfweek Brad Klein makes a prudent case for a quality restoration at YALE.

The article recognizes YALE's great architectural potential and admonishes those in charge for not restoring and maintaining the golf course to its optimum level.

Will exposure and criticism from a National publication have any effect on those in charge ?  Will it focus attention on what needs to be done and result in a quality restoration and elevated maintainance standards at YALE ?

Has the University ever published their official position on their level of committment and responsibility to the YALE golf course, and their views with respect to the preservation of the architectural treasure in their possession ?

[SPDB]

Pat - just curious. What's the deal with your use of CAPITAL letters?

[GeoffreyC]

Pat

It's a teriffic article that should serve as a wake up call to those in charge who must now realize that they failed to listen to George Bahto and his document of October 2000 and now an acknowledged expert on historical preservation of golf courses gives them another "slap in the face" nearly three years later.

I hope this will initiate rational conversation between Brad and those in charge so that then can start over again from scratch to do the right thing by this historic architectural gem. They must now realize that Roger Rulewich is simply not the right person for this job and they must also finally realize that the course is much more then just a place of recreation for students, faculty and workers.

Personally, I now think its a lost cause as Beinecke, the committee and the Athletic Department simply don't get it!

[TEPaul]

Patrick;

Obviously you don't have a very clear understanding of the "Yale Man". Even the "Harvard Man" can't get through to them and you know about those Harvard men--you can tell them but you can't tell them much!

I haven't read Brad's article about Yale yet but I hope he hit them with one of his wakeup call opening lines like he did the restoration forum he was at here in Philly. When the moderator asked Brad what first impressed him about golf architecture he shot back;

"Rich people can be real idiots sometimes."

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

He opened with:

"A landmark gone askew"

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Wasn't one of William F. Buckley's books entitled "God and Yale"?

Brad should've opened with "A Yale Landmark Gone To Hell."

[TEPaul]

Pat:

I'm putting some finishing touches on various types of "maintenance melds" and in the case of Yale G.C. I think it's going to be either;

"The AFL/CIO and the "maintenance meld"" or "The minimalist's approach to course maintenance". Or perhaps even "The Deconstructionist's approach to golf course maintenance".

The first and most important facet of it is to show up at 6am, punch in on the union clock and then hang around the maintenance building or just sleep until noon!

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

I haven't seen Brad Klein's article, but having recently started a thread on "Is Yale the greatest tragedy in golf?", I'm delighted Brad elected to highlight this issue.

The sad thing is that several people who post here frequently disagreed with the thrust of my thread and essentially took the "it's good enough" attitude. One has to worry if people who regularly post on GCA take such an attitude, what hope is there to move forward at Yale? Hell, the Yale managment could have taken their comments and said "gee, even the golf architecture fanatics at GCA think the place is good enough". Sad really. Their comments were some of the most unfortunate ever posted at GCA.

But, let's hope that with Brad's contribution those in the "it's good enough" camp will re-think their position. As people like George Bahto and Geoffrey Childs have expressed many times, Yale truly is one of the treasures of American golf. One can only hope Brad's article will have the desired effect.

One last point. I spent Saturday afternoon and dinner at Country in Cleveland with a Yale graduate who fondly remembers playing the course as an undergraduate. I distinctly remember the pride he took in the course when we met about five years ago. However, this fellow was not aware of George Bahto's efforts to generate support for restoring Yale and it made me wonder how well aware Yale alumni are of the situation. Perhaps Brad's article can help change that.

My compliments to Brad for using his position for such a worthwhile golf architecture cause.

[Kenny Lee Puckett]

I look forward to reading the article.

I played Yale in August and saw that the greens were at least beginning to rebound, but I think that it will take years and a great deal of "Moola, Moola" to get the course into the shape that it deserves.

In regards to the re/de-construction on 12, 13 & 16, I am not thrilled with the bunkering at the top of the Alps on 12, I kind of like the back left bunker going in on the Redan, and 16 appeared to be more appearance maintainance than anything else.

Overall, they need to fix the drainage first, second and third - particularly on #4 (I wonder what C.B. would think of the new elevated back tee?!?).  

The Course at Yale still has greatness in its "Bones." I hope that the fans on this board and elsewhere can help the university reclaim one of its treasures.  They let the Yale Bowl go to rot.

KLP

[Bruce Katona]

I had the pleasure to play at Yale for the first time, the day before the strike began ( 8/26 ??). It is easy to see what everyone else has already identified at this gem. The greens (as I was told) were in ok condition; (a little slow and bumpy) they had been better the week before as a strong storm had come along, power been lost and the pumps motors for the irrigation sysytem lost. The crew had been hand watering.

The fairways played as I beleive everyone here would want, fast and firm. They were green/brown,, but not buned out.

The rough was in poor condition and they had lost some sod on a bunker face/surround under construction on the back nine.

I must admit, the tee ball on #9 to that two-tierred green is visually impressive. As a matter of fact, I would say my strongest first impression of the course is the visual challenge associated with the tee ball. When you arrive at either the green/landing area, you have a larger target than what appears from the tee.

Given a five year modest capital improvemnt budget and plan; with a maintenance crew dedicated and motived to improving the course, it could be an even better place to enjoy the game.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Tim,

I left enough alone at the time, but I can't stay silent forever about it.  I'm sure I'm one of the ones you refer to when you mention those of us who said Yale was "good enough".  But I NEVER said (and neither did Huckaby) that Yale was "good enough".  You put those words in our keyboards.

What we said was that, as it currently is, (summarizing) "Yale is still a very fun course to play with plenty of strategic interest still available."  NEVER did we say that Yale was "good enough", which implies that we don't think anything needs to be done to the course, or we don't care if it ever does.  Much to the contrary.  I (and I believe Huckaby, too) still feel that Yale should be restored to it's former glory and it's ashamed that it might not ever happen.  But our gist was that, even if it never happens, Yale is still a very good golf course and is fun to play (as even uber-critic Emperor conceded).

[HamiltonBHearst]

Mr Burroughs- your comment is part of the problem.  What administrator at Yale would not be happy with a golf course that is "very fun to play with a lot of strategic interest".   As an alumnus this is the only area of the University where this attitude would be acceptable, and that is the problem.

I have not played there since the payne-whitney fundraiser two years ago but there were a lot of people walking around patting themselves on the back.

It is sad that outsiders like Mr. Klein have more of a love for the course than the people whose charge it is to maintain it.

[Scott_Burroughs]

So, I guess we all have to just lie and say "this really sucks, I hate it" to get things done?

While neither Huckaby nor I have anything to do with Yale's Top 100 ranking in GM or GW(C), I believe those accolades far outweigh his and my feelings (by about a gazillion).  I believe if Yale fell out of either or both of those lists, then perhaps something might be done.  Or maybe, just maybe, the layout as is currently stands is THAT strong to actually be worthy of it's rankings.

[Joel_Stewart]

My guess is unfortunately, no (small letters).

I have to agree here the answer is no.  

I have many questions on how Yale has let the course go without hiring an outside management company to run the place.  The point being they obviously don't have any interest in running the course, so why not bring an outside company and share the revenue.  

I have also always wondered how can they possibly exist without having a super for over 2 years?
 

[Dan Kelly]

Would someone (possibly Tim Weiman himself) please go to that thread Tim Weiman cites and show who said Yale was "good enough"? Thank you. (I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone can do it.)

***************

As for myself:

YALE is the greatest tragedy in golf.

It really sucks.

I hate it.

There! Now the historians won't blame ME!

Phew.

(Is this unwillingness to hear even slightly contrary views, no matter how temperately expressed, a GCA version of Political Correctness? How apropos that it should rear its ugly head in connection with a golf course owned by a University.)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly, Scott Burroughs, et. al.,

Perhaps those making some of those comments aren't aware of what was done to holes # 1, 2, 3, 4, 16, 17 and 18, not to mention other changes like fairway widths, etc., etc..

Perhaps George Bahto, Geoff Childs, Brad Klein and/or others  can list what needs to be restored and/or changed.

The issue extends far beyond maintainance.  And those focusing on maintainance alone are missing the mark.

[Dan Kelly]

Dan Kelly, Scott Burroughs, et. al.,

Perhaps those making some of those comments aren't aware of what was done to holes # 1, 2, 3, 4, 16, 17 and 18, not to mention other changes like fairway widths, etc., etc..

Perhaps George Bahto, Geoff Childs, Brad Klein and/or others  can list what needs to be restored and/or changed.

Perhaps.

And perhaps.

And one more perhaps: Perhaps Scott Burroughs and Tom Huckaby and others who've enjoyed playing Yale, despite the damage that's been done to it, will loudly and enthusiastically endorse Yale's restoration, as well as improved maintenance.

Matter of fact, I'd bet on it!

My point was only to suggest that one does not become an enemy of Yale's restoration and improvement merely by expressing the opinion that the golf course has merits even in its present condition.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Obviously you don't have a very clear understanding of the "Yale Man". Even the "Harvard Man" can't get through to them and you know about those Harvard men--you can tell them but you can't tell them much!

I resemble that remark...  

I haven't seen the course at Yale since Gary van Sickle ran me out of there on a rail, but that's another story. It was always in poorish condition while I was there, but at least I got to play it before Rulewich got started. The photos I've seen do not look good at all. Regardless: can we not refer to a golf course redesign as a "tragedy"? It's obviously sad, but it's not like someone on the construction crew died or anything.

Cheers,
Darren

[Tim_Weiman]

Dan Kelly:

I continue to believe there were people who expressed an attitude that undermines the already limited hope for a true restoration at Yale.

Exact words are important, but so is tone and attitude, especially knowing the situation in New Haven. Do you really think there were not posts that could only serve to encourage the “it’s good enough” attitude? If so, your understanding of language and politics is worlds apart from mine.

Yale is one of the great designs in American golf. Sadly, it has been allowed to fall from being the best it could be. Trying to turn that situation around is at best difficult and probably damn near impossible. The “it’s good enough” attitude is already pervasive at Yale, unfortunately. That being the case, greater sensitivity should have been displayed by those posting at GCA. Going back after the fact and trying to parse words doesn’t help. The damage has already been done.

Again, I pay my respects to Brad Klein for reviving this issue. People like George Bahto and Geoffrey Childs were brave first soldiers on the beach. Brad is to be admired for joining their cause. People who love great golf architecture should do so as well.

P.S.  I fully realize my words and tone might be considered obnoxious. If I didn’t think Yale was deserving of the greatest support, I wouldn’t bother.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

BCrosby made the point in the reconstructive surgery thread that many golfers have no frame of reference with respect to the original design, hence judgements about the course are frequently made in a vacuum, without all of the historical information and facts.

One might play an altered course and enjoy it, but had they known what existed before the alterations, they might have felt deprived, and instead of endorsing the current golf course, which sends the wrong signal to current management, they would be amongst the critical legions calling for a restoration,  which sends the right message to current management.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Will exposure and criticism from a National publication have any effect on those in charge ?  Will it focus attention on what needs to be done and result in a quality restoration and elevated maintainance standards at YALE ?

Patrick,

Obviously time will tell, but I am told that THE highest levels of Yale University are aware of the criticism of the restoration and the subsequent article by Brad. Geoffrey's passion for the course and much of his off-line work contibuted to this.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Patrick,

Not sure who that was directed to (Pretty sure Huckaby knew what course once was and I know I did - getting a hole-by-hole description over the phone from one passionate about the subject), but I'm not so sure how anyone would be willing to carry it out.  Who in their right mind, as a guest of the course, would make it known to management their displeasure of what currently is there, knowing what it use to be, when you're a guest of the place to begin with?  

I can see it now, I walk in after finishing, after being treated to the course via being set up in the pro shop:

"How'd you like it?"

"Boy this would be a hell of a course, if it were just restored back to the CBMac/Raynor original design, but as it is now, it's a piece of crap.  What were you thinking letting Homeboy Rulewich loose out there?  Have a nice day."

"And which member sponsored you here today?  Oh, and let me add your name to our guest registry for future mailings:  Nevergonna Playhereagain, was your name, right?  Parking lot is that way."

That'll do the trick.

[George_Bahto]

Patrick: you asked ....  "Has the University ever published their official position on their level of commitment and responsibility to the YALE golf course, and their views with respect to the preservation of the architectural treasure in their possession ? "

They recently have and you'll soon find out what their "position" is ........... I'll have a lot to say about the this soon.

Their "position" is based on of that grand old saying "CYA"   - cover you a _ _!!  

They are contending:

"All parties have made a reasonable effort to return the course to the design developed and implemented by Charles Blair McDonald and Seth Raynor (- that friends is their spelling of his name - McDonald - this is higher education!! ..... that  spelling also appears on apparel in the pro shop -) .. continuing:, "sometimes at the expense of practical construction and the wishes of today's recreational golfers."

They contend the use of early aerials provided "as clear a picture as possible of the conditions at the time." and "Every effort is being made to reproduce these and other traps on the course during the course of the project."

"effort?"   ......   "reproduce?"

There is also a position they've taken on me personally which has got me totally incensed and I'm not going to stand for it!!!!! ..... stating that I was more interested in advancing my own opinions than in collaborating with us to determine the layout of the course as it was designed and built.

I'm not going to let them get away with that crap without responding.

I offered to assist in any way possible to help return the course to as originally built.

I offered my services because I wanted to preserve that great course. I wanted to preserve this textbook of golf architecture. I offered my services and told them that I didn't want any credit - let Roger have all the credit - I couldn't care less about the credit - the course was more important.

I spent a lot of time one afternoon with RR going around the course discussing where bunkers ended and what the shapes were. My answer was always the same "the aerial tells the whole story - use that as your guide - there are nearly 200 construction photos!!"

Damn what the hell else would you need.

I spent a lot of time on a lot of other things for the Yale "project" which I got dissed for financially.

But unfortunately I'm just a dumb-ass, uneducated working guy - they are the smart ones.

WELL, GO TAKE A LOOK AT THE PLACE SEE WHAT THEY'VE DONE AND COMPARE IT TO THE AERIAL AND TO THE PHOTOS - SEE FOR YOURSELF.

They've made fools of themselves and are patting each other on their backs trying to convince each other and others  they've done the right thing. Give me a break.

Hogwash! CYA is the position, Patrick.

Next time I'll tell you how I really feel!

[Tim_Weiman]

George:

It is painful to hear what has been happening. I hope someday the chemistry - or should I say pyschology - will change and things can move forward.

I mentioned on another thread that I spent Saturday with a Yale alumnus checking out restoration work underway in The Country Club in Cleveland. One takeaway for me is that true restoration efforts are possible, but they take the right leadership and support. I hope Yale will get there someday and hopefully before too long.

Your efforts on this issue are appreciated.

[SPDB]

Geoffrey - Just out of curiousity, have you tried to make any inroads at the School of Architecture? I'm not implying that they would add any gravitas, but certainly they could be co-opted to the movement, and (possibly) add some academic urgency to the matter.