Will YALE heed Brad Klein's advice ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff,

I think one of the reasons that nothing has been done at YALE is due to the "institutilization" of the problem.

In other words, comments have been directed toward YALE and not directed toward the INDIVIDUAL/S entrusted with YALE's responsibility.

It's easy to hide behind the corporate or institutional wall.

It is only when the spotlight of scrutiny identifies those responsible and tracks and evaluates their performance, that results are achieved.

In all of the threads and discussions about YALE noone has been informed with respect to the identity of the responsible parties.  That needs to be done, complete with their names, titles and level of responsibility.

It is time, for those responsible for the golf course, to step up to the plate, announce their intentions or defend their actions or inactions.

Without constructive criticism, progress is impossible.

[GeoffreyC]

Pat

You are probably correct.

The Yale golf course is under the direct supervision of the Yale athletic department.

The director of athletics at Yale is Tom Beckett.  Mr. Beckett to the best of my understanding runs the show and is ultimately responsible for all aspects regarding the course.

The fundraising committee that engaged George Bahto at my request is headed by an alumnus, John Beinecke. It is in my opinion John's choosing "practical solutions" and compromises rather then scholarly realization that the course and its history is as important as the rare books in the Beinecke Library at Yale that lead to this latest work at the course!

Finally, Roger Rulewich is the architect doing the actual work in the field. The above individuals who hired Mr. Rulewich should have realized that (IMHO) he has no talent as a restoration architect.

[Lou_Duran]

By now, the powers that be at Yale have been challenged so much that they could be just digging their heels in.  Admitting one's errors humbly is not a personal characteristic common to very many people of authority.

A few years ago, Ohio State was planning to renovate or restore its Scarlet course.  Green fees were raised to partially cover this work, and notable alumni such as Mike Hurdzan and Tom Weikopf provided their visions for the course.  Due partially to the large differences over what these two architects or designers were proposing, the project was delayed.  Stupid me, I thought that an impartial, but qualified (in gca) committee would work nicely to resolve the differences and suggested it to the athletic director.  Well, I got a nice letter back from Andy basically thanking me for my suggestions, and advising me that the final decision was his solely and that he did not need help or input on this matter.  Reportedly, subsequent cost overruns with the football stadium renovations have led the athletic department to place the golf course work on long term hold.

The problems at Yale appear to be more severe, though some similarities exist.  Both courses are university treasures, and deserve to be treated accordingly.  A possible approach at Yale might be to identify a few powerful, well-heeled alumni who can raise the needed money for a sympathetic restoration and, perhaps, an endowment for future operations at an acceptable level.  Armed with their influence and money, these alumni should have access to the highest level of university authority (president and board), and can perhaps bring the impasse to a favorable conclusion.  Or maybe golf is just such a narrow interest for a few of us that the world at large just doesn't give a damn.  Let's hope not.

[Dan Kelly]

Outside the box?

What the Yale golf course needs is for George Herbert WALKER Bush to get behind a restoration.

Why would he want to do that?

So that Yale would be a proper setting for the biennial staging of the BUSH Cup Matches (held in even-numbered years; alternating with the WALKER Cup).

The Bush Cup Matches would pit the amateurs of the United States against the amateurs from the world outside GBI.

All of that ethnic diversity should please the folks at Yale.

And go one step further: Make it a match for male and female amateurs both.

Whoever has GHWB's e-mail address: Forward this to him, please.

[marbleman]

No sense wasting time and messing with the underlings, they have no decision making powers. Go to the top.
The gentleman named below is trying to build his own high end course in the northwest corner of Connecticut.

Roland W. Betts, ’68 JE (Elected, 1999 to 2005)
Board member on Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Corporation.
Developer of Chelsea Piers in New York.
Friend and funder of George W. Bush
Chair, Yale Corporation Building and Grounds Committee (2002-03

[HamiltonBHearst]

Who did Mr. Betts pick on his own golf course?  Friends with GWB is their a Texas connection? Perhaps Coore & Crenshaw?

[marbleman]

I think C&C looked.

Ken Dye was chosen

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff Childs,

It would seem that intelligent communications should be initiated with these individuals asking them to review their plans or lack of plans with respect to restoring YALE.
I would think that civility, brevity and candor would be the best and most appreciated method, and that the communications should begin as soon as possible, from as many people as possible.

If you have their email or mailing address that would be most helpful.

Marbleman,

It's difficult to fund a project when you are not yet aware of its scope.

I would think that the priority would be formalizing a comprehensive restoration plan first, and then determine the funding necessary to implement that plan.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[GeoffreyC]

Pat

check your email from me.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff Childs,

Thanks,

But, if they only get one letter, from me, it won't have much of an impact.  Others need to communicate with these individuals as well.

[marbleman]

Patrick Mucci,
I wasn't referencing Mr. Betts' wealth, only his position as B&G Chair at Yale. Not an unimportant man to make aware of the architectural history of the course.
Yale saw the possibilities, a plan, through the efforts of GB and GC. They chose a different way and it won't change until the people responsible for that plan get directed toward a new one. Therefore, I feel that going to the top, the B&G Chair, and convincing him that a true restoration is in the best interests of the school and the course is the best and fastest way to effect change. If the B&G Chair was on board then the mindset of others would fall in line behind such a plan. This includes the mindset of the AD, any committees and the architect.

       

[Matt_Ward]

I only now had the opportunity to read Brad Klein's article on Yale and I just have to say hats off for its directness and candor. Too many publications today are overly "glowing" about the nature of courses today and it astounds me that Yale would be rated among the top 100 of GolfWeek's modern courses given the existing situations one sees today.

It also concerns me that real and meaningful analysis is lost when golf courses are discussed. Brad's column was indeed a breath of fresh air -- more of this type are needed for golf journalism to have any real meaning besides serving as the PR arm of developers and architects.

For a University with the endowment that Yale has it amazes me the course is in such a sad and seemingly endless decline. It's clear to me too many people at Yale are in major denial about the nature of the decline and I wish the best of luck to the new superintendent in trying to rectify this mess.

For those who have rated the course in such high company I would urge them to see Yale as it "is" rather than what "might" be.

[T_MacWood]

One of the reasons Brad is well equiped to address issues like the sad state of affairs at Yale is due to his thorough understanding of golf architectural history. Far too many writers aren't able to give a similar perspective.

[Brad Klein]

Sorry I could not respond sooner, but was actually away for 10 days without internet access (my first real vacation in years).

My hope in writing the article and in referring to some of the internal Yale documents of the 1950s that Bahto mentioned was to show that Yale's present decreptitude is not just a labor issue but the outcome of a long term process. Sadly, the current renovation program is so badly structured as a decision-making process for Master Planning that no good restoration can come out of it. It needs to be revised thoroughly prior to any real restoration.

Unfortunately, it's a waste of some good GCA talent that a few people take up space and time arguing here like old batty ladies about who said what when and what effect it will have on Yale. A few too many of you guys take yourself way too seriously and waste valuable resources in the process. You cannot judge Yale on the basis of a superficial round; you need to engage the history seriously, which is why Bahto and Childs are so important. As Lou Duran suggests above, Yale is even more political and difficult to deal with than your average golf club, and look how often they botch basic restoration issues. Add the extra weight of an Ivy League institution run by people with big egos and bigger bank accounts and it's no wonder they are so pleased with themselves.

Pat Mucci asks me and a few others to specify what changes would be appropriate to Yale. There's no point, however, in doing that in this forum. That's a question that needs to be asked directly by those at Yale and by the committee. If they are interested enough to inquire, I'd gladly spend the time with them. But not on an open forum where they are not certain to be listening intently.

I must say that I've been encouraged by the e-mail response I've gotten by alumni. The real test will be if any private channels of communicatin are opened by decision-makers and those in place to do the everyday work.

[Tim_Weiman]

I have never had the pleasure of being called “full of____”, an “old batty lady” and accused of taking myself “way too seriously” all in one thread!

Wow! I didn’t know Golfclubatlas could be so much fun.

But, it does bring to mind a story about Woodrow Wilson, the former President of Princeton University – not Yale.

Not long after he assumed his other Presidency, Wilson was asked by a journalist to compare university politics to what he found so far in Washington. Wilson surprised the journalist by explaining that things in Washington were pretty simple compared to politics on campus.

Many years later sociology Professor Merion Levy would offer his theory why:

“University politics are so contentious because the stakes are so low”.


Dan Kelly:

Why not two recent Presidents who were both Yalies.......Bush and Clinton?

[George_Bahto]

wow - wouldn't it be something

"W" and "Slick-Willie" both working on the same project together

"W"  with 6-guns blazing

"Bubba"   parsing away and at his side Chrome-DomeJames Carvel

how could we go wrong

[Dan Kelly]

Why not two recent Presidents who were both Yalies.......Bush and Clinton?

Because I don't think you could get Clinton interested, and because I'd prefer to keep Clinton as far as possible away from having any power over golf.

On the other hand: You're trying to convince the Eli powers-that-be that they need to take a mulligan. Who better than Clinton to make that case?

[Tim_Weiman]

Dan Kelly:

I know from Ballybunion that Bill Clinton is something of a golf nut and I wouldn't entirely discount him taking an interest.

[ForkaB]

Tim. et. al.

There is a great article in the current issue of Golf World in which the author describes a game of golf with Pres. Clinton at Purchase GC, damn near my old underage drinking haunts when growing up in CT.

Apparently Clinton does NOT take "Mulligans" but he makes liberal use of "Billagains."  A "Billagain" aparently involves the Pres. hitting a shot and then dropping (or teeing up as the case may be) another ball or two or three just "for practice."  When getting to where his ball(s) might be, more often than not it is deemed by his playing sycophants (Oops, fellow competitors!!!) that the ball closest to Position A was in fact his 1st ball.

The author said that Clinton posted a "score" of about 82-83 in his round, but hit the ball about 120 times.  God help Yale GC if he gets involved in this brouhaha.  Now THAT would be a tragedy..........

[George_Bahto]

Rich: you said:

"God help Yale GC if he gets involved in this brouhaha.  Now THAT would be a tragedy.......... "

But like the  "Col-e-forn-ee-a"   situation, what could be worse ....


I'm convinced (dead) "Bernie" from "Weekend At Bernie's" could have done a better job in both cases

(you've got to love Bernie)

[Dan Kelly]

... assuming the radical elements wouldn't protest just for the sake of protest because someone right of Marx is involved.

Disarming the protesters, via ethnic and sexual DIVERSITY, was the point of my original (if I do say so myself) proposal in this thread, which, perhaps, you missed:

"What the Yale golf course needs is for George Herbert WALKER Bush to get behind a restoration.

Why would he want to do that?

So that Yale would be a proper setting for the biennial staging of the BUSH Cup Matches (held in even-numbered years; alternating with the WALKER Cup).

The Bush Cup Matches would pit the amateurs of the United States against the amateurs from the world outside GBI.

All of that ethnic diversity should please the folks at Yale.

And go one step further: Make it a match for male and female amateurs both."

[ForkaB]

George

I should have said "tragi-comedy" but I don't like editing my posts.

Rich

PS-- I really do wish you and Geoff C. all the best in your efforts.  I have no doubt at all that you are on the side of the angels, but you are climbing a very tortuous and slippery slope.  If I were you I'd bypass the Beinecke's and Betts' of the Yale micro-world and go straight to the University's President.  He's been around for quite a while (i.e. no threat of job loss, lots of street cred amongst the community), and if you really have a case that Yale GC is as worthy of attention and preservation/restoration as some of the priceless manuscripts in the Beinecke Collection (for example), I'm sure he'd listen and maybe get on your side.  If you can't cogently make that argument, well, just get back to what you are doing, be resigned to bing quixotic, and never mind any more musings from Stanford and Harvard  (trade school) guys like me...........

[Forrest Richardson]

I just finished reading Brad's commentary/obesrvations in GW. The writing, as usual, is first-rate Brad. I was not impressed — nor taken by — the photos. They are good and decent, but in my view they failed to drive home the point. In fact, there were two comparisons which showed little difference. Obviously this is only a photo comparison. I've never been to Yale Golf Courses. But I have been to the Medical Center where my wife's mother's body was donated when she died at a young age. It was a scarey hallway with brains in jars and that sort of stuff. I assume the course is now scarey, too. I just wish the photo comparisons were more dramatic as I feel this would have caused more emotion and action among people, even if they had never been there.

[Brad Klein]

Forrest, I agree with you - you are a thoughtful observer; the photos could have been more dramatic in contrasting before/after, but I had no "previous" versions of the really horrific fairway bunkering at no. 1 or no. 17 and nothing to show how the now truly insipid "road hole" bunker at no. 4 used to look. In those cases, the current imagery was all I had of it, and perhaps I should have gone with it.

But if you use your usual acumen and look closely, you'll see the front greenside bunker on no. 5, which used to be 10 feet deep with a nearly vertically sloped face, has now become less than 5-feet deep with a 3-1 slope. The left side bunker has been similarly softened. Plus the green is much smaller.

They are building fairway bunkers with huge bulldozers, not with back hoes, and they are dinner-dish deep; truly awful stuff.

Incidentally, I have gotten over 20 private emails from Yale members and alumni supporting the article and only one that was critical of my approach.

The above specualtion (by others) regarding involvement by former Presidents Bush and/or Clinton is simply indulgent and irresponsible. They are not the kind to stick their heads out in golf, have no track record in such matters and they know nothing about design. The pressure will have to come from within, from members and from faculty.

[GeoffreyC]

Forrest- old photos are harder to come by to show just how much the course has been butchered by Rulewich.

Here is the current Road Bunker from hole #4 (noted I believe as one of the best 100 holes in the US by certain publications). This is older front nine work but interestingly it is the second attempt as Rulewich was instructed to redo the first try after he flashed the sand up the front  



I ask if anyone thinks this is an appropriate version of a road bunker?  For reference look in the course profiles of Piping Rock and NGLA to see other MacDonald/Raynor interpretations of this hazard.

Piping Rock



NGLA


OK you say- the new project on the back nine is what is intended as restoration and surely these bunkers will reflect the Raynor style.



Well here you have the BRAND NEW front right bunker on the par 5 16th hole.  Beautiful isn't it?      THis is what members and alums were asked to contribute to.  This is crap.

Here is some additional sensitivity on the part of the "restoration crew".  It is the previous location of the 16th green.  It was bulldozed away removing any residual evidence in case someone wanted to possibly restore it and its location near the swamp.



I have pictures of every bunker on the course and we can critique them all.