You guys are stupid for not respecting RTJ..

[BCrosby]

Jaka -

In response to your last question -

Yes. RTJ wrote the book on how to maul a Ross course. His changes to Ross courses for US Opens - done at the behest of our friends at the USGA, let's not forget - haunt gca to this day. See his work at Oak Hill, Oakland Hills in the '50's.

Bob

[JakaB]

Bob and Mike,

Did anyone object to his work inside a decade from its completion...Could your objection be more based on failures by Ross to prepare for the technological advances of the 50's...are you just killing the messenger..What could have RTJ done differently to change these nice country clubs into championship venues.

[Tim_Weiman]

JakaB:

Are you saying that there is no RTJ course you have played and feel passionate enough about to write a glowing post?

I'm confused. Which RTJ course do you love? Which would have made your 31 flavors?

[George Pazin]

What is stupid is you perpetuating this constant notion that there is some uniform party line here on the site. Do you even read the posts on the site?

Separately, even if one accepts your premise that no one objected at the time, that does not mean butchering Oakland Hills, Oak Hill, Aronimink, etc., was the right thing to do.

[BCrosby]

Jaka -

Lots of people objected at the time. Most notably the pros that had to play those courses. Hogan, Snead, Middlekopf (never can remember how to spell the Dr.'s name) all had remarkably insightful objections to RTJ's "monster" concepts and what his ideas did to shotmaking/strategy.

Their voices were muted by the USGA's chest thumping about "manly" tests, etc. Then and now the USGA is ready and eager to use the tough guy strophe. With the implication that anyone who objects is somehow a wussie.

Bob

 

[Tim_Weiman]

George Pazin:

I share your feelings. If someone thinks a golf architect is underappreciated, I can't understand why they don't just write a passionate post about one of his courses.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Barney,

I grew up down there so I have a bunch of friends at Aronimink, so they would know better. Actually one is named Ripper and the other is my brother-in-law who loves cart golf in Arizona, so maybe we should not ask them. However, Dave Miller, from here, has been a member there since he was a kid, so he is certainly qualified to answer. There are also numerous post from June, prior to the Senior PGA that talks about these issues.

In the NY region, I have pretty much played what I want to see of RTJ. Why should I make the trip to Bellerive? Can you be specific? Not being confrontational, I am interested. Please note I added Peechtree to my list after Bob's post.


("I love everything about Bellerive....If you have not played it with modern technology you are missing out on a real treat....fun in the real world in real time.")

[JakaB]

Bob,

Thank you for an accurate and insightful answer...thats neat.

Tim,

I was a member of a Golf Digest top 100 for over a year before I played another top 100 course....My 31 flavors would be meaningless based on my lack of field work.  I know that I don't glow well..but I really though I was all giddy about Bellerive...I liked it so much I asked to join but the feeling wasn't mutual.  Small town boys just don't realize people actually have to wait for some things and they don't have a national membership classification.

Bellerive is in the my personal top 5 and Otter Creek is in my top 31.

George,

Please tell me how RTJ butchered the courses you mention and at whose direction...The only course I have done any reading on outside this site is Baltusrol and the truth of his work there is far from the "party line" found on this site.  I am somewhat lucky to have never even thought about golf architecture before coming to this site...so with a clear mind I know exactly what has been spoon fed to my by the "official circle"...it really isn't pretty when you just want to go enjoy a nice game....I had an awakening at Valhalla when my body kept saying like and my gca.com demons kept saying nolike...the like won and I had a great day no thanks to the party.

There is nothing wrong with a "party line" and it may even be correct....and if I could find a site where most people thought like me I would probably get bored and think like you just to stir things up...its just a game within the game when you don't have time to tee it up.

[JakaB]

Mike,

We live in such different cultures that me going to St. Louis and playing Bellerive is much different that you leaving Manhattan and doing the same.   I think that may be why they build so many courses in so many different places.   I don't know why I loved it any more than I know why I love Halloween sized chocolate bars with Sponge Bob on the wrapper...I just do.   I wish I was better at saying why I love something instead of being so good at saying why I hate something....I just had a great day there on Sunday in February on a round that I set up two weeks prior...Like a miracle it turned out to be 64 deg...I got paired with Jay William's father in law (a very solid golfer)...the course was packed and everbody walked in under 4 hours....I was treated like I was a member(and not in that fake kinda way)...The dormant zoysia was perfect for winter play....I played well...It had a short par four or two (not just monsters)....The shoe guy sat down with me and told me some great stories as I waited for my cab...they had free sticky buns in the clubroom....I just was happy for the entire time I was on site...a near impossibility with my ease of displeasure.

Rather than give a hole by hole specific account...please believe me I am not qualified to go into such specifics...

[Tim_Weiman]

JakaB:

I have never seen Bellerive and know very little about it. If it makes it in your top five, why not start a thread an tell us why? Isn't that what we are here for?

People here will never agree on the "top five". I'd rather play at Dooks than Pine Valley, but I'm guessing very, very few people would share that feeling. But, who cares?

Isn't it better that we understand your passion than necessarily agree with it?

FYI, I still like the guy I met down at one of Cleveland Metroparks 9 hole courses a couple years ago. He had his own philosophy. He didn't want to play any good courses because he once did that and found it had a shot where you had to hit 100 yards over water!

I'll never forget his passion and joy to play a mere beginner's course - one that wouldn't make any GCAer's top 5,000.

[George Pazin]

Sorry, Barn, I don't have the energy for another Pat-esque who did what to whom & when slugfest.

I'll simply say that I don't think anyone on here has as low an opinion of RTJ as you're implying and I think the many posters on board are deserving of more respect than another sweeping party line condemnation.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Jaka - After RTJ redid Oakland Hills for the US Open didn't all the pros and media hate the course?  RTJ simply made it impossible to play.  I believe the eventual winner, Ben Hogan, was quoted as telling Mrs. RTJ after the tournament,

"madam, if your husband had to play courses he designed for a living, you'd be in a bread line."

JC

[A_Clay_Man]

Bcrosby- Is there any way for you to expound on "who" those pros were? I would find it interesting since they obviously were the ones with real insight.

George Bahto- In response to a future post(the very next one) I guess that's what Tradition points gets you.

[George_Bahto]

My problem with RTJ is the number of great classic courses he decimated with little respect.

Now understandably, much of the fault for these fiascos was the fault of the clubs - thinking they were doing the right thing by "modernizing" ("murderizing?? - now that's an interesting word) - getting the "new' look.

His new courses are what they are and everyone can judge them for what they think they are. I have no problem with that although I don't care to play them - way too many great places to play.

His lack of respect for the great classics is where I lose the respect.

.......... funny how acorns do not fall too far from the tree ...........      

[Jeff Fortson]

"His new courses are what they are and everyone can judge them for what they think they are. I have no problem with that although I don't care to play them - way too many great places to play.

His lack of respect for the great classics is where I lose the respect.

.......... funny how acorns do not fall too far from the tree ...........  "



WOW.  It's like someone got in my brain and wrote exactly how I feel.  How did you do that George?  

Jeff F.

[Mike Hendren]

I understood Barney's initial post to credit RTJ with courses that have held up well to the onslaught of modern technology, period.  Even those that don't like RTJ's body of work seem to acknowledge that many of his courses are "sound tests of golf."  I don't purport to put words in Barney's mouth (it's already a pretty big mess in there ) but it seems to me this thread has been hi-jacked by a bunch of thinned skinned treehouse members that confuse like w/ respect.  

Stupid regards,

Mike

[JakaB]

George,

What respect did Tillinghast show to Baltusrol when he showed up in 1922...he did his job and changed the living hell out of the place.

Did CBM ever do work at an existing course...did he show respect to what existed before he layed his genius upon the land...

[BCrosby]

A_Clay

As I mentioned, quotations about the new "monster" courses in the early '50's from Hogan, Snead, Dr. Cary M.....(sp?) and maybe others (I don't recall) show up in histories by Wind.

Wind himself was no fan of RTJ. It comes out clearly in his World of Golf (not sure that's the exact title) where he and his co-authors surveyed the great courses. For a good example of RTJ bashing, reread the introduction to that book, if I remember correctly. You don't have to probe very deeply between the lines to figure out who Wind disliked.

There is also a history of the US Open (author name forgotten) that I bought from The Classics of Golf years ago. It had some good quotations re the 1953 Open. Hogan was the most out-spoken, as I recall.

The USGA shrugged it off as sour grapes. They still do.

Bob

[Jeff Fortson]

Mike,

I will agree that many of us have gone astray as to what I think Barney was trying to get at.  In context of what BArney was getting at I will say that RTJ has been instrumental in changing golf and more of that for the worse than the better.

There are many reasons I believe this.  The guy built functional, plain, "solid tests" of golf.  In other words, boring.  I play golf for many more reasons than to just "test my game".  His rolodex of boring holes makes each course similar to the next with very little variety in visual appeal.  He was a catalyst in the modern architectural disaster called, signature courses.  What a load of crap.  If you are going to put your name on a living art piece where you get credit for designing it then actually design it yourself or at least attempt to be a part of the process other than cashing the customer's check.  

Competitively, he took chance and quirk out of many great courses and forced the ball in the air moreso than any other living architect, IMO.  This more than anything else is the biggest turd he dropped on golf.  How many RTJ courses are meant to be played on the ground.  Hmmmm..... I can't think of one.  So, yes, from Barney's standpoint he made courses that stand up to the modern game and his children do the same.  Unfortunately, the result is a game of super high, super long, super straight launch ball that took all the enjoyment of using the golf course to play golf and to keep the ball in the air as long as possible.  Shit, you don't even need a golf course to play golf anymore thanks to RTJ.

Jeff F.

[George Pazin]

Mike -

If by thin skinned individuals, you mean posters who are sick & tired of generalized potshots at the group, then I'll plead guilty as charged.

[George_Bahto]

JakaB: I can't speak about AWT - not knowledgeable enough on that subject.

Macdonald refined National for over 25 years modifying his design to make HIS course better (in his opinion).

Macdonald did not have a lot to do with courses after NGLA - he did not want to built golf courses.

Raynor seldom modified a course other than their own designs. If he was asked to do his thing over an existing property, it was to built an entirely new course (sometimes using existing fairway if possible to save the club $$).

Raynor and Banks, like CB at NGLA, often went back and reworked (improved on) their own designs. Mt Lake, Old White at the Greenbrier Hotel, Hotchkiss, Raynor redoing the Macdonald course at Chicago , Raynor going back to Maidstone after a couple of years, come to mind.

There were a couple of cases where they presented a plan and because it may have been too costly for the club, may have done just a few holes leaving the rest for the club to implement according to their submitted plans.

[Joel_Stewart]

Why didn't he do any of the stupid things you guys seem to think are rubber stampage at Olympic Lake..

I can tell you that a number of people at Olympic are considering what Oakmont did, find out exactly what RTJ did  and put it back the original way.  In my own research, he destroyed the 8th hole at Olympic and ruined a number of other holes.

The idea that RTJ added the only fairway bunker at Olympic is completely false.  He did add the current fairway bunker on #6 but he filled in fairway bunkers on the right of 6, left of 9, left of 14 and the right on 18 at the bottom of the hill.

[Dan Kelly]

Like JakaB, I am not qualified to speak to the entire RTJ oeuvre, but...

The guy built functional, plain, "solid tests" of golf.  In other words, boring.

RTJ's Hazeltine, a course I loved, was an extremely solid test of golf -- but not in the least, to my eyes, "plain" or "boring."

It was, I believe, not "plain" or "boring" enough for the Touring Pros and the USGA. That's what led to all of the changes (dramatically straightened doglegs, dramatically flattened greens) -- most of them not for the better, in my opinion.

Competitively, he took chance and quirk out of many great courses and forced the ball in the air moreso than any other living architect, IMO.  This more than anything else is the biggest turd he dropped on golf.  How many RTJ courses are meant to be played on the ground.  Hmmmm..... I can't think of one.

Meant to be played on the ground?

Not Hazeltine.

But possible to play on the ground -- and sometimes rewarding play on the ground?

Yes, Hazeltine (with the exception of a few holes).

[John Kirk]

A couple comments about Eugene (Oregon) Country Club:

1.  It's an interesting remodel project, in that he reversed all the tees and greens of the original design by Chandler Egan.

2.  Some of my friends here swear by it.  It's probably the best of the classic Northwest U.S. designs, characterized by narrowish fairways bordered by mature specimen trees.  It is  very well conditioned course, with a difficult set of par-3 holes.

3.  I don't like it that much.  It's claustrophobic, monotonous, and I never play well there.

[JakaB]

Joel,

Please explain your comments about the 8th at Olympic....It was home to my only Barney Birdie of the day so I am partial to any changes.

[Tags:]

Tags: