Stoke Park in the UK next buy for Trump?

[Ben Stephens]

Seems like 'arrogance of ignorance' from the club/director of golf


Hope Trump can revert this even though I am not a fan of Trump Golf venues but it will be a lot better than what has been done here as Stephen Jones the famous rugby reporter says - 'an absolute travesty' the Donald would prefer to use a golf golf archie that knows what they are doing.

Wow - that is shocking - the bunkers look really amateurish and has downgraded the profile of Stoke Park. I have seen a number of bunkers done in house and greens committee who think that they know better which have been pretty dire.

Millions of pounds surely they could have brought in a well known GCA to sort everything out as I have seen last weekend which has made a great course even greater.

But this is the point Ben, they haven't not used an architect to save money. They have deliberately chosen not to use an architect because they think they will get more Colt-like work that way. WRONG!

[Kalen Braley]

This course would be perfect for Trump... Overpriced and over-rated!!  Then he could raise the green fee 50% and the wannabes would be lining up even more!

[Frank Pont]

Visited Stoke a few years back at their invitation to see how they could restore/improve the course and bring back more of Colt's brilliance.





Of the 27 holes only the first 9 have the original routing, the second 9 are quite changed, and the third 9 are completely changed. (see the 1942 aerial below)





Quality wise its about the same as the changes; the first 9 is fairly good, the second 9 is OK, and the third 9 is a car wreck.


Main problem obviously is the routing of the second and third loops, that's what I focussed on in my thinking on what they could improve. Obviously they had also lost the original size of a lot of the bunkers, but that was secondary to their main issue the routing.


Came up with the following





Did not get the gig, so am happy to share with the crowd at GCA.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/d2ut4qx8eb9un16/Stoke%20Park%201%20A3.pdf?dl=0

[Anthony Gholz]

Frank: 


Thanks for sharing especially the 1942 aerial. 


I assume the 18th is the hole that finishes in front of the ch.  The 1942 bunkering along the right side of the driving area looks incredible.  You'd have to be on the ground to figure out how it fit the land forms, but given the depression and WWII it probably is as close to Colt's bunkering as we can figure.  My question is:  It appears your analysis drawing shows only a small fairway bunker in that area, nothing like the original.  Does your comment about routing being the main problem mean that you were only showing placeholders for bunkers and not actual Frank Pont design?


Anthony

[Duncan Cheslett]

Stoke Park have clearly got form in making a pigs ear of their golf course.


A Google Earth image from 2002 is bad enough...







The same view from 2013 illustrates well what Ken Moodie and I experienced on our visit the following year...





Perhaps they employed a golf course architect who "wanted to put their own personal stamp on the course".


And perhaps they didn't.

[Ben Stephens]

Stoke Park have clearly got form in making a pigs ear of their golf course.


A Google Earth image from 2002 is bad enough...







The same view from 2013 illustrates well what Ken Moodie and I experienced on our visit the following year...





Perhaps they employed a golf course architect who "wanted to put their own personal stamp on the course".


And perhaps they didn't.

Duncan,


As Adam said earlier in this thread the current work is being done in house.


I have a pdf copy of the course report by Mackenzie and Ebert in 2006 - if anyone wants to see it IM your email address and I will forward it to you


Pity they didnt use Frank


Cheers
Ben

[Duncan Cheslett]

As Adam said earlier in this thread the current work is being done in house.

I know that Ben.  I was referring to the previous work done sometime between 2002 and 2013.  Surely Mackenzie and Egbert weren't responsible for those dreadful bunkers?   






I'd love to see that 2006 report. Ben.   I'm at golf@duncancheslett.com

[David_Tepper]

Are those 3 baseball diamond/fields in the upper left-hand corner of the 2014 aerial photo? Very curious as to who uses them.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Are those 3 baseball diamond/fields in the upper left-hand corner of the 2014 aerial photo? Very curious as to who uses them.

It's probably the local girls' school. Rounders is very popular with schoolgirls in the UK.




 

[David_Tepper]

"Rounders is very popular with schoolgirls in the UK."

For those of us not terribly familiar with rounders:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounders

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luJ4F1N7eEA

I knew rounders was a forerunner of baseball, but did not know it was still played so actively in GB&I.

[Duncan Cheslett]

David,


That video is about Irish Rounders.


English rounders differs slightly in that the bat is short and held in one hand. The ball is pitched underarm.


Long handled baseball bats are very popular in England, however.
Far more are sold than the tiny number of people who actually play baseball!

[corey miller]

So now people are "ass-holes" because they don't have the same discerning taste in golf clubs?  And I thought it was only a function of who they choose to support in an election? 

Many of these "ass-holes" were historically discriminated against in the "non-asshole" clubs which does beg the question, who is really the "ass-hole"? 

We live in a Hamptons/Hollywood world where people pay half a million dollars to join clubs that are equally ostentatious to Trump properties but are somehow "non-assholes" because the course itself was designed by C&C or Doak or Hanse or heck even Rees?

Tough crowd but I do look forward to seeing the criteria for as well as final list of the "ass-hole" clubs. 

[Ben Stephens]

http://golffeatures.net/Magazine/current_issue/index.html


Stoke Park article re phase 2 design being undertaken by the director of golf and estate manager


I for one know these are not Colt Style shaped bunkers 

[Niall C]

When you boil this down, are all that they are doing is a comprehensive re-bunkering program rather than a redesign ? While the "design" is in-house they seem to be using a reputable (presumably) and experienced (also presumably) contractor to undertake the work. It would be interesting to know how much of the design element is in-house and how much they are relying on the contractor.


For instance, how much of the shapes and designs of individual bunkers down to the club and how much left to the devices of the contractor. In this regard, is it better (from the POV of the club member) to have architect designed bunkers built by the green-keeping staff, or is it better to have club officials decide roughly what they want and where they want it and leave it to an experienced contractor to provide ?


Niall

[Ben Stephens]

When you boil this down, are all that they are doing is a comprehensive re-bunkering program rather than a redesign ? While the "design" is in-house they seem to be using a reputable (presumably) and experienced (also presumably) contractor to undertake the work. It would be interesting to know how much of the design element is in-house and how much they are relying on the contractor.


For instance, how much of the shapes and designs of individual bunkers down to the club and how much left to the devices of the contractor. In this regard, is it better (from the POV of the club member) to have architect designed bunkers built by the green-keeping staff, or is it better to have club officials decide roughly what they want and where they want it and leave it to an experienced contractor to provide ?


Niall

Niall my analogy for this is like building a house without an architect on board for example there are so many Noddy like houses being built by housing developers. Stoke Park seem to be relying heavily on Greasley experience of building courses which to me can be quite repetitive in appearance. 

[Niall C]

Ben


Repetitive or consistent ?    Let me put it this way, did the ODG of the Golden Age not also rely on these type of guys at times ?


Niall

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

The Stoke Park clubhouse was also featured in the Daniel Craig movie "Layer Cake."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Ofdp35vfg

It is a pretty good movie, well worth seeing. But there is a spoiler alert if you do not want to know how the movie ends!

The course is  over rated, unlike the film Layer Cake which is under rated. Daniel  Craig is at his best.

Don't know about Daniel Craig's best work, but a nice performance by Sienna Miller!

[Ian Mackenzie]

So now people are "ass-holes" because they don't have the same discerning taste in golf clubs?  And I thought it was only a function of who they choose to support in an election? 

Many of these "ass-holes" were historically discriminated against in the "non-asshole" clubs which does beg the question, who is really the "ass-hole"? 

We live in a Hamptons/Hollywood world where people pay half a million dollars to join clubs that are equally ostentatious to Trump properties but are somehow "non-assholes" because the course itself was designed by C&C or Doak or Hanse or heck even Rees?

Tough crowd but I do look forward to seeing the criteria for as well as final list of the "ass-hole" clubs.

Corey -


You have missed the point entirely. It has NOTHING to do with politics and has VERY little to do with architectural heritage. "Ass-hole traps" have existed for decades, long before the rise of reactionary politicians. Just like in every major metro area, there is the "Catholic club", 'The Jewish club", "the WASP club", etc.


It does, however, have EVERYTHING to do with club culture and certain developers/investors/owners foster a certain type of culture on a consistent basis whether the course is designed by Fazio, Hawtree, Wilson, CC, RGD, ODGs or anyone else.


Most major metro areas have one and most "aware" golfers know where they are.
I would also guess that most members of those courses are NOT participants here.


Go ahead, start the thread....;-)


Cheers/

[Frank Pont]

Frank: 


Thanks for sharing especially the 1942 aerial. 


I assume the 18th is the hole that finishes in front of the ch.  The 1942 bunkering along the right side of the driving area looks incredible.  You'd have to be on the ground to figure out how it fit the land forms, but given the depression and WWII it probably is as close to Colt's bunkering as we can figure.  My question is:  It appears your analysis drawing shows only a small fairway bunker in that area, nothing like the original.  Does your comment about routing being the main problem mean that you were only showing placeholders for bunkers and not actual Frank Pont design?


Anthony

Anthony,


on the road without access to my pics on the ground at Stoke, so doing this from my memory....


funny enough the spectacular fairway bunkers on 18 actually were the bunkers short left in the upslope of a deep ravine, that nowadays is overgrown with trees. If these were reinstated they would be cool, but way to short of the tee to be in play for all but the weakest players (the original tees of hole 18 also used to be further back, I seem to recall). Funny enough the right side bunkering isn't very strategic in any case, given that the preferred angle in to the green seems to be from the left.


Most of the other bunkering is either based on historical (aerial) pictures, or in some cases for the fairway bunkers based on modern play distances.


The club has a ton of pics and information on how the course looked like in its early days, much of which is in their history book.

[corey miller]

Ian


I don't think I have missed the point.  I do think in this instance it does have to do with politics and it does have to do to some extent with architectural heritage.   


Perhaps we differ on what we are measuring in this "ass-hole" factor....you yourself state that most members of "ass-hole" clubs would not be members here so it does seem that there must be some architecture component. 


We may need to agree to disagree on this but the NYC metro area probably has ten clubs with greater than $100,000 initiation developed over the last thirty years.  My opinion is that the "ass-hole" factor is viewed through  the prism of the underlying architecture  or in Trumps case the developer. 


There was another thread on Keiser, comparing him to Kohl as developers.  Do these properties tend to attract different percentages of "ass-holes"? 


I would not be so quick to judge those that have chosen to join Trump clubs in the past any more than I would judge people that live in his buildings.  Do any of his buildings tend to attract more "ass-holes" that the comparable?


Again...I think politics is clouding your judgments about people many of whom would not make the same membership decision today including perhaps President Clinton.   

[Frank Pont]

When you boil this down, are all that they are doing is a comprehensive re-bunkering program rather than a redesign ? While the "design" is in-house they seem to be using a reputable (presumably) and experienced (also presumably) contractor to undertake the work. It would be interesting to know how much of the design element is in-house and how much they are relying on the contractor.


For instance, how much of the shapes and designs of individual bunkers down to the club and how much left to the devices of the contractor. In this regard, is it better (from the POV of the club member) to have architect designed bunkers built by the green-keeping staff, or is it better to have club officials decide roughly what they want and where they want it and leave it to an experienced contractor to provide ?


Niall

Niall, Greasley were hired specifically because they had gained valuable experience restoring Colt bunkers with me at both Tandridge and Le Touquet La Mer (the Stoke press release specifically mntioned this).

[Adam Lawrence]

When you boil this down, are all that they are doing is a comprehensive re-bunkering program rather than a redesign ? While the "design" is in-house they seem to be using a reputable (presumably) and experienced (also presumably) contractor to undertake the work. It would be interesting to know how much of the design element is in-house and how much they are relying on the contractor.


For instance, how much of the shapes and designs of individual bunkers down to the club and how much left to the devices of the contractor. In this regard, is it better (from the POV of the club member) to have architect designed bunkers built by the green-keeping staff, or is it better to have club officials decide roughly what they want and where they want it and leave it to an experienced contractor to provide ?


Niall

Niall, Greasley were hired specifically because they had gained valuable experience restoring Colt bunkers with me at both Tandridge and Le Touquet La Mer (the Stoke press release specifically mntioned this).

It did. I had a laugh when I saw it but thought at the same time I wouldn't find it so funny if I were Frank

[Ian Mackenzie]

Corey -


No politics, just observations.


Agree to disagree. No worries.
Cheers,
Ian

[Frank Pont]

Adam,


To be honest I wasn't that bummed when they did not hire me at Stoke, you win some and you lose some, just surprised that they decided to do it on their own without any support from someone who knew a bit about Colt.


I do not blame Greasley, they are good guys and were very uncomfortable with the wording of the Stoke press release. They cannot help it that they have very good shapers and workmen who learn while on the job working with me.... in any case they would be the first to state that they need the input of an archie to get the best results.


Only two things have made me sad so far in this industry:


-  People who steal/use your ideas and then claim they had the same ideas al along, (that's why with legal help of a fellow GCA person I have started tagging my drawings with legal disclaimers).


-  Even more sad is when a shaper whom you hire to do a job tries to steal that client from you, something that happened to me last year, and a well known shaper as well..... now that is both sad and desperate.

[Anthony Gholz]

Thanks Frank.


Question to you (and others):  if the club really has all this history than maybe they've used it and we should not complain about bunker "locations," but more in our gca view of the specific bunker aesthetics?  If my Detroit area (and historical photos) knowledge is correct, the scale of these bunkers is too small and regular and not of either the original Colt "ripped" look or the later, larger scale Alison look (see Hirono) or in my case Port Huron GC.


My recent experience reviewing Sea Island's history makes me leery of saying Colt and/or Alison did just a ripped edge look when Alison's original Sea Island bunkers were huge clam shells.  Despite others on this site who say some nasty things about Fazio, imo his bunkering of Sea Island is not that far off and quite in scale with Alison's 1928-29 design.


Anthony


Anthony