News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor New
« Reply #50 on: September 20, 2019, 01:18:27 PM »
1921

Country Club of Fairfield (Fairfield, CT)

[To be updated]

1928 Scorecard and Plan of the Course -






Metairie Golf Club (New Orleans, LA)

Raynor's design was constructed by Joe Bartholomew, who is considered the first black golf course architect in the country.  More on Bartholomew can be found here:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,50967.msg1307831.html#msg1307831

I don't have anything on Raynor and Bartholomew at Metairie.  A 1937 article in the Jefferson Parish Yearly Review (copied below) discusses the reworking of the course by Jack Daray.

1927 Scorecard -



By 1935 the Scorecard indicated changes made to the back 9.



1937 Jefferson Parish Yearly Review -






William Stauffer Estate Golf Course (New Orleans, LA)

There is no evidence that this course ever existed, and one theory is that its inclusion in Raynor's body of work is due to a confusion with Stauffer's involvement with Metairie.


Gibson Island Club (Gibson Island, MD)

The original plan for Gibson Island was for 36 holes.  Only 18 were built, with 8 of those 18 used in a 9 hole course put into play in 1927.

Sept. 30, 1921 Baltimore Sun -



March 12, 1922 Baltimore Sun -



March 13, 1922 Evening Sun -



1921 Olmsted Plan -


Aerial -



1926 Aerial Photo -



1945 Scorecard -




Minnesota Valley Country Club (Bloomington, MN)

[To be updated]


Southampton Golf Club "Cow Neck Course" (Southampton, NY)

When the Southampton Country Club was in its initial phase, the newly organized club was considering purchasing a site on Cow Neck.  Rayner was engaged and at the very least produced a preliminary plan for the course.  It is of interest to note that when the club eventually constructed its course at its current site, Raynor was given an honorary membership and was noted as Vice President in the 1925 Annual Guide.

Oct. 22, 1921 Brooklyn Times Union -



Feb. 17, 1922 East Hampton Star -




Wanumetonomy Country Club (Middleton, RI)


June 17, 1922 Newport Mercury -





Dec. 16, 1922 Newport Mercury -




Feb. 2, 1924 Newport Mercury -




1934 Scorecard -

« Last Edit: October 13, 2019, 09:29:22 AM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #51 on: September 20, 2019, 01:23:07 PM »
As a followup to the 1921 Listing above, I wanted to highlight the article below discussing plans for a new club in St. Paul and the 36 holes to be designed by "C. Raynor."

This is the only mention of this project I have found.  Apparently it died on the vine.

Dec. 30, 1921

"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #52 on: September 20, 2019, 02:14:30 PM »
The Gibson Island scorecard looks like it is the same nine holes, twice around, from different tees.


Was it already down to nine holes for good by then?

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #53 on: September 20, 2019, 02:18:51 PM »
Tom:

Apparently the course was down to 9 holes by around 1927.

March 2, 1930 Baltimore Sun -



« Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 12:52:05 PM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #54 on: September 20, 2019, 02:59:14 PM »
Wow, that's not what I expected.  Lots of golf courses failed in 1930, but not so many were cutting back in 1926-27.

Nigel Islam

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #55 on: September 20, 2019, 04:03:09 PM »
.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2019, 10:19:12 PM by Nigel Islam »

Nigel Islam

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #56 on: September 20, 2019, 04:08:03 PM »
.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2019, 10:19:31 PM by Nigel Islam »

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #57 on: September 20, 2019, 04:10:18 PM »
Sven,


I think Bret and I think the "Stauffer Estate" course was Metairie filed under Stauffer's name at the Southampton surveyor's office. I think Mr. Bahto might have jumped to the conclusion they were two separate courses. Stauffer's known New Orleans residences could not have had a golf course from a land standpoint.


Even a three green course like the Whitney Estate?


Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Nigel Islam

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #58 on: September 20, 2019, 04:42:18 PM »
Sven,


If you look closely at Anthony's list he is very specific about what Raynor did, possibly did, and likely did not do.


The Whitney estate existed and was more than 3 holes and does not really match the The Evangelist of Golf. But CBM says they did it.


The Moore estate existed as well and actually bears a slight resemblance to The Evangelist of golf. As above CBM says they did it.


The Knapp estate we are skeptical about. There was a course on his brother's estate, but he lived in Manhattan. His wife had a house on Long Island. George confuses this with the neighbor, Rufus Patterson of Blowing Rock. Different estates. Bret Lawrence knows his historic Long Island mansions.😁


Gardiners Bay we have little evidence for


Bellport we have some circumstantial evidence for


Thousand Islands CC we have one obscure article for.


Babson Park was a Ralph Barton design


Watchung is another one I'd refer to the list for.


The Stauffer Estate really was a house close to Lafayette #2 Cemetary. Even the other address George came up with could not have had a golf course other than a single green in the 1920s. I think he got the fact that Metairie was a course for Stauffer confused with the fact that Stauffer had his own course.

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #59 on: September 20, 2019, 05:02:49 PM »
Nigel:

I have looked closely at the list, and am well aware of which courses there is or isn't evidence for Raynor's involvement.  I am doing my best to note any lack of evidence in this thread.

You did confuse me a bit with one comment.  The list says the Payne Whitney course was a three green course.  Above you say it was more than 3 holes. 

You did answer my question on the Stauffer Estate.

Sven
« Last Edit: September 30, 2019, 08:53:27 AM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Nigel Islam

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #60 on: September 20, 2019, 05:25:21 PM »
Yes it appears to have more than 3 greens on the 1926 aerials. Which of course MacDonald wrote about, so confusing. It's a wicked looking course though!

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor New
« Reply #61 on: September 20, 2019, 06:46:40 PM »
1922

Taft School Golf Course (Watertown, CT)

Oct. 3, 1922 Taft Papyrus -



Oct. 4, 1922 Taft Papyrus -



Oct. 13, 1922 Taft Papyrus -



Jan. 17, 1923 Taft Papyrus -



1922 Plan of the Course -



Aerial -




Blowing Rock Country Club o/k/a Green Park-Norwood Golf Course (Blowing Rock, NC)

Raynor's involvement at Blowing Rock seemingly dates back to 1915, with a new 18 hole course put in place in 1923.  In both instances, the actual construction of the course was managed by Lute Nelson.

Dec. 24, 1915 Lenoir News -



March 1, 1923 Statesville Record and Landmark -



March 9, 1923 Lenoir News-Topic -



March 15, 1923 Watauga Democrat -



1942 Scorecard -




Brookville Country Club (Glen Head, NY)

Jan. 18, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -



Feb. 9, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -



Feb. 17, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -



March 13, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -



April 16, 1922 Brooklyn Daily Eagle -



June 29, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -




The Creek Club (Locust Valley, NY)

July 25, 1922 Brooklyn Daily Eagle -



Aug. 13, 1922 New York Times -





Dec. 22, 1922 Chicago Tribune -



March 5, 1924 New York Evening Post -





May 3, 1925 Brooklyn Daily Eagle -



May 17, 1925 Brooklyn Times Union -




Glen Acres Country Club a/k/a Mossy Springs Country Club (Harris Hill, NY)

Despite the reports below, the planned course never came to fruition.

March 19, 1922 Buffalo Courier -



April 9, 1922 Buffalo Express -



April 15, 1922 Buffalo Times -






Glen Head Country Club f/k/a Women's National Golf & Country Club (Glen Head, NY)

Spearheaded by Marion Hollins, Women's National was a Devereux Emmet project with CBM and Raynor offering assistance.  The Hollins/Raynor relationship would continue with her move to the West Coast in a few years.

Jan. 27, 1922 Daily News -



Feb. 1922 Golf Illustrated -



May 19, 1922 The Daily Times -



Oct. 20, 1922 New York Herald -



Nov. 22, 1922 Brooklyn Times Union -









Jan. 1923 Golf Illustrated -













Feb. 9, 1924 New York News -



March 1924 Golf Illustrated -















Thousand Islands Club (Alexandria Bay, NY)

[To be updated]


Greenbrier Golf Course No. 2 (White Sulphur Springs, WV)

The No. 2 for this course is a bit of a misnomer, as it predates the No. 1 Old White course.  Originally it was a rather short 18 hole course laid out in 1912 and 1913 by Alex Findlay and Fred Pickering, and was reduced to 9 holes when the Old White was built utilizing the best holes of the original 18 (see the end of the Oct. 1914 article below).  As the 1930 Scorecard below indicates, it was still a short 9 hole course at that time and had been described in the press as more of a pitch and putt practice course than a full size course.  At some point the what would become the "Lakeside" course was extended to 18 holes (again), and there are reports the work was carried out by George O'Neil.

I am not sure where the idea comes from that Raynor reworked this course in 1922.  There are no contemporaneous accounts of any work taking place at that time, although the remodeling work on the Old White and the construction of No. 3 were covered extensively.

Oct. 1914 Golf Magazine -






1930 Scorecard -




Greenbrier Golf Course No. 3 (White Sulphur Springs, WV)

The third course at the Greenbrier was originally going to be designed by CBM.  By 1922 the press began reporting Raynor as the architect, and there are varying accounts on CBM's involvement.  In 1926 Charles Banks added bunkers to the course according to Raynor's plans.

June 16, 1920 Evening Public Ledger -



Oct. 28, 1922 New York Herald -



Nov. 5, 1922 Philadelphia Inquirer -



Sept. 1924 Golf Illustrated -







Oct. 20, 1924 The Sun -



May 1926 Golf Illustrated -



1922 Aerial Photo - Old White on the upper left, Nine Hole No. 2 Course in the middle, No. 3 Course under construction in the lower right -



1923 Olmsted Plan -



1934 Aerial -



1930 Scorecard -




Mid-Ocean Club (Tucker's Town, Bermuda)

[To be updated]

1923 Olmsted Plan -




Riddell's Bay Golf & Country Club (Bermuda)

[To be updated]

1933 Scorecard -

« Last Edit: October 16, 2019, 10:06:14 AM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #62 on: September 22, 2019, 12:53:27 PM »
I played the Bolstad course probably 75 times in 1980, and still remember it quite well.  Real interested to read more about Raynor's work on it, because while the article says it has 6 templates, I can't think of any there.  As at Forest Park in St. Louis, maybe the course I played differed significantly from what the article describes.  Perhaps #14 is sort of a cape??

Raynor is certainly not shy about his accomplishments.  In this article he names Bolstad as among the finest layouts in the country, and earlier he pronounced Forest Park as the best public course in America.


Jim,


You are confusing two courses.


The Les Bolstad U of M course had no association with Raynor. It was designed by Tom Vardon.


Across the street from the Bolstad course is my home course, Midland Hills CC, which was originally called University Golf Club — and WAS designed by Seth Raynor.

I would be happy to host you (or anyone else) and show you the numerous template holes, as we prepare for Jim Urbina’s restovation next fall.


Dan

"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #63 on: September 22, 2019, 02:06:49 PM »
restovation


Dan:


I am surprised a journalist would use a bullshit marketing word, that's not in the dictionary.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #64 on: September 22, 2019, 02:10:40 PM »
Sven:


I am looking forward to what you've found on the third course at The Greenbrier.  I saw an aerial photo of it when we interviewed for the consulting job there years ago, and it was far more interesting to me to look at than Old White, because they had already used all the templates next door and had to go deeper into the bag for some new ideas.


I had assumed those further ideas were Macdonald's, since Raynor never did go to the UK to find any template ideas of his own, but I didn't get to stare at the aerial photo long enough to see if I could identify where they were from.

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #65 on: September 22, 2019, 02:13:09 PM »
restovation


Dan:


I am surprised a journalist would use a bullshit marketing word, that's not in the dictionary.


Gee, I thought it was *my* word.


For the record, no one else I know is using it. Jim Urbina certainly isn’t.


“Restoration/renovation” isn’t in the dictionary, either.


"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #66 on: September 22, 2019, 03:30:48 PM »

Gee, I thought it was *my* word.

For the record, no one else I know is using it. Jim Urbina certainly isn’t.

“Restoration/renovation” isn’t in the dictionary, either.


I've seen it a couple of other places.  I think it's been used to describe Gil Hanse's work at Pinehurst #4, but not certain it was for that course.


I am just hyper-sensitive to projects that sort of pretend to be restorations, but then aren't.  [I have no idea what is proposed for Midland Hills.]

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #67 on: September 23, 2019, 09:37:46 AM »
"Restovation" probably originated in the building trades. It was used to describe the blend of work done on an old 1700's/1800's home to bring it up to modern standards, hopefully without overly affecting the original.


I first heard it when I worked with a restorer of old houses in the early 1980s. 
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #68 on: September 23, 2019, 10:35:02 AM »
Sven:


I am looking forward to what you've found on the third course at The Greenbrier.  I saw an aerial photo of it when we interviewed for the consulting job there years ago, and it was far more interesting to me to look at than Old White, because they had already used all the templates next door and had to go deeper into the bag for some new ideas.


I had assumed those further ideas were Macdonald's, since Raynor never did go to the UK to find any template ideas of his own, but I didn't get to stare at the aerial photo long enough to see if I could identify where they were from.


Tom:


I've added in some aerials, plans and articles to the Greenbrier No. 3 listing.  On No. 3 there are a number of templates, including a Sahara, Cape, Biarritz, Punch Bowl, Eden and Redan (there are probably others).


I am curious as to what you mean by "going deeper into the bag for some new ideas."  Is the thought that even the new holes borrowed concepts from other famous holes not included in what we consider their standard group of inspirations?  If anything, the descriptions of the new holes read as originals. 


Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting you don't think Raynor had the capability to create originals from a blank canvas, and only CBM had those skills.


Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #69 on: September 23, 2019, 11:15:00 AM »
I played the Bolstad course probably 75 times in 1980, and still remember it quite well.  Real interested to read more about Raynor's work on it, because while the article says it has 6 templates, I can't think of any there.  As at Forest Park in St. Louis, maybe the course I played differed significantly from what the article describes.  Perhaps #14 is sort of a cape??

Raynor is certainly not shy about his accomplishments.  In this article he names Bolstad as among the finest layouts in the country, and earlier he pronounced Forest Park as the best public course in America.


Jim,


You are confusing two courses.


The Les Bolstad U of M course had no association with Raynor. It was designed by Tom Vardon.


Across the street from the Bolstad course is my home course, Midland Hills CC, which was originally called University Golf Club — and WAS designed by Seth Raynor.

I would be happy to host you (or anyone else) and show you the numerous template holes, as we prepare for Jim Urbina’s restovation next fall.


Dan



Dan:


Jim's comments were due to a mistake I made by putting in a separate listing for the Univ.of Minnesota/Les Bolstad course which has since been deleted. 


Sven
« Last Edit: September 25, 2019, 11:20:40 AM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Bret Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #70 on: September 25, 2019, 10:28:48 AM »

Sven,


I am including two maps posted earlier in the thread.  As you can see the Greenbrier's nine-hole course on the 1923 plan is different from Findlay's original design shown in the 1914 map.  As indicated in the articles you posted, land was needed on the nine-hole course to make the new No. 3 course.  Findlay's layout was approximately 2,500 yards and the 1923 nine-hole course was closer to 2,000 yards.


If the aerial you posted is from 1922, then it clearly shows the newer version of the nine-hole course.  You can see the second and third green hugging the lake.  The only real difference is 1 and 9 have been flipped in relation to the 1923 layout.  I have seen a reference in the 1929 and 1930 American Annual Golf Guide that suggests the No. 2 course was established in 1918.  There is an article in 1922 mentioning the new nine-hole course was recently opened, but it mentions there are already two Raynor Macdonald courses.  Some of the articles on Greenbrier are a little confusing and conflicting with their information.  The club itself believes Raynor came to the course in 1923 to make improvements to the No. 1 course, construct the No. 3 course and make adjustments to the No. 2 course.  If anyone has a more definitive date for the nine-hole course, I'd love to see it.


1914 Map:
1923 Map:



Bret

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #71 on: September 25, 2019, 10:51:59 AM »

I am curious as to what you mean by "going deeper into the bag for some new ideas."  Is the thought that even the new holes borrowed concepts from other famous holes not included in what we consider their standard group of inspirations?  If anything, the descriptions of the new holes read as originals. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting you don't think Raynor had the capability to create originals from a blank canvas, and only CBM had those skills.



Correction:  I don't think Raynor had the capability to borrow other holes from the U.K., since he was never there.

I've seen several references over the years to the fact that CBM had notes on a bunch of other holes [or parts of holes] from the U.K. that he admired.  However, since he was so liberal about attributing his holes to the places he'd found them, because he liked having the classical connections, I had assumed that anything he didn't single out was his own idea.  Until I started recognizing holes that CBM had failed to acknowledge.  Over the years, I've discovered a few examples of this. 

For one, Macdonald never referred in print to borrowing the 4th hole at Scotscraig as his "knoll" hole, but a friend of mine who grew up in Scotscraig played with me at Piping Rock and noticed the similarities, and now that is accepted dogma. 

For another, when I was out at Lundin Links, to have a look at the Leven hole -- I can't remember whether it was the trip with Jim Urbina and Mike Keiser, or the previous one with George Bahto and Eric Iverson and Don Placek -- the similarities between the par-4 that follows the Leven hole and the 16th at The National Golf Links of America just smacked me in the face.  I am 99% sure that Macdonald was thinking of that hole when he built National.

And then there was the Cape hole, which Macdonald claimed to have invented, but the diagonal tee shot on it is very reminiscent of the 10th at Westward Ho!, which [IIRC] Devereux Emmet surveyed for Macdonald on one of his trips to the U.K.  Maybe Macdonald just didn't attribute them, because Scotscraig didn't have the same cachet as Prestwick and St. Andrews and [oddly] Biarritz.


The problem was, Macdonald was only building 18 holes at a time, so he couldn't use all of the concepts he'd liked in his travels abroad, and he had some very strong favorites.  And since Macdonald never even mentioned some of those antecedents in print, did Raynor even know where they came from, or that they weren't Macdonald's own ideas?  You would have to bet on "no", wouldn't you?

This was exacerbated to whatever extent that Raynor had taken over the routing process, because Raynor only knew the holes that he had built with C.B.  He could not incorporate some different ideas from Macdonald's notes, because he wasn't familiar enough with them.

I thought if there was anyplace where Macdonald might have gone further into his bag of concepts he loved from the U.K., it would have been at The Greenbrier, where they built two courses side by side.

If the "other" holes on that course are really "originals", then they could just as easily have been Raynor's ideas instead of Macdonald's.  [Who really knows?]  But if they were, in fact, Macdonald's holes, I would bet on them being adaptations of something instead of "originals".


And, just for argument's sake, I hope that you will highlight all of the original Raynor holes you come across in this terrific thread.  I've never sat down and tried to analyze how many of them there were.  The first couple that come to mind were entries in the Country Life magazine contest that CBM and Raynor borrowed when building Lido, and that's a curious definition of "original".  Was Raynor's Prize Dogleg an entry submitted by Seth Raynor, or was it someone else's design that Raynor liked?

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #72 on: September 25, 2019, 11:39:28 AM »

Sven,


I am including two maps posted earlier in the thread.  As you can see the Greenbrier's nine-hole course on the 1923 plan is different from Findlay's original design shown in the 1914 map.  As indicated in the articles you posted, land was needed on the nine-hole course to make the new No. 3 course.  Findlay's layout was approximately 2,500 yards and the 1923 nine-hole course was closer to 2,000 yards.


If the aerial you posted is from 1922, then it clearly shows the newer version of the nine-hole course.  You can see the second and third green hugging the lake.  The only real difference is 1 and 9 have been flipped in relation to the 1923 layout.  I have seen a reference in the 1929 and 1930 American Annual Golf Guide that suggests the No. 2 course was established in 1918.  There is an article in 1922 mentioning the new nine-hole course was recently opened, but it mentions there are already two Raynor Macdonald courses.  Some of the articles on Greenbrier are a little confusing and conflicting with their information.  The club itself believes Raynor came to the course in 1923 to make improvements to the No. 1 course, construct the No. 3 course and make adjustments to the No. 2 course.  If anyone has a more definitive date for the nine-hole course, I'd love to see it.


1914 Map:
1923 Map:



Bret


Bret:

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote above, and I definitely think work was done to the No. 2 course around the time when Raynor was working on No. 3, as the 1st and 18th holes of the No. 3 course overlap with part of the old 9 holer.  I just haven't seen anything the definitively links that work to SR.

The No. 2 course was very much just a practice course, one where beginners and children would cut their teeth.  It wouldn't surprise me if whatever happened to it was more of an after thought, with the experts left to focus on the big courses.  It also wouldn't surprise me if Raynor's team handled the reshuffling that was done.  I just haven't seen anything noting that to be the case, and the fact that the articles that covered the work done there in the early 1920's mention the Old White and No. 3 work without saying anything about No. 2 makes it a bit suspicious.

It probably makes sense to lay out specifically what we know about the No. 2 Course here.

April 17, 1910 Times Dispatch notes Alexander Findlay accompanied by Mr. Pickering visited last month to lay out the new 9 hole 2,735 foot course. 

July 1912 Golf Magazine notes new 9 hole 2,820 yard course was laid out by A. H. Findlay and F. G. Pickering with plans to add 9 more in 1913. 

Aug. 1912 Golf Magazine notes new 9 hole course.   

July 1913 Golf Magazine notes White Sulphur Springs 18 hole course was laid out by Alex Findlay. 

Oct. 1914 Golf Illustrated notes old 9 hole course to remain open while new 18 hole course is built. 

Oct. 1914 Golf Magazine notes an 18 hole new course and and a 9 hole course that is comprised of the best holes of the old 18 hole course. 

Oct. 1915 Golf Illustrated notes first course at the resort was of 9 holes which was later extended to 18. 

1916, 1917, 1920 Annual Guides - 9 hole 2,487 yard course

1921 Annual Guide - 9 hole 2,210 yard course

1923, 1925, 1926, 1927 and 1928 Annual Guides - 9 hole 2,740 yard course

Sept. 1924 Golf Illustrated notes this as a 9 hole course. 

1929 and 1931 Annual Guides - 9 hole 1,972 yard course

May 1931 and Feb. 1932 Golf Illustrated note the No. 2 course as a 9 holer.

The quick story seems to read an early 18 hole course which was shortened to 9 when the Old White was built.  That 9 holer was briefly shortened by a couple of hundred yards around the time the No. 2 course was being built, and then subsequently lengthened a couple of years later before being significantly truncated in the late 1920's.
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #73 on: September 25, 2019, 12:23:33 PM »

I am curious as to what you mean by "going deeper into the bag for some new ideas."  Is the thought that even the new holes borrowed concepts from other famous holes not included in what we consider their standard group of inspirations?  If anything, the descriptions of the new holes read as originals. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting you don't think Raynor had the capability to create originals from a blank canvas, and only CBM had those skills.



Correction:  I don't think Raynor had the capability to borrow other holes from the U.K., since he was never there.

I've seen several references over the years to the fact that CBM had notes on a bunch of other holes [or parts of holes] from the U.K. that he admired.  However, since he was so liberal about attributing his holes to the places he'd found them, because he liked having the classical connections, I had assumed that anything he didn't single out was his own idea.  Until I started recognizing holes that CBM had failed to acknowledge.  Over the years, I've discovered a few examples of this. 

For one, Macdonald never referred in print to borrowing the 4th hole at Scotscraig as his "knoll" hole, but a friend of mine who grew up in Scotscraig played with me at Piping Rock and noticed the similarities, and now that is accepted dogma. 

For another, when I was out at Lundin Links, to have a look at the Leven hole -- I can't remember whether it was the trip with Jim Urbina and Mike Keiser, or the previous one with George Bahto and Eric Iverson and Don Placek -- the similarities between the par-4 that follows the Leven hole and the 16th at The National Golf Links of America just smacked me in the face.  I am 99% sure that Macdonald was thinking of that hole when he built National.

And then there was the Cape hole, which Macdonald claimed to have invented, but the diagonal tee shot on it is very reminiscent of the 10th at Westward Ho!, which [IIRC] Devereux Emmet surveyed for Macdonald on one of his trips to the U.K.  Maybe Macdonald just didn't attribute them, because Scotscraig didn't have the same cachet as Prestwick and St. Andrews and [oddly] Biarritz.


The problem was, Macdonald was only building 18 holes at a time, so he couldn't use all of the concepts he'd liked in his travels abroad, and he had some very strong favorites.  And since Macdonald never even mentioned some of those antecedents in print, did Raynor even know where they came from, or that they weren't Macdonald's own ideas?  You would have to bet on "no", wouldn't you?

This was exacerbated to whatever extent that Raynor had taken over the routing process, because Raynor only knew the holes that he had built with C.B.  He could not incorporate some different ideas from Macdonald's notes, because he wasn't familiar enough with them.

I thought if there was anyplace where Macdonald might have gone further into his bag of concepts he loved from the U.K., it would have been at The Greenbrier, where they built two courses side by side.

If the "other" holes on that course are really "originals", then they could just as easily have been Raynor's ideas instead of Macdonald's.  [Who really knows?]  But if they were, in fact, Macdonald's holes, I would bet on them being adaptations of something instead of "originals".


And, just for argument's sake, I hope that you will highlight all of the original Raynor holes you come across in this terrific thread.  I've never sat down and tried to analyze how many of them there were.  The first couple that come to mind were entries in the Country Life magazine contest that CBM and Raynor borrowed when building Lido, and that's a curious definition of "original".  Was Raynor's Prize Dogleg an entry submitted by Seth Raynor, or was it someone else's design that Raynor liked?


Tom:


I find that when we discuss the templates, the focus is often on how CBM and/or Raynor replicated the features of the inspirations, as opposed to how CBM and Raynor created holes that asked the golfer to hit a variety of different types of shots.  Just think about what MacDonald was saying when he called the short par 4 12th at Biarritz a poor hole, but walked away with the concept for a par 3.


It is the variety of experiences throughout a round that stand out to me in their designs.  The templates certainly serve as a guideline to help with this, but it is how they placed those holes on every different piece of land, and then how they worked the gaps between the obvious spots that shows their real genius.


Perhaps with respect to Raynor, Shoreacres serves as the best example of what I'm trying to describe above (and probably a good start for looking at Raynor originals).  The stretch from 10 to 15 is as good as it gets for me out there.  I'd call 10 and 14 pretty "pure" applications of the template model, but the rest stand out as inspired adaptations, using what the terrain gave him.  And those four holes (11, 12, 13 and 15) are some of my favorites on the course.  My first play there I remember the sense of awe that arose on the first pass through that stretch.  Not only for how he was able to use the natural features, but for the judgment each shot on those holes demanded, without any repetition of what was being asked of me. 


With that being said, I really have no idea what they did at the Greenbrier No. 3 course.  We've probably lost that story to time.  But I do feel that they could have used many of the same concepts, on different land, with perhaps a few "gap" holes thrown in and created a course that would have felt different than what had been done at the Old White.  This course is really a prime example of how much we don't know about their working relationship.  At this point was CBM more of just a name, leaving most of the work to Raynor.  Of after Raynor had spent months on property mapping and planning, did he then run everything by MacDonald?  Hopefully, this thread can shine a bit of light on those questions.


Sven
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Bret Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Re-engineering Raynor
« Reply #74 on: September 25, 2019, 01:25:57 PM »

Sven,


I am including two maps posted earlier in the thread.  As you can see the Greenbrier's nine-hole course on the 1923 plan is different from Findlay's original design shown in the 1914 map.  As indicated in the articles you posted, land was needed on the nine-hole course to make the new No. 3 course.  Findlay's layout was approximately 2,500 yards and the 1923 nine-hole course was closer to 2,000 yards.


If the aerial you posted is from 1922, then it clearly shows the newer version of the nine-hole course.  You can see the second and third green hugging the lake.  The only real difference is 1 and 9 have been flipped in relation to the 1923 layout.  I have seen a reference in the 1929 and 1930 American Annual Golf Guide that suggests the No. 2 course was established in 1918.  There is an article in 1922 mentioning the new nine-hole course was recently opened, but it mentions there are already two Raynor Macdonald courses.  Some of the articles on Greenbrier are a little confusing and conflicting with their information.  The club itself believes Raynor came to the course in 1923 to make improvements to the No. 1 course, construct the No. 3 course and make adjustments to the No. 2 course.  If anyone has a more definitive date for the nine-hole course, I'd love to see it.


1914 Map:
1923 Map:



Bret


Bret:

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote above, and I definitely think work was done to the No. 2 course around the time when Raynor was working on No. 3, as the 1st and 18th holes of the No. 3 course overlap with part of the old 9 holer.  I just haven't seen anything the definitively links that work to SR.

The No. 2 course was very much just a practice course, one where beginners and children would cut their teeth.  It wouldn't surprise me if whatever happened to it was more of an after thought, with the experts left to focus on the big courses.  It also wouldn't surprise me if Raynor's team handled the reshuffling that was done.  I just haven't seen anything noting that to be the case, and the fact that the articles that covered the work done there in the early 1920's mention the Old White and No. 3 work without saying anything about No. 2 makes it a bit suspicious.

It probably makes sense to lay out specifically what we know about the No. 2 Course here.

April 17, 1910 Times Dispatch notes Alexander Findlay accompanied by Mr. Pickering visited last month to lay out the new 9 hole 2,735 foot course. 

July 1912 Golf Magazine notes new 9 hole 2,820 yard course was laid out by A. H. Findlay and F. G. Pickering with plans to add 9 more in 1913. 

Aug. 1912 Golf Magazine notes new 9 hole course.   

July 1913 Golf Magazine notes White Sulphur Springs 18 hole course was laid out by Alex Findlay. 

Oct. 1914 Golf Illustrated notes old 9 hole course to remain open while new 18 hole course is built. 

Oct. 1914 Golf Magazine notes an 18 hole new course and and a 9 hole course that is comprised of the best holes of the old 18 hole course. 

Oct. 1915 Golf Illustrated notes first course at the resort was of 9 holes which was later extended to 18. 

1916, 1917, 1920 Annual Guides - 9 hole 2,487 yard course

1921 Annual Guide - 9 hole 2,210 yard course

1923, 1925, 1926, 1927 and 1928 Annual Guides - 9 hole 2,740 yard course

Sept. 1924 Golf Illustrated notes this as a 9 hole course. 

1929 and 1931 Annual Guides - 9 hole 1,972 yard course

May 1931 and Feb. 1932 Golf Illustrated note the No. 2 course as a 9 holer.

The quick story seems to read an early 18 hole course which was shortened to 9 when the Old White was built.  That 9 holer was briefly shortened by a couple of hundred yards around the time the No. 2 course was being built, and then subsequently lengthened a couple of years later before being significantly truncated in the late 1920's.


Sven,


Thanks for your response. I agree that the yardages are all over the place throughout the 20's.  It makes me wonder if the 1st, 2nd, 17th and 18th of No. 3 were built earlier and incorporated into the nine hole course before they ever built No. 3?


You can throw this story into the mix as well.
1923 publication titled White Sulphur Springs-A Brief History by Quintard Taylor.



Bret

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back