https://golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/morrison-wayne-a-comparison-and-contrast-of-the-donald-ross-and-william-flynn-routing-plans-for-the-country-club-of-York/Wayne Morrison's newest contribution to GolfClubAtlas represents a
f-a-s-c-i-n-a-t-i-n-g comparison of William Flynn's proposed routing for Country Club of York against Donald Ross’s that was actually implemented.
The storyline is one that is not often repeated. Here are two grand masters, both renowned for their superb ability to route. They are given the identical parcel of land and each produces a routing, the documents of which have weathered the test of time. In theory, it would hardly be surprising if the two routings had multiple points in common but they have shockingly few. Indeed, they share only two (!) similar playing corridors in the same direction.
Wayne and his co-authors Messers Crosby, Disher and Green (Andrew Green is the consulting architect at CCY) show how Ross radiates holes from the flat central plateau that Flynn uses to build ... a practice field! Meanwhile, Flynn eschewed the central plateau and headed into the most rambunctious portion of the property to build holes with the most convoluted land tending to be in the middle of the holes. As Wayne notes, Flynn focuses on the northeast ridge which
' serves as a hub for several holes that traverse the severest topographical features on the property.' Flynn was also unafraid to build greens in some of the low-lying areas. Meanwhile, Ross shies away from the property's most rugged portion, sometimes sticking closer to the perimeter where the land was tamer and then layered on some pretty darn zippy greens.
After you peruse this presentation, I imagine you will agree with their conclusion that Ross's course was easier to walk and Flynn's would have been more dramatic. Which would you prefer? Happily, there is no correct answer, which helps explain why golf architecture is endlessly fascinating. Heck, the answer might even vary with your age. This case study also might prompt you one rainy day to muse about what Flynn would have done at Seminole and Ross at Shinnecock Hills, for instance. Impossible to imagine either being better but … still, this piece sets in motion some mental gymnastics.
So much of a course's quality hinges on its routing but it's a subject that is only now coming to the fore. Everyone awaits Tom Doak's long forthcoming book on what is arguably architecture's single most important - and least discussed - subject. For now, have fun and dig your teeth into this analysis (which is somewhat shorter
than Wayne and Tom Paul’s 2,400 page disc entitled
The Nature Faker on William Flynn). It is intellectually stimulating even if, like me, you have never been to the Country Club of York.
You might think Flynn was from Mars and Ross from Venus, which simply wasn’t the case. Both shared far more in common (great routers, adept at shifting hole directions, low profile tees, move minimal dirt from tee to green, fit bunkers into landforms where possible, great green complexes, strategy) than not. Bottom line: Their courses
always looked at peace with the land and they both found ways to do so here, albeit in wildly different ways.
Best,
P.S. This kind of compare and contrast is made for GolfClubAtlas - if anyone has something similar, please, please, please shoot me an email.