Courses that have not been altered.

[Peter Flory]

I don't believe there have been any significant changes to Lawsonia which remains a wonderful place to play and learn.

That was the first one that came to my mind as well. 

I believe that the 1st hole there was originally a par 5 and the tee was back by the putting green- and maybe the 5th was a par 4 and had the tee pushed back to preserve the overall par when they converted 1 to a par 4 (based on an early scorecard and/or photo that I saw posted in the clubhouse there).  I'm looking at a 1937 aerial now and it shows the current configuration... so maybe I'm wrong.  That or they made the change very early after opening. 


And it is a rare example of a course that now has fewer trees than when it was originally built.  But very unchanged overall. 

[Duncan Cheslett]

Reddish Vale is a perfect example of a club formed in the countryside by Edwardian gentlemen which subsequently found itself on the wrong side of town surrounded by social housing.


As a result the club has never enjoyed the prestige or financial comfort enjoyed by clubs with lesser courses in more salubrious areas.


Happily, the upshot of this is that egotistical greens chairmen have never had the funds available to mess the course up too much. Damage had been limited to tree planting and bunkers being grassed over. With the exception of Braid’s new 16th hole in 1930 and some landfill work on the 4th in the 1960s the original MacKenzie course is completely intact - greens and all.


Had more money been available over the last 100 years I’m sure this wouldn’t be the case.

[Jon Wiggett]

Duncan,


wasn't the 18th also altered a bit?

[Sean_A]

How do people know if courses have been altered or not? Especially greens? There seems to be a nostalgia about original most anything. Because people seem to want golf courses to be original they declare it so without knowing for sure.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Be nice to play a course with the clubs and ball that was used when the course was opened. Not just yee olde era courses either. Might be a bit of a surprise and quite a challenge.
Atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

How do people know if courses have been altered or not? Especially greens? There seems to be a nostalgia about original most anything. Because people seem to want golf courses to be original they declare it so without knowing for sure.

Ciao

There's often history that tells as much. But also there's usually been much more tinkering than people tend to realise.

When it comes to old links courses, it's often easy(ish) to guess what approximate era a green design / shape comes from even if there isn't any history.

If I take my home club, the routing skeleton is very similar to the 1890's. But there were many changes in the 1920's, instigated by Cairnes, most likely at the suggestion of a 1919 Colt report (since lost). Most of the green sites orginate from then although there has been green design tinkering over the years, especially by Hawtree in the early 2000's on at least 3 of them. Plus the addition of a new 8th green by Morrison in 1938 and a new 6th green by Fred Hawtree in 1969. However, the course as we know it is primarily routing 1890's and detail 1920's.

[Ari Techner]

I grew up at an old Donald Ross course outside Detroit that claimed it was 100% authentic and original Ross and had never been changed. So much so that they still had dirt in the bunkers and had never replaced it with modern sand because "that's what was in the bunkers when Ross left".  As a kid I never questioned it, I just accepted this as fact. As I got older and looked into it more I found out that atleast 2 greens had been moved or significantly changed since Ross left amongst other things.  So while this is a great talking point I'd bet it's rarely if ever true for a course of that age. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think the place to look is rural courses that have never had any money to upgrade.  Many years ago, Ron Whitten and I took a few detours around Kansas and found a few courses that still had sand greens.


That said, I doubt there are many truly unchanged courses.  For example, when we were retained to match Dick Nugent's style when renovating the second nine at Dornick Hills in OK, a bit of research showed the greens had been rebuilt at least once before that, and not apparently with any architectural help.  And of course, they did it again around 1985 with Nugent and a few years later with us.


Odd ground forms that seemed to show old bunkers were confirmed when we found that now more well known original plan showing the course was originally built in a  CB Mac style.  That didn't matter to them in the 1950's (1956? I think) or 1985 when they rebuilt the course. And this, with the architect buried near their 17th tee.


To save money in tough times? To survive? To follow then modern trends?  To take out "unfair" Maxwell contours? Probably all 4, my guess. 

[Tommy Williamsen]

Reddish Vale is a perfect example of a club formed in the countryside by Edwardian gentlemen which subsequently found itself on the wrong side of town surrounded by social housing.


As a result the club has never enjoyed the prestige or financial comfort enjoyed by clubs with lesser courses in more salubrious areas.


Happily, the upshot of this is that egotistical greens chairmen have never had the funds available to mess the course up too much. Damage had been limited to tree planting and bunkers being grassed over. With the exception of Braid’s new 16th hole in 1930 and some landfill work on the 4th in the 1960s the original MacKenzie course is completely intact - greens and all.


Had more money been available over the last 100 years I’m sure this wouldn’t be the case.

Hi Duncan, I was wondering about RV. Two questions; Was the clubhouse already built when the club built the course? Has 18 changed at all since inception?

[Ian Andrew]

Watching "First Man" does not give you a definitive answer to who Neil Armstrong was ... but most of us talk about golf course histories with that level of research. Our views are shaped by second hand accounts. Unless you've been down the rabbit hole looking for "all" the information, it's really hard to know what's original and what's not. And even when you do, there's a point where you forced - if working on a course - to speculate on some of the missing details. Nothing is ever a 100% clear in research.


Nothing is ever 100% intact ...

[Tommy Williamsen]

Watching "First Man" does not give you a definitive answer to who Neil Armstrong was ... but most of us talk about golf course histories with that level of research. Our views are shaped by second hand accounts. Unless you've been down the rabbit hole looking for "all" the information, it's really hard to know what's original and what's not. And even when you do, there's a point where you forced - if working on a course - to speculate on some of the missing details. Nothing is ever a 100% clear in research.


Nothing is ever 100% intact ...

I would think that bunker size and shape change naturally, mowing lines on and around the green change over time, as well as length of holes. A tree comes down or one goes up. I suggested lengthening a couple of holes where I live many years ago. Very few now know it happened. Even those who were here before the lengthening happened have forgotten it changed.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Hi Duncan, I was wondering about RV. Two questions; Was the clubhouse already built when the club built the course? Has 18 changed at all since inception?

Hi Tom,


Yes, the clubhouse is a late Georgian manor house built for a local industrialist. Similar houses lined the upper reaches of Reddish Vale giving fabulous views down to the river 150 ft below. It was quite a well to do neighbourhood back in the day. Most of the grand houses have now been demolished with a few repurposed as care homes, a pub, or a golf clubhouse.


The 18th retains the same footprint and green, but the steeply climbing fairway was smoothed into a single steady slope in the 1960s instead of the series of terraced steps that pertained previously.

[Thomas Dai]

In some industries it’s the norm when a job is completed for a comprehensive package of say as-built details etc to be handed over from the builder to the client. The level of comprehensiveness of the package being dependent on the business and the project etc.
To what extent is this done in golf? Should it be done more?
Would it be feasible for the architect firm involved to produce a limited production run book detailing many aspects including photos, plans etc of how the course was designed, constructed etc. In the digital age it shouldn’t be difficult to produce and it would be an excellent historical record. A course legacy book.
I believe something like this is already being done by one particular firm of architects in relation to their restorations/renovations etc. Might be a nice little earner too.
Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Thomas,


Contractors usually produce as built drawings, including underground drain and irrigation locations, but with GPS, usually all bunker, green and maybe tee sizes.  Sometimes, a GPS map is used to pay contractors on a unit price basis.


That said, I have never seen one produced with intent to keep the original design.  Like I have said, if there is a feature that is hard to maintain, it will probably be gone within five years.  Most folks just don't care about original design if it is not suiting their purpose.  That includes golfers, green committees, etc.

[Tom_Doak]

Actually, some of the best preserved (at least in terms of not having been altered) golden age golf courses in the United States are from the municipal system.   For the most part, no one had the money to futz with them and minimal monies were available to maintain them.

Very true.  Some of the old holes at Sharp Park are now under the seawall, but most of the holes that still exist in the same spot have never been touched.  They were talking about building new USGA greens to "restore" it and I said, well, why don't we just mow them back out like they used to be, and see how people like that first?  (Sadly, committing to even that much is difficult for the SF Parks Dept.)


When there was a debate about an old bunker location, I asked for a shovel.  It's still there, only a couple of inches under the grass.

[Ally Mcintosh]

That’s why a type of O&M manual is a good idea, describing design intent, showing photographs with mowing lines etc...


Still doesn’t mean it will be followed of course.

[Tom_Doak]

How do people know if courses have been altered or not? Especially greens? There seems to be a nostalgia about original most anything. Because people seem to want golf courses to be original they declare it so without knowing for sure.

Also a good point.


When we were rebuilding the greens at Holston Hills, I was under pressure to soften the slope at the par-3 14th, which was very steep from back to front, and had a horrible false front that they were having trouble mowing.  I felt bad about altering an untouched Donald Ross green.


When the contractor excavated the green, we found an old layer at the front and left of the green, several inches below the current green surface.  It had already been built up once to make it less severe!  And no one at the club had any idea when that had been done, so it was probably fairly long ago.

[mark chalfant]

Schuyler Meadows a superb 1927 design by Emmet and Tull is very well preserved.


Franklin Hills, a vintage Donald Ross gem, had some fairway bunkers removed over the years. I believe they were restored. The rolling course set 20 miles north of Detroit has a great routing and several superb greens.


I wonder if Chicago Golf Club is relatively intact since Raynor's work there in the 1920s?

[Tommy Williamsen]

How do people know if courses have been altered or not? Especially greens? There seems to be a nostalgia about original most anything. Because people seem to want golf courses to be original they declare it so without knowing for sure.

Also a good point.


When we were rebuilding the greens at Holston Hills, I was under pressure to soften the slope at the par-3 14th, which was very steep from back to front, and had a horrible false front that they were having trouble mowing.  I felt bad about altering an untouched Donald Ross green.


When the contractor excavated the green, we found an old layer at the front and left of the green, several inches below the current green surface.  It had already been built up once to make it less severe!  And no one at the club had any idea when that had been done, so it was probably fairly long ago.

Did you change the green? It is pretty severe.Just keep it below the hole. It also seems to be in the shade.

[Peter Pallotta]

"Nothing is ever 100% in tact"

Ian, I assume, is absolutely correct.
And yet: some courses *appear to be* 100% in tact
Might that not be the much more telling, and important, fact and consideration?
An analogy: a great modern course, on the first day of opening and solely because of the skill and craft of the design team, 'looks like it's been there for 100 years', when in fact (in truth) it's brand new.
Well: maybe the truth here is not nearly as important as the fiction -- especially as the 'believable fiction' is a major part of that course's quality and charm. 
It's a trick, yes -- but what's the alternative?
Similarly (though this may be heresy to some): why should anyone care a whit whether or not a course has ever been altered, especially if/when it *looks like* it hasn't been?
After all, G-D didn't create it originally, some architect did, maybe a good one or even a very good one. And if G-D didn't make it to be eternal, it's not, only ever fleeting -- and besides, there's been a lot of very good architects since then.
Maybe the better question for a site like ours is: what courses have been so wonderfully tinkered with by such top-flight talents that they can *fool* even the most experienced eye into believing they've never been altered?
     

[Jon Wiggett]

The 18th retains the same footprint and green, but the steeply climbing fairway was smoothed into a single steady slope in the 1960s instead of the series of terraced steps that pertained previously.

I thought there was something.

[Thomas Dai]

That’s why a type of O&M manual is a good idea, describing design intent, showing photographs with mowing lines etc...
Still doesn’t mean it will be followed of course.

And if it's a new course or a significant change or renovation/restoration turn the manual into a smart limited edition book and sell it to members. Not only will it be good for posterity and history but whenever a change is proposed by some eager beaver there's a formal published document than can be used as evidence to disagree if necessary with the eager beaver and members, rather than just committee folks and those 'down the sheds', should have copies as well. If done nicely such a book ought to be nice little earner too.
atb

[Mike_Trenham]

What about Fishers Island?

[Duncan Cheslett]

I thought there was something.

Yes, I’d forgotten that one!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Duncan, you have been and are a member of two relatively intact Dr. Mac courses. Pretty nice.