[GeoffreyC]

The Tragedy of Yale – Hole #4

We skip hole #3 for the time being but we will return to this hole with a surprise image at a later date. There are no bunkers on #3 for Mr. Rulewich to dumb down but the superintendent (Harry Meusel) did move the green long ago.  The new green shown in this image of Ran’s taken during our May 2001 Yale GCA outing shows the lifeless small IHOP pancake away from the water and out of character with the originals in contour and size.  This hole was mistakenly thought to be Raynor’s alps hole by some including me until George filled me in on the original green and on the butchering of hole #12 (alps) by Harry as well.



Hole #’s 2, 3, 4, 5 and 15 can be seen on this blow up of the Yale old aerial used by Rulewich for this “restoration”.  



The fourth hole at Yale is our Road hole.  The hole plays 430 yards; however, there is room directly behind the tee to extend it a lot if needed.  I believe Ben Crenshaw called the 4th at Yale one of the finest uses of water as a hazard off the tee that he could recollect. The water begins about 230 off the tee where the fairway narrows and placement of the drive becomes strategic. Unfortunately, the longest of hitters can take it over the water which is why I mentioned the additional land behind the current tee.

The road bunker dominates the second shot to the green which is at a mirror image angle to the Road Hole at St.Andrews. Below is an old construction image of the 4th at Yale.



Note the steep angles and how tight to the slopes and green the bunkering is placed. Imagine the old pot bunker placed tight into the hollow against the green. This is a fierce greensite which not too long ago required hitting sideways or backwards out of in some circumstances.

Now let us see the results of Roger Rulewich’s “restoration” work.  Recall Mr. Rulewich’s quote from his reply to the article in Golfweek (“A landmark gone askew”) where he says in his own words “The bunker renovation started in 1998 after reviewing hundreds of construction pictures and several aerial photos of the entire course taken since 1934”.  Well now- above you can see the aerial and a construction photo.

This is Roger Rulwich’s version of the restored Road bunker on #4! This is a revised version because on his first attempt he “wanted to see sand” so he freekin flashed the sand up the face. He was told to change it and this is his corrected shallow lifeless revision


Do these greenside slopes look like the original shown above?

For comparison let us look at some other Road Bunkers
#17 at St Andrews- the original


National Golf Links of America #7


Piping Rock


The other bunkers are no better. The left side bunkers at Yale #4 are/were supposed to mimic the road behind the 17th at St. Andrews. From the aerial image seen above, they were intact although the angle is not ideal.

Here is what the “road” looks like at NGLA (thanks Mike Sweeney)


At Yale, Mr. Rulewich “restored” them as seen below




So what do you think?  By the way, these needed repair because drainage pipes popped up through the sand.

There is also a right rear bunker on #4 at Yale (see old photos above).  Here is the “restored” right rear bunker.


Well- this is our road hole today after work by Mr. Rulewich. Hole #4 was voted one of the best 500 holes in America. Did it get the respect and care it deserved?

[George Pazin]

I think this is probably the best documentation of the worst hole seen yet. Very sad.

[Rick Shefchik]

Never having played Yale, and knowing nothing abut Mr. Rulewich, his previous work or his mandate at Yale, and being very reluctant to criticize someone's professional endeavors on the internet (via pictures, no less), I nevertheless have to conclude that these bunkers are Godawful.

[Scott_Burroughs]

This is a continuation of the gathering of evidence for the attorneys on the board to file suit oon behalf of Yale against RR for willful property damage, defamation, libel, breach of contract, whatever.

The minimum damages should be the money spent to do this garbage and to get a restraining order from the property.

[Francis Macomber]

The photos offered so far in this series rank as the most
profoundly disturbing GCA related images I have ever laid
eyes upon.  

I honestly kind of feel sorry for anybody who attempts
to defend the work on display at Yale as a restoration.

Francis

[Dan Kelly]

I echo my colleague Mr. Shefchik.

Those bunkers look like what you might find on some nothing 9-hole municipal in the middle of nowhere.

You SURE Mike Sweeney's kids didn't do 'em?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Dan,

Give Mike's kids more credit than that!

[Mike_Sweeney]

I would like to provide some balance:

#1
__________________________________________________
Scott "This is a continuation of the gathering of evidence for the attorneys on the board to file suit oon behalf of Yale against RR for willful property damage, defamation, libel, breach of contract, whatever."

Scott,

Boards don't typically file lawsuits against themselves. I am not defending RR, but he is not the only one to blame here.
__________________________________________________

#2 The 4th @ Yale is famous via Ben Crenshaw who called it one of the great driving holes. Fortunately there are no fairway bunkers on # 4, nor many on the entire course.

#3 I was up there on Sunday, and the new Super, Scott from The Orchards, has painted new lines on some greens extending the putting surfaces. Specifcally here on #4, he is widening it to the right. This guy deserves a chance and condeming the whole place is not fair.

I have said it before, fix the bunkers (and a green or two), but lets not kill everyone.

PS. I am working on the kids, but I think they could do better with some Bahto coaching.

[GeoffreyC]

Dan-  

Mike Sweeney is a good buddy of mine and I play golf with him often.  Why do you insist on insulting his children?  What did he ever do to you?  

This whole idea of the work to the front nine being a restoration is a bunch of revisionist lies as a result of Brad Klein's article in the September 27th 2003 issue of Golfweek (shameless plug for all to go out and buy the magazine). Mr Rulewich striking back at that article was his way of defending the work done to the whole course now that it is finished.

As we stated before there was no master plan.  There was no vision.  This project started as an individual bunker by bunker patch-up for maintenance, fast play and to have sand under the ball for collegiate events so they were not embarassed by conditions.     When some poor soul paid $5000 Mr. Rulewich would come in and build one of these beauties I've shown you. However, his letter of rebuttal to Golfweek insists that he consulted the aerials and construction photos right from the getgo in 1998 to guide his work. I'm going to document that work here on GCA.

The true effort at "restoration" only started with the back nine when John Beinecke was shown this front nine work (by me) and he agreed to begin a new project.  

The pity and crime of all this is to me that Mr. Rulewich would agree to this plan and work under these conditions in the first place.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Scott,

Boards don't typically file lawsuits against themselves. I am not defending RR, but he is not the only one to blame here

Sorry for the confusion, Mike.  I meant this board, GCA.com's Message Board/DG, with it's abundance of attorneys.

[GeoffreyC]

Scott and others

I too would like to reiterate Mike Sweeney's message that the new superintendent is a good step in the right direction.  He is expanding greens and fairways. Turf conditions are improved.

In addition, the arrogant Yale administration especially within the athletic department headed by Tom Beckett share a GREAT DEAL of the blame for this tragedy. They do not realize the landmark that they oversee. They approved and initiated this work to the front nine.  Mr. Rulewich as an architect and Yale alumnus should have known better then to actually follow through on these requests for individual new bunkers. Of course now in 2003 he insists that he used the aerials and construction photos.  I will leave it up to the readers which conclusion is worse- his accepting this job to dumb down the course like this or this really represents his best attempt at restoration  

[Bruce Katona]

Hving played the course for the first time this summer and viewing the above photo's of "before" and "after", I pose the following question:

Was drainage a concern with the original very vertical (deep)bunkers?  The horizontal shape of bunkers is easily manipulated with the cutting of sod, but did the Raynor bunkers trap water as they were very deep?  If there is no way to daylight water out of a bunker , nor a place lower than the bottom of the bunker to drain via subsurface piping, the new bunkers could be a result of this type of site condition.

Guys, if the original site pictures and air photos exist, it's not that difficult to rebuild was was originally there.  We may get into a debate if some faction believes work done to be "unfair", "penal", "not in keeping with the original design " or whatever, but the hazards can be placed fairly easily in the correct two dimensional location and shape.

[Jeff Fortson]

One word.....

abominable



Jeff F.

[Mike_Sweeney]

bkatona,

A friend of mine at Winged Foot made the same point to me recently. Tom Fazio fixed the bunkers at Winged Foot (isn't that right Tommy, I feel a separate thread coming ) from previous problems and the members are happy. However, Winged Foot has deep pockets, and please nobody quote the size of Yale's endowment fund. Also there are egos in the way.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Wow! I hate to judge based on photos, but that work leaves a lot to be desired! Does anyone think that's good work? I've seen better bunker work on 9 hole tracks in the middle of nowhere West Texas.

[SPDB]

This one is a real tragedy, simply because it would require so little in the way work to make it represent its original state. What is so difficult about digging bunkers to their original depth, it was done at Merion. If Fazio can do it, anybody can.

Geoff - the picture of the original hole (I assume during construction) is confusing and doesn't really add much to determining restoration limits. Do you have one that shows the completed hole (possibly from a similar angle)?

[George_Bahto]

I'm sure many of you can see more clearly why we are so upset  --  this should not happen to a muni, let alone a landmark golf course

[Steve Lang]

 

$5k a hole doesn't buy much.. does it?

Perhaps the GCA Golfing Society should file a class action suit!

[GeoffreyC]

More from Roger Rulewich's letter of rebuttal to Brad Klein's article in Golfweek.

This is a direct quote from Mr. Rulewich- I was planning to use this quote on hole #5 which we will address shortly but someone mentioned bunker depth here.

"All of the other sand bunkers have now been repaired with improved drainage and new sand. The style of flat sand areas and grass banks have been preserved. The grass slopes have not been softened - they were left undisturbed in most every case when the bunker repair was done. The steepness is not gone and depths have not been compromised. In several cases they were excavated to bedrock. They could hardly have been deeper! Only the floor of the front bunker on no. 5 was raised a foot to help it drain and keep it from becoming a water hazard after every heavy rain."

Those in the business please reply- Are there modern methods besides making the bunkers shallower then they were to allow for good drainage?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sean, I wish you would stop trying to spin it that the bunkers at Merion are a good thing. They aren't even close to being right. You know it.

[tonyt]

We sometimes get a bit tough on people here, and convict without seeing things for ourselves.

But every now and then, some work comes along that even with just photos, makes it easy for us to do so!

Huck, was it you who defended Yale based on it still being very enjoyable? If this course wasn't Yale, I agree with you that it would most likely be an absolute joy to play. But anyone knowing anything of it's past or understanding of it's significance MUST cry and MUST be devastated and MUST not counter some of the comments we've made in a few threads here. This stuff is tragic.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Also, I see great parallels of stupidity from both Yale and Merion when looking at these photos.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Tony T
THANK HEAVENS SOMEONE GETS IT!

The same you just said goes for Merion, and I'll stop here with my tirade because this isn't about Merion, it's about YALE.

I haven't seen the new Merion in person. But he pictures say enough.

[THuckaby2]

TonyT - check your IM.
Thanks.
TH

[kwl]

one thought. technicolor yawn.

those bunkers around 4 green are it! poster children for bunkers with disabilities.

thanks for the methodical analysis and updates. i played yale often during my tenure in new haven. i am glad i have memories, because i don't want to go back until the problems are fixed. akin to seeing an old girlfriend after 60 lbs or beat-up old car that you know was somebodies dream, one day long ago.

real question, which i think you are getting at, how do we generate the enthusiasm and support to effect change? i would start with the bunkers on 4.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()