[Mike Feeney]

As I drove by, I was forced to wonder, is there any piece of earth-moving equipment, in the Northeast, not at Wannamoisett?
They started in September and are moving quickly.

Can't say I know the goals -- suspect they are:  1. Northeast Amateur competitive viability   2. Receive Top 100 consideration  3. Retrieve Ross'ish design features lost over time

Northeast Amateur is a college-kid Summer event...which means you have to defend against 325+ yard tee shots.  Quite a challenge on an 89 acre, land-locked footprint.  Wanny's defense: Deeply undulating greens, jacked-up to be intensely slick, and now, thanks to reno, utilize pin positions that even wedge shots will have trouble finding.

Was worried the fool's errand of sustaining competitiveness, against increasingly nuclear tee shots, would negatively impact Ross' great work.  This Andrew Green narrated tour of work-in-progress reduced my concerns -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6MHJzzL4PY&t=414s

[Mark_Fine]

“Deeply undulating greens, jacked-up to be intensely slick, and now, thanks to reno, utilize pin positions that even wedge shots will have trouble finding.”
[/size][/color]
[/size]Sounds great!  The high handicappers will love it [/color] [/size]  I have played the course multiple times and it is special.  Hope it doesn’t get over done. [/color]

[Tim Martin]

As I drove by, I was forced to wonder, is there any piece of earth-moving equipment, in the Northeast, not at Wannamoisett?

Mike-I had the same feeling while looking over the fence from Irondequoit in 2019 about Oak Hill East which was also an Andrew Green project. It seemed like there was enough heavy equipment on site to build the Freedom Tower. Of the Ross par 69’s I’ve played it is by far the most difficult to post a score at least for me. Looking forward to seeing the finished product.

[Joe Andriole]

The amount of equipment and men on site more likely reflects a compressed schedule to minimize course closure That was certainly the case at Oak Hill where a phenomenal amount of work was done and only a little course time lost. That project was certainly successful and the course is more playable for the high handicapper.

[Mike_Trenham]

This is no intent to be critical.  Has any course had more talented array of consulting architects over its history? 


If you watch the whole YouTube video it’s clear the most dramatic changes coming are to the greens which have shrunk due to maintenance practices.  Andrew Green basically says the bunkers are past their expected life.


Who can assemble the list of consulting architects that have worked for WCC? 


This is a club with a remarkable amount of Ross drawings and historical photos and I have rarely heard a loud criticism of previous work.

[Tim Martin]

This is no intent to be critical.  Has any course had more talented array of consulting architects over its history? 


If you watch the whole YouTube video it’s clear the most dramatic changes coming are to the greens which have shrunk due to maintenance practices.  Andrew Green basically says the bunkers are past their expected life.


Who can assemble the list of consulting architects that have worked for WCC? 


This is a club with a remarkable amount of Ross drawings and historical photos and I have rarely heard a loud criticism of previous work.

It’s got a terrific set of greens with 2,5,7,9,10,12,15 and 16 as standouts. Some additional pin positions will be of benefit.

[Tim Martin]

Would anyone else like to see the 2nd hole returned to a par 5 as it was on opening day? For that matter what about the 9th which was also a par 5 in the original routing? Both holes require a forced carry on the approach over a gully fronting the green with yardages of 505/456 on 2 and 453/428 on 9. I don’t know when the card went to par 69 though I’m thinking it may have coincided with the advent of the Northeast Amateur. I have no inherent distaste for difficulty but this nine extracts more pain than any I can think of and most especially those interested in keeping a scorecard. Finally why not reinstall one or both holes as par fives for the members and go back to par 69 for the Northeast Amateur? Rant concluded.

[MCirba]

Would anyone else like to see the 2nd hole returned to a par 5 as it was on opening day? For that matter what about the 9th which was also a par 5 in the original routing? Both holes require a forced carry on the approach over a gully fronting the green with yardages of 505/456 on 2 and 453/428 on 9. I don’t know when the card went to par 69 though I’m thinking it may have coincided with the advent of the Northeast Amateur. I have no inherent distaste for difficulty but this nine extracts more pain than any I can think of and most especially those interested in keeping a scorecard. Finally why not reinstall one or both holes as par fives for the members and go back to par 69 for the Northeast Amateur? Rant concluded.

Tim,


I wondered the same, particularly with #2. 


The front nine beats you around the body til you drop your hands, and then goes for the kill shot to the head on #9.

[Mike Feeney]

Intrigued in reading #2 & #9 were designed as par 5's. 

I learned, from the Club's website, Ross had 2 bites at the Wanny apple. "In 1914, Ross first came to Wannamoisett Country Club and redesigned Willie Campbell’s layout into our first 18-hole layout. Twelve years later, in 1926, Ross would return to revamp his initial layout, and provide us with our current championship 18-hole golf course..."


So, I assume when referred to as "original", it is the 1914 Ross design.  When to Tufts Archives and looked at Ross' 1926 hole sketches - https://giventufts.pastperfectonline.com/webobject/59542D1B-C8B7-45D8-9C0C-327271204833 

With the membership looking for a championship course, 2 short'ish 5's, even with 1926 clubs & balls, seems curious. But, they are not pushovers...layup on #2 challenging, #9 not-so-much.

Ross wasn't big on the importance of par and not indicated on 1926 sketches.  The hole's lengths (#2 453 yards / #9 435) combined with the sketched green complexes, larger than I would have thought for short par 5's, thickens-the-plot.  The prevailing wind, being out of the Southeast, would make both #2 & 9 play longer than yardage.  Ross designed other long par 4's on the front, #1 designed as 432 yards and #4 as 440 -- both with prevailing wind support.
2010 course review, here on GCA by then Super Mark Daniels, supports both being par 5's.  He claims 9th was changed to a 5, "...after World War II".  https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/wannamoisett-2
Can someone share other evidence (scorecard, perhaps) of these holes being par 5's?

[Tim Martin]

Mike-The basis for the claim is from the 2010 GCA course review you cited in your last post. It references an opening day date of 1916 rather than 1914.

[Mark_Fine]

Wanna is one example that could be used on that other thread where Ross didn’t get it right the first pass (after redoing Campbell’s course) and came back again for another go.  Things change and so did most architects.  Their tastes and preferences evolved. So many other factors as well.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()