Hanse to work on Oakmont

[John Foley]

Andy Johnson reporting this yesterday.


https://thefriedegg.com/gil-hanse-oakmont-country-club-renovation-work/




I understand the lines off the tee's some took at the US AM last year was a potential issue but Fazio's re-do was not that long ago.

[archie_struthers]

 


wow, Gil Hanse and Wags getting all kinds of great work!

[MCirba]

Now they just need them to move in a different direction in Clementon.

[Peter Pallotta]

Now they just need them to move in a different direction in Clementon.

Why?

[Peter Pallotta]

Now they just need them to move in a different direction in Clementon.

Why?

What's in it for 'Clementon'?

[Tim Martin]

Now they just need them to move in a different direction in Clementon.

Why?

What's in it for 'Clementon'?

Hanse or a contemporary with a similar vision instead of Fazio.

[MCirba]

Tim is correct, Peter.

[Connor Lewis]

I have seen the plans and actually have them on my computer, but can’t betray the trust of the person who shared them with me. They aren’t meant for public. viewing.


What I can tell you is that they are historically accurate and bring back some of the width that has been lost in the past 100 years. There is also a restoration of some of Oakmont’s original ditches.


If you have seen aerials from between 1925-1935 you can get an idea of where Hanse wants to go.

[V. Kmetz]

Was there any hint of surprise when this thread title appeared?  At this point, Hanse has reno-stored all the golf courses; he may be working plans for my backyard, when he gets through with the minigolf/driving range down Route 7.

So Hanse has got to be the latest Open Dr... fair enough, he's a great architect, I loved NLE (that's was weirdly quick for an Open doctor's indy work, no?)Tallgrass, and both WF courses shine (though they've gone 10-15% too far with the trees, editorial). Quaker was really well done; so was Apawamis (20 years ago now) so was most of Fenway. I'm forgetting a dozen in WGA alone, I'm sure.


OK, honest question, not intended to demean or rob uniqueness... what is Hanse doing with these courses that most of working competent architects/supers wouldn't or couldn't do with 3-12 mil?  I mean, he cuts overgrown or later-planted trees...wouldn't you?  He observes the 192_ aerials and recovers old margins, removed or added bunkers...wouldn't you?   He provisions back tees for championship play... wouldn't you? He makes a plan for drainage in spots that need it...you guys know drainage, don't you? He's got subterranean and laser tools to capture the surface and below surface profile... can't you buy those things?


I'm staring right now at the WF master plans for both East and West courses, including the putting greens and short game area...(I wish I could show them to you to illustrate but some malcontent is likely to cry "privacy" "proprietary" though you and I and everyone know not one loss to either Hanse or WF would occur)... they contain nothing I haven't seen in Stephen Kay or Roger Rulewitch reno-storation plans (Kay and amazingly Arthur Hills actually started the Siwanoy recovery process that Mike Devries got to bring to fuller pitch in the last decade)...nothing I haven't seen in Fazio plans and re-visits and re-touches of his courses, Jim Urbina's reno-storation of Blind Brook might have been equaled by Hanse but not exceeded... nothing in these WF plans I haven't seen or heard about  in his other plans for other Westchester Courses... so what's the secret sauce?


Honestly, it might seem a bit obtuse because his work is now-ubiquitous and we (I guess) assume the reno-storation market is acting competitively, but what plus factor is that market reacting to? Really what does he see in the 192__  aerials that you don't?  How are his site visits any more creatively sensitive to a restoration than your own?  Where lies his willing/not willing to alter or eschew restoring an original feature that you wouldn't? Is he somehow more read on Tillinghast or Fownes, or have access to archives and material you would not have, if you were entertained to be hired? Especially when at these big courses you have all this expertise, USGA and scientific agronomy community and, again, 5 - 15 Million dollars to do it...


Does Hanse get in the shovel and shape these when no one is present and pat down the pre-sod/seed surface, with his hands to get that subtlety of pitch and break that will confound the Open competitors in 18 months from then, as Tillinghast intended?


People have mentioned Fazio and PV and how Hanse needs to go there...what would he eliminate, restore or add that Fazio has be-smirched...again what would Hanse do different than you or that PV couldn't do in house and save themselves 5-7 million. ??


Last point, for now. Because he is a fine, fine architect, I'd want to see Hanse do more of his original courses and/or start to take on lesser local projects that could sorely use him. Same goes for C/C.  I'd love those of them, whose reputations and fortunes are secure to finish their careers with some unexpectedly humble tracks, be they resorts or municipals or lesser 1000 privates and work with a max 1.5 million budget...there's the challenge!  We all know some of our greatest ODGS and greatest courses were fly overs and limited visits... so it could be in today's era. I'd love Gil Hanse to do a blitzkrieg year of these projects in one year...I know it won't turn out like his premium reno-storations - but it would be an architecturally interesting project to have our best extant architects to do a Johnny Appleseed or reno design for under the radar courses that might advance the art locally, and the novel practices that might come from having these great architects to speed-innovate.

[mike_malone]

Hanse shows his humility when he researches the early evidence of a classic course. It looks like he has done something marvelous when he simply respects the past.


I posted the above before reading V.Kmetz’s post.


I watched from a few feet away as Hanse restored things as they were and “ got away” with it when many others may have withered in the face of powerful but ill informed members.

[Mark_Fine]

V. Kemetz,
Gil was one of the architects who inspired me to get into the business 20 years ago.  He wasn’t quite as famous back then but honestly in the 20 plus years I have known him, he hasn’t changed much (just a really good and genuine guy and obviously an outstanding architect).  Many of my own projects were thanks to him referring me.  It is hard to get to work on the “noteworthy/TV/famous" courses as those tend to go to architects like Gil, but there are many others out there working on much lesser known courses with much smaller and more frugal budgets doing some really good work.  It is all relative, we just don't talk a lot about them.  And by the way, there are many who also don't wither in the face of powerful but ill informed members  Much of our job is education so they are not so ill informed!

[PCCraig]

It's hard to fault Oakmont for going with Hanse.


To the point above, yes almost any of us could go through old aerials and attempt to recreate old features on a master plan. The difference is that a) Hanse & any other high performing GCA will get the detail work right and b) Hanse gets a ton of these high profile jobs because he seems to be a master communicator / salesman. It also probably doesn't hurt that he's had a ton of successful projects on TV and at a certain point some guy on a Green Committee just isn't going to argue with you.

[jeffwarne]

Was there any hint of surprise when this thread title appeared?  At this point, Hanse has reno-stored all the golf courses; he may be working plans for my backyard, when he gets through with the minigolf/driving range down Route 7.

So Hanse has got to be the latest Open Dr... fair enough, he's a great architect, I loved NLE (that's was weirdly quick for an Open doctor's indy work, no?)Tallgrass, and both WF courses shine (though they've gone 10-15% too far with the trees, editorial). Quaker was really well done; so was Apawamis (20 years ago now) so was most of Fenway. I'm forgetting a dozen in WGA alone, I'm sure.


OK, honest question, not intended to demean or rob uniqueness... what is Hanse doing with these courses that most of working competent architects/supers wouldn't or couldn't do with 3-12 mil?  I mean, he cuts overgrown or later-planted trees...wouldn't you?  He observes the 192_ aerials and recovers old margins, removed or added bunkers...wouldn't you?   He provisions back tees for championship play... wouldn't you? He makes a plan for drainage in spots that need it...you guys know drainage, don't you? He's got subterranean and laser tools to capture the surface and below surface profile... can't you buy those things?


I'm staring right now at the WF master plans for both East and West courses, including the putting greens and short game area...(I wish I could show them to you to illustrate but some malcontent is likely to cry "privacy" "proprietary" though you and I and everyone know not one loss to either Hanse or WF would occur)... they contain nothing I haven't seen in Stephen Kay or Roger Rulewitch reno-storation plans (Kay and amazingly Arthur Hills actually started the Siwanoy recovery process that Mike Devries got to bring to fuller pitch in the last decade)...nothing I haven't seen in Fazio plans and re-visits and re-touches of his courses, Jim Urbina's reno-storation of Blind Brook might have been equaled by Hanse but not exceeded... nothing in these WF plans I haven't seen or heard about  in his other plans for other Westchester Courses... so what's the secret sauce?


Honestly, it might seem a bit obtuse because his work is now-ubiquitous and we (I guess) assume the reno-storation market is acting competitively, but what plus factor is that market reacting to? Really what does he see in the 192__  aerials that you don't?  How are his site visits any more creatively sensitive to a restoration than your own?  Where lies his willing/not willing to alter or eschew restoring an original feature that you wouldn't? Is he somehow more read on Tillinghast or Fownes, or have access to archives and material you would not have, if you were entertained to be hired? Especially when at these big courses you have all this expertise, USGA and scientific agronomy community and, again, 5 - 15 Million dollars to do it...


Does Hanse get in the shovel and shape these when no one is present and pat down the pre-sod/seed surface, with his hands to get that subtlety of pitch and break that will confound the Open competitors in 18 months from then, as Tillinghast intended?


People have mentioned Fazio and PV and how Hanse needs to go there...what would he eliminate, restore or add that Fazio has be-smirched...again what would Hanse do different than you or that PV couldn't do in house and save themselves 5-7 million. ??


Last point, for now. Because he is a fine, fine architect, I'd want to see Hanse do more of his original courses and/or start to take on lesser local projects that could sorely use him. Same goes for C/C.  I'd love those of them, whose reputations and fortunes are secure to finish their careers with some unexpectedly humble tracks, be they resorts or municipals or lesser 1000 privates and work with a max 1.5 million budget...there's the challenge!  We all know some of our greatest ODGS and greatest courses were fly overs and limited visits... so it could be in today's era. I'd love Gil Hanse to do a blitzkrieg year of these projects in one year...I know it won't turn out like his premium reno-storations - but it would be an architecturally interesting project to have our best extant architects to do a Johnny Appleseed or reno design for under the radar courses that might advance the art locally, and the novel practices that might come from having these great architects to speed-innovate.

Entertaining post.


Talent goes a long way,then the "5-15 million", then the wave of Golf Chairmen who insist on a brand name like all the major courses, though I honestly had a conversation with a well placed individual who suggested his club hire this "unknown young guy" AFTER he had redone Trump Doral, opened the Olympic course and a hundred other projects.


I do agree that many/most courses could no doubt find a less in demand talented architect to do the project well with his/her heart and soul, for a more reasonable number,but without the cover of a brand name, they worry that their renovation will end up like some of the projects Hanse was hired(with far more resources)to redo after several of the aforementioned names screwed them up(with minimal resources).The fact that there are more talented architects than ever today doesn't change the fact that few want to hire anything but a brand name.
Kudos to Zac Blair with Kye Goalby(routing and consultation by Tom Doak)
as well as to Nick Schreiber with Brian Schneider.
Both, like many talented architects hitting their stride 10-15 years ago should've had many original works in the ground years ago, but a nasty financial crisis stepped in and changed(or ended) the careers of many, and few dare take a chance on something not a name brand.

[Kalen Braley]

VK,

Excellent post and questions,  you can count me as a big fan of his restovations.  From where I sit,  my perception is this.

1)  He really tries to restore how the course was near the beginning and resists putting his own stamp on the work, (outside of adding a few extra tee boxes for championship play as noted).  And I suspect this is also the case for the tree removal, even if you can't exactly "restore" that fairly precisely.
2)  He doesn't seem to be afraid of the clearly artificial items like squared off greens, sharp and precise cut lines, non-frilly bunkers when applicable, etc.
3) Creating that finished product seems like it would takes an abundance of patience, and this may be what you're really driving at, but I'm not sure how many other architects would be committed to or have the skill-set to get it "right".   And I'm not trying to be offensive here, just my amateur observation.  And as Jeff pointed out, i'm not sure if many of the others who could do this, would be interested.

Overall it seems to me that the product he produces would be a fairly close approximation to what I would have seen if I was there in person in 1920 something (save for the lush grass and short greens).

Once again,  I could be completely wrong on all this and get skewered, but hey i'm no Doak! 

[Don Mahaffey]

Hanse shows his humility when he researches the early evidence of a classic course. It looks like he has done something marvelous when he simply respects the past.


I posted the above before reading V.Kmetz’s post.


I watched from a few feet away as Hanse restored things as they were and “ got away” with it when many others may have withered in the face of powerful but ill informed members.

I wouldn’t undervalue what Mike is saying here. These high profile clubs have strong confident members and all the clubs have a few raters. Lessor known architects will be scrutinized much more than a big name. Those doing the hiring know this. It’s a lot easier for a single owner to hire Kye or Brian. And even tho they might do just as good work as Gil at a big name club, they will be questioned more aggressively if they do anything controversial.
Managing the membership on these high profile jobs is not easy and it appears the Hanse group is very good at it.

[Mike Hendren]

Would someone please explain where Golfweek’s 6th ranked classic course is deficient?

Why doesn’t it’s membership just shut up and enjoy one of the world’s great courses?


“All in all it’s just another brick in the wall.”


Mike

[Peter Pallotta]

Mike,
with Oakmont now a USGA anchor site, and with a membership proud of its reputation as a stern championship test, I imagine the key/main priority here was addressing the recently identified 'alternate avenues of play' -- with much of the rest of the press-and-nerd-friendly palaver about Fownes' original vision mostly window dressing....IMHO

[Dan Herrmann]

V. Kmetz
If you want to learn why/how Hanse does his craft, I suggest spending time looking as his work at Monroe and CCR up in Rochester, NY.


Monroe today is certainly a Ross design - one of my favorites.   Country Club of Rochester is nearby and you can read about the work here:  https://golfclubatlas.com/forum/?topic=53129.10;


The work wasn't just eliminating trees and the like.   Many bunkers were restored, and some were relocated to keep up with modern times.   


Monroe and CCR in Rochester are excellent examples of wonderful courses that are now much better due to the work of Hanse/Wagner and their team.



PS - About 15 years ago, my parents lived in Rochester, and I contacted CCR about a non-resident membership.   It didn't work out, but their membership chair and I spent about an hour on the phone talking about the work there and where I play (I play at a Hanse original).   Trust me, the CCR people were absolutely thrilled with the work done there.

[Philippe Binette]

Why Hanse and Wagner ?


1-It's one thing to look at an aerial photo... it's another to understand the 3D of it.


2-attention to details: you could put 4 people rebuilding a bunker from an aerial photograph, and you'll get different results, some great and some bad


3-if you have to interpret an element, move a tee or bunker for some reason, you want the judgment of some of the best...


Think about it: you have to restore Mona Lisa, you'll choose the best you can find...

[John Foley]

Would someone please explain where Golfweek’s 6th ranked classic course is deficient?

Mike

Here is the question that's not being answered. Was the alternate lines off the tee's the Am's took last year worthy of a new massive effort? I saw bunker work being mentioned, the greenside FW mounds "may" be an issue?

[John Foley]

V. Kmetz
If you want to learn why/how Hanse does his craft, I suggest spending time looking as his work at Monroe and CCR up in Rochester, NY.

Another interesting question is why is Tyler Rae doing a masterplan at Monroe after Hanse's fantastic job he did there?


Hope all is well Dan.

[Dan Herrmann]

A master plan at Monroe?  That's really odd!