2023: The Year of George C. Thomas (in Pro Golf)

[Michael Chadwick]

With the annual but now "elevated" Genesis at Riviera, and this year's US Open at LACC's North course, I'd like to get a new thread going on Mr. Thomas and his work. Particularly on LACC's North course, for however many different avenues (Thomas, Bell, Hanse, US Open) we might want to take.

I was on property for the first time recently, unfortunately in tandem with the arrival of yet another heavy storm. Nonetheless, I played holes 10-18 before our event was canceled, and have a few initial thoughts, even if they should be marked with an asterisk for incompletion.

(Here's a nice throwback thread originated by Tommy N. while I was perusing GCA for more context and history on the course: https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,37045.0.html)

The scale of the property is vast. Bigger than what I anticipated, and I anticipated something similar to Cal Club, which apparently wasn't enough imaginatively. Standing on 10 tee and looking at the wide upslope of the fairway ahead, particularly in the low ceiling storm clouds, made the green appear much further than the yardage on the card. The fairway bunkers cutting in near the high right side, guarding the flatter lie and optimal angle, were grand. The visuals were immense before stepping foot on the iconic 11th, and then you have long stout par 4s on 13, 16, and 17!

A small epiphany occurred on 13, unrelated to the adjacent Playboy Mansion. I recognized and appreciated--more so than at Riviera--the fact that George Thomas was not an offshoot of the Philadelphia School of Architecture but a model of the group! That this redesigned course of his harkens to the most consequential group of US Golden Age architects to design championship pedigree venues (Flynn, Fownes, Tillinghast). Who valued strategy, but also a measure of challenge to push players into higher levels of play.

When I try to situate LACC's scale, and the expansiveness of the holes routed on its property, what courses really compare? Of what I've seen, my mind immediately goes to William Flynn's Rolling Green and Lancaster. Those two courses, from another Philly School member, possess similar parkland attributes in imposingly sloped, wide, muscular land to what LACC does out West.

The variety of skill, and the amount of the architect's "hand" on display for Thomas (and Bell) between Riviera and LACC is as unique to me as what Ross achieved at Oakland Hills South and Pinehurst 2. The focal points at Riviera of course being more the constructed features to make up for the limitations of the natural terrain. Obviously there are some terrific land movements and barranca characteristics to help dictate strategy at Riviera, but much of the routing is within the base of the bowl, and Thomas has a more noticeable signature at Riviera for the holes he had to design in order to create compelling golf at that site.

At LACC, however, the ingenuity comes from Thomas restraining himself, and relying instead on his routing from what was previously there that accentuates--and makes full use of--all that the land has to offer. Playing up and over hills (10). Down the hill (11). Blind tee to a dogleg on the elevated plateau (12). Over a valley to other side of the plateau (13). Riding the sharp edge of the ridge as it plummets all along the right hand side (14). Beautifully manufactured and testy short par 3 on the plateau (15). Working gently down the hill's spine (16). Plunging from hill to valley floor (17). Working one's way back up (18). And to think (from what I gather), there is more quirk to the landforms to be found on the front nine!

Restraint doesn't apply in all respects, though. The greens at LACC appear more contoured and varied in shape than at Riviera. Perhaps that wasn't the case initially but is a result of time? While LACC's bunkering is spectacular as well, there is a deliberately cohesive, slightly understated ethos to it. It's far more naturalist than Riviera (without even mentioning the native areas), but at the same time the high consistency of LACC's holes may be less visually distinctive than, say, what you see at Riviera 4-6, 10, etc.

My point isn't about matching Riviera against LACC (someone's supposed to finish that thread elsewhere!), it's that the two courses are marvelous displays of an architect recognizing what's inherent in the land, then basing his decision of how much--or how little--he needs to reveal himself to create holes of lasting interest and beauty. What a gift for appreciators of architectural history to have two courses miles apart that showcase Thomas's multi-faceted range so well.

[Tom_Doak]

My memory is that several of the greens at LACC were revised in the restoration to break up slopes or to add extra, smaller contours.


I asked my host [who was involved with the restoration] about it after walking off the first green, and he was surprised that I'd noticed a difference, since I hadn't seen the course for many years.  But he confirmed that it had been changed at the back.


It's a very good routing on an interesting piece of land.  And it has always been a difficult test of golf, but even more so now.