My case for Flynn as the best Golden Age American architect

[mike_malone]

I was listening to a local sports radio bemoaning the ranking for our QB as 11th.


   It made me think it would be better to say Mahomes is alone as the greatest. 3/5 others are excellent in no particular order and then some number are very good followed by the good group and the lousy set. If our QB is even very good I’m fine.


Flynn belongs in the greatest group. That’s the real point of my topic. None of the other contenders are clearly better than him. It comes down to preferences which is fine but his architectural skills are as good as it gets.

[Bill Gayne]

Mike makes his case for Flynn being the best "Golden Age" American architect. Why not simply best American architect or best architect? I don't think modern architects are held in higher or lesser regard than golden age architects. Flynn's body of work clearly makes a case for being one of the greats regardless of time period or geography.

Bill

[archie_struthers]

 


I'm all in that Flynn was one of the best ever, his courses are pretty universally good at many levels some are great~ 


His collaborations at Pine Valley and Merion also speak to his great ability to be a complimentary player also  !


the list is incredible from Lancaster to Rolling Green to Indian Creek etc etc etc


one of the best for sure, hard to rank anyone as the GOAT

[Malcolm Mckinnon]

Rory made the best post.


Absolutely correct!  Sums it up! No argument. Thanks!


Signed,


A member of a Flynn redesign in 1927-1928 all my life who has played mucho Flynn in my day.

[Steve Lapper]

Flynn was indeed a wonderful, and often underrated, architect. His body of work was excellent.


Tillinghast was better!

Specifically why?


Steve,


I ask because there are things that Flynn and Tillinghast do differently in my experience that make me favor Flynn. At the green I find that Flynn uses angled bunkers and greens more frequently and usually has an opening. Tillinghast more often encircles the green with bunkers limiting choice. Or Tilly uses bunkers parallel to the green more often which I find puzzling.


At WFW I felt that many green sites were artificially built up while Flynn prefers more natural green locations.


Flynn is often knocked for his simplicity on his parkland courses while Tillinghast is more visually appealing. But I believe that the playability is better at Flynn courses .


Undulating greens appeal to many but I believe that sloping greens are more deceptive and allow for more pins.


These are a few.

Mike,


  You, as a member of a wonderful Flynn course, favor Flynn. I completely understand and do believe Flynn was absolutely under appreciated relative to his peers. I belong to and have a stake in a Tilly and favor him. All square.


  I do agree that Flynn did a masterful job of angling greens and bunkers. As for your take on Tilly' encircling greens with bunkers, it's truly only a small percentage of holes (and mostly par 3's at best), I'd point out that Flynn did a fair amount of "closed" greens translating into a "do or die" shot value. Tilly's green side parallel bunker placement makes eminent sense as more often than not, as he used internal slopes to force the better player to pick a side to bring the ball in from. Tilly placed greater premiums on precision that Flynn IMO.


  WFW is and was essentially a flat piece of land and the club's mandate was for a competition worthy course, necessitating the artificial elevation of greens and their adjacent bunkering. Flynn was fortunate to have more interesting natural terrain, yet I'd argue that Tilly did far more with far less, thus establishing himself as the greater talent. +1


 Tilly's playability is plenty....it just requires more thought and caution. As for slope, there isn't a single Flynn course that even remotely approaches Tilly for deceptive, sloping greens. Tilly added, and sometimes ignored the addition of undulation...most likely in response to the degree of difficulty of the approach. +2


Tillinghast over Flynn 


 

[mike_malone]

Flynn was indeed a wonderful, and often underrated, architect. His body of work was excellent.


Tillinghast was better!

Specifically why?


Steve,


I ask because there are things that Flynn and Tillinghast do differently in my experience that make me favor Flynn. At the green I find that Flynn uses angled bunkers and greens more frequently and usually has an opening. Tillinghast more often encircles the green with bunkers limiting choice. Or Tilly uses bunkers parallel to the green more often which I find puzzling.


At WFW I felt that many green sites were artificially built up while Flynn prefers more natural green locations.


Flynn is often knocked for his simplicity on his parkland courses while Tillinghast is more visually appealing. But I believe that the playability is better at Flynn courses .


Undulating greens appeal to many but I believe that sloping greens are more deceptive and allow for more pins.


These are a few.

Mike,


  You, as a member of a wonderful Flynn course, favor Flynn. I completely understand and do believe Flynn was absolutely under appreciated relative to his peers. I belong to and have a stake in a Tilly and favor him. All square.


  I do agree that Flynn did a masterful job of angling greens and bunkers. As for your take on Tilly' encircling greens with bunkers, it's truly only a small percentage of holes (and mostly par 3's at best), I'd point out that Flynn did a fair amount of "closed" greens translating into a "do or die" shot value. Tilly's green side parallel bunker placement makes eminent sense as more often than not, as he used internal slopes to force the better player to pick a side to bring the ball in from. Tilly placed greater premiums on precision that Flynn IMO.


  WFW is and was essentially a flat piece of land and the club's mandate was for a competition worthy course, necessitating the artificial elevation of greens and their adjacent bunkering. Flynn was fortunate to have more interesting natural terrain, yet I'd argue that Tilly did far more with far less, thus establishing himself as the greater talent. +1


 Tilly's playability is plenty....it just requires more thought and caution. As for slope, there isn't a single Flynn course that even remotely approaches Tilly for deceptive, sloping greens. Tilly added, and sometimes ignored the addition of undulation...most likely in response to the degree of difficulty of the approach. +2


Tillinghast over Flynn 


 

Steve,


Thanks for the response. When I play Somerset Hills as a payoff for a Super Bowl bet I probably will come away agreeing with you.

[Tom_Doak]

Routing skill
 Variety of exceptional parkland and
     seaside designs
 Bunkering principles  ( not penalizers)
 Use of angles particularly at the green
 Slope versus undulation
 Memorability
 Be natural or look natural
 Fairways sideways on hills
 Creative use of water
 Deception (looks one way but the other
    is preferred)
 Tree principles
 American (didn’t copy British courses)
 Scientific
 Not flashy but very strategic
 Disposal of debris natural
 Believed land as best hazard
 

This is an interesting list, although it is still subjective, and judging who's best at the various pieces is also subjective.


A couple of your criteria are written to favor Flynn:


   Variety of exceptional parkland and seaside designs is okay, but too specific . . . it would be the same if a modern architect insisted that having built desert courses was a necessary mark of greatness.


   Fairways sideways on hills is a matter of working on land that allows for that.  In some places the hills are too steep for it, or there aren't many hills at all.  Philadelphia had the right kind of hills for Flynn to do his thing, but if you said 'fairways along barrancas' then George Thomas would be your man.




At the end of the day, though, rating architects is pointless unless you need to hire one.  We are what we've built.

[mike_malone]

Tom,


 I felt that Beechtree reminded me of Flynn in its simplicity. I didn’t think things like water or trees detracted from the playing experience. Compared to Bulle Rock up the road which is more conventional in its appearance. Although I liked Bulle Rock the difference was stark.


It takes chutzpah to be simple.Most people that I played with preferred Beechtree over Bulle Rock but couldn’t exactly say why. Bulle Rock seemed to be purposefully designed to elicit reactions. Beechtree was just fun to play.

[Jim_Coleman]

   Beachtree had the added advantage of being half the price of Bulle Rock. Now Beachtree is gone and Bulle Rock is half its old price.