Mackenzie's famous Sitwell Park Greens: Now with Before and After Pics

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks for the links Duncan. Interesting reading. Well done Robin and Neil.
Here's the b&w photo of the (apparent) 4th at Sitwell now coloured.
atb

[James Reader]

Posted today from the Sitwell Park Twitter account; “ How would this be received. Putting the 12th back to how it was originally designed.” Exciting if they genuinely are considering it.

[Robin_Hiseman]

Posted today from the Sitwell Park Twitter account; “ How would this be received. Putting the 12th back to how it was originally designed.” Exciting if they genuinely are considering it.

Only 20 years after I suggested it to them!

[Grant Saunders]

With much thanks to my brother Andy, who some of you may remember joined us at the Painswick BUDA, here are, for what may be the first time, before and after pics of Mackenzie's iconic 12th and 18th greens at Sitwell Park.   

I've added Andy's emailed comments to me, which clear up once and for all which green is which and that there are inded two separate greens.

 The two old b/w photos are clearly of two different greens. I showed them to the two senior greenkeepers, and both agreed that the 'very wild' green is now the 12th, and the slightly less wild green is the 18th.

THE 18TH

I think photo 18th01_small is taken pretty close to where the 'HOME GREEN AT SITWELL PARK' photographer was standing. 18th02_small gives you a slightly more close-up view of the now-flat green.


Mackenzie's Original 18th green


2011:  Taken from approximately the same position.


A slightly closer view.


THE 12TH

I've given you three views of the 12th. The key challenge was: where was the photographer standing when he took the iconic view of Mackenzie's 12th green? For the iconic photo seems to have been taken from an impossible place. The ground slopes very sharply up a hill towards the green (you can see this best in 12th03_small), and there's seemingly no way to take the 'iconic' photo without the aid of a cherry picker! Rob I'll leave you to decide. You can see sheds and fences etc behind and to the right of the green, but they are now obscured by bushes and trees.


One of the most famous pictures in golf architectural history


Approximately the same view today


The view from the forward tee.


From the front left of the old green.

It seems to me that, for the most part, Mackenzie's original contouring is still there, but has just been grown in.  The winter green is a new addition, the terrace of the current green has been extended and the bunkering is long gone. It would not be beyond the bounds of possibility to recreate that photo in the current day, if it could just be worked out exactly where the original shot was taken.

If Andy's photos do anything they show very clearly just how steep the greensite was and how it was the case that Mackenzie emphasised form over function with his design in this instance.  Another thing that strikes me is how dry the grass faces must have been.  It had to have been extremely difficult to keep those slopes in a playable condition.

Well, I hope this thread ties up a loose end about what became of these greens.  Who'd like to join me in recreating the photo?

Im sure someone will have noted this before but to me, the original photo of the 12th green appears to have been taken from up a tree?


If you look at the top of the photo there is a small branch visible which is a scale and size not in keeping with the trees in the background and it "hangs" down into the frame.


Would this perhaps tie in with the comment about the need for a cherry picker to recreate the photo?

[James Reader]

Better late than never, Robin?


Grant, I can’t agree on the ‘up a tree’ theory.  The grass in the bottom left of the photo looks to be too close to the camera for that.

[Simon Barrington]

...

Neil R., that's almost certainly not Mackenzie. As Marty B said.

...

Perhaps it is Mr. A. E. Turnell?

[Brett Hochstein]

Glad this cool thread was brought back up.


I was recently able to stop in here and take a quick look at these greens. The 18th has been mostly wiped out into a big flat cut/fill pad in the amphitheater it still sits in. 12, the more famous and wild one right next to it, still has some contours intact.


I really wanted to see this in person, having obsessed over this picture since college days and using it in numerous presentations since. Also wanted to see how it compared to 16 at Pasatiempo, which I got to spend some time around last summer, to see if any sort of re-instatement/restoration was practically possible.


Having now seen it in person, a true restoration would seem to be a stretch, even if there was a commitment to keep speeds at 9 or less. What kind of skews my judgment negatively though are two clearly changed conditions from that original version--the current green pad that is built up very high up above the back section of the old one, making it all feel a bit steeper than it would have been; and the front left bunker and landform is missing, which would provide a supporting stop for any poor souls who end up too long and having to putt back downhill. Both of these items would reduce the overall back to front slope differential, thus making everything in between a bit more manageable.  If you start with those moves, and maybe even exaggerate them to skew toward playability, you might have a roadmap to re-instating what might very well be the most incredible green ever built. Because I wouldn't be surprised that there are actually a bunch of clever ways to get from level to level if out of position, aiming sideways or even backwards, taking big zig-zag routes to get from A to B, with stops at C, D, and maybe E along the way.  I have a feeling you'd be able to find the original levels and shapes in the back section too once you start peeling away that current pad. Would be pretty amazing to dig around and see what you find.

[Brett Hochstein]

I also want to make note of two other observations of the course from the distant high portion of the property (I was in a hurry to Woodhall Spa, or else I would have explored some more). 


1st--the course sits on the side of a big hill, with these crazy old greens at the highest and steepest part of it. The many tiers and levels in them were a matter of practicality as much as anything.  I wasn't really expecting that.


2nd--it looked like from distance there were a bunch of other really cool old remnant features out there on the course--mounds, bunker landforms, etc. I assume many were from MacKenzie's time but would be curious to be certain.  They looked cool, and I'd be curious to see more of that up close, especially trying to imagine what the greens that tied into them may have been like.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

I had the pleasure of meeting the Swedish golf architect Peter Nordwall at Bro-Bålsta Golf Klubb about 10 years ago. We had a great discussion and knowing he drew inspiration from GB&I courses when he designed the course in the early 1980s, I had to ask him about one green in particular. Knowing that he would be familiar with the famous green (I was only aware of one green at that time) at Sitwell Park, I asked him if created the 8th green at Bro-Bålsta with MacKenzie's green in mind; he said yes.


My account at Photobucket is frozen, but one of these days I'll get around to posting some photos of the green. It's one of the wildest greens I have ever seen and I suspect the elevation change from front to back could be 6-feet or more. There are 3-4 distinct levels and when the hole is located at the back of the green, it is not possible to see the hole or even the bottom 6 inches of the flag, when putting from the front of the green.

[Tags:]

Tags: