Donald Ross Summary

[Mark_Fine]

What I believe about Ross:  My "short version" summary 


Donald J. Ross

• Trees:
• Ross once stated that as beautiful as trees are, we still must not lose sight of the fact that there is a limited place for them in golf. 
• Felt if a tree interferes with a properly played stroke it is an unfair hazard and should not be allowed to stand. At the same time he said there is no need to ruthlessly cut down everything in sight. 
• On hot summer days, recognized trees are most welcome around tee boxes.
• Ross rarely incorporated trees as an integral part of the strategy of a golf hole.  Most of his sites were void of trees and Ross did little to encourage any to be planted. 

• Variety:
• Contrary to popular belief, Ross went through a number of style changes.   Early on, he did what he could with the limitations of the land and equipment he had at his disposal.  The courses employed a scruffy look with abrupt mounds often containing piles of rocks gathered from on site.  Putting surfaces offered steeply graded contours with sharply graded outslopes rather than smooth flowing lines. 
• As years went on, Ross hired W. Hatch and J. McGovern as associates and transitioned to a more mature flowing style with features more carefully integrated into the terrain.  His designs reflected better engineering support and more modernized earth moving equipment. 
• As his career winded down, Ross’ style became more functional and less aesthetic and strategic.  He focused more on playability and maintainability and there was less attention to detail. 
• Despite his vast resume of courses, each of his designs was original and designed specifically for the landscape on which it was built.
• Often would design one shot to go one way and the next to go another.  Subsequent holes might be reversed.  His courses demanded a wide range of golf shots and little repetition.
• On par threes, he usually had a dominant hazard on one side of the hole and then on the opposite side on the next.
• Though Ross built some crowned greens they are by no means his defining mark.  Most of his greens were not crowned at all.  The turtle-backs we all hear about often came from years and years of top dressing. 
• Ross aimed to offer alternate lines of play on each of his golf holes.  Such would be the case on a two-shot hole, the stronger player might take a more daring route to get home in two, while the weaker player could navigate another one to reach the green in three.
• Ross once stated, “Variety is the spice of golf, just as it is of life.”
• Felt all one shot holes should be difficult as the golfer gets to start with a preferred level lie.

• Mixed mounds, hummocks, and grass hollows in with his bunkers to create variety.  Also incorporated high grasses to accent holes but despised lost balls. 
• Because he took on so many courses and wasn’t present at many, his courses look different depending on who did the construction.  Add to that the varying maintenance practices and you have lots of variety in his designs.

• Greens:
• His most common design scheme for greens was an elevated fill pad using pushed up native soil and contoured for drainage.  His bunkers were built low into the upslope surrounding the putting surface.
• On clay soils he often incorporated an early version of a USGA green using layers of rock, gravel, sand, and topsoil in a growing medium.
• Ross’ built his greens to accept a number of different approaches but often on the best line of play.  They accepted well struck shots but would repel an errant missile.  A player might still end up on the green but would face a treacherous two putt. 
• Ross only utilized punchbowl greens on limited occasions.  He didn’t feel they provided an adequate test of skill as they offered equal advantage to both good and poorly played shots.
• Throughout his career, he always was concerned about proper drainage of his greens as poor drainage leads to poor turf conditions.
• Ross always pushed up greens on low flat land and incorporated mounds.
• He often placed his greens on plateaus which was a quite effective natural drainage system.
• His finished greens flowed seamlessly into the surrounding landscape, especially on those courses he designed in the prime of his career,
• Ross usually designed larger less undulating greens for long par threes and par four holes and smaller greens for par fives and shorter par threes and fours.
• Nearly all his greens slope from back to front and less drastically from one side to the other.   Rarely did he build greens that sloped away from the approach shot. 
• Ross defended par at the green and in doing so made his courses stand the test of time.

• Bunkers:
• Ross believed there was no such thing as a misplaced bunker as it was the business of the player to avoid it. At the same time, Ross felt bunkers should be placed clearly in view and in such locations to make all classes of players think.

• Ross was not averse to using cross bunkers, some well short of his greens.   However, his cross bunkers were more strategic than the penal versions of early design periods. 
• His bunkering ranged from flashed sand to flat bottom grass faced designs. 
• Most of his bunkers were not severe, generally three to four and a half feet deep.  In keeping with his belief that there should be a certain proportional relationship of challenge and recovery, he did not build bunkers that were inescapable.
• His fairway bunkers were generally much broader than greenside ones and often about two feet deep.  The closer one got to the green, the deeper the surface and the steeper the greenside wall. 
• Ross would place bunkers in low lying areas where the ball was likely to run and settle out.  This was based on his ground game philosophy.
• Felt the best hazards were those located so as to force a man to use judgment and to exercise mental control in making the correct shot.  At the same time believed a highly criticized bunker is often one of the best forms of praise.
• Often bunkered the inside of dog legs to allow the player to contemplate their level of risk on the tee shot.
• Incorporated central bunkering to encourage strategy.
• Liked to set his bunkers into the faces of knolls or slopes.
• Would often sweep the sand up to the top of the faces to make them visible from the tee.  Also would utilize a ribbon of turf to stabilize the face.
• As he progressed in his career, Ross used less bunkers but better placed them.

• Tees:
• Encouraged having two or more tees per hole, each more than twenty yards apart.  Most of his later designs had longer tees and/or three or four at every hole.  Felt flexible tees allowed the course to present the same possibilities in various wind and turf conditions.
• Liked to offset tees from a hole’s centerline to add interest and create multiple angles of play.  It is rare to find a Ross hole with a straight away fairway and a tee complex down the center.   Ideally he would place the tee on one side and have the fairway start on the other, only to cross over and then bend gently back.
• Preferred naturally level sites for his tees and located so the view of the landing area or the green will be clearly in sight.

• Fairways:
• Hated to see fairway lines running straight from tee to green.  Liked irregular fairways that moved left to right and right to left. 
• Preferred to avoid two or three consecutive holes running in the same direction.
• Felt ideal fairways consisted of knolls and dips that reach right to the greens to test stance, swing and shot placement.
• Thought it was highly desirable to compel a player to place his tee shot in the proper position in the fairway so as to have a clear shot to the green.  Shots not properly placed may find their next shot to some extent blind.
• Advocated clearings of forty yards on short holes and sixty to ninety yards in width on longer holes.  Liked fairways that narrowed toward the tee and green. 
• The advent of watered fairways changed many of Ross’ playing characteristics as soft conditions made it more important to move the ball in the air rather than on the ground.
• Often aligned his holes to play across swales/ravines to natural plateaus. 

• Water:
• Ross utilized water hazards in his designs when the opportunity presented itself.  He felt they offered welcome variety as long as they were not over used.  He suggested no more than three preferably two in the course of a round.
• Ross despised lost balls especially for weaker golfers who found the water hazards difficult.  He wanted golfers to enjoy themselves.
• If a stream or brook was running through the property, he would incorporate it in different ways either by playing along it on one hole and across it on another. 
• Felt water could add to the charm and beauty of a design if used sparingly.

• Approaches:
• Ross was a strong advocate of the ground game and designed greens that were receptive to the run-up shot.
• Loved to see little hillocks and undulations in front of greens that lead to creative golf shots. 
• Felt that holes governed by interesting approaches were superior to those where approaches were flat. 

• Other thoughts:
• Of the 400 or so courses attributed to Ross, he probably never saw or only made a short visit on about a third of them, and another third he visited and spent maybe a few days overall and on the other third he spent a significant amount of time on site (significant varies but more than one or two visits).  Ross did much of his design working from topographic maps.  He made detailed drawings and sketches along with written instructions for his construction crews.

• Ross was a genius at sound and efficient routings taking full advantage of the best natural features of the land.  He incorporated minimal walks between holes and commonly routed his shorter holes on uphill ground to ease the hill climbs.  He despised long walks between holes.
• Continuity was important as he designed his courses to flow without interruption.  One hole to the next was a natural evolution. 
• He gently turned players in different directions rather than back and forth incorporating different wind directions to help or hinder the golfer.
• Ross designed strategically sound golf holes.  Variety, strategy and naturalness were some of his most consistent design traits. 
• Believed golf should be a game of pleasure but testing to the better golfer at the same time.  The severity of the test should be in direct proportion to the ability of the golfer.
• Ross favored rolling sandy terrain for his golf courses. 
• Ross believed each hole should present a unique problem that the golfer must solve.
• Felt the course should be arranged such that every stroke should be made with full concentration.
• Despised divided courses, those broken up by roads.
• Would accept some average holes to incorporate some exceptionally fine ones in his layouts.  Felt courses have become famous because of one or two holes that stand out in one’s memory.
• Often contended that length of holes was overrated.  Felt a shorter more thought provoking course was much more interesting than a long straight forward one.
• Believed a properly designed course caters to every class of player.
• Advocated that some holes be very challenging for all players.
• Felt golf should be a mental test and an eye test.
• Limited the number of three shot holes as he believed the two shotters were a much finer test of golf.
• Leaned toward a not too difficult opening hole to give the golfer the chance to find his game. 
• Preferred to play up to property boundary lines rather than along them.
• Ross liked to finish with long par fours as it was his belief that the most dramatic shot in the game was a well-struck long iron.  Many of his finishing par fours played into a prevailing wind. 
• Ross moved little dirt and was very practical in his spending.  Fortunately most of his sites were already cleared of trees, rocks and vegetation.  When he encountered rocks and stumps, he piled them up and covered them.
• Ross’ design style might be best characterized as the marriage of sound grounds keeping with sound golf!

[Tim Martin]

This information is superfluous as to which courses in your words he “mailed in”. Please detail the 1/3 of courses “he probably never saw or only made a short visit, and another 1/3 he visited and spent maybe a few days overall.” I’ll wait for you to get in touch with Brad.

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
By the way, you are welcome for all that “superfluous” insight about Ross which took years to research 


In the meantime buy a copy of Brad’s book and educate yourself     He lists all those courses you want me to retype here which I am happy to do for you when I get back home and pull it off the shelf.

[Tim Martin]

Tim,
By the way, you are welcome for all that “superfluous” insight about Ross which took years to research 


In the meantime buy a copy of Brad’s book and educate yourself     He lists all those courses you want me to retype here which I am happy to do for you when I get back home and pull it off the shelf.

I have the book. Educate yourself as to all the new information that has come to light in the last twenty five years since it was published. And again for the umpteen time list just five courses that he designed from a topo map without any visits. I asked before but you didn’t reply as to whether you consider yourself a Ross expert/historian?

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
I wasted too much time trying to educate you.  I am trying to work and respond to this on my iPhone which is not easy.  I started this thread for those interested in learning more about Ross and provided a Cliff Notes version of things I have learned and studied over the years.  People can use it or not as they see fit.


The statements below come directly off The Donald Ross Society website!!!!  Maybe they need to look at all this new information that you say has come to light and update their site! 


From the Donald Ross Society website:


"Of all the courses that bear Ross' name, either as original designs or as renovation projects, he probably never even saw a third of them, and another third he visited only once or twice. Given the constraints of train and car travel in those days, repeat visits were difficult to arrange. Though Ross was a voracious traveler, he did much of his design work from his home in a cottage behind the third green at Pinehurst. There he worked from topographic maps, drew up blueprints, and wrote simple but sharply-worded instructions that his construction crew knew how to implement."

I have no interest in listing the name of a bunch of these topo courses.  It serves no positive purpose. Look them up yourself or go to the Ross website.

[Tom_Doak]

There’s a difference between “never saw the (finished) course” and “never saw the site”.  I draw whatever plans I draw when I’m home, too, but it’s usually after a site visit (or two or three) to lock in the routing.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
I agree and not sure anyone knows the split on what he saw finished vs what he saw unfinished or not at all??  What I posted was the exact wording from the Ross Society website’s Ross Biography. 


So what do you believe about Ross.  Also any comments on my Ross Summary?  I can take it 

[Chris Hughes]

Tim,
By the way, you are welcome for all that “superfluous” insight about Ross which took years to research 


In the meantime buy a copy of Brad’s book and educate yourself     He lists all those courses you want me to retype here which I am happy to do for you when I get back home and pull it off the shelf.

And again for the umpteen time list just five courses that he designed from a topo map without any visits.

Carolina Golf & Country Club.


Charlotte, NC.

[Brian Finn]

Tim,
By the way, you are welcome for all that “superfluous” insight about Ross which took years to research 

In the meantime buy a copy of Brad’s book and educate yourself     He lists all those courses you want me to retype here which I am happy to do for you when I get back home and pull it off the shelf.

And again for the umpteen time list just five courses that he designed from a topo map without any visits.

Carolina Golf & Country Club.
Charlotte, NC.

Chris,
There are articles, pretty easily found on this discussion board, that say that Ross, "came, saw, and marvelled" at the land on which Carolina GC now sits.  The only issue he had was that the natural site was a little too small, so Mrs. Dunavant bought an adjoining 20 acres.  Considering the fact that Ross spent a significant portion of each year in NC, visited and designed several other courses in the city of Charlotte and surrounding region, and is even said in articles from the time to have visited, for what reason would you suspect he designed the course from a topo map without any visits?

[Chris Hughes]

Tim,
By the way, you are welcome for all that “superfluous” insight about Ross which took years to research 

In the meantime buy a copy of Brad’s book and educate yourself     He lists all those courses you want me to retype here which I am happy to do for you when I get back home and pull it off the shelf.

And again for the umpteen time list just five courses that he designed from a topo map without any visits.

Carolina Golf & Country Club.
Charlotte, NC.

Chris,
There are articles, pretty easily found on this discussion board, that say that Ross, "came, saw, and marvelled" at the land on which Carolina GC now sits.  The only issue he had was that the natural site was a little too small, so Mrs. Dunavant bought an adjoining 20 acres.  Considering the fact that Ross spent a significant portion of each year in NC, visited and designed several other courses in the city of Charlotte and surrounding region, and is even said in articles from the time to have visited, for what reason would you suspect he designed the course from a topo map without any visits?

My mention of CGCC was in no way meant to be definitive...


...that said, have you ever read "A Widow's Will", written by Sutt Alexander Jr.?

[Mark_Fine]

Whether Ross was on site or not or saw the course during construction or not or saw it when it was finished or not doesn’t really matter as much as what ended up on the ground and how it evolved over the years.  I would still investigate the history of his involvement for an individual project just so I know but it likely wouldn’t change what we do to the golf course. 


I stated in the above short summary some of what I have learned so far about Ross.  If you have a “Ross” course or play some of his designs, look for these attributes and see if you agree. 

[Tim Martin]

Whether Ross was on site or not or saw the course during construction or not or saw it when it was finished or not doesn’t really matter as much as what ended up on the ground and how it evolved over the years.  I would still investigate the history of his involvement for an individual project just so I know but it likely wouldn’t change what we do to the golf course. 


I stated in the above short summary some of what I have learned so far about Ross.  If you have a “Ross” course or play some of his designs, look for these attributes and see if you agree.

Do you consider yourself a Donald Ross expert/historian?

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
All I know is I have studied a lot of architects extensively and do so when I am working on a particular architect’s course.  I personally feel it is needs to be done before doing any kind of change/renovation work. I also did a lot of research for the book Forrest Richardson and I wrote titled Bunkers, Pits & other Hazards.  I have also spent a lot of time working with Brad Klein. I consider Brad a Ross expert far more so than me.

[Tim Martin]

Tim,
All I know is I have studied a lot of architects extensively and do so when I am working on a particular architect’s course.  I personally feel it is needs to be done before doing any kind of change/renovation work. I also did a lot of research for the book Forrest Richardson and I wrote titled Bunkers, Pits & other Hazards.  I have also spent a lot of time working with Brad Klein. I consider Brad a Ross expert far more so than me.

I can’t tell if that’s a yes or a no. No worries as I think I know the answer.

[Sven Nilsen]

I'd like to know if Ross said no to this one.


Nov. 7, 1928 Grand Rapids Press -

[Simon Barrington]

...I would still investigate the history of his involvement for an individual project just so I know but it likely wouldn’t change what we do to the golf course...

Hello Mark

Am genuinely interested in this statement; so I want to try and understand it.

If it wouldn't change what you do, why expend any effort on the research of what was there before?

If one judges only by what is presently visible, could you miss a really interesting option to recover a piece of prevously (possibly unfashionable) genius that had been removed by others in between? It might even be a unique novel feature not seen elsewhere in the ODG's body of work, thus of wider interest?

ODG's work may have been over-written by others less sympathetic/respectful of what was there before, but that doesn't always mean that these actions were a good decision.

By starting and remaining only in the present and not researching (or ignoring) what was there before through time, the opportunity to embrace/use the ODG's talent and creativity might be lost.

The past could be a rich souce of ideas and inspiration, especially on that particular site. Or more broadly, as Pete Dye took structural sleeper facings from the old courses over in the UK (for a topical example)

Does the statement assume that the modern day Golf Architect knows more than the ODG's that preceeded them, and/or has more relevant creativity? Perhaps the best of the past along with the best of today might yield an improved result?

Thanks


BTW - I just ordered your & Forrest's Book!

[Mark_Fine]

Simon,
To clarify, I wouldn’t change what I do based on whether Ross was one site one time, two times, not at all,…. That was my point.  Once we understand as best we can how the course itself evolved and what was Ross vs someone else, then we can make more educated decisions.  Does that clarify?


Tim,
I don’t consider myself expert at anything as that is not for me to decide.  Have I done a lot of GCA research, the answer is yes.

[Simon Barrington]

Simon,
To clarify, I wouldn’t change what I do based on whether Ross was one site one time, two times, not at all,…. That was my point.  Once we understand as best we can how the course itself evolved and what was Ross vs someone else, then we can make more educated decisions.  Does that clarify? ...

Yes, Thank you.
I may have read it differently, hence my question.
Good to know what went before (regardless of by whom, and how often by them) is included in your decsion process.

[Tags:]

Tags: