News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Banff Springs
« on: November 23, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
I heard an interesting story today:As many of you may already know, the relocation of the clubhouse at Stanley Thompson's Banff Springs course in Alberta (1927) a few years back resulted in a renumbering of the holes. Now (fairly) recent "renovation" work by Les Furber has resulted in a strange situation on the greens.  It seems after years and years of fungicide application up there in the Rockies, the greens had built up an abnormal level of Mercury in them. In turn, they were having trouble growing grass, and the decision was made to rebuild them. However, it is illegal in Canada to transport toxic materials through National Parks (and Banff is in a National Park). So there was no way to dispose of the contaminated soil.Furber's answer was to rebuilt the greens on top of the existing greens. Sixteen (16) inches above the level of the originals in fact. Now, aside from the additional depth of the  greenside bunkers, the green surfaces are actually raised 16 inches higher than the level of the fairways. Playing the ball onto the greens via the ground has change, I imagine?Has anyone seen the course since the Furber renovation? My source also mentioned that a few fairway bunkers were relocated from there original positions to that "magical" 240-260 yards distance from the tee as well!!! Which is believable considering Furber recently professed his dislike for random bunkering schemes in an interview appearing at golf.com.
jeffmingay.com

Ran Morrissett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Banff Springs
« Reply #1 on: November 24, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
I personally doubt the veracity of the story - I walked the back nine two years ago last month when it was being "restored." Certainly, I have an untrained eye to the actual building (or re-building) of a course but nothing untoward seemed to be going on.Regardless, I hope everyone has or will go there. Properly done, the orginial 18 is as inspiring a setting with which I am familiar.

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Banff Springs
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
Ran -- I STRESS that this is ONLY a "story" as I know it now. I haven't seen the coursesince the renovation.In fact, I'll say that I heard the "story" from another architect who was competing for the job with Furber (he's actually a former employee of Furber's as well). So I hope you're right.It is a classic Thompson layout.
jeffmingay.com

Tom Naccarato

Banff Springs
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
Be afraid, be very, very afraid!I heard the same story and I heard it was very true.  I also heard that the greens were not even close to the same original contours.

Yancey_Beamer

Banff Springs
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
I also walked the back nine two years ago and at that stage of renovation could not tell if there were any severe changes.I certainly hope not.This must be the most incredible setting in all of golf.

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Banff Springs
« Reply #5 on: November 24, 1999, 07:00:00 PM »
In response to Naccarato's post, I also heard -- as a part of the "horrifying" story that instigated this discussion -- that the original green contours were NOT "laser mapped". And, in turn, the new greens are far from the original Thompson contours. Sadly, this is shaping up to be an unfortunate situation.
jeffmingay.com