Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: mark chalfant on November 05, 2007, 07:45:41 PM
-
a friend told me that he was certain that Thompson did some work in northern Ohio. Is anyone familiar. If so, are the routings/ features still intact ?
thanks
-
Here is at least one course, well spoken of. View the nice 'images'.
http://www.golfclevelandohio.com/G2003-main.htm
-
Damn!
Just checked my link and found it went generally to the Cleveland Golf website and not to 'Sleepy Hollow', which is the course Thompson designed.
Please go to Top 20, click on Sleepy Hollow, and THEN enjoy the pix and website.
Very sorry!
Doug
-
From a 1926 advertisement.
Beechmont GC 1925 Cleveland
Chagrin Valley 1925 Chagrin Falls
Geneva-on-the-Lake GC ca. 1925 Geneva
Sleepy Hollow 1923-25 Cleveland
Squaw Creek CC 1924 Youngstown
Trumbull CC Warren
-
Mark:
I think, if I recall our conversation, that GCA poster Evan Fleischer has played Sleepy Hollow; he lives in the area. I have not played it, but Thompson's Sleepy Hollow is a well-regarded course, perhaps a notch below the area's best (Canterbury, The Country Club in Pepper Pike and neighbor Pepper Pike CC), but still considered one of the best in northern Ohio. On some very good terrain, from what I've heard.
-
Mark,
Stanley Thompson did do a fair amount of work in Ohio, of which, I have played the following:
Sleepy Hollow GC Brecksville, OH
Geneva-On-The-Lake GC Geneva-on-the-lake, OH
Squaw Creek CC Vienna, OH
Big Met GC Cleveland, OH
Little Met GC Cleveland, OH
Sleepy Hollow appears to be the most unaltered. Squaw Creek has had a lot of bunker work done and definetly lengthened the course. The course is now owned by Avalon Properties and called Avalon Lakes CC - Squaw Creek. Geneva-on-the-Lake is 100% Thompson (C&W say it is NLE and that Garbin&Harrison have a course in Geneva with the same name). GOTL is Thompson, but alterations were done and an abandoned green is evident next to hole 11 I believe. There is still a lof of thompson there. Big Met has had a lot of work done, but many of Thompson's orginal greens are still there. I think this course is in a flood plain and has been damage in the past due to this.
I also believe he may have done at least one other course in northern Ohio that is not in C&W or the advertisements of his that I have seen.
Chris
-
The still existing Thompson courses (in one form or another) in Northern Ohio are Beechmont, Big Met, Chagrin Valley, Sleepy Hollow, Squaw Creek and Trumbull. I have played Sleepy Hollow and Squaw Creek. Sleepy Hollow is terrific and appears pretty true to its original design. Squaw Creek appears to have been altered significantly since it does not possess the bold bunkering and green complexes that I have seen on some of Thompson's other work (such as St. George's).
Chris-I have never seen Little Met listed as a Thompson design. Having played it (a 9 hole, unimaginative design), I doubt it is a Thompson. While I have seen Geneva-on-the-Lake referred to as a Thompson, I have never seen that confirmed (at least in its current state). This probably means that very little Thompson is left.
-
This thread included, I continue to hear very interesting things about Sleepy Hollow in Cleveland. I need to get down there to see the course, soon.
-
I've played Sleepy Hollow just south of Cleveland quite a bit. I essentially alternated between it and Ross' Manakiki every Saturday morning (weather permitting and I mean basically no snow & > 40 F) for 3-years.
I don't know, however, how intact it is. Because it's a public course, it may have been less destroyed by greens committees than a private club.
It's a city MetroParks owned course. It and Manakiki are the flagship golf courses of the MetroParks system.
The terrain for Sleepy Hollow is great. Basically 10000+ years ago the land there was a bunch of glacier lakes so it's great rolling terrain. Perfect for parkland golf. Since it's Cleveland city parks, there are signs explaining the waters receeding to the Great Lakes and leaving the rolling terrain. There are also signs describing the local wildife.
It's a great course with a strong set of opening holes.
(http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~jconnor/SleepyHollow.jpg)
The front nine is on the top, the back nine on the bottom above.
1 is a pretty easy downhill par 5 (and the site of perhaps the longest shot I've ever made for eagle, maybe 60 yards, no career holes in one here). But 2-4 are tough.
2 is a 200+ yard par three with death to the right (coming back to the clubhouse).
3 is a 440 yard par 3 with trees coming out from the left between the 1st and 2nd shot and a gulley a bit before the green (you can see the fairway stops above, it's the hole in the middle near the top). Very tough hole. I'd call it the toughest par 4 I played in Cleveland.
4 is a long (maybe 560) straight away par 4.
6 is a fun short par 3. Left and/or short and you have to pitch straight up, you're way below the hole. Long you're dead.
They were redoing the 8th green when I left. It was a par 3 with a super steep green. Basically you had to be below the hole or you'd be back off the green if you missed your putt. THey were flattening it a bit.
9 was a medium straight away par 4. It's a much better hole than the 18th. Good green.
The back nine is St. Andrews-esque in that there is just one par three and one par five and 7 par fours.
13 is a pretty hole where you cross a walking bridge to the men's tee then play straight out to the fairway before the hole drops off steeply and you hit to blind green beneath you (unless you boomo your drive).
14, the only par-5 is nearly a 90 degree dogleg left. Your 2nd shot is merely a wedge to get up to the turn unless you want to hit a blind shot over trees, something I've tried many times and succeeding hitting the green only a few times. It's the hole on the far right of the layout above.
15, 16 and 17 are shorter par 4s but wiht plenty of character.
15 has you hitting to a steep elevated green. Tough par if you miss the green.
16 has a rolling fairway with jail left. And you have to hit the right side of the fairway for the best shot into the green. There is a ridge on the where if you hit it correctly, you'll get some added distance and roll into great position for a short approach. If you look closely above (the hole before the hard, short dogleg left 17th) you can actually see the ridge I'm referring to.
17 is a short dog leg left where if you turn it over (for a righty) you can drive the green. Perhaps my funniest golf story occurred on this hole one very rainy Labor Day.
I thought the finishing hole was a bit dull, a straight away par-4 that's perhaps the least memorable hole on the course.
So that was a long answer. And I'm not sure how true to Thompson's original design it is. But it's a fun course, open to the public, that's definitely worth playing if you're anywhere nearby.
I'd also encourage you to his Manakiki, a public Ross course nearby. There are a bunch of Ross courses, including a very early one (Shaker Heights CC) in the Cleveland area.
-
Mark:
I think, if I recall our conversation, that GCA poster Evan Fleischer has played Sleepy Hollow; he lives in the area. I have not played it, but Thompson's Sleepy Hollow is a well-regarded course, perhaps a notch below the area's best (Canterbury, The Country Club in Pepper Pike and neighbor Pepper Pike CC), but still considered one of the best in northern Ohio. On some very good terrain, from what I've heard.
Have always enjoyed Sleepy Hollow...should really get out there more since it is only about 25 minutes from my house. but being new to the Cleveland area I'm taking in the local scene.
Big Met is an 18 hole course (not 9), and Thompson is credited as the architect of record...but maintenance changes (like grassing in all the bunkers) and being located in a flood plain has really altered the essential design elements to the point where it simply looks like a ho-hum muni now.
I have yet to play any of the other Thompson courses listed...but for $30-ish to play at Sleepy Hollow, why bother? ;) 8)
-
Billsteele,
Geneva-On-The-Lake GC to me is similar to Big Met. If you go out and play what is there, the greens and bunkers (many have been gassed in) have the look and feel of Thompson. I believe there were some alterations done most likely by Garbin and Harrison in the 50's or 60's (Hence the dual Geneva-On-The-Lake GC's in Cornish & Whitten). This may have been the case because the course was dormant for awhile. I know some work was done because there is an unused green site off of the 11th hole and from the aerial, it looks like two holes may have been abandoned north of the currenth 16th / 17th holes. They may not have ever been holes though b/c behind the short par 3 16th is a marshy area and this may be what is visible on the aerial.
Based on the greens and grassed in bunkering, I still think there is still a fair amount of Thompson there.
-
Jason:
Thanks for the aerial and the great write-up; I used to live nearby Sleepy Hollow, but never took up golf until I'd moved from the Cleveland area. The back nine does look really interesting; I'm intrigued by the par 3 12th; I originally thought it was a Biarritz-like hole with a significant walk-back from the 11th green, but couldn't figure out where the tee was. Then I realized it's more of a Redan with the tee behind the path near the tree line past the 11th green. That looks like one hard hole -- heavily trapped to a shallow green with no real apparent place to bail out. What distance does it play at?
A feature I find interesting on this course, and that I see on some old classic courses (but perhaps not on moderns?) like Oakmont (5?) is the use of interrupted fairways, often accompanied by sharp changes in terrain. SH appears to have four such holes, including three in a row on the back nine. Neat stuff.
-
Phil,
I'd say 12 is the easiest par 3 on the course! All 3 par 3's on the front were much harder.
The tee is basically behind and left of the 11th green. And it's pretty flat, just a bit of a hollow before the green. As the overhead shows, it's by far the most open of the par-3s (i.e though it has the most traps of any green, it has the fewest trees of the par 3s).
As mentioned #2 is super long with a very deep, mutli-tiered green.
6 is a elevated green with super steep drop offs, it's far more Redan like than 12.
8 is tight plus had an impossible green (it's possible since they were flattening it that it's become easier if you keep the tee shot straight).
I don't remember the distance, but I'm think it was 135-150.
Sleepy Hollow is a great course.
Big Met and Little Met are your standard crappy muni's. That's why I played SH and Manakiki over and over for three years. Nothing beat playing Ross and Thompson every weekend for $25.
-
Maybe some gca'ers can do a get together at Sleepy Hollow next spring? I might be able to swing a free day.
-
Maybe some gca'ers can do a get together at Sleepy Hollow next spring? I might be able to swing a free day.
George,
Give me a buzz in the Spring and I'd be happy to try and coordinate something for the gang.
BTW...an interesting side note...I've played the place jsut a small handfull of times and each time there the nines have been reversed! Seems they are constantly having problems with pace-of-play and try switching nines every now and again to see which configuration works better. I do not know what the "original" routing was, but I think that the first hole going away from the clubhouse (closest to the driving range) is the #1 hole.
-
Playing it for the 3 years I did 2000-2003, #1 was always the par 5, which is further from the clubhouse (to the north) than #10, the tee by the clubhouse beside the practice range.
I'd never known them to switch, so that's interesting.
-
Playing it for the 3 years I did 2000-2003, #1 was always the par 5, which is further from the clubhouse (to the north) than #10, the tee by the clubhouse beside the practice range.
I'd never known them to switch, so that's interesting.
Jason...first time I played the hole I speak of was the #1 hole...next time I played "your" hole was #1...and now they are back to "my" hole as #1. Seems that the par-3 #11 hole was causing a fairly significant back-up as the second hole out for the day so they've decided to switch it back to the back-nine.
Go figure...
-
Yeah, as mentioned 1 is a reachable, downhill par 5 followed by a very very hard long par 3.
So there was always a wait on the 2nd tee, but after that things were typically pretty well spaced.
PS Evan -- I love the license plate. Me too, every round I've ever played at Sleepy Hollow.
-
Maybe some gca'ers can do a get together at Sleepy Hollow next spring? I might be able to swing a free day.
George: I know Ian Andrew and I have been talking about coming down to see Thompson's work in the area for some time -- perhaps we can make arrangements to meet up. Ian knows about as much about Thompson and his work as anybody...
-
Yeah, as mentioned 1 is a reachable, downhill par 5 followed by a very very hard long par 3.
So there was always a wait on the 2nd tee, but after that things were typically pretty well spaced.
PS Evan -- I love the license plate. Me too, every round I've ever played at Sleepy Hollow.
Thanks Jason...now that I live in Ohio I have a "boring/normal" license plate, but will always love the one on my avatar!
Gang...please let me know if you all plan on coming to my fair city...would love to be a part of the gathering.
-
If there is a Toronto to Cleveland trip next spring I'll even offer to drive.
-
I'm in the process of moving from Indianapolis to Orlando.
But I might try to swing this. I have an open business invitation back in Ohio, so perhaps I can work to the two together and even expense the trip.
-
Maybe some gca'ers can do a get together at Sleepy Hollow next spring? I might be able to swing a free day.
George: I know Ian Andrew and I have been talking about coming down to see Thompson's work in the area for some time -- perhaps we can make arrangements to meet up. Ian knows about as much about Thompson and his work as anybody...
I can think of few things I'd enjoy more than finally meeting my Canadians friends while enjoying a Thompson design accompanied by someone with Ian's background.
Since you and Ian would be the guests of honor at said event, perhaps you could choose a date and the rest of us could try to work around it. I'd be happy to help out in any way possible.
BTW, for the Cleveland posters:
Steelers 31, Browns 28. Nice try. :)
-
Maybe some gca'ers can do a get together at Sleepy Hollow next spring? I might be able to swing a free day.
George: I know Ian Andrew and I have been talking about coming down to see Thompson's work in the area for some time -- perhaps we can make arrangements to meet up. Ian knows about as much about Thompson and his work as anybody...
I can think of few things I'd enjoy more than finally meeting my Canadians friends while enjoying a Thompson design accompanied by someone with Ian's background.
Since you and Ian would be the guests of honor at said event, perhaps you could choose a date and the rest of us could try to work around it. I'd be happy to help out in any way possible.
BTW, for the Cleveland posters:
Steelers 31, Browns 28. Nice try. :)
"Just wait 'till next year!" :o 8) ??? :'(
-
Hi Guys,
Interesting reading. Not only have I been down numerous times since this thread began, but I've played/walked most of the courses mentioned. I'm also working with three of the Stanley Thompson courses that have been discussed.
I've got a question that hopefully someone can help me with. Was the current 9th at Chagrin Valley originally a three or four when it opened? It's currently played as a long par three. I know it played as a short four for quite a long time before that. It appears to be be a very long three in the earlies aerial. "Appears" and "was" are too different levels of surety.
Just wondering if anyone has earlier information or a score card from "Back in the day."
Thanks in advance .....
-
Ian,
Are you doing any work on Sleepy Hollow? One of my all time favorite public courses.
Regards,
Geoff
-
Ian:
The April 6, 1924 Cleveland Plain Dealer noted the 9th as a 323 yard Par 4 and the 18th as a 342 yard par 4. This was an early version of the course (credited to Thompson), and I believe the front nine of this course became the back nine when nine holes were added around 1928. The old second nine (which was located across the street) was used as a course by at least two other organizations. I don't have any information on who designed the nine added in 1928, and I am not sure what order of nines the course is played in now.
Here are the yardages from 1924 for the full 18, which might help (the article I have is fairly blurred out, so these might not be completely accurate):
Original Nine
1 - 295 Par 4
2 - 137 Par 3
3 - 284 Par 4
4 - 402 Par 4
5 - 393 Par 4
6 - 415 Par 4
7 - 397 Par 4
8 - ??? Par 3
9 - 323 Par 4
New Nine -
1 - 410 Par 4
2 - 465 Par 5
3 - 433 Par 4
4 - 435 Par 4
5 - 140 Par 3
6 - 325 Par 4
7 - 363 Par 4
8 - 233 Par 4
9 - 342 Par 4
Hope that helps.
Sven
-
Sven
The clubhouse was in a different location, so yes that is helpful, just have to go through the holes and confirm. Thanks for that.
Geoffrey,
Yes, I put together a Master Plan for them. It’s probably 10 years of tree removal before anything else might happen. The canyon hole is where I think they need to focus first. They’ve started, but have lots more to remove.
-
Hello all....long time lurker, first time poster. Wanted to follow up with some earlier Plain Dealer coverage I dug up a few years ago that sheds some light on Sleepy Hollow's early days.
Per a 1922 Plain-Dealer article, the first nine holes at the property were designed by Harry Bandy (secretary of the Cleveland District Golf Association) and Howard Hollis (an acclaimed local golfer based out of Portage CC). That article states:
“Harry Bandy and Howard Hollinger, who have outlined the first nine holes, which they expect to be ready for play by mid-summer, have wisely utilized every facility accorded by nature. Their plan for the course follows the high ground in a manner that brings the hollows, rough, water and woods into the best possible play.”
This included the current holes 10, 11, 13-18.
Thompson arrived during 1924 and set about creating the current nos. 1-9 (perhaps why its par 3s are more eye-catching), as well as removing Bandy & Hollis's no. 12 and creating a new par three, which exists there today.
Bandy and Hollis clearly had some eye for potential holes -- the aforementioned "Canyon" hole was and may still be the most celebrated, and I've always enjoyed the preceding par four as well -- but in Bandy's own words, the pair were not destined to be great architects. A quote in that same article:
“We laid it out pretty well I thought...But we sort of forgot to get any grass on the greens. That was somewhat bad and had to be rectified.”
Ian:
The April 6, 1924 Cleveland Plain Dealer noted the 9th as a 323 yard Par 4 and the 18th as a 342 yard par 4. This was an early version of the course (credited to Thompson), and I believe the front nine of this course became the back nine when nine holes were added around 1928. The old second nine (which was located across the street) was used as a course by at least two other organizations. I don't have any information on who designed the nine added in 1928, and I am not sure what order of nines the course is played in now.
Here are the yardages from 1924 for the full 18, which might help (the article I have is fairly blurred out, so these might not be completely accurate):
Original Nine
1 - 295 Par 4
2 - 137 Par 3
3 - 284 Par 4
4 - 402 Par 4
5 - 393 Par 4
6 - 415 Par 4
7 - 397 Par 4
8 - ??? Par 3
9 - 323 Par 4
New Nine -
1 - 410 Par 4
2 - 465 Par 5
3 - 433 Par 4
4 - 435 Par 4
5 - 140 Par 3
6 - 325 Par 4
7 - 363 Par 4
8 - 233 Par 4
9 - 342 Par 4
Hope that helps.
Sven
-
Hello all....long time lurker, first time poster. Wanted to follow up with some earlier Plain Dealer coverage I dug up a few years ago that sheds some light on Sleepy Hollow's early days.
Per a 1922 Plain-Dealer article, the first nine holes at the property were designed by Harry Bandy (secretary of the Cleveland District Golf Association) and Howard Hollis (an acclaimed local golfer based out of Portage CC). That article states:
“Harry Bandy and Howard Hollinger, who have outlined the first nine holes, which they expect to be ready for play by mid-summer, have wisely utilized every facility accorded by nature. Their plan for the course follows the high ground in a manner that brings the hollows, rough, water and woods into the best possible play.”
This included the current holes 10, 11, 13-18.
Thompson arrived during 1924 and set about creating the current nos. 1-9 (perhaps why its par 3s are more eye-catching), as well as removing Bandy & Hollis's no. 12 and creating a new par three, which exists there today.
Bandy and Hollis clearly had some eye for potential holes -- the aforementioned "Canyon" hole was and may still be the most celebrated, and I've always enjoyed the preceding par four as well -- but in Bandy's own words, the pair were not destined to be great architects. A quote in that same article:
“We laid it out pretty well I thought...But we sort of forgot to get any grass on the greens. That was somewhat bad and had to be rectified.”
Just fixing the font size.
-
Thanks..."first-time poster," indeed.
-
Thanks..."first-time poster," indeed.
If you want, you can click the Modify button at the top of your post, highlight all the text and then choose 10pt from the Font Size dropdown box and then click save/post to fix your original. The font size issue is a bug, nothing you did wrong.