The real TOP 100

[Patrick Kiser]

Not unlike this suggestion + it's been mentioned here and elsewhere...

... Sharp Park

1-18 LIDO
somewhere this could be built

[Tom Huckaby]

Tyler:

Well, a healthy majority already have been removed between 1 and 9... it works pretty darn well now.  As for additional thinning between 6 and 7, I don't think they can - it's just too tight of an area - that needs blocking or the issues Bill and I highlighted come up.  Same goes for 7 and 8.

And Patrick, re Sharp Park, dare to dream.... sadly though with the city of SF involved, I don't see this happening in my lifetime.
 

[Tom Roewer]

DON'T EVEN FOOL AROUND WITH MERION!!!

[Paul_Turner]

Sitwell Park's famous green, by miles.  Good pic of it too.

For a bunker:  8th St George's Hill

[Adam_Messix]

Mike M--

What is involved in the Torresdale-Frankford Master Plan?  I hope they do not change the greens, they're awesome.

[mike_malone]

 Adam,

   I saw one possible green change--#4 , the first par three. I believe it will be expanded. The club resisted a previous recommendation to change the greens; they seem to value them appropriately. However, they seem not to value the angles of play into them that were so cleverly designed.

[Mark Bourgeois]

For a bunker:  8th St George's Hill

Second!

[Brad Tufts]

Sean-

The Ponk is a good candidate for restoration, even though the Ross 9s are split between course 1 and course 2.

The first issue would be the playing surface and drainage, of which there isn't much there now.  Almost every hole not in view of the clubhouse has potholes in the fairway, and the 7th is usually played as a 260-yd par 4, even though it was designed at 410-420.  The fairway lies so low here that they cannot maintain it as anything other than wetland.

I haven't played the Ross 9 on the #2 course, but on the #1, there are a couple holes where their design does not help their maintenance or playability, #18 in particular.  I've always thought an original refurbished Ross 18 at Ponky would be good, but not as great as all the "USGA Bethpage-US Open program" rumors may indicate.  They certainly would have the room to host a huge tournament though.

Personally, I'd love to see a sprucing up of George Wright, which has began a program by firing the former management company (Johnson Golf, bad reputation in eastern MA), and beginning a Friends of George Wright group.  This course, while only 65-6600 yards in length, could easily be among the top layouts in town if it had the money and a bit of work done.  The greens aren't as wild as Brae Burn, TCC, or Salem, but the design is there.  Not to mention the bones seem to be very intact.

Franklin Park has come a long way in making a playable product, and is a great take, although it too needs a pruning here and there, especially on #16.  It's a more historical-experience course at 6000 yards, but a good model for any city muni.

[wsmorrison]

"Any further word on documenting the architect for Philmont North?"

Kyle,

There is no further word because there is no further information and there may never be.  I would not make the assumption that Andy Karff and the club is making, namely that because William Gordon is in a photograph taken during opening day that he was working for Flynn at the time (1923-1924) and that Flynn must have designed the holes in conjunction with Park, Jr.'s routing.  William Gordon's son doesn't know when his father started working for Flynn and we have not been able to determine it either.  There is not one document that links Flynn to Philmont North.  The "Well, it looks like Flynn" evidence doesn't fly at all.  I've seen very highly skilled golf architects get attributions wrong by means of visual determination.  Without a shred of evidence that Flynn had anything to do with Philmont North, I would say any pronouncements to that effect are premature and not to be taken as truth.  J.Wood Platt's letter after the inaugural tournament congratulating the club on their new Willie Park, Jr. course is all the contemporary reference there is.  I think I'll go along with that one reference for now and till something else turns up.  We do not accept Philmont North as a Flynn golf course at this time.  The club feels otherwise but is without any support whatsoever.  People can judge for themselves.  

[JSlonis]

Adam,

   I saw one possible green change--#4 , the first par three. I believe it will be expanded. The club resisted a previous recommendation to change the greens; they seem to value them appropriately. However, they seem not to value the angles of play into them that were so cleverly designed.

That would be a shame if the club didn't address the tree issue.  The greens are wonderful and would only get better if there were opportunities to expand them back to original size.  Mayday is correct, currently there really aren't any "angles" at Torresdale...they're all covered in trees.

[Adam_Messix]

Mike & Jamie--

I'm glad to hear that they are not messing around with the green contouring, there is some interesting stuff there.  It's a shame that they aren't doing some tree cutting.  They could cut down a bunch of trees there and not appear to be doing much.  The one thing about T-F that is surprising is that there is plenty of property there, the trees make the course (particularly the 8th) rather claustrophobic.  

My addition to this list would be a complete restoration of Timber Point.  

[Jim Nugent]

Sounds like ANGC offers a smorgasboard of choices, especially with trees on various holes.  

[Patrick Kiser]

Not in my lifetime either and I'd be more than willing to donate personal time to this cause.

Forrest, you working on that survey still?

Patrick

Tyler:

Well, a healthy majority already have been removed between 1 and 9... it works pretty darn well now.  As for additional thinning between 6 and 7, I don't think they can - it's just too tight of an area - that needs blocking or the issues Bill and I highlighted come up.  Same goes for 7 and 8.

And Patrick, re Sharp Park, dare to dream.... sadly though with the city of SF involved, I don't see this happening in my lifetime.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Has Oak Hill ever reconsidered the changes made by Fazio years ago.

Many members objected to those changes at the time.

However, most of them are probably long gone by now.

I'd be interested to know what the current membership thinks about those holes ?  And, I'd be curious to know how many members even know what the original holes were like.