[JC Jones]

From Golf.com website description of Crystal Downs:

This course was built on a bluff overlooking Lake Michigan and Crystal Lake. The tree-lined fairways are extremely hilly, so expect many uneven lies. One small pond comes into play on the 550-yard, par-5 8th hole. Originally designed by Alister MacKenzie and Perry Maxwell in 1929, Crystal Downs was redesigned by Geoffrey Cornish and Brian Silva in 1985.

Redesigned?  To what extent?  I think I recall a recent post re Crystal Downs playing in as close to its original design of any "golden age" course.

Can anyone clarify?

[ed_getka]

JC,
   Tom Doak or Mike DeVries are who you want to ask. They both grew up around there. I don't remember many details but not much has been done to the course. Somebody was there years ago to look things over, but I don't remember if any changes were implemented.

[Brian_Sleeman]

From what I know, around 2000 some work was undertaken to restore some of the original bunkering.  Tree removal has occurred here and there over the years but very few were ever added in the first place.  I'm not sure what the deal is with Brian Silva but I'll ask around and I'm sure Tom Doak and/or Mike DeVries will chime in.

[Tom_Doak]

In the early eighties, Geoff Cornish was called in [on the strength of being co-author of The Golf Course, with Ron Whitten] to consult on the course.  He narrowed some of the fairways with contour mowing, and suggested some cape and bay work on the bunkers, which was carried out by then-superintendent Tom Mead [who later was one of my associates].  Brian Silva made one or two trips as part of that job and rebuilt the #1 tee.

In the early 1990's, the club found an old home-movie film which showed most of the holes as they existed in 1932.  None of the cape and bay work was correct ... most of the bunkers didn't have any, Cornish had just assumed so because it was a MacKenzie design.  So, when the bunkers were redone again [in-house again, by the current superintendent Mike Morris], the old film was used as a guideline for most of the bunkers.  The fairway lines have also been redone, so pretty much none of Geoff Cornish's work is left there.

The small pond that used to be in front of the 8th tee was also converted to a wetland.

Also, just for the record, Mike grew up near Crystal Downs but I only came up to see it for the first time while I was in college, in 1982, just before any of the newer work was done to the course.

[ed_getka]

Tom,
   Thanks for the clarification. Have you seen that film of the course?

[John Kavanaugh]

ed,

Did you play Crystal Downs with HW Wind?

[Tom_Doak]

Ed,

Yes, somewhere I still have a copy of the film, though I haven't looked at it for several years now.  They made a bunch of still photos from it to guide them in rebuilding the bunkers.

[JC Jones]

Thanks for the clarification Tom.

I wonder if it is still right to give Cornish and Silva architectual credit if their work has been undone....

[Tom_Doak]

Well, the first tee is still as they rebuilt it.

Really, though, this is why I think architects shouldn't take credit for redesign and restoration work unless it is a complete redesign.  Building new ladies' tees shouldn't give anybody the right to put Oakmont on their resume.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

I knew that tee felt different!  BTW, I got to wondering the other day if there was any chance the 11th green was mildly inspired by the Valley of Sin?  Any thoughts?

As to attribution, I agree some gca's have exagerrated credit over the years, but its natural to want a larger number of projects on the resume. It gets complicated for the historian, since many different gca's have worked on a lot of different courses, doing many types of projects that aren't necessarily design.

Cornish and Whitten had it about right in The Golf Course, where they probably listed it as such for Geoff:

Remodels
.....

Michigan: Crystal Downs, 1985 (r: 1 tee)

I think they got those lists from the gca's, so most of us are pretty up front about exactly what we did. However, even the knowledge that the firm did a tee may leave the historian wondering about exactly which tee without further documentation.

Wouldn't most agree that people should know exactly who did what and when?

It gets harder when the work isn't exactly design related. For example, years ago at Colonial in Ft. Worth, I did a complete drainage system that helped both tournament and membership in keeping the course playable after Texas rains.  I am proud of that work, even though others have worked there before and since.

Should the world know that I (and others, whose greens and tees are now obliterated by the newest Keith Foster renovation) had a hand in how the course plays now?  And how much detail do people want to know?  


How should one credit renovation work that is NLE? The 12th green at Colonial might read:

Bredemus, 1936-1968
Plummer 1968 (channel relocation forces green move 100 yards south)

Morrish 1983-1996 (redesign and flattening)

Brauer (added tee and fw drainage)

Various Superintendents (Re-seeded new Bent Grass Strains, added drainage. Some inadvertant re-contouring may have occurred)

Foster (1996 restoration to 1983 Morrish Plan, with added flare)


How about consulting reports with work being done by the super years later in removing trees or other mundane tasks that improve the golf course pursuant to the gca recommendations, and yet, not really design?

Short version:  I am in favor of more specific credits and attributions so future generations know how the course evolved, not less, just because the work wasn't "important." If it wasn't important, it wouldn't have been undertaken, no?

[JC Jones]

I have not a leg to stand on in this conversation for several reasons including:

1.  im not a gca
2.  i've never played CD

However, IMO, a gca shouldnt slap his name on one of the worlds best courses if A) his/her work wasnt extensive enough to change the course significantly; or B) his/her work has been completely undone (save 1 tee box) because it was found to be inaccurate.  

That being said, for historical reasons, Im strongly in favor of the course keeping accurate records of who did what to the course and when.  I just dont think I should read your name on golf.com as an architect of the course simply because you made some tweaks...especially if they arent there anymore.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:

I'm all for correct attribution.  However, nobody follows through on it.  

No architect ever volunteers that they did a Master Plan, but no one acted on it, or it's all been blown up by Arthur Hills' subsequent master plan.  Most are counting on getting some vague credit toward having done redesign work at a famous course.  

I know of several cases where architects have taken credit for working at a course, where all they have done is rebuild or add to the practice facility.  But I'll be polite and not name names.

You asked if the work wasn't important, why would it have been undertaken?  Sometimes, it was undertaken because the architect was a good salesman, and subsequent generations have seen through that and want to put it back the way it was.

[Bill_McBride]

I was lucky enough to be able to play Crystal Downs this summer and it immediately joined my pantheon of all time favorites.  It ranks right up there with The Valley Club and Pasatiempo, just behind Cypress Point and just ahead of Meadow Club and Alwoodley among the MacKenzies I've played.

Incredible set of greens.  I think #11 might be the steepest green I've ever played and think it's more a reflection of that slope than a homage to the Valley of Sin.  No earthmoving!

#8 and #16, very difficult set of par 5s, which is not that characteristic of MacKenzie par 5s in my experience.  I'll bet #1 was a par 5 in its early days, and perhaps #2 as well.  That would match Valley Club and Pasatiempo for opening par 5s.

#17 could be MacKenzie's funkiest hole.  Anything else match that 300 yards of madness?  My tee shot hung up in the fescue at the very top of the slope high on the right side, not a fun place from which to play the approach, a chop in this case.

I've always loved the walkability of Dr. MacKenzie's courses, and Crystal Downs doesn't let you down except for the trek from #11 to #12. I wonder why they didn't clear out those trees, I guess because of the road in front of the #12 tee.

[ed_getka]

JakaB,
   No, I never had the chance to golf with Mr. Wind. Just the lunches and long conversations. Why do you ask?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()