[RJ_Daley]

I'm in accord with Steve and Ian.  We've discussed this whole issue many times in the past, most often when Geof Shack was a frequent contributor.  

From all accounts, it does seem like Faz/Marz got the gig on a certain premise (as Steve describes even using old photos as a baseline for what the scope of the project would be, then changed horses in midstream with on-the-fly stylistic changes).  And, to read the quote in Tony's LINKS article, it would point even stronger to a certain mindset of Marz putting himself ahead and above the original architect Thomas-Bell whom in this case weren't just some dirt pushers, but among the great historically significant creating one of the most distinctive and compelling styles af all times.  Riv is Thomas's "crown jewel" as Ian rightly observes.  I think that the owner and members do have a certain debt and responsibility to care for a jewel of such prominence in the world of GCA.  

To say it is their money and they can do with it as they want is technically correct.  But, if someone bought them out, and excised the "tumors" and restored the graceful lines, the current owners would still be the goats, and whoever restored it faithfully would be the hero.  

I don't know all the inside baseball of the owner ignoring Geof in all of his advocating for faithful respectful restoration, or remodelling in sympathy with Thomas's style to bring the course up to date for the competition.  But, it has always seemed to me that the owner didn't give two ships about the integrity and respect of what was on the ground there (even though the indication is that Faz/Marz originally gave indications of following old photos).  And, with Geoff or Lynn being long time members and Geoff being so committed to study of the architectural aspects, and to ignore him was crude, IMHO.  Unethical as defined may be too strong, but insensitive sure fits in my book.  

BTW, thanks to Steve and Ian as they have stepped up with opinions and facts many GCS's shy away from vocalizing unfortunately in fear of members and owners too often trying to squash honest POV.  

[Lou_Duran]

Ian Larson,

Thanks for clarifying your earlier reply.  I too have no doubt that the Hanse team would've delivered a more sympathetic restoration.

It would be interesting to learn how analogous your experience at LACC is to Riviera's.  For example, are the golf course maintenance budgets similar (after adjusting for # of holes and economies of scale)?  Do they do as much hand work?

If they are, was Marzolf just plain wrong on the maintenance angle?  Did the superintendent not point this out to him?  Could the owner had just prefered a cleaner look?  Do the members really care?  (Mostly questions that can't be answered except by the principals.)

All your points are well taken.   I've only played Riviera once, and except for that damned kikuyu, there is nothing I didn't like about the course.  However, I understand how people like the Shackelfords and yourself, who experienced  the course closely over many years, can have such strong feelings about it.

[Mike_DeVries]

"Could it be that ragged, frayed-edged bunkers came into being because of the nature of the soils and climate in the areas where golf started and that it was impractical to build and maintain them with cleaner lines?  Did Mike DeVries at Meadow?  Certainly these gentlemen are as "ethical" and sympathetic to what we call classical architecture as they come."


For clarification, the bunkers at Meadow were never "ragged, fray-dedged bunkers" -- they were originally made with the shallow scallops that we restored.  It is different than anything he ever did that I have seen and I am not sure why, but they are authentic to the pictures we have.  If, by rugged, you mean an unkempt edge, yes I would agree, and the crew there does work hard at that by trimming the edges on an irregular schedule by chopping them with a hedge trimmer!  Interesting solution that came about with trial and error.

Best,
Mike

[Bill_McBride]

"Could it be that ragged, frayed-edged bunkers came into being because of the nature of the soils and climate in the areas where golf started and that it was impractical to build and maintain them with cleaner lines?  Did Mike DeVries at Meadow?  Certainly these gentlemen are as "ethical" and sympathetic to what we call classical architecture as they come."


For clarification, the bunkers at Meadow were never "ragged, fray-dedged bunkers" -- they were originally made with the shallow scallops that we restored.  It is different than anything he ever did that I have seen and I am not sure why, but they are authentic to the pictures we have.  If, by rugged, you mean an unkempt edge, yes I would agree, and the crew there does work hard at that by trimming the edges on an irregular schedule by chopping them with a hedge trimmer!  Interesting solution that came about with trial and error.

Best,
Mike

Mike, I was there a couple of weeks ago and the bunker edges and grasses looked great.  I didn't have a chance to visit with Sean Tully to find out if this maintenance regime is causing any problems, but it sure does look good.  The course was in great condition with the Pac-10 championship coming up the next week.

Let me count the three putts........

[John Sheehan]

For clarification, the bunkers at Meadow were never "ragged, fray-dedged bunkers" -- they were originally made with the shallow scallops that we restored.  It is different than anything he ever did that I have seen and I am not sure why, but they are authentic to the pictures we have.  If, by rugged, you mean an unkempt edge, yes I would agree, and the crew there does work hard at that by trimming the edges on an irregular schedule by chopping them with a hedge trimmer!  Interesting solution that came about with trial and error.

Best,
Mike

Bunkers that are more natural looking with the scallopped edges or taller fescues are not always ALOT more money to maintain. And I think that needs to be clarified. Hard edging all the bunkers on a course could be just as much cost to maintain as a more natural bunker. Once a month I send a crew out to hard edge the bunkers at LACC South. Typically it takes a crew of five guys two days to do all bunkers, sometimes longer if theyre checking sand depth and moving it. On an average day it takes four guys four hours to hand rake all of them. Now lets imagine that I clicked my fingers and they instantly turned into bunkers with the scallopped edges and tall fescue banks. The average day of raking them would not change. And when I edged them I would do it maybe only every other month. And the crew would use pitchforks not mechanical edgers. The only added cost would be maintaining the fescues once or twice a year which would probably be very comparable to the time we spent flymowing all the banks and noses twice a month. If I sat down and put some hard numbers together I think alot of people would be surprised.

Ian -
Thank you for answering a question I have had for quite a while and have intended to post.  No one has ever been able to articulate quite as well your description of what it takes to maintain bunkers with jagged/frayed edges, scallops, etc.  I've had people tell me they are much more expensive to maintain and I could never buy into that line of reasoning.

Mike -
Thanks also to you for describing the method the crew at Meadow Club discovered for maintaining its bunkers - a hedge trimmer - who'd have thunk? Has that method been patented yet?    Good stuff.

[Ian Larson]

Lou Duran

To answer your questions it would only be the decision of the owner and the architect as to what look they would create. Rivieras superintendent and greens staff are a very hard working, talented group of guys. The superintendent obviously had input but I dont think he could have persuaded each party either way. And on the greens staff behalf, no matter what look was created, they pulled off the renovation flawlessly. Riviera does alot of handwork. They pretty much have a small crew that work on the bunkers all day every day. Rivs bunkers are always in tip top condition. Compared to LACC, budgets are somewhat comparable, but LACC doesnt put as much time and work into their bunkers.

Id also like to reiterate my point earlier. I believe they could have pulled off a cleaner look with also keeping the original look in mind. Refer to Thomas' Golf Architecture in America. There is a picture in there of the greenside bunkers for #2. Scallopped edges with a clean edge. And that is where Marzolf was completely wrong. Those edges are just as maintainable as the current edges. Only with more curves. And that is where it is up to the superintendent to go above and beyond to not let the bunker crew go out of control with a mechanical edger.

The bottom line with Riv is that I thought there was a huge disconnect between the owner, architect and Thomas. Riv could have had a more seamless renovation if the owner and architect cared at all about Thomas' vision,

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()