[Anthony Gray]

  What's the history with theses courses?

  ARG

[PCCraig]

The Ohio State course is essentially a Jack N. course now after a recent butchering/renovation/redesign.

The U of M course is alot of fun to play, and has an unreal amount of potential in the hands of a Devries, Doak, etc..., but was "renovated" by Art Hills about 10 years ago and according to many he didn't do a good enough job. There was a recent thread that could be found easily by using the search tool.

[Matt Elliott]

The Ohio State course is essentially a Jack N. course now after a recent butchering/renovation/redesign.

The U of M course is alot of fun to play, and has an unreal amount of potential in the hands of a Devries, Doak, etc..., but was "renovated" by Art Hills about 10 years ago and according to many he didn't do a good enough job. There was a recent thread that could be found easily by using the search tool.

I agree, I'm not a fan of what Jack did at Scarlet. I don't really remember what the course was like pre-renovation, however Scarlet isn't really much fun to play with Jacks enormous bunkers. Also, the fourth hole is really bad and doesn't fit in with the other 17 holes at all.

The golf course is worth playing, it's just not somewhere you want to play every day unless you're a student and can get a membership for cheap.

[Brent Carlson]

Anthony,

Personally I enjoy the UM course much more.  There are a ton of fun holes that GCAers would love.  I am not sure how much MacKenzie is left.  Chuck Brown has some good information regarding the course.

I would consider OSU more of a championship test for the modern game. 

[Sean_A]

Here is a great thread on UofM.  Some believe UofM would be loads better in the hands of an expert.  I disagree and think the course would be marginally better - certainly not enough to spend loads.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,34505.0/

I have never seen OSU and the recent pix of Jack's work doesn't compel me to make the trip to the dreaded Buckeye Land.

Ciao

[Tom MacWood]

I would not call Ohio State a Mackenzie course, and I think there is strong evidence to suggest Michigan is actually a Maxwell design.

[Rick Sides]

The Battle For Toldeo continues!

[Niall Hay]

Ohio State (Scarlet) is the better course, a championship course. That said it is brutally difficult. UM may be more enjoyable to play, but not as good as Scarleto which is a much the Good Doctor as UM's.

Laurent, where are you now Mr. Buckeye?

[J Sadowsky]

The Michigan course greens still have a lot of Maxwell in them, though they may have been dumbed down a little.  The routing is still all MacKenzie's, and it's a top notch routing.  THe bunkering and some of the contours have been dumbed down by Hills, but I think the "spirit" of the MacKenzie course is still there, and I also think that Hills - although he didn't do an A+ job - gets unfairly maligned on the Michigan restoration because the course doesn't "look" like a Doak-restored MacKenzie course, even if it still plays like one to a large extent.

[Chip Gaskins]

i have heard that there was a chance the Mackenzie may not have even been to Ann Arbor and Maxwell did the work.

[J Sadowsky]

The greens are definitely Maxwell's, the routing I'm less sure about. 

[Chip Gaskins]

then again, i have heard that the athletic director at the time convinced Mackenzie to stop in Ann Arbor to look at the site on his way from Crystal Downs to Detroit where he was taking the train to go out west.  Anyone know if this is true?  Maybe he saw the site, did the routing and Maxwell followed up and built the course??

[Chris_Clouser]

There are a lot of stories about how Maxwell and Mackenzie were hired at Michigan.  Some say Fielding Yost wanted to hire Maxwell specifically from his experience at the Melrose course in Philadelphia.  Some say he wanted to hire Mackenzie directly and Maxwell came along with the package.  I'm not 100% sure what is 100% correct, but this is the best that I have come up with. 

Mackenzie was contacted by U of M in most accounts and I tend to lean this direction as well.  From here on out I'm pretty sure on what happened, just not exactly when as dates seem to contradict depending on the source.  Mackenzie accepted the contract and had Maxwell visit the potential site in 1929 before going home to Oklahoma that fall from Crystal Downs.  Maxwell did the initial routing of the course in 1929 (I have a copy of it and it is dated).  Mackenzie then came through Ann Arbor and gave recommendations on changes to the routing, mostly in holes 2 through 6 and probably some bunkering advice as was his custom on their projects.  Maxwell made the changes and handled the construction.  Maxwell oversaw the construction personally while also going back and forth between Crystal Downs and Ann Arbor.  His lead construction man, Dean Woods, was in Kentucky working at Princeton and going back to Oklahoma on a few small projects there while also chipping in at Crystal and U of M when possible.  I don't know if Mackenzie ever saw the final product at either location. 

[Brent Carlson]

Sean,

After reading you're linked thread, I am very tempted to pen a letter to David Brandon.  If Mike DeVries is offering I will mention his name.  I still think the course has a lot of potential.

BC

Here is a great thread on UofM.  Some believe UofM would be loads better in the hands of an expert.  I disagree and think the course would be marginally better - certainly not enough to spend loads.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,34505.0/

I have never seen OSU and the recent pix of Jack's work doesn't compel me to make the trip to the dreaded Buckeye Land.

Ciao

[Sean_A]

Sean,

After reading you're linked thread, I am very tempted to pen a letter to David Brandon.  If Mike DeVries is offering I will mention his name.  I still think the course has a lot of potential.

BC

Here is a great thread on UofM.  Some believe UofM would be loads better in the hands of an expert.  I disagree and think the course would be marginally better - certainly not enough to spend loads.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,34505.0/

I have never seen OSU and the recent pix of Jack's work doesn't compel me to make the trip to the dreaded Buckeye Land.

Ciao

Brent

I am not sure what is meant by potential.  Much would depend on what a project like re-expanding the greens would cost.  Now isn't really the time for a public institution in Michigan, especially one fighting for every public dollar it can from an increasing shrinking public pot and one whose impressive portfolio of investments is bound to have been hard recently, to be spending money on a golf course.  While I love the course and think Doak completely and totally missed the boat with a 3 rating (probably Doak's biggest cock-up in his CG), real world realities lead me to think the course is just not good enough and thus worthy of public spending for a redo so quickly after the last redo.  

Ciao  

[Brian Laurent]

It wouldn't surprise me if MacKenzie never visited the U of M site...why would anyone want to visit Ann Arbor to begin with!? 

I was a bit unsure of the changes at first, but the more I play the new Scarlet the more I see the course really hasn't changed...playing angles/strategy remain the same (with exception of #4) and it's still one of the most difficult courses I've ever played, especially when playing fast and firm to some of Coach Brown's Kepler pin placements!   

Thomas MacWood did a fantastic write-up of Scarlet:
http://golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/ohio-state-golf

[Niall Hay]

Completely agree Brian. The Tom MacWood piece (I like to call "A Study in Scarlet") is the reason I got into GCA.com. It is the best, most interesting piece of golf and overall history on not just the course, but the history of the athletic dept, OSU, economics, and the general evolution of big times college sports. Awesome write-up and I wish there were more like it.

At the very least having had the land picked out by Ross, routing (at the very least) by the good Doctor and his continued input by him and his associates and now Jack still make it a classic championship golf course that compares favorably to the others (and there are many greats in Ohio) in the area.  It is as hard a course as any I have played including Pine Valley, Oakland Hills, Pinehurst 2 and many others beasts….add in Brownies “qualifier” pin placements and early morning tee times post college late night “socializing” and it is second to none in difficulty.

Scarlet is a difficult championship course, UM is a fun quirky course....having played both many many times and discussing with a variety of college golfers all agree although harder, longer and less enjoyable (at times) Scarleto is superior to UM in design and overall layout.

[Richard Choi]

There is only one way to resolve this debate!

Midwest Mashie 2011 - OSU course vs UM course!!!

[Brian Laurent]

….add in Brownies “qualifier” pin placements and early morning tee times post college late night “socializing” and it is second to none in difficulty.

I have no idea what you're talking about, Niall...there was no "socializing" with our group!!!

The best part about the OSU courses is that you can bang your head against the wall all day on Scarleto and follow that up with a nice walk in the park on Gray-gusta, where even par was usually a bad score.

Richard...sounds like a great plan for the 2011 Mashie. 

[Brent Carlson]

Sean,

All I would like to see the greens restored and trees chopped.  When I was in school the course turned a nice profit, so I think the course could pay for it itself and not pull from public funds.  Kind of like the stadium where the profits are being reinvested to return greater profits in the future.  Like you say however, now may not be the time for a restoration.

-------------------

Brent

I am not sure what is meant by potential.  Much would depend on what a project like re-expanding the greens would cost.  Now isn't really the time for a public institution in Michigan, especially one fighting for every public dollar it can from an increasing shrinking public pot and one whose impressive portfolio of investments is bound to have been hard recently, to be spending money on a golf course.  While I love the course and think Doak completely and totally missed the boat with a 3 rating (probably Doak's biggest cock-up in his CG), real world realities lead me to think the course is just not good enough and thus worthy of public spending for a redo so quickly after the last redo.  

Ciao  
[/quote]

[Andy Troeger]

At the very least having had the land picked out by Ross, routing (at the very least) by the good Doctor and his continued input by him and his associates and now Jack still make it a classic championship golf course that compares favorably to the others (and there are many greats in Ohio) in the area.  It is as hard a course as any I have played including Pine Valley, Oakland Hills, Pinehurst 2 and many others beasts….add in Brownies “qualifier” pin placements and early morning tee times post college late night “socializing” and it is second to none in difficulty.

Niall,
When you say the course compares favorably to the others in the area do you mean quality or difficulty? Muirfield Village and The Golf Club blow away Scarlet in my opinion, and Double Eagle and Wedgewood are comfortably ahead for me as well. Scarlet is very difficult, probably harder than any of the others except MV, but hard doesn't mean good.

[Niall Hay]

Certainly would put The Golf Club, Muirfield Village and Scioto as top 3, but Scarlet is an excellent course and is as good as any not in the top 3….also it is harder than any other in the area but much of what is wrong with Scarlet is condition and simply being beat up by lots of play among other things.

Agreed that difficult does not equate to good. But Scarlet is both.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()