Hawtree and Son - The World’s Longest Continuous Golf Architectural Practice

[Jon Wiggett]

I think the Trump development will be Martin Hawtree's defining course. I hope he has the courage to do something different. It does seem that everytime he does however he gets criticised. I quite liked the work on the 17th at Birkdale and thought the new green added a lot to the hole but he was torn apart by many people for it.

Paul,

do you mean Toronto is now a small village with a railway station and two heathland courses

Jon

[Padraig Dooley]

Padraig

This is an old thread on how we discussed Lahinch at the time.  Really disagree on the 11th.  Hawtree's greens are all very similar...all raised.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,4161.0/

Most of Lahinch's greens were raised even before the redo.

[Paul_Turner]

Padraig

Re the raised greens, I was referring to Dublin.

[Ben Stephens]

Hawtree have recently done a rework of Luffenham Heath. Two new greens on 8 and 10. The surrounds of these new greens don't pay any resemblance to the other older green surrounds. Sound of the new bunkers have very steep lips and its difficult to hold enough sand up the faces. The best bunker on the course was filled in! It depends who was working on it and the contractor involved. If I was the project architect I would make sure the contractor understands that the surrounds has to be similar to the other current greens rather than do what he has done before. The mounds are repetitve and out of character. Luffenham has subtle mounds and lot of grass bunkers areas which was not replicated on the new greens.

Also they are reworking Hunstanton at the moment.

Cheers
Ben

[Paul_Turner]

Sean

If I have many variables (the clubs) and one constant (the architect) and the results are very similar....

I think that once an architect becomes very high in stature or becomes the perceived expert to work on a particular ODG's courses,  they can push through much more than what the members originally wanted in their brief.  i.e. see the old Lahinch thread above it was a Mack restoration that morphed into something else.  That then goes on to new projects....Royal Melbourne and it doesn't stop.

There's also cases as you state where an architect does an audit (possibly safety audit) and then sells a lot of changes. It's not always the case that clubs are looking to change, the ideas are sold by the architect.

[Carl Johnson]

I think the Trump development will be Martin Hawtree's defining course. I hope he has the courage to do something different. It does seem that everytime he does however he gets criticised. I quite liked the work on the 17th at Birkdale and thought the new green added a lot to the hole but he was torn apart by many people for it. . . .

A great question.  Aside from renovations and Lahinch, landing the Trump protect has got to be significant, any way you look at it.  How will that affect the Hawtree legacy, or is this not something worth speculating about now?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Paul,

The greens at Royal Dublin were raised because the main issue there was the water table. The whole course struggled with drainage becuase of its proximity to it. I agree that it was a shame they lost the 11th green (I think Padraig was thinking that you referred to the 11th at Lahinch) but the bottom tier was very low...

As for Lahinch, Hawtree's routing is much closer to that of the 1928 MacKenzie course (elimination of par-3 third, re-introduction of par-3 eighth, par-4 seventh green replaced to near the original) than the course he started with (from the early 1930's)... It is not a restoration though (eighth on different orientation, introduction of new 11th) but was it ever billed that way?...

Niall,

You refer to FG when you mean to say FW...

[Jon Wiggett]

I think the Trump development will be Martin Hawtree's defining course. I hope he has the courage to do something different. It does seem that everytime he does however he gets criticised. I quite liked the work on the 17th at Birkdale and thought the new green added a lot to the hole but he was torn apart by many people for it. . . .

A great question.  Aside from renovations and Lahinch, landing the Trump protect has got to be significant, any way you look at it.  How will that affect the Hawtree legacy, or is this not something worth speculating about now?

Carl,

I think this is a potential make or break project for Martin H. It is seen as been set amongst some of the most spectacular sand dunes in the UK and as having almost unlimited funds. If it is a great success the PR exposure will surely lead to other big, high profile projects. If the course is seen as a failure this will almost certainly but the breaks on him getting any other projects of this nature. If he plays it safe and produces a none descript course then he will probably stay where he is now, doing lots of work but not a household name from a GCA point of view.

Jon

[Brian Phillips]

Paul,

I think you are being very hard on Martin about Lahinch.  I have not met anyone yet, that thinks he did a poor job on the work he did there in fact many believe he improved the course.  I played the course after the work was done and I like everything (well, almost everything) that he has done there and I think the greens work very well.  I know he put his heart and soul into that project and I think you are being unfair.

I think his work elsewhere varies and I do not like his bunkering style on many of his restorations including Toronto but as Sean mentions I do not know what the brief is on ANY of his projects so who am I to criticize especially when he seem to have many happy customers.

[Paul_Turner]

Brian

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,4161.0/

[Brian Phillips]

Paul,

I stand by my first statement:

"I have not met anyone yet that thinks he did a poor job on the work he did there in fact many believe he improved the course."

Your link is just conjecture, people forming opinions not based on any real evidence.  None of the people in the link had actually visited the course themselves after the work was finished.

[Paul_Turner]

Brian

But was the assurance of having “ A restored MacKenzie course.” accurate?

Would a restored Mackenzie course relegate one of the few remaining Mackenzie holes (11th) into an alternate hole?

[Brian Phillips]

No, is the answer.  It was not a complete restoration of the course, however it is still a very good MacKenzie style course including the greens that Hawtree touched.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Paul,

Restoration (for better or for worse) is almost an unheard of genre in golf course architecture in Britain and Ireland...

The closest we get to it (and this is only recently) is to "restore" the heathland feel of many of the Surrey sandbelt courses...

I think it unfair to pick out that one comment (as the whole thread you linked to does) when he quite clearly went on to say there would be some Hawtree in there as well...

The course he "renovated" is most definitely closer to the MacKenzie routing of 1928 (which had been changed by 1935 and was considerably different prior to 1928)... The course is almost unanimously seen as a BETTER course than the one that was there before he started... The members like it, the visitors like it, the raters like it... In my opinion, the only major decision that is a divider is the addition of the new 11th...

On top of this, there is not enough evidence in the club's histories (which I am still looking in to) to enable a full restoration of the MacKenzie holes... The actual placement and knowledge of some of them is lost along with Brud Slattery it seems... They only existed for less than seven years after all...

[Paul_Turner]

Paul,

Restoration (for better or for worse) is almost an unheard of genre in golf course architecture in Britain and Ireland...

The closest we get to it (and this is only recently) is to "restore" the heathland feel of many of the Surrey sandbelt courses...

I think it unfair to pick out that one comment (as the whole thread you linked to does) when he quite clearly went on to say there would be some Hawtree in there as well...

The course he "renovated" is most definitely closer to the MacKenzie routing of 1928 (which had been changed by 1935 and was considerably different prior to 1928)... The course is almost unanimously seen as a BETTER course than the one that was there before he started... The members like it, the visitors like it, the raters like it... In my opinion, the only major decision that is a divider is the addition of the new 11th...

On top of this, there is not enough evidence in the club's histories (which I am still looking in to) to enable a full restoration of the MacKenzie holes... The actual placement and knowledge of some of them is lost along with Brud Slattery it seems... They only existed for less than seven years after all...

Ally

I think the way the project progressed was more like as Ran described in that post.  The article was from when the project was finished.

And it has led on to a lot of more changes by Hawtree on other great old courses.

[Bart Bradley]

Paul:

I must say that Lahinch is absolutely magical in its current configuration.  IMO, it is one of the world's best courses.  I would play there everyday if I could.  I don't understand your level of disdain, given that the final result is wonderful.  I can't wait to get back to that place, I think about it all the time.

Bart

[Paul_Turner]

Bart

From my point of view, the discussion isn't really about how good Lahinch currently is.

[Brian Phillips]

Paul,

I will back you 100% on many of the opinions you have about "restorations" and such like but I feel you are choosing the wrong battle with Lahinch.  Hawtree has done a wonderful job there.

You know I would say otherwise if I did not think so.  It is the wrong course for you to use as an example if you want my opinion.  

[Brian Phillips]

If MacKenzie had not gone in and changed the course we would still have a mix of Old Tom Morris and whoever else designed things there.  It is always a question about how far back does a restoration go? 

Who decides the timeline? You, me, Ally, the EIGCA, the ASGCA? 

You are not a member (or are you?), you probably don't even play there more than once every 5 years.  What right do we as outsiders have to say about a course owned by other people?  Yes, we can give opinion about what we feel is a museum piece but we have no right to critisise especially when the work has been done well, give the man credit when it is due and not when he deserves to be criticized.

Like I said I will back you up when I think the work is crap but it isn't on this one.

[Paul_Turner]

Brian

Yeah right...architects are usually remarkably sanguine about changing golf courses, unless of course it's they're own design that's getting redone by someone else!

[Tony_Muldoon]

Good thread. I’ll be brief as I’m very pressed for time.

Original Hawtree is greatly under appreciated.  Courses like Hainault and Chigwell got the most from their land.  He was a crusader for public golf.

Can read more about/by him here.

http://www.britgolfcollectors.wyenet.co.uk/TTG%20Index%20Files%20HTM/TTG%20Index%20H.htm

In one article it’s clear that he was the driving force and Taylor the marquee name.


Today
Lahinch is magnificent.

Bearwood lakes is solid but I feel the land could have produced more. Nothing there was really exciting/inspirational.

When judging the Trump course I believe the routing was already done before he came on board, so it may not be as important a test for him as some above suggest.

Re the case for only having one style of green; I feel this is true.  At Dooks he got to change pretty much all of them and I loved the results.  A couple of months ago I played East Devon GC.  A good Braid design that was in the recent listing between 100 & 200.  It’s a most enjoyable course with simple greens mostly featuring stiff cants, following the lie of the land.  They had to redo one hole and they renamed it Hawtree ,just in case anyone couldn’t spot the huge difference in style, with low mounding and curves biting into the green.
I’LL LOOK FOR PHOTO’S LATER.