[Joe Bausch]

On the last day of spring I was fortunate to play HGC on a glorious day.  This Walter Travis design is a real treat, with the most recent excellent work done there (beginning 2013 I think) by Tom Doak.

The set of greens and the bunkering is fantastic.

Check out the tour for yourself:

http://www80.homepage.villanova.edu/joseph.bausch/images/albums/HollywoodGC/

[Tommy Williamsen]

Thanks Joe, When I played Deal I wanted to get over to Hollywood but it didn't work, although they let me walk some of the course. How do you play number 12? The bunkering looks pretty penal.  That was one of the holes I wished I had taken my clubs.

[Joe Bausch]

Ahh, the "Heinz 57" 12th hole.   


Apparently it might have had 57 bunkers at one point.  Now, there are many but not 57!


I think the play is down the left side, then a mid-iron to short-iron approach that is a bit visually intimidating b/c of all the bunkers.  I hit maybe my best drive of the day from the blue tees and almost ran out of fairway left, leaving about 165 in. 

[Blake Conant]

Thanks for the updated album, Joe.  Hollywood is such a special place, with a great set of Travis greens.  Hopefully they allow Schneider to rework the 17th hole so it can resemble the original as much as possible.  There's also ~40 or so bunkers that still need to be put back.


Not sure if the fescue eyebrows being as long and thick as they are is helpful or hurtful.  Seems to take away from some of the movement and sand lines that are there, and they look less than playable.  Did you find yourself in some of the long stuff, and if so, how penal was it?

[Joe Bausch]

I was between bunkers on 6 and the long stuff was long (duh!) but seemed a playable density.  I was able to advance the ball 100 yards or so.

[Eric Hammerbacher]

I played Hollywood last year and loved it too- it has some of the wildest greens I've seen. I thought #4 and #7 were so much fun...unless the pin is on the bottom tier on #7

[John Blain]

Where does Hollywood rank among all of the Travis courses? In particular how does it compare to Scranton?


Thank you.


-John

[Blake Conant]

Where does Hollywood rank among all of the Travis courses? In particular how does it compare to Scranton?


Thank you.


-John

Hollywood and Scranton are a funny comparison.  Both would never change much in the rankings because the routings are in tact and both have most of their original greens (15 original greens at Scranton and 16 (maybe 17) original greens left at Hollywood).  Scranton's current bunkers look nothing like what Travis put in, which is a shame, but their superintendent, Greg Boring, has done a fantastic job with tree work, mowing, and grassing.  Similarly, Hollywood's super, Mike Broome, does a great job keeping Hollywood's bentgrass fairways and approaches playing firm and fast throughout the summer months in the met area.  He and Brian Schneider have the grass lines dialed.  Scranton has crazier greens and more interesting topography, but Hollywood's greens are no slouch, and they're up there with Troy for what I consider Travis' most mature set of greens.  Also, what Isaac Mackie and Travis did to route a course at Hollywood with variety and interest and different strategy on a flattish piece of ground is impressive.  Therefore, I give the nod to Hollywood.


If you can count Garden City and Ekwanok as Travis, my list of Travis courses I've seen would be:


Garden City - 9


Hollywood - 8


Scranton - 7
Cape Arundel - 7
Ekwanok - 7
Troy - 7


Lookout Point - 6
Round Hill - 6
Westchester West - 6
Westchester South - 6


Stafford - 5


Equinox - 0

[Tom_Doak]

If you can count Garden City and Ekwanok as Travis, my list of Travis courses I've seen would be:


Garden City - 9


Hollywood - 8


Scranton - 7
Cape Arundel - 7
Ekwanok - 7
Troy - 7


Lookout Point - 6
Round Hill - 6
Westchester West - 6
Westchester South - 6


Stafford - 5


Equinox - 0

Your scores tend to be a half point or a full point higher than mine but I'd have these mostly in the same order.  I liked Lookout Point better, and Scranton not as much, because of the bunkers there.


North Jersey CC is the only other one I can think of off the top of my head.  Some extra wild greens there, but they've also bowdlerized a couple of them.

[Tim Martin]

After a play in 2014 I was lucky enough to get it around Hollywood with professor Bausch this past week. It is absolutely one of those courses that you want to go right back to 1 tee and do it again after putting out on 18. Course setup and maintenance are near perfect and with the addition of some combo tees there is a yardage that suits everyone's ability. I'll echo what previous posters have said in that the greens are really fantastic and basically untouched from what I was told with the exception of 17. The powers that be at Hollywood chose the right team for restorative efforts and want to continue to fine tune the golf course as needed with a smart and proactive greens chairman and golf committee at the helm.

[Steve Lapper]

 Fortunately, the present governance and staff at the club has clearly recognized, and rallied, around the brilliance of their Travis design, and dedicated themselves to protecting it. "The powers that be" have every intention of having Brian Schneider return and rework the 17th hole, completing the job started several years back. Although, the members are thrilled with the work done to date and look forward to the final chapter, I don't think it'll see the addition of many, if any, more bunkers. It's just not needed.


 Hollywood GC is a gem that flies a bit under the radar in the golf-rich NJ-NY-CT Met section. The club has a long and illustrious history of sharing the facilities for preeminent amateur competitions and fully intends to continue that tradition.


 Glad to hear you guys had a great day. Sorry I couldn't make it as I was over the pond for business (along with a round or two :`) . As said before, kudos to Rob, Mike, Burt, Kevin, et.al. for hosting a fabulous day and a historic nod to Jeff S. and his charge for "doing the right thing, no matter the political consequences!"




PS...I  agree with Blake Conant's smartly drafted comparison between HGC and CC of Scranton. I really like them both, but can't get past the bunkering dichotomy at the latter. A complete return to the clean and simple Travis bunker-style and elimination of the out-of-place Fazio-Marzoff would be a big architectural positive in my book..

[Tim Martin]

The club has two gigantic assets in Golf Professional Kevin Weyeneth and Superintendant Michael Broome. Our group got to play a bunch of holes with Kevin and his enthusiasm for and knowledge of the golf course added to what was already a fantastic day. His long tenure with the club is no surprise.

[Blake Conant]

 Fortunately, the present governance and staff at the club has clearly recognized, and rallied, around the brilliance of their Travis design, and dedicated themselves to protecting it. "The powers that be" have every intention of having Brian Schneider return and rework the 17th hole, completing the job started several years back. Although, the members are thrilled with the work done to date and look forward to the final chapter, I don't think it'll see the addition of many, if any, more bunkers. It's just not needed.

Hard to say certain aspects of the design aren’t needed and in the same breath say the club has recognized and is rallying around the brilliance of their Walter Travis design. If Travis and Mackie thought enough to put a bunker in, why shouldn’t HGC put it back?

[Blake Conant]

By my count there's ~61 bunkers yet to be restored (counting clusters like the ones on 6 and 11 as one).  ~1/3 of those probably can't be put back because of drainage, property line, or circulation issues.  so that still leaves about 40 bunkers you could choose to put back that would make an impact strategically or visually or both.  Those being:


1: 5 down right side of fairway; 1 big bunker 40 yards short right of the green
2: 1 at start of the fairway on the right; 1 across from left fairway bunker
3: 4 cross bunkers 60 yards short of the green; 1 bunker between 18 green and 3 green
4:
5: 3rd bunker down the right (connecting to complex on 17); 1 big bunker short left of the green in front of existing bunker
6: cluster at start of fairway left; bunker short right of green; bunker short right of 5 green
7: bunker 200 yards off the tee left; sand scab past right fairway bunker
8: two fwy bunkers left
9:  some form of a string of 8 bunkers along the left of the fairway leading to the green (drainage issues here); cluster of bunkers at start of fwy left
10:
11: central cluster
12: more bunkers to the right of right fwy bunker hugging the fwy line
13: restore the ditch!
14: give left fairway bunker his brother back; bunker down the right 50 yards past right fwy bunker
15: 4 bunkers short and left, another bunker long left
16: 1 cross bunker beneath the right most bunker (almost connecting to bunker left of 3 green)
17: original green site had 9-10 bunkers; restore the ridge and tunnel to 18 tee!
18: 1 at 200 yards on right of fwy; big scab short of fairway? big bunker dug into the hill left?

[Steve Lapper]

 Fortunately, the present governance and staff at the club has clearly recognized, and rallied, around the brilliance of their Travis design, and dedicated themselves to protecting it. "The powers that be" have every intention of having Brian Schneider return and rework the 17th hole, completing the job started several years back. Although, the members are thrilled with the work done to date and look forward to the final chapter, I don't think it'll see the addition of many, if any, more bunkers. It's just not needed.

Hard to say certain aspects of the design aren’t needed and in the same breath say the club has recognized and is rallying around the brilliance of their Walter Travis design. If Travis and Mackie thought enough to put a bunker in, why shouldn’t HGC put it back?

    I wholeheartedly disagree. I think any club that recognizes and rallies around the brilliance of their original architect still retains the right to limit the restoration to what it believes mates the course to it's current membership, market, and maintenance costs and practices. I'd go as afar as to say that no architectural firm or person associated with one has the preeminent right, or privilege, to do anything more than advocate for more restorative work. The trick to being successful is listening to the client and giving them just a little more than what they thought they were going to get. Only then, can they conceive of going outside their original mandates.

[Blake Conant]

Steve, I agree with the latter part of your message.  Brian proposing a true restoration was above their mandate and did get them thinking about what they had and what was possible.  I'm confident everyone at the club is on the same page with Brian and Mike about what can be put back and what's achievable. They're probably not done restoring bunkers quite yet...

[Steve Lapper]

Steve, I agree with the latter part of your message.  Brian proposing a true restoration was above their mandate and did get them thinking about what they had and what was possible.  I'm confident everyone at the club is on the same page with Brian and Mike about what can be put back and what's achievable. They're probably not done restoring bunkers quite yet...

Blake,


  Are suggesting the club isn't protecting the Travis design unless they add most, if not all of the bunkering you've identified? Nice and optimistic, but isn't that just talking your own book??


   Unless you know the HGC membership better than myself, I rather doubt your statement about the "everyone at the club is on the same page." The club's current powers are unquestionably more receptive to finishing off the 17th and possibly adding a few bunkers (i.e. 18th), but they are shrewd and experienced and don't want to repeat the errors of the past.

[corey miller]

   I wholeheartedly disagree. I think any club that recognizes and rallies around the brilliance of their original architect still retains the right to limit the restoration to what it believes mates the course to it's current membership, market, and maintenance costs and practices. I'd go as afar as to say that no architectural firm or person associated with one has the preeminent right, or privilege, to do anything more than advocate for more restorative work. The trick to being successful is listening to the client and giving them just a little more than what they thought they were going to get. Only then, can they conceive of going outside their original mandates.


Perfect Steve. 





[/size][/font]

[Blake Conant]

If they rebuilt 17, but didn't do anything else, I'd still be elated.  They've committed to the bulk of the restoration and have been great stewards of one of Travis' best course.  However, selfishly, I'd like to see one of my favorite golf courses go the distance and be fully restored i.e., rebuild 17, put back as many original bunkers as possible, recapture more original fairway lines, and continue with selective tree removal.  Hollywood is one of the best examples of Walter Travis' work, and I'm of the belief that every great architect deserves to have a couple of their courses presented as they intended.  Clearly that's easier said than done, but in an ideal world Hollywood would be one of the museum's people go to to see Mr. Travis' brilliance on full display.   

[Joe Schackman]

I had the good fortunate of play Hollywood last summer. It is a fantastic course and definitely deserves more recognition in the golf-rich state of NJ.

I particularly liked the 4th, 7th and 9th holes. The day I played the pin was in the same place as the picture in the album. Made for a really fun approach and putt.

[Mike Sweeney]

...

[Blake Conant]

who told you the red trees on 5 were coming out?

[Steve Lapper]

 The long-studied 17th hole dilemma seems to have been finally solved.


 I believe Brian Schneider and the club are in agreement on the plan to restore it back to Travis from the Rees-butchered version. A tee or so will be swapped and the green moved back and left. Once complete, that should finish the heavy-lifting work of the Travis restoration.


 Yes, the red trees on 5 are being discussed as they really function as both an unnecessary aiming point and poor artificial hazard at best. Balls landing around their area will have a hard enough time navigating the now awkward angle of approach to one of the course's best (and most devilish) greens.


  Hats off to so many members who were responsible for initiating and pushing this project.. Special credit to JS,BE,& RW for their tireless efforts.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()