News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« on: May 30, 2003, 07:21:25 PM »
Thought this would be interesting to the board (thanks to RT).  I haven't sussed the evolution of this hole fully, yet.  The basic hole direction is as Park designed, but Colt moved the green about 80 yds further on and to the left.  In Colt's bio by Hawtree, there's a photo of this hole in transition, but I have no idea who (Park or Colt) was responsible for that diagonal echelon of bunkers, or which version Macdonald saw and based his Bottle hole on.



Colt's junior partner, John Morrison, replied to Behr in the letters section of GI, defending the current hole.  But, sorry, I haven't copied it, perhaps next week!

C Ambrose is a fine contributor in the old GI issues- particularly his drawings.

Any comments?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #1 on: May 30, 2003, 08:22:36 PM »
Paul:

God bless you for the interesting things you find and post. Not sure why you mention the "bottle" hole concept but those comparative drawings and that architectural essay by Ambrose is fascinating.

The Max Behr references and quotes about him by Ambrose are fascinating. There's no question in my mind that Behr hit the essence of it all and squarely and the supreme irony is that to date no one is willing to take the time or devote the effort or interest in either reading what he wrote or attempting to understand him regarding the essence of golf and golf course architecture.

The most interesting thing about Ambrose's remarks is when and where he says although Behr appears to be a perfect terror of complication that in fact (when he get to his conclusions) he's a model of simplicity.

Someday good golf analysts will might figure that out but it doesn't appear we're quite there yet!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #2 on: May 30, 2003, 08:35:31 PM »
Tom

I mention the Bottle because I think this hole, at Sunningdale, was to some degree, an inspiration for Macdonald's 8th at NGLA.  George Bahto would be able to expand.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Mike_Cirba

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #3 on: May 30, 2003, 08:40:41 PM »
The "debate" between Ambrose and Behr preceeded the "Line of Charm" discussion GCA by a few years, but also seems prescient in retrospect.

Ambrose seems to be speaking from a very nationalistic, protectionist perspective, clearly identifying Behr as an "American golf architect", almost with disdain.

I think both make their respective points with clarity and understandabililty, but if one is looking for creativity and original thought, Behr clearly wins out.

On the other hand, I'm sure that the "look" of the Colt hole was superior, and in almost MacKenzian fashion, might have been more "exciting" for the average golfer, who faced a challenge that was simpler than it looked.  That golfer's "carry" over the bottle bunkering scheme might have been more inherently "satisfying", yet there is no question in my mind that the single bunker interrupting the line of instinct would have created more confusion and perplexion for every level of player, although many of them wouldn't have been able to understand why.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

TEPaul

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #4 on: May 30, 2003, 08:51:36 PM »
Paul;

If that hole in either the Park/Colt or Behr iteration is an inspiration for Macdonald for the "Bottle" hole at NGLA then C.B was a most liberal architectural interpreter indeed. If it's so though, or GeorgeB says so, we all should be well aware of that because it would mean a lot to architectural analysis.  What it would mean, in my book, is that most architectural inspiration is only due to the fact that the similarity is it's golf architecture, and not that much more. The diagonal cross bunkering of the first iteration is completely different in fact and in playability than NGLA's Bottle hole and in Behr's iteration the small middle bunker is entirely too far off the tee to even make Tiger Wood's pause!

But who really knows, maybe the "bottle neck" effect for which NGLA's hole is named was for the second shot for weak players or a recovery shot obstacle. Today, though, the actual "bottle neck" effect of NGLA's #8 only comes into effect for very long drivers with a driver off the tee. But one should not forget that NGLA's #8 has had a certain amount of tee length added to its original Macdonald design. Plus the original tee was on the opposite side of #7 green!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #5 on: May 30, 2003, 08:58:32 PM »
"Ambrose seems to be speaking from a very nationalistic, protectionist perspective, clearly identifying Behr as an "American golf architect", almost with disdain."

Mike

Hey, be nice  :D  I think Ambrose is complimentary in the first paragraph.  But I agree, the final paragraph is a bit protectionist.  You get quite lot of this in the old GI (UK) editions, American golf is viewed with a mixture of admiration/confusion/disdain.  There's some interesting stuff on the American invention of "par" ( and you lot have apparently always played at a snails pace :D).

I'm not sure, but perhaps the diagonal echelon of bunkers was there before Colt shifted the green on and to the left?  And he just left them as they were.  

The green is placed on a steep knoll, and in the old days, when the course was playing very firm in the summer, a perfect brassie approach would carry just over the bunker(s) and chase up the bank onto the green.  Behr's bunker would perhaps be too severe for this approach; but, of course, I don't think he knew the green is on a knoll.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #6 on: May 30, 2003, 09:23:04 PM »
I just had a quick email correspondance with George.  I think perhaps the original "Bottle" feature that CB Mac spotted was that diagonal Dyke.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #7 on: May 30, 2003, 09:40:49 PM »
TEPaul,

A 1928 schematic doesn't reflect a tee to the left of the 7th green, nor does it reflect a tee for # 12 to left of # 11 green.

Are we certain that these tees existed ?

If they did, when were they abandoned ?

And, when were the current tee locations established ?

George Bahto,

Can you provide any assistance ?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #8 on: May 30, 2003, 09:51:59 PM »
Consider this from C.B Macdonald who honestly has to not only be considered the father of American architecture but also the transporter and conveyor of the spirit of the old game to America (an attempt I fear he very early realized he would not succeed in as he'd hoped).

"It was not until the summer of 1907 that the storm broke in a wave of indignation, demanding a revision of the St. Andrew's rules. I must say that I had much sympathy with this movement. The rules of golf as applied to St Andrew's worked out well enough with golfers born and bred there who intuitively absorbed the spirit of the traditions of the game, although they might know really little about the letter of the law. Custom made the law and so St. Andrews has ever been a law unto itself in golf. When the myriad of golf clubs sprung up throughout the world, with every variety of golf course......the custom at St Andrews did not satisfy, nor could it meet the emergencies arising from the new conditions. Then again, in America every person was comparatively a beginner in golf."

And more poignantly this about burgeoning America golf and architecture from A.W. Tillinghast in 1917;

"Although the criticism is aimed at modern courses in general, it occurs to many that Taylor is taking a long brassey to the blind green on a strange course, for he refers to American courses of which he has heard. Certainly the recollections of the courses over which he played in America during his visit some years ago, made it difficult for him to conceive of the gigantic strides toward perfection, made by American golf since that time. Little Wonder! He saw some of the crudest courses of that period and several of the best, which were bad enough as compared with those of today. America no longer is the heathen country in which his pilgramage found him. Since that day American progressiveness has given to the game the rubber core ball, which was only adopted grudgingly in Great Britain, but to which may be traced the real secret of the game's universal popularity. This same spirit of progressiveness has enabled this country to produce its own excellent clubs, develop its own professionals, its own architects, and to think its own thoughts. Once we gave ear to the words of the master without question. Now we are pleased to listen just as attentively, yet form our own conclusions with our own brains.  In the jargon of the theater, "Waving the American flag has saved many a bad show." Let this not be the  excuse for my defense of our modern courses. But it is because I believe we have grown big enough to think for ourselves, I dare raise a voice to assert that Taylor's shot has not found our green."

And those two sentiments from two Americans who not only knew and understood the old architecture and the old game as well as any Americans but were two of it's most knowledgeable proponents at one time.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #9 on: May 30, 2003, 09:56:30 PM »
Pat;

Would you mind cutting, pasting, saving and then deleting post #7, at least for a time?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #10 on: May 31, 2003, 06:22:10 AM »
I'll have a lot more on this very interesting thread a little later in the day - perhaps after the NJ Devils throw a third straight shutout at the Disney-Duckies tonite !! hah

Pat: the 1928 NGLA schematic was just that - 1928 - almost over 20 years after his original concept.

yes there were the original tees on 12 andand 8.

8 began to play too short and 12 errant tee balls were going into the Road hole fairway on the left - among other things

anyhow more on the Sunningdale bottle concept later

Pal - great job - thqnk you so much

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2003, 07:21:57 PM »
Here is John Morrison's reply-he was Colt's junior partner.

 

I'm fairly sure that Macdonald saw Park's version and not Colt's.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

ForkaB

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2003, 09:09:50 PM »
Paul

This is a classic letter, and of inestimable value if only for the phrase "Mr. Behr's picturesquely worded generalities."  I hope Tom Paul sees this when he wakes up!

Speaking of which, am I the only one who reads Behr's words (in your initial post) and comes to the conclusion that to Max the "line of instinct" and the "line of charm" are one in the same thing?  When he says......

"If the ground slopes gently down from right to left, the line of instinct will be bent out to the right.  We will want to overcome the throw of gravity.  Thisw we may call the line of charm."

.....what does this really say other than that our instincts (i.e. sense of gravity) allow us to find the "proper" (or charming?  charmful?) line to a hole?

Most importantly, the various exchanges do show that the main difference between Behr and his British countreparts are that the latter seem much more attuned to the needs and capabilities of the "average" golfer (i.e. the person who has trouble breaking 100--particularly in those days), while Behr is focusing on how the hole plays for the "scratch" player.  Is Behr's approach really enlightened, or is it just some "picturesquely worded generalities" taking the elitist point of view?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2003, 04:50:22 AM »
Rich:

Your estimation of who Behr was speaking about (the scratch man vs the poorer player) compared to the example of that Colt hole and Behr's prescription for it is just about completely turned around or turned upside down, in my opinion.

But this thread and the information supplied by Paul Turner on it is much of what makes Golfclubatlas.com such an interesting and educational website, in my opinion. This thread and the subject of it is very much into conceptual architecture and what it takes in actual architecture to pull off various fundamentals or architectural philosophies. It's ironic that threads like this one don't get that much attention on here--certainly not compared to the ones on ranking and the ones that argue over bias or disagreement or whatever they're about that don't really teach anyone much. It's too bad really.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Will E

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2003, 05:41:02 AM »
Fantastic read and the best post I've seen in a while.

Interesting to me in that last week at a section event here in Chicago I was having a conversation with one of our elderly "master" professionals over the current state of golf course design. His feeling is that it's driving new golfers and women out of the game, rather than helping to grow golf. Slope ratings of 150, forced carries, deep bunkers. He's very worried about the future of golf, even thought he knows he wont be a part of it.

"not worth the time or trouble to worry about such a creature".
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2003, 06:14:21 AM »
Tom P

Re-read Morrison's reply closely.  You will see that it is he, and not me, who question's Behr's ability to connect with the avergae player.  Try to shoot the message next time (if you so wish) and not the messenger.....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Max Behr Hits the Bottle
« Reply #16 on: August 15, 2003, 01:12:53 PM »
Just bringing this back up, because I'm hoping George Bahto might have more to post on the Sunningdale Bottle Hole concept and the above discussion:

George Bahto wrote:

"anyhow more on the Sunningdale bottle concept later"

can't get to heaven with a three chord song