[Jeff_Mingay]

Bobby Jones collaborated with RTJ at Peachtree.

I know the former wrote quite a bit about Augusta National's original design. But how about Peachtree? Are there any Bobby Jones writings out there on the design of Peachtree and his collaboration with Trent Jones?

Just curious.

[Coral_Ridge]

It seems that Robert Trent Jones is not in vogue these days, too.  Does anyone think that one of his golf courses, Peachtree for instance, may climb way up the rankings list in the next decade.  There are some who feel that this golf course is still number 2 behind Augusta in Georgia.

[Bill Gayne]

Jeff, below is a link to the Atlanta History Center that is currently housing a Bobby Jones Golf Exhibit and it really is a Georgia golf exhibit. In addition to the link if you contact one of the curators they may be able to give you more detailed info to your question concerning correspondence between Bobby Jones and Robert Trent. If you find oout anything please post.

http://www.bobbyjonesgolfexhibit.com/

It's my understanding that Jones played the majority of his golf at four clubs. His childhood at Eastlake, ANGC, and later Peachtree. He also used Highlands CC as a summer retreat. Highlands and Eastlake were Donald Ross courses. ANGC was heavily influenced by Robert Trent and Peachtree was a Robert Trent original. I've wondered about the dynamics (if there were any) of the relationship of the three especially in light of Mackenzie doing ANGC and Ross ending up with Augusta Country Club.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I think Fazio should go in there an make Peachtree play up to spec for the modern golf ball. After all its considered a classic course, and the Great One doesn't believe in tooth fairies.

This means moving bunkers, raising and lowering greens, planting forests, etc.  Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Get in there Faz--work that charm and give them some framing. Rename the place Peachtree National or The Monkey In The Peachtree National or something.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Thanks for that link, Bill.

Funny, Peachtree is high on my "to see" list, but with all due respect, I sense I'll be disappointed when I finally see it.

I hope I'm wrong.

[Carlyle Rood]

I think Fazio should go in there an make Peachtree play up to spec for the modern golf ball.

This means moving bunkers, raising and lowering greens, planting forests, etc.

Tommy:

Funny you should bring this up...

If you were more familiar with the course, then you might realize that it was designed specifically to accomodate advances in technology.  It was opened at 7,219 yards in 1951!  Yet, it was 6,364 and 6,669 from the other tees.  It was the longest course in the United States at the time.

And yet, if you look at the axonometric in the 5 March 1951 issue of Life Magazine, you'll recognize that most of the holes can accomodate moving the tees backward.  A remarkably forward-thinking consideration.  It also featured the longest tee in the U.S. (on the par-3 11th) at a whopping 240 feet long.  The tenth green, on a par five, was the largest in the U.S., as well.  (I don't have that figure available.)

As far as moving bunkers to modernize the course, there aren't many bunkers to move--another unique design philosophy.  The only two original fairway bunkers are on the first hole.  (The second hole, a par five, has no bunkers at all.)

The article cites Jones's philosophy "to lay out a course on which the hazards are strategically placed to cause trouble for the par-buster, yet not unduly to penalize the ordinary golfer."

There's no mention of Robert Trent Jones in the brief article; though, I have another Life Magazine where Trent Jones identifies his Top 18 holes.

Carlyle

[Sean_Tully]

In the 1950 edition of Golf Courses-Design, Construction and Upkeep; there is a section that was written by Trent Jones and in it he mentions some of his work and focuses on Peachtree. He talks about Bobby's design strategies and refers to Augusta National. In one section Trent states, "Jones had some theories of his own which modified some of Mackenzie's extremes."  He also states that Peachtree, "exemplifies ,WE believe, the best principles of modern golf course architecture."

He compares the greens and is proud of the fact that his course can be played anywhere from 6,300-7,4oo. The greens were designed to have at 5-6 distinct pinnable positions, that for the better golfer would challenge their game. Whereas, for the average golfer the greens averaging in size between 8,500-9500square ft would be their target.

In Trents words Bobby wanted 'sahara-type' bunker and that is found on the 10th. On the 16th hole Bobby was looking for the priciples of the 14th at St. Andrews. The 14th works the redan principle in with the water hazard. He goes into a detailed description of the both the 10th and 16th holes in the book.

Also found an early refernce to framing....
"We have offset this to a great extent by framing the greens with long well-formed mounds, placed stategically, thus presenting a definite problem to the hole."  RTJ

Tully

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Carlyle,
Isn't it amazing that MacKenzie was generous in the same way some 18 years prior?!?!?!

[Carlyle Rood]

Carlyle,
Isn't it amazing that MacKenzie was generous in the same way some 18 years prior?!?!?!

It certainly is.  Is utilizing his generosity still such an abomination, or are you softening your stance about the lengthening of the course being inconsistent with his design intent?  Does it really matter what era you utilize his design?  Does a design option have to be exercised during the architect's lifetime?

It's unlikely that any design will be able to endure advances in technology seventy years into the future.  And as you try to evolve, certain strategic elements are likely to be casualties during that time.  But I do think a club can embrace certain fundamental principles and ensure that they're cultivated and honored over that span of time, and far greater.

Where we seem to disagree is that I think Tom Fazio, under the direction of club chairman Hootie Johnson, has honored those principles.

It's curious that changes to Augusta National are often perceived as a defamation of Dr. MacKenzie's vision.  It seems to me that the architecture's flexibility has allowed it to evolve gracefully over the last seventy years.  That graceful evolution, and the enduring challenge that the course still possesses, is a tremendous testament to the brilliance and timelessness of Dr. MacKenzie's vision.

Or maybe MacKenzie was just a hack and this is all just a coincidence.

C

[BCrosby]

Jones tried to replicate TOC strategies at P'tree, as he had done at ANGC. He and RTJ were far less successful at P'tree. The 10th was supposed to recall the 14th at TOC. The 6th was supposed to have elements of Eden. I don't see it. There were other supposed TOC hole matches.

I don't have the essay with me, but the notion was that RTJ was hired because, as a protege of some of the Golden Age greats, he would be most attuned to Jones objectives. Jones missed his bet with RTJ, unfortunately. There is little at P'tree that makes one think of TOC, specifically, or the Golden Age, generally.

To the contrary, P'tree has always struck me as the first post-Golden Age course. It was the beginning of "modern" gca, a/k/a the Dark Ages.

(BTW, the GolfWeek modern/classic distinction should be set at 1945, not 1960. There were no Golden Age courses built after 1945. But there were lots of modern courses built after that date. P'tree, Firestone, Doral, etc.)

I think P'tree is now the fourth or fifth best course in Georgia. It falls somewhere after ANGC, Cuscowilla, East Lake, Settindown, The Farm (an early, under-appreciated Fazio. Better than Wade Hampton) and maybe Crabapple. Some might argue it also falls after Ocean Forest and Seaside at Sea Island. I'm not much for rankings, but P'tree is clearly not the best in the state and may not be in the top five anymore. IMHO.

Bob

[Steve_ Shaffer]

There is a videotape available of the Shell's WWG match
Julius Boros vs. Sam Snead at Peachtree in 1967 at
www.shellgolf.com

Steve
 
 

[T_MacWood]

"Where we seem to disagree is that I think Tom Fazio, under the direction of club chairman Hootie Johnson, has honored those principles."

Carlyle
What principles of Jones & MacKenzie are Johnson & Fazio adhering to?

Bob
I agree, the 'modern' vs 'classic' cut off should be 1945. I see it even within RTJ's own work...some of his pre-WWII is more classic than modern.

Regarding the collaboration with RTJ not being totally successful, around that same time RTJ was the preferred architect at ANGC (making a number of notable changes), but that role did not last long for whatever reason. I wonder why he was replaced.

[TEPaul]

Bob:

For what it's worth, that does sound like a reasonable idea to divide the classic or Golden Age era from the Modern Age era at 1945 instead of 1960.

[BCrosby]

Tom MacW -

I too have wondered about why ANGC ceased using RTJ after his one, albeit major, stint in '48/'49. He was, afterall, the leading architect of the era. By a longshot.

The parallel question is why the middling George Cobb took RTJ's place in the late '50's at ANGC. (At about the same time Cobb was also working on East Lake, Jones's home course.) But soon thereafter, Cobb too faded from the scene, never to return.

Is it possible that Jones was, in hindsight, dissatisfied with the changes these guys made? Was something else in play?

In fact, I don't think (until Fazio recently) ANGC ever used the same architect twice. What was going on? Why the fruit basket turnover in architects?

Bob

P.S. Yes, using 1960 at a classical/modern break point makes no sense whatsoever. Firestone, Doral, P'tree have no business being in the same pot as NGLA, Fisher's and Cypress.

[Bill Gayne]

It would appear in 48 that Robert Trent Jones was splitting his time between at least three projects: ANGC, Peachtree, and the Dunes in Myrtle Beach which opened in 1948.

[Carlyle Rood]

Carlyle
What principles of Jones & MacKenzie are Johnson & Fazio adhering to?

Tom:

I'm talking about the same principles that Jones reiterated for Life Magazine regarding Peachtree: "To lay out a course on which the hazards are strategically placed to cause trouble for the par-buster, yet not unduly to penalize the ordinary golfer."

Fundamentally, Augusta National was intended to challenge Jones's peers, while remaining playable and enjoyable for his friends.  The course certainly still honors that principle.

Carlyle

[Carlyle Rood]

I too have wondered about why ANGC ceased using RTJ after his one, albeit major, stint in '48/'49. He was, afterall, the leading architect of the era. By a longshot.

It seems like ANGC is always trying to maintain its independence.  Even its long-term relationships, like with CBS television for example, are couched in short-term contracts.

C

[T_MacWood]

Carlyle
When Jones and MacKenzie designed ANGC these were the principles that guided them:

1. A really great course must be a constant source of pleasure to the greatest possible number of players

2. It must require strategy in the playing as well as skill, otherwise it can not continue to hold the golfer's interest

3. It must give the average player a fair chance, and at the same time, it must require the utmost from the expert who tries for the sub-par score

4. All natural beauty should be preserved, natural hazards should be utilized, and artificiality should be minimized

How do the changes made by Johnson & Fazio, namely significantly narrowing the course with rough and trees (not to mention lengthening it), honor those principles?

The redesigned course is much less friendly to the average golfer and the elimination of width has limited strategic choice...if anything the changes made by Johnson and Fazio are the antithesis of what Jones and MacKenzie created.

There was no plan to hold an annual tournament at ANGC when the course was planned and built....I'm not sure where you got the idea about Jones's peers being a point of emphasis.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()