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.


NAF

Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« on: May 13, 2003, 03:52:23 AM »
I've been reading Pennick's 1952 tome on Golf.  In it he describes the 13th at RCD as being replicated by his friends in Cincinnati.  I assumed this is by Raynor and Co. at Camargo.  Does anyone know which hole at Camargo would be the replica? It would be a sweeping dogleg right (shaped like a banana) that would have a semi blind approach if the drive was not placed correctly..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2003, 07:20:05 AM »
Noel,
Having not seen RCD, I can't really tell what hole at Camargo would approximate the 13th. My best guess would be the 12th, but my understanding is that hole was meant as a copy of the Channel hole at Lido, reinforced by the fact that its named Channel.

The strange thing about Camargo, is that nearly every hole in one way or another is a copy. As far as sheer numbers of "replica" holes, I don't believe Camargo has any peer among SR/CBM holes. The only other one that I can think of, that has a big sweeping dogleg right is #2 (Valley), and in addition to being a par 5, is more of an extended Prize Dogleg, and there is no blindness. He could also be referring to #9 which doglegs slightly, but there is really no blindness to it either.

1. OUT (4)
2. VALLEY (5)  
3. LEVEN (4)  
4. NARROW (4)  
5. EDEN
6. KNOLL
7. ALPS
8. BIARRITZ
9. LONG

10. SHINNECOCK
11. SHORT
12. CHANNEL
13. BOTTLE
14. HOGBACK
15. REDAN
16. PLATEAU
17. ROAD
18. HOME
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:05 PM by -1 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2003, 10:55:59 AM »
Camargo sounds like a terrific course.

Other than the fact that it is not near Philadelphia or Southampton, is there a reason why it doesn't get more attention?

My guess is that there are lots of us that would like to hear more about the course.

I've read Ran's review. Any updates? Status of Doak's restoration?

Just curious.

Bob
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jim Sweeney

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2003, 02:04:20 PM »
#13 (bottle) at Camargo also doglegs right and can offer some blindness on tyhe second shot if the tee shot is mishit.  #12 also features a set of cross bunkers on the second shot, though they are a concern only to the shortr hitter- they were probably a bigger obstacle eighty years ago. My guess is that 12 is the answer, though I don't know RCD and assume so based on previous post.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Hope and fear, hope and Fear, that's what people see when they play golf. Not me. I only see happiness."

" Two things I beleive in: good shoes and a good car. Alligator shoes and a Cadillac."

Moe Norman

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2003, 03:07:36 PM »
Bob - The course is terrific, and I suspect you will continue to hear more about it in the future. With Renaissance's work it has already made big jumps in recognition.

For a course that (i think) Raynor referred to as perhaps his best inland effort (and SR was not prone to such Fazio like claims), it does get a shockingly small amount of "press." My guess is that is because of two reasons. First, it has a very low-key and small membership. Second, it does (still) have some Von Hagge in it (some of which is actually pretty good), and like others that have this mixed breed status (CC of Fairfield come to mind), it tends not to get the full credit that other pure breed Raynor courses do. Admittedly the back nine does run out of steam, and it probably would have been better had Raynor not taken ill/died mid-construction. Banks did do an admirable job finishing it up.

But like I said, it may be the single best Raynor course to visit if you want to get a complete picture of all of the go-to holes (even though some are shadows of their original state) that Raynor included in his design repertoire. Does anybody dispute this ? I'm not talking about quality, just numbers.

Jesplusone -
It would be hard to imagine that 12 would be the hole NAF is talking about since Raynor originally designed this hole to play with all the strategy of The Channel hole at Lido, complete with alternative fairway. Unfortunately the hole was never built to spec.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Camargo, Frank Pennick and Royal County Down
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2003, 04:06:05 PM »
SPDB -

So many Raynor courses have an allure about them. There's the architectural side of things of course. But it's also the fact that so many of them were built for small, exclusive and very wealthy memberships. Fishers, Chicago, St. Louis, Yeamans, Lookout, Camargo, etc.
 
My guess is that there was a point in time when members could travel between these clubs, meet the same types of people and - as an extra bonus - play the same holes that were at their home course. An almost perfectly insulated world.

I would love to play the course someday. Are restoration efforts still contemplated?

Bob


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »