Mass is my favourite state for golf.  Had a very brief sneak look at Fowler's Eastward Ho! (mostly the front 9) and in my view, it's uniquely brilliant.  

The tees were being rebuilt and it looked like some bunker work had recently been completed so some of the pics aren't from ideal angles.


1st...lots of rain the night before...puddle.


2nd tee


2nd looking back.


3rd tee.

4th...tee to the left.


5th tee


5th looking back


6th

6th fairway!

6th looking back.

7th, filled bunker?

8th

8th

9th

11th

12th

I've felt for a few years now that the golf course I'd most like to see and study in the United States is Fowler’s Eastward Ho! The reasons are Cornish & Whitten’s description of Fowler as ‘Herbert Fowler was perhaps the most naturally gifted architect of his time’, followed by a quote from Bernard Darwin, “I never knew anyone who could more swiftly take in the possibilities of a piece of ground.”

In a way I was surprised to see Fowler designed Eastward Ho! In 1922---I would’ve logically thought it may have been designed perhaps ten years earlier----particularly in light of the remarkable strides and notoriety some of the Heathland architecture was getting before 1912 or so, certainly including Fowler’s noteworthy Walton Heath that C&W remark may’ve been more notable and noticed than even Park’s and Colt’s Sunningdales as a breakthrough in early architectural style and type.

In any case, the real noteworthy aspect of Eastward Ho! To me is the extreme topography of the mid-body of many of the course’s holes----what Paul Turner refers to as “roller coaster golf”. It would seem that this style of architecture is very much “of an era” and highly unusual today for that reason. I don’t think it’s any secret that this type or style of architecture today generates a really wide spectrum of opinion----from real popularity to real unpopularity. To me the fact that it’s unpopular with many American golfers today is truly a shame but that sentiment very likely reflects that this type and style of architecture was dedicatedly avoided in the modern age of architecture for a variety of reasons.

It appears that many of the holes of Eastward Ho! Are reminiscent of a type of highly topographical hole (in the mid-body) I personally just love. Good examples today would be Shinneock’s #10, PVGC’s #8, Misquamicutt’s #1 and #9, Friar’s Head”s #9 and #16 and certainly NGLA’s #2 and #16!! The unfortunate reasons for the lack of popularity of highly topographic hole mid-bodies today is likely a certain amount of blindness or lack of visibility as well as perhaps too much unpredictability in where a golfer's ball will end up.

One of the things I’d suggest on holes like those is that it really can and does give the architect the opportunity to go light or very minimal on bunkering and just go with the effects of playability on highly topographical ground for interesting  and challenging golf.

Another thing that truly interests me about the likes of those early Heathland architects, according to C&W, is that they really did shape greens and tees more than most of us might expect. That would certainly seem to be the case just looking at the photo above of green #6, for instance.

In any case a type and style of architecture like Eastward Ho! Really does fascinate me and perhaps the greatest reason is because of that highly topographic “roller coaster” type of hole Eastward Ho! Appears to have so much of. We’re into many aspects of renaissance today in golf architecture---will the type of extreme hole topography of the likes of Fowler’s Eastward Ho! Ever make a comeback in popularity or even acceptability in a general sense?

RandyVS:

Thanks for the informative and up to date information about what's been going on recently at Eastward Ho! I don't mean to pry but if possible it'd be nice to know your connection to Eastward Ho! since you seemed very informed.

It's interesting to know that the enormous feature on hole #7 that looks like an old sand bunker outline never was a sand bunker. In my opinion, features like that without sand fit and meld far more naturally into an overall site like Eastward Ho!  than a sand bunker does, and are surely every bit as effective as a sand bunker.

It's also interesting to know that Eastward Ho! plans to establish firmer and faster conditions "through the green" than in the recent past. This sounds good but may have an ultimate drawback in some instances. With the type of severe fairway topography Eastward Ho! seems to have so much of there very well may be some danger and inconvenience if the fairways are too firm and fast to hold the golf ball on some of those slopes. The likely result may be the collecting of balls into some very small areas and the consequent wear and tear on the turf in those small collection areas.

This has certainly gotten to be a problem on some high topography fairways such as PVGC's #17, NGLA's #16 and particularly Shinnecock's #10. With the speed and lack of friction on those fairways due to very low mowing heights golf balls tend to collect in very small areas which basically beats those area to death with divot marks. Perhaps Eastward Ho!  should go for firm and fast conditions "through the green" but strive to raise the fairway mowing height enough so more balls will get hung up on the grades of some of those fairways rather than always collect into a very small low spot. It would have the effect of making the course play more interesting and challenging if the golf ball would remain more on some of the uneven grades on those fairways rather than always collecting into flatter low spots!

Just a thought that could significantly effect both playability and maintenance!

Mass is my favourite state for golf.  

Paul,

I am starting to think that way too, and except for Long Island being attached to New York, I would agree completely.

Here is a fuzzy picture from the roller coaster 10th at Wianno on The Cape from Ross.

Certainly one of the things that makes me admire an architect like Fowler so much is the fact that it just ain't easy to arrange a routing such as Eastward Ho! clearly has whereby all that cool topography is just about in the exact correct spot on each hole to accomplish what it really does to the golf ball.

How many times must one of those old architects like Fowler have said to himself---"Oh shit, I only wish this cool topography was 50 yards over here or 100 yards over there and it would make my holes and their routing so much more acceptable?"

I admire the fact that they put together the jigsaw puzzles of these golf courses as well as they did but I guess we should recoginize that a lot of the sportiness and quirkiness of many of those old courses was because they were always limited by what they could do (to change things). The fact that todays architects can do much more to massively change the "pieces" (the holes and their topography) makes this kind of thing so much less likely to happen the way it once did.

I'm also trying to figure out if and how maintenance might diminish that old fashioned up and back fairway cut look when the mowers get close to the approaches to the greens! I wonder what method they use to turn those mowers in that area.

It appears that this course doesn't make any of the Top 100 lists  Why on earth not?

My guess is that with open minded people like Mr Ward on the panels, 6200 yards will not be taken seriously. The old courses on The Cape all seem to be shorter (see Slapper's Sporty thread), so they don't seem to get the respect they may deserve. However, I was told by a legacy member of Eastward Ho! that they have something like a 20+ year waiting list, so they probably don't care a whole lot about The Jersey Golfer panel.  

Andy

The fairways are generous.   The 5th is probably the widest and it needs to be with those undulations.

Those are fantastic photos, Paul. I am amazed that you managed to capture the topography so well. Seems like most times I try to photograph a course, everything gets flattened out. Well done.

The terrain really has to be seen in person to be believed. For some reason today, it seems that dramatic elevation changes are fine, but dramatic right to left (or vice versa) slopes are taboo.

Tom Paul -

I'll tell you about the sixth hole.

I four-putted a hole location that was just over the ridge, i.e., my first putt rolled back far away and I used classic overcorrecting methodologies to put my second putt twenty feet above the hole.

It is the most dramatic tee shot I have ever undertaken, over the corner of a mountain with the awesome backdrop of the ocean and sandbar.  A well struck three wood will funnel right dow to a flat lie with about 130 yards remaining. Anything that stays on the side of the mountain is dead.

Michael and Paul:

Thanks for the info on hole #6. How long is that hole? I guess I was also wondering if there's perhaps an "ultra secret", "theory of contrary opinion", "double reward" option of playing an approach to #6 from the 7th green!  

And also---is it possible for a long hitter from the tips to bomb a drive all the way down to that flat area below the green (where there seems to be some standing water in that photo)?

Forgot - The hole is 405 yards, and with the equipment these days, it is very possible for a well-hit shot to get down to the middle of the Valley inside 100 yards.  It better be straight, though, or it will end up on the hill on the right, or perhaps in that big depression on the hill leading up to 7.

TEPaul -
The 6th hole is where the genius of the routing is revealed. The holes get out to a point on the 3d hole pretty quickly, and then turn back against the bluff before heading inland. You then take another turn and head back out toward the bluff on the 6th hole. Its green is one of the great spots on the cape.