Golf course architect John LaFoy was a very close associate of George Cobb. I tipped Mr. LaFoy to this thread, and I believe readers will find his response to be most interesting. Here it is:
I read with some interest the thread regarding Bald Head Island Golf Club, but particularly the comments about its architect George Cobb. Of course, the comments about the golf course are just opinion, but the comments about Mr. Cobb reflect more fact and some speculation. I think for the most part Bob Crosby and John Stiles have most of what they commented on exactly right. I will try to “fill in the blanks” and clear up some of the speculation. (I should add that I am entirely prejudiced, as I worked for him for ten years and grew up with his son as my best friend).
First - Bald Head. I think many of the posts were correct, particularly those who felt like it is an excellent layout, but could use some updating and taking care of deferred maintenance issues. Courses usually suffer for a few years after they are taken over by their members, but once they get their feet on the ground and get their financial house in order, they usually start to improve. Hopefully that will happen here. Rob mentioned a million dollar “facelift,”, but it would probably be two or three times that if they wanted to really do it right. Working on an island makes everything cost a lot more than it should. As some of you might have surmised, that golf course was very difficult to build, for a lot of reasons. 1) it was not a high budget golf course; 2) much of it was built in a swamp (I have photos of centerline stakes in three feet of water) and 3) logistically, it was just difficult to get equipment, materials, and labor there. There was no electricity on the island and the irrigation system ran off of generators for years. The greens were originally Bentgrass.
More about George Cobb. George Cobb understood golf. He understood how it was played, how courses should be laid out, and how courses should be maintained. He understood how to get jobs (the hardest part of golf course architecture - designing is easy (if you know how to do it)). He was also quite practical. He did not design courses that required a XXX dollar maintenance budget if he knew they only could afford half that amount. On the other hand, he would not take jobs if he knew they should not or could not be built for the proposed construction budget. That is not to say that it never happened, but in his case it was very rare.
Mr. Cobb was indeed the consultant at the Augusta National (I guess you refer to it as ANGC on this forum), as well as the architect for the Par 3 course. I am still in possession of the original par 3 layout (pencil on 8 1/2 x 11 onionskin), as well as all of his other drawings of ANGC. Speculation as to why he did not parlay his work there into other high profile jobs is quite simple. He has a letter (from Gene Howard, I think) stating that any information linking George Cobb to ANGC would come from ANGC and not from Mr. Cobb’s office. He simply could not talk about it. I worked with him there from 73-78 (until the year after Robert’s death) and we just could not use it as a promotional tool. By then however, most folks knew we worked there.
However, Mr. Cobb did get a number of high profile jobs (mostly in the southeast, as I think John and Bob’s speculation about why he worked in the southeast is mostly correct), including Quail Hollow. A lot of folks don’t realize that he designed the first seven courses on Hilton Head Island, including Harbor Town. I think Pete Dye, in his book, credits Mr. Cobb with the original layout (although Mr. Cobb never claimed to have designed Harbor Town - as some might ). He also worked on a number of high profile renovations as well, including Birmingham CC and East Lake. There were not a huge number of high profile clubs built in the 50’s and 60’s so I would say that Mr. Cobb got his share of them.
I also think the speculation or discussion about who “followed” behind Dick Wilson and Robert Trent Jones is interesting, and Bob and John, I think, have that correct. Certainly Mr. Cobb would be in that short list, as well as Ellis Maples, Larry Packard, to name a few (there were more and it is probably not fair to leave them out). Mr. Cobb and Maples certainly knew as much about golf course design and golf as RTJ and Wilson, but just did not have the same aesthetic flair (particularly bunkers) as those two. He did not have the “marketing” prowess as RTJ (who did?) or the eccentric reputation of Wilson. Having a “schtick” in this business goes a long way! Mr. Cobb told me one time that when he was designing The Surf Club, at North Myrtle Beach, he purposely did not go by and see The Dunes Club, as he did not want to be accused of trying to copy RTJ.
Bob’s comments on Athens CC were also right on the mark (other than the date - should have been in the 70’s). The third nine on that fine course was built on a limited amount of land by a very poor contractor that did just about everything wrong - starting with clearing the first hole straight, ignoring the dogleg turn. He wound up walking off the job when it was about 75% complete leaving the club (and the bonding company) holding the bag. If I remember correctly a rental car (or bulldozer) was left sitting in one of the fairways. We found out later that the contractor never intended to finish the course and just bailed out when we started writing him “split” checks written to him and his suppliers, whom he was not paying. Fun stuff.
One last comment. Great architecture should not be entirely based out how artistic bunkers appear. If you take the same layout of a “great” course and substitute oval or elongated oval bunkers, does it all of a sudden become a “goat track.” If you take a poor layout and maintain it to ANGC standards, does it suddenly become a “great” layout?
After designing golf courses for over thirty-five years, I have determined that every course has its place and I try and not be too critical of any facility, particularly if I don’t know the whole story behind it. Some of the most “charming” courses I have visited have been very low budget layouts that serve a purpose to get people playing.