[Joshua Pettit]

Is anyone familiar with the history of Inwood Country Club located in Inwood, New York?  A few days ago my curiosity was sparked by an aerial view I encountered while flying directly over one of the greens as I landed at JFK airport.  Indeed a pity for the club, having to put up with constant aviation traffic.  

After conducting a brief search I was able to find that the original 9 hole course was constructed in 1901, designed by a Dr. William Exton and Arthur Thatcher.  It was later converted to an 18 hole course and hosted the 1921 PGA Championship, won by Walter Hagen, and the 1923 U.S. Open won by Bobby Jones, which was his first major championship (an inspiring bit of information).  

From the club’s website:
“…which in its new status as a golf course bore a striking resemblance to the original farm. The fairways were rough and the rough was worse. Greens were designated by courtesy rather than fact. The tees were composed of loose ashes held in place by a shallow lumber frame. The expense of laying out the course amounted to $610.00.” (Superbly exemplifies the minimalist philosophy, although in that day it most likely wasn’t referred to as such)

Does anyone know when it was converted to an 18 hole course and what architect was responsible?  How has the course evolved since then?  What architects have been involved with course modifications over the years?  Is the current state of the golf course reminiscent of the1923 layout in any way?

Any insight into the history of the club would be much appreciated.  Thanks.

-Josh



BOBBY JONES & GENE SARAZEN
1923 U.S. OPEN CONTESTED AT INWOOD COUNTRY CLUB

[Steve_ Shaffer]

From the article on Inwood in Met Golfer:

Herbert Strong came to Inwood in 1912 as the professional, following a six year stint at Apawamis...While at Inwood, Strong's interests turned to architecture, and he remodeled the course into nearly its present form...Following Strong's tenure, Jack Mackie, a Scot from Fifeshire,began his 34 year tenure at the club in 1917...By 1926, Mackie had modified Eriksen's original design at Inwood twice. First, he eliminated the original ninth and tenth holes which were then located across Donahue Road while at the same time creating what now play as the 13th and 15th holes from the marshland near the bay. This was the course that hosted the 1921 PGA and 1923 US Open. Mackie's later revision in 1926 eliminated the the original 15th hole, a short par3 playing to the present 15th green while at the same time adding the present par3 14th hole along the bay and giving the 15th its sharp dogleg to the right. It was basically Mackie's course that Golf Digest rated among the 200 toughest in the country in 1966 at a time whem that magazine's list was based on the USGA rating system.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Josh,

I've started a few threads on Inwood.

It's a neat golf course with a neat clubhouse and a ton of tradition.

If you'll search through the archives you should find a few threads on it.  My last thread is probably within the last 30 pages.

[Jason Blasberg]

Inwood has the bones of a first rate course and has the warts of 2,000 too many trees.   Remove the trees and the real Inwood would reveal itself for proper review.

[Tom_Doak]

Josh:

We are consultants for Inwood, and did a lot of bunker work there a few years ago.  Took down a bunch of trees, but not nearly as many as I wanted to.

It's very flat except for a few holes (the highest elevation is maybe 20 feet above sea level), but it's a cool old course.

[Wayne Freeman]

The article with the most info is as mentioned above from The Met Golfer, Oct./Nov. 2000.  Inwood is so close to JFK that you can swim to the runway.  It also has the shortest par 3 hole in U.S. Open history.

[David Mulle]

As luck would have it, earlier this week I ordered the book published in 1951 on the 50th Anniversary of the club.  This post is based on the that book, the Met Golfer article and conversations I have had with some of the older members.

The original nine-hole course was laid out by Inwood's first pro. Edward Eriksen.  There are a number of holes that are still in use from that 9-hole course (with modifications), including the current 18th.

Herb Strong became the pro in 1912.  He redesigned the course and turned it into an 18 hole course.  

Prior to the PGA Championship in 1921, the course was played in a different order.  
1st hole - 502 yard par 5 (this is the current 4th hole)
2nd hole - 476 yard par ? (this is the current 5th hole)
3rd hole - 173 yard par 3 (this is the current 6th hole)
4th hole - 208 yard par 3 (this is the current 7th hole)
5th hole - 366 yard par 4 (this is over the same land as the current 8th hole but there have been substantial modifications)
6th hole - 300 yard par 4 (this hole was eliminated by Jack Mackie)
7th hole - 347 yard par 4 (this hole was eliminated by Jack Mackie)
8th hole - 390 yard par 4 (this is the current 9th hole)
9th hole - 104 yard par 3 (this is the current 10th hole)
10th hole - 416 yard par 4 (this is the current 11th hole)
11th hole - 498 yard par 5 (this is the current 12th hole)
12th hole - 133 yard par 3 (the hole was eliminated by Jack Mackie and green for this hole is the current 15th hole)
13th hole 430 yard par 4 (this is the current 16th)
14th 327 yard par 4 (this is the current 1st)
15th 386 yard par 4 (this is the current 2nd although it appears that the tee has been moved to the right from its location in 1915)
16th 554 yard par 5 (this is the current 3rd)
17th 408 yard par 4 (this is the current 17th)
18th 430 yard par 4 (this is the current 18th)

Jack Mackie eliminated the 6th and 7th holes in the Strong lay-out.  As was mentioned before, Mackie also added the current 13th, 14th and 15th holes.  

Tom Doak is obviously in a better position than I am to discuss the work he has done there.  There was some very extensive tree removal on the 13th, 14th and 15th holes.  The result is outstanding.  When you look at some of the pictures in the clubhouse from the 1980's it is shocking how stupidly placed some of the trees were.

In 1923, there were no trees at all over the part of the property that is the current 1st through 7th holes.  There were however trees on the rest of the course.

In recent years there has been a real effort to remove a lot of trees.  However, there is still quite a bit left to do.  In my opinion that are currently way too many trees on holes 1-7.  If I had my way, I would remove at least two-thirds of the trees that are there.
I would not remove as many trees on the rest of the course because I think they are in keeping with the character of those holes.  

If you look in past threads, Pat has been championing a return of the 18th green to its former dimensions.  I think that is an great idea but that is not something that is being actively discussed at this point.
     

[Joshua Pettit]

Tom-

What was the objective associated with the bunker project you did there?  Did you work on all the bunkers or just select holes?  I noticed from looking at the aerial that one particular green is surrounded by rather square-ish looking bunkers, which look like they might be kind of neat but its hard to tell from just the aerial, they seem to present quite a contrast with the style of bunkering found on the rest of the course.  Was this intentional, or just some bunkers that you didn’t get to work on?  Approximately how many trees were you able to remove?…JUST CURIOUS.

Thanks.
 

[T_MacWood]

This course has had a pretty interesting evolution. I believe it became 18 in 1906 thanks to Eriksen. And as has been stated Strong then redesigned the course when he arrived in 1912 and Mackie began tweaking it after 1917 - adding tees, moving a few greens, changing the order of the holes - before and after the PGA & US Open.

I believe the new holes out by Jamaica Bay were done in two stages. The 13th and shorter version of 15 in 1927. And then the 14th and lengthened 15th later on...although I'm not sure when exactly and who did it. I assume it was Mackie.

[Patrick_Mucci]

If you look in past threads, Pat has been championing a return of the 18th green to its former dimensions.  

I think that is an great idea but that is not something that is being actively discussed at this point.
     

David,

Then I decree that it's your mission to bring it to the forefront of discussions concerning the golf course.

But, don't forget about the trees.

I can't think of one reason why a club with a hole/green with that unique and spectacular history wouldn't want to restore it ASAP.

If Inwood wasn't so far from my home and/or the traffic to get there wasn't so difficult, I'd want to join.

It's a terrific place.

[David Mulle]

Patrick,
   All in good time, all in good time.  I figure I'll be a member at Inwood for at least another 50 years so I want to wait a few years before I become a pain in the ass.

All kidding aside though, I honestly believe the greens committee and our superintendent are doing a great job.  

I think the two biggest things that need to be accomplished now are a continuation of the tree clearing efforts and a continuation of the efforts to firm up the greens.  That is their focus as well.  Since there is some dissension on both points among the members, I have made sure they know how strongly I support their current efforts.  I have also been giving them pictures of the course so that they see how many more trees could be taken down.

As much as I agree with you about the 18th green, I think it is third on the priority list.

On another note, I now have a great collection of photos from 1906-1910, the 1920s and the 50s.  As soon as I learn how to scan them and post them it will make for a really interesting demonstration of how the course has developed.
 

[Mike_Cirba]

Can someone with Internet hosting capabilities please assist David?

The pictures of Inwood illustrating the historical evolution certainly sound fantastic.

[corey miller]

Why all the debate among the membership? Don't you already have a well regarded consultant?

[David Mulle]

By and large the membership is supportive of the changes. Almost everybody agrees that the changes to 13, 14 and 15 are great.  But there is still resistance to removing trees.  That is not unique to Inwood and I don't think that saying "Tom Doak said we should do it" would end the debate.  
The greens committee has been very proactive explaining why tree removal makes sense.  Every letter to the members contains an explanation of why they are carrying out the tree removal program and an explanation of why the course should sometimes be brown instead lush shades of green.  
But people like trees.  Some people have complained that the course is playing easier since the trees were removed.  In addition, some trees were removed behind the 11th green over the winter.  I heard some grumbling that now we see the houses across the street from the golf course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

At many clubs the compromise is to remove interior trees, while perimeter plantings are maintained, if not increased.

Interior tree removal remains a constant battle within memberships.

I also feel that once you allow the process of oversight or micro-management by the membership on the removal of each individual tree you're impeding any measurable progress in this area and dooming the project to failure.

Clubs that do it well seem to do most of the work over the off season eliminating the daily complaints and debates that accompany the highly visible removals during the golf season.
In many cases, returning members don't notice the difference.

I don't know if you've noticed the rapid dropping of the temperature, but, it's a sure signal to start warming up those chainsaws.

Good luck

[T_MacWood]

I'd love to see those photos too...can anyone help?

[Joshua Pettit]

In response to John's recent thread about Inwood I thought I would bump this thread.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()