AGN #12 restored?

« **on:** April 16, 2007, 03:35:00 PM »

These, and a few other, images were generated for Geoff Shack's recent LINKS MAGAZINE article, but weren't printed.

They simply represent what we would hope the golf course might look like had the club embraced or at some point restored the original design character to its golfscape.

While the "changes" at AGN are fun to imagine, far more important is the impact extrapolated throughout the continent
on so many over manicurred clubs and courses that have tried to emulate or keep up over the decades.

Had AGN followed the rugged natural approach from day one, or returned to it at some point in its history, we might be a nation where Prairie Dunes is the aesthetic ideal to which most strive rather than Medinah or Oakland Hills. Truly staggering to consider the economic and environmental impact the AGN model has had on golf property throughout this country. Maybe at some point in the future they may embrace their lead role in the world of golf and direct the masses back to sustainablility. Certainly the benefits of firm and fast were on display recently, its a start.

#12 c.1987

#12 "before before!!"

« **Reply #1 on:** April 16, 2007, 03:38:23 PM »

The hairy bunkers look really stupid.

« **Reply #2 on:** April 16, 2007, 03:48:39 PM »

The lower picture looks so clearly doctored as to look silly. Did the bunkers ever look that way? Is there any pictorial evidence? Is straight edging the bunkers the worst that ANGC has contributed to "over-manicuring" the course and leading the rest of the courses of the world to damnation?

« **Reply #3 on:** April 16, 2007, 03:52:51 PM »

Hopefully Mike Young will chime in on this thread. He is always arguing that Southern courses on clay soils are handicapped to a more sedate parkland "look" which hurts their rankings ... but he has never considered that a Southern course, Augusta National, set the manicured look for other courses to emulate, and that the new ragged-edged bunkers he hates so much are just a contrast to the manicured style which has dominated for years.

« **Reply #4 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:01:46 PM »

Most of us rank amateurs on this site have been through various "looks" at our own clubs, so the difference in the appearance of the bunkers at Augsta is not that shocking, but it is interesting to me how much I do prefer the clean look. It's surprising, because my typical aesthetic would lean toward the shaggy look, because it would appear more "natural" and not so "manufactured". For years, I have railed against the overly clean look of the bunkers and other areas at Pebble Beach, especially when you compare it to the old photos. Augusta at this point is starting to look almost as fake as Shadow Creek, but for some reason, it still works for me.

« **Reply #5 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:08:00 PM »

I don't mind hairy bunkers when they fit the site...A perfect example:

« **Reply #6 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:09:17 PM »

In the upper photo, I would say the raggedness of the grass along the waterline and the dirty color of the water really upset my sense of harmony and perfection.

On the other hand, the shagginess along the top edges of the back bunkers, that pelt of disorder to the left of the back bunkers, and the lack of any blooms indicate this photo was taken on a date far removed from tournament time.

« **Reply #7 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:28:51 PM »

There actually is a place for manicured surrounds.

I was watching the 1975 Masters film yesterday and I think the course looks much better today than back then. Of course, I think many of the new trees have been a real mistake, not in keeping with Mr. Jones' philosophies.

« **Reply #8 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:55:21 PM »

Is it Jesper Parnevik's fault when Kenneth Ferrie (that real affable yet heavy set English pro) shows up in a skin tight J. Lundeberg outfit with half his belly hanging out?

« **Reply #9 on:** April 16, 2007, 04:57:19 PM »

Jim,

I guess I won't be wearing my skintight JL outfit when we get together. I don't know how else I'll have a chance to beat you. I now need even more strokes

« **Reply #10 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:04:31 PM »

Tell you what...you find a nice baby blue JL get up and I'll give you all the strokes you want...

« **Reply #11 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:09:33 PM »

I was thinking lime green...but baby blue it is. Hope to see you soon!

« **Reply #12 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:11:55 PM »

And, Wayne, I'll get you one of those dumb little hats Jesper Parnevik wears that makes him look like Ed Norton (Art Carney) on The Honeymooners and Sully can double all the strokes he's willing to give you in the first place.

« **Reply #13 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:14:26 PM »

I think the guy who started this thread is an architect. How bout showing some respect and staying on or getting back to topic.

« **Reply #14 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:16:26 PM »

The 12th never looked like the "restored" version. Thank goodness.

Bob

« **Reply #15 on:** April 16, 2007, 05:18:09 PM »

Tom,

Who was that golfer we saw at the Masters that had that funky hat on? He wore JL too but it wasn't Jesper. That looked like a miniature version of the hat WC Fields used to wear. He looked god awful in that thing. But the hat and my belly hanging out of my skintights might distract Sully enough so that my double strokes could lead me to victory. I'll do it!

Sorry for the tangent. Back to the thread now.

« **Reply #16 on:** April 16, 2007, 06:00:39 PM »

In this example I think the bunker edges are less significant than the the color of the sand. Look how the shade of the "restored" sand actually complements some of the shading in the trees. It's very natural and much easier on the eyes. The brilliant white sand that Augusta uses has also been replicated everywhere. Those of us who are becoming visually impaired have a hard time seeing the ball in a bunker on a bright day.

« **Reply #17 on:** April 16, 2007, 08:20:51 PM »

Shivas...

Johan Edfords was wearing a painter hat. My guess is you may have seen him in a nice purple number.

« **Reply #18 on:** April 16, 2007, 08:35:00 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Doak on April 16, 2007, 03:52:51 PM

Hopefully Mike Young will chime in on this thread. He is always arguing that Southern courses on clay soils are handicapped to a more sedate parkland "look" which hurts their rankings ... but he has never considered that a Southern course, Augusta National, set the manicured look for other courses to emulate, and that the new ragged-edged bunkers he hates so much are just a contrast to the manicured style which has dominated for years.

Tom,
I have ever said the ragged-edged bunker hurt their rankings.....I think it is the grass...cool season vs bermuda.....my argument has always been that any bunker where you had to bring the sand to it was not a natural bunker....I would assume that ragged edged bunkers at ANGC would be a cool season grass and would not be there all season...ALSO....I very much like ragged edged bunkers but they have their place and when you are trying to cut chnks out of red clay and get the look that everyone expects...well I don't see it....I have done ragged edged bunkers in sand but not in clay.....JMO
Mike

« **Reply #19 on:** April 16, 2007, 11:22:08 PM »

I agree with what Mike Young is saying:

In the humid south, (and really whether on sand or clay) you just can't get the look presented in the photo on a perennial basis. The wispy fescue thing just doesn't work for very long down here. In short time it will die and be replaced by a broadleaf weedy mess.

Mr. Esler, is indeed an architect and I've had the privilege to play his Black Sheep course. It is fine, fine, fine. If his grass choices there would work in the South, many more would choose them.

Glad to see you back David.

« **Reply #20 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:31:36 PM »

Heretofore, I've been pretty ambivalent about even offering an opinion on a preference on either photo but on reflection and particularly after considering what Craig Disher said above I think I prefer the more rugged (or doctored version) primarily for the very reasons he gave.

My concern at first was that a more rugged bunker style may not fit in that well with the over-all immaculate look and aura of ANGC but if one looks at the hues and lines and such behind that green one can see that the bottom version is more conducive to the look of the scene in both color and otherwise.

It is pretty hard to condone that ultra clean, ultra white bunker look anywhere, even at ultra clean and ultra immaculate ANGC. It's also pretty hard to imagine a greater caricature of the real thing than those ANGC bunkers. I guess I've become somewhat used to them over the years just because they are at and representative of ANGC. Therein probably lies the problem.

« **Reply #21 on:** April 17, 2007, 07:35:02 PM »

Quote from: Dave Esler on April 16, 2007, 03:35:00 PM

They simply represent what we would hope the golf course might look like had the club embraced or at some point restored the original design character to its golfscape.

Dave, I'm not so sure that the look you presented is feasible.

Maintaining those jagged bunker edges is difficult, especially on steep slopes.

One might argue that ANGC has the resources to maintain that look, but, I'm not so sure that the task isn't beyond the ability of the field worker.[/color]

While the "changes" at AGN are fun to imagine, far more important is the impact extrapolated throughout the continent
on so many over manicurred clubs and courses that have tried to emulate or keep up over the decades.

ANGC often gets blamed for the "manicured" look, but, I'm not so sure that the strain on budgets at local clubs didn't play a more significant role. That, combined with the manufacturers of greens equipment that presented their equipment as labor and dollar saving devices.

Certainly you can't lay the blame for tri-plex mowers and other equipment that groom golf courses at the foot of ANGC.[/color]

Had AGN followed the rugged natural approach from day one, or returned to it at some point in its history, we might be a nation where Prairie Dunes is the aesthetic ideal to which most strive rather than Medinah or Oakland Hills.

I don't think that's true when it comes to grooming.

The mistake that you and others make is that of universal, undisciplined or indescriminate transferance. By that I mean that you can't take the Prairie Dunes look and import it to Seminole or Pine Tree.

While I might prefer treeless courses I'm not so sure Pinehurst # 2 would be enhanced by the global removal of all of the trees in and around the golf course.

There tends to be a "prefered" look by some.
A look that lends itself to links like golf courses, be they Sand Hills, Pacific Dunes, Shinnecock Hills, Garden City Golf Club and others.

But, that look isn't universally exportable.

A great deal is site and weather dependent.

What would be a great help would be to see what the Augusta Golf club looked like in 1927, 7 years prior to the introduction of ANGC. And/or East Lake and others.[/color]

Truly staggering to consider the economic and environmental impact the AGN model has had on golf property throughout this country.

That's only if you buy into the theory that ANGC was the sole influence in the maintaining and manicuring of golf courses.[/color]

Maybe at some point in the future they may embrace their lead role in the world of golf and direct the masses back to sustainablility.

Early photos, photos circa the opening of the golf course reveal a manicured look, therefore one has to question your theory.[/color]

Certainly the benefits of firm and fast were on display recently, its a start.

Mother Nature certainly contributed to that.
In prior years, rain and heavy rain prevented firm and fast from being the norm.

But, if we extend your theory, stating that fast is desireable, how many golf courses will disfigure their character laden greens in the name of the need for speed ?[/color]

#12 c.1987

#12 "before before!!"

« **Reply #22 on:** April 17, 2007, 11:00:45 PM »

Based on a quick look through the old photos in Stan Byrdy's book on Augusta National it doesn't appear the bunkers at ANGC ever had the long, hairy, fescue look. Nor did they originally have the high maintenance look of today's bunkers. Rather the bunker look was more natural, rustic and freeform akin to what we have seen in old photos of Mackenzie's Pasatiempo.

Regarding the 12th hole in particular, the 1932 version had a larger green especially on the left front side where a bunker was located on the left hand side between the green and water which jutted in somewhat at that point. The front middle bunker was in today's location and there was a solitary bunker built high on the bank behind the green. The entire green was much lower and closer the creek. In 1960 the green was raised significantly and moved back a little from the creek to provide the steep slope to the front of the green that exists today. The raised green brought the rear bunkers more into play at green level.

Those differences noted, I am in agreement with Dave's principal premise that Augusta sets the standard that others have followed and that this has influenced other courses around the country in the direction of a highly manicured high maintenance look and away from a more natural look. Augusta clearly sets the standard for perfect, green playing conditions and over time this evolved into the highly manicured look of today as compared to the more rugged, rustic look the course had when it opened.

Over time, even while Bobby Jones was still running the show, an emphasis was placed on top quality playing conditions and high standards of maintenance that toned down the rugged look over time. It is my supposition that the advent of tv, in particular color tv, provided the money and the incentive that caused the conditioning standards to kick into a much higher gear resulting in the extremely clean look of today and spread the influence of that look nationwide. This change is evident in the comparison of the 1950's photos to those of today.

« **Reply #23 on:** April 17, 2007, 11:02:36 PM »

Although the trimmed clean look is currently in style, many of us older folks can remember the days when "hairy bunkers" were the norm.

Tom

« **Reply #24 on:** April 17, 2007, 11:43:30 PM »

Those hairy bunkers look like the "grow your own crystals" kit with which I amused myself as a child . . .

News:

Dave Esler

John Kavanaugh

Bryan Izatt

Tom_Doak

tlavin

John Kavanaugh

Mark Bourgeois

Dan Herrmann

JESII

wsmorrison

JESII

wsmorrison

TEPaul

John Kavanaugh

BCrosby

wsmorrison

Craig Disher

Doug Spets

Mike_Young

Jimbo

TEPaul

Patrick_Mucci

Dan Moore

Tom Yost

Michael Moore