In reading the RJ thread and reading the article by Geoff S last week....question.....seems so many guys today just don't get it according to this site....so tell me ...who was the worst of the old gead guys?  Ross?  Simpson?  Tater? McKenzie?  Inquiring minds wish to know.

Mike, by definition all the ODGs were great, how could one be worst?

Is RTJ considered an ODG? Or is he just a DG?

Quote from: Jim Franklin on October 30, 2007, 06:26:28 PM

Is RTJ considered an ODG? Or is he just a DG?

He's an ADG.

Aging Dead Guy.

Damn, there goes that suggestion .

Mike,

Braid.

So he put his par 3's at 3, 6, 9 and 12.

Yee bob.

At least someone gave an answer.....
I say Ross.....percentage wise that is.....

During the '20s, RTJ designed 21 courses in the NY Metro area.  Only Tillinghast and Emmet designed more courses in the NYC area during this period (26 and 23, respectively.)  

During the '20s, RTJ designed 21 courses in the NY Metro area.  Only Tillinghast and Emmet designed more courses in the NYC area during this period (26 and 23, respectively.)  

RTJ in the twenties?

Mike,

I'd be interested if you would list your biggest beefs with Ross, and this isn't bait because I haven't seen enough of his work to really know.

PS am playing LS again tomorrow and am so jazzed I doubt I'll get decent sleep.

Gary,
Ross has some very good stuff as we all know....but let me ask.....would it be considered architecture today if you saw a place one day and mailed in a set of plans and never saw it again....would the GCA association he belonged to allow such a practice?  Would the client accept it.....would one have any control over the outcome of the project......400....come on  there are some bad ones out there....say maybe 100.....
yet a guy like William(Wayne) Flynn might do 40 and not have the recognition.....but have 40 good ones....
can one honestly say an architect took pride in his work if he never saw the project at completion?  
These are just questions I have always had when I begin to hear he did 400 courses.....

Mike,

The very few Ross courses I have played have been real treats.  They have a feel to them.  Not to get carried away here but I liken them to the way Miles Davis did music in their subtle craft.  

The 397 others..  I don't know.  I've read some of Ran's reviews and they jibe with what I have seen myself.  For a guy who did so much and spent so little time on site he sure seems to have been consistent.

"Would it be considered architecture today if you saw a place one day and mailed in a set of plans and never saw it again  .."

You're an architect, I'm a writer.  I have low opinions of writers who mail it in, but I'm probably less discerning about golf architecture, so my uneducated answer would be "does it work?"

Quote from: David Stamm on October 30, 2007, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: JMorgan on October 30, 2007, 08:02:00 PM

During the '20s, RTJ designed 21 courses in the NY Metro area.  Only Tillinghast and Emmet designed more courses in the NYC area during this period (26 and 23, respectively.)  

RTJ in the twenties?

Shhhh!  

I think not, RTJ's first solo effort was in 1929, so he probably doesn't count as an old dead guy.

As for the answer, it's pretty easy: Tom Bendelow.

I too was going to suggest Tom Bendelow.  Since he is taken I will throw out Alfred Tull.  He did some really good stuff with with D Emmet , but his own work, while good, is not really great.

Mike,

Actually, I will finish a column later today and will email it in to the editor in Cleveland.......no real reason to "see the site" where its published.

As to ODG, I think there was a variety of talent out there.  Didn't Billy Bell have a lot of proteges, like his son and Lawrence Hughes, who did a lot of average stuff?  

Was Banks as good as Raynor?

There was a guy named Tucker who was good, I think, but not great.

Even Press Maxwell was considered to not be able to hold a candle to his father.

How many Ross proteges were really distinguished in their careers?

There are so many pedestrian older courses out there that there had to be a lot of pedestrian, if not outright bad, gca's in that era. At least, Bendelow got better as his career progressed.

Gary,
Just to play Devil's advocate. (not that Mike needs any egging on)
remember that the only Ross's you're playing are the one's that survived. (presumably the better ones)
I played Ross's Brunswick CC competively in the 1980's and trust me there weren't a lot of fans of that course (at least in Brunswick) Recently that course has been renovated by Love's firm, but my guess is it wasn't a restoration, but rather an improvement.
But 20 years from now people will play it and gush over Ross, rather than Love and his firm. (presumably Cowley?)

Secondly, I think anytime we play a Ross or ODG course we are by definition playing an older,mature course where certain attractive features have been allowed/encouraged to evolve and certain unattractive features have been eliminated.

For instance, would any of the courses at Pinehurst have much charm if "restored" to their original opening state.
Stark,spindly,timbered pines and circular small, sand greens.
We all forget Ross worked on Pinehurst for YEARS, yet we want to pass judgement on new courses the year that they open and rip them to shreds.


There just is a certain charm to an older course that is irreplaceable and may have as much to do with maintenance practices and green committees as it does with the original architect. (of course we have some courses that were bastardized for what seemed like good and logical reasons at the time)

There is no substitute for time and maturity-which contribute greatly to charm.