News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Raynor
« on: January 19, 2004, 04:39:44 PM »
I had the displeassure of hearing Ian Baker Finch give the low down on Wailea during the recent telecast this past weekend.

Finch went to on call it a "Raynor design," although he added that it had been "tweaked" a little bit.

Based on what George Bahto had to say last Friday it seems that the course has been much more than tweaked, thus it irritated me that Finch fed the public a bunch of misinformation.  Pretty standard, though, isn't it?

Moving along....my question is........what Raynor course can the average bloke get on that plays truest to Raynor's original design intent?  

Seth Raynor is someone whom I've learned more about than any architect since taking part in gca.com.  I use to dismiss him as nothing but CBMac's right hand man, but many of you have taken the stance that he is a genius in his own right.

Thus, where can I get a taste of his true work?  I doubt I'll ever set foot on Fisher's Island or Camargo.  Unfortunately, both Yale and Wailea have been bastardized.  

What genuine Raynor gems can "Average Joe" play that are TRUE Raynor gems?


What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2004, 05:04:20 PM »
George Bahto's Stonebridge Links on LI is probably the course average blokes can get on that plays closest to Raynor's original design intent  :)

As for Baker-Finch's comments, it reminds me of so many clubs with classic courses - clubs that ordered changes to golf courses originally designed by Raynor, Ross, Flynn, Mackenzie, Colt, Thompson, Tillinghast, et. al., and now trumpet the fact that the course was designed by Raynor, Ross, Flynn, Mackenzie, Colt, Thompson, Tillinghast, et. al. because it's en vogue.

Look back on television coverage of the Sony Open since its been played at Waialae and tell me many commentators previous to Baker-Finch mentioned Raynor? I don't know for sure, but I'd guess zero.
jeffmingay.com

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2004, 05:07:21 PM »
Michael,

I don't think that it would be in Finch's best interest to say that Waialae had been "butchered beyond recognition" (or something a little less harsh  ::)), as the club wouldn't be too happy about that.  He'd probably be fired by the network.  I'm just glad he mentioned Raynor at all.

As for public Raynor layouts, only 3 came up on golfcourse.com:

Old White course at Greenbrier
Hotchkiss School (CT), 9 holes
Olde Course at Thousand Island CC

OW at Greenbrier had been significantly changed through the years I believe, but is/was going through a restoration by Lester George.

30 courses came up under a search for private Raynor designs (several are probably co-credited w/CB Mac).
« Last Edit: January 19, 2004, 05:08:08 PM by Scott_Burroughs »

JakaB

Re:Raynor
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2004, 05:21:07 PM »
Unfortunately, both Yale and Wailea have been bastardized.  

If you can't look past the obvious and still see the great architecture at Yale...you need to find a new hobby.   You people will never let me rest with your continued use of hyperbole in the interest of false architectural intelectualism.

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2004, 06:45:05 PM »
Unfortunately, both Yale and Wailea have been bastardized.  

If you can't look past the obvious and still see the great architecture at Yale...you need to find a new hobby.   You people will never let me rest with your continued use of hyperbole in the interest of false architectural intelectualism.

Come now jaka?  One Geoffrey Childs has been on a crusade to point out what has happened to Yale for sometime now.  I guess you still had your head buried in the sand while all this was going on.  Please don't try and tell me Yale is the same course that it use to be.

As far as creativity goes?  Again, come now jaka?  When the Starship Enterprise beams me up I'll head straight towards the holodeck so that I may transplant myself back into the 1910's and play Yale in its' original form.  Outside of that day I have a hard time playing imaginary courses.

This is the whole point of my thread.  I can bloody well imagine what Yale use to be.....but it isn't that anymore.  If you want to call that my "continued use of hyperbole in the interest of false architectural intelectualism" then so be it.  

But, I'm not alone.  Hell, I didn't even come up with the notion.  Go yell at those guys who think Yale sucks now.  I'm just a dumb robot copying what they say because I don't have an original thought in my big pumpkin of a head  

What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2004, 06:50:01 PM »
Shivas: I'd like to list a number of Raynor courses that have been changed as much or more than Waialae but I think I'd probably get in trouble - hah.  Remember, I have to "converse" with these clubs.

I think what disturbs me the most is how the undulations have been removed from so many of these courses yet these are some of the same clubs who are always looking to make their course "harder" - usually by adding scorecard yardage to their layout.

Those greens out there at Waialae looked flat as a pancake. I quit watching after about half an hour.

Restore the bunkers properly, get some semblance of the proper (note: proper) and original undulations back on each style of green, and at 6500 - 6700 yards, you'll have your hands full scoring.

mdugger: let me see if I can find a few courses where you can same some of his "original" work or at least where there are at least a number of original holes - not easy, considering most of them are on very private clubs.

Yale is an "interesting" subject .... for what it's worth:  there are no fairway bunkers - never were (well, one or two). Without any fairway bunkering you still have to place the tee-balls to get a max play to many of the greens. Many of the greens are unaltered and those that have not been, are spectacular - true classics - so that leaves the greenside bunkering which have had their shapes grotesquely mutilated but remain basically positioned as designed but this has no bearing on the Macdonald/Raynor architectural strategies.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2004, 06:51:31 PM by George_Bahto »
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2004, 06:50:43 PM »
Michael,

I don't think that it would be in Finch's best interest to say that Waialae had been "butchered beyond recognition" (or something a little less harsh  ::)), as the club wouldn't be too happy about that.  He'd probably be fired by the network.  I'm just glad he mentioned Raynor at all.


Scott....

Sure sure, I totally hear ya.  Of course, Finch can't talk a bunch of shit about how much it has been ruined.  Yet, he could say it is aQUITE different course instead of "there have been a couple of insy weensy changes"  

It's misleading to amatuer golf viewer, the very folks we need to edumacate, and furthermore, stating that the course has been severly altered is not an admission that it has been ruined, right?
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Mike_Sweeney

Re:Raynor
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2004, 06:51:22 PM »
Mdugger said, "I may transplant myself back into the 1910's and play Yale in its' original form.  Outside of that day I have a hard time playing imaginary courses."


Michael,

Yale is ALOT closer TODAY to MacRaynor's wishes than it was in 1910's  ;)

« Last Edit: January 19, 2004, 06:51:42 PM by Mike_Sweeney »

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2004, 08:50:59 PM »
That is interesting, George. I presume Waialae will keep adding yardage in an attempt to remain relevant, but I guess they'd never consider putting those Raynor greens back, would they.

Amazing, really.
jeffmingay.com

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2004, 09:01:37 PM »
In trying to answer something for Mike on this thread, I went to my link on the Seth Raynor Society and found it is kaput.  George or Tony, Doug or King, if you are lurking, can you tell us the status?
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2004, 09:05:08 PM »
In past broadcasts of the Sony I've heard IB-F talk about the great other designs of Raynor, naming CC of Fairfield (also another altered Raynor course), Shoreacres, Fishers Island, The Creek and Mid-Ocean as other examples. (can't remember if he talked about CBM in the latter two).
« Last Edit: January 19, 2004, 09:05:59 PM by SPDB »

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2004, 09:11:07 PM »
...don't forget yeomans hall....
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2004, 09:19:28 PM »
...don't forget yeomans hall....

Nothing yeoman about Yeamans Hall.   ;D ;D

Mike_Sweeney

Re:Raynor
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2004, 09:38:00 PM »
In trying to answer something for Mike on this thread, I went to my link on the Seth Raynor Society and found it is kaput.  George or Tony, Doug or King, if you are lurking, can you tell us the status?

RJ,

Try here, I just got my book Soctland's Gift from Tony.

http://www.sethraynorsociety.org/

JakaB

Re:Raynor
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2004, 09:39:12 PM »

Yale is an "interesting" subject .... for what it's worth:  there are no fairway bunkers - never were (well, one or two). Without any fairway bunkering you still have to place the tee-balls to get a max play to many of the greens. Many of the greens are unaltered and those that have not been, are spectacular - true classics - so that leaves the greenside bunkering which have had their shapes grotesquely mutilated but remain basically positioned as designed but this has no bearing on the Macdonald/Raynor architectural strategies.

Please everyone file this under "Courses that don't suck".   You can't fight the wisdom of Georgie B.

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2004, 09:40:01 PM »
Jeff, in all fairness this was built for a hotel - a resort course if you will, but I’m not sure that really holds
much water neither. Banks oversaw the construction of the course and he was no softie when it came to undulating greens.

Examples: He built a muni for the Essex County Park Commission now called Hendricks Field (we refer to it as Branch Brook), where I played for about seven years. This was a major gambler’s hangout - Pat Mucci will tell you all about Branch Brook also. Some of the great golfers in NJ used to go there for “action.”  This is the course where Joe Louis lost tons (tons!) of his money to the head pro, who was one of the greatest putters I’ve ever seen. He is a true legend in NJ. The greens at Branch Brook were generally slow - unless the pro had a big $$ match going then the speed was up because that would favor him. He and Titanic Thompson were the Minnesota Fats of golf, I would think.

Every type of a match you could imagine. One day it was 100 to 1, the pro  vs an low-80 player. I was there - there were about 300 of us watching as the pro almost lost. Pro was ahead by one after the seventh, but he chilli-dipped one from the fringe on eight, losing the hole. Pressure on the ninth was incredible. The player (known as Ballentine Pete - hah!! .... true!!) hits his ball into the right tree tree-line  off the ninth as the pro splits the fairway and birdied the short, blind tee-shot, downhill 9th hole.

That place was Runyon-esque - truly. Lots of Cross-country matches - three against two .... we often played 7 and 8 man “cats” (skin games) late in the PM .... all in the same group of course, one tie all tie - that was super fun.

Sorry .....   point is this: the greens on that short-length muni were and still are, full of mounds - the
proverbial “buried elephants” with double and triple breaks.

So because the course was a muni or a “hotel course” does not mean the greens were mundane.

Difficult greens were what they were about.

The Knoll has all sorts of undulations ..... built for an older membership who asked him (Banks) for course “not too hard” - hah!  Yeamans Halls original greens had all sort of great thing going on etc ........ as did the original Lookout Mountain greens and most all the rest as well.

So certainly must have Waialae had these undulating greens - this was their trademark.

How non-Raynor were the bunkers at Waialae! Yikes!

What did they give for the present yardage of the course? Did anyone get that?      
« Last Edit: January 19, 2004, 09:48:41 PM by George_Bahto »
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

George_Bahto

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2004, 09:46:49 PM »
JakaB: you said: "Please everyone file this under "Courses that don't suck".  You can't fight the wisdom of Georgie B.

hey, only in the context I give, though

 .....  they still really wrecked what may have been Raynor's greatest course, incredibly, when they had the opportunity to make it even better than we knew it - and we didn't even know what it once was until recently
If a player insists on playing his maximum power on his tee-shot, it is not the architect's intention to allow him an overly wide target to hit to but rather should be allowed this privilege of maximum power except under conditions of exceptional skill.
   Wethered & Simpson

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2004, 09:48:38 PM »
George, I think they said it played a hair under 7000 yards.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Adam_Messix

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2004, 10:19:26 PM »
To the group--

Has anyone here seen the restoration work that Brian Silva did to the Raynor designed Everglades Club?  I would be interested to hear what people here think.  As a comparison, the work at the Everglades in terms of the bunker work is similar to what Silva did at Mountain Lake Club in Lake Wales.  I am curious to hear what people think about it in terms of whether it is keeping with the true Raynor style or not.  

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2004, 04:02:21 AM »
...SPDB...yea man ,i hear you ...it was late  ;)

..[and i played it last week ]
« Last Edit: January 20, 2004, 04:07:27 AM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

CharlestonBuckeye

Re:Raynor
« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2004, 06:55:04 AM »
If you ever plan to be in the Charleston area I'd be more than happy to host you at Yeamans Hall.

john_stiles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2004, 01:38:07 PM »
Call or write and we could play Lookout Mountain on a weekend with sufficient notice.

We would also have to play Black Creek, down the hill from Lookout Mountain.  Black Creek is a wonderful Silva course designed in the tradition of Macdonald and Raynor.

FREEMAHC

Re:Raynor
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2004, 04:35:13 PM »
First post here, so I don't know the ful extent of the yale bashing, I'll have to check in the archives. But as far as the bunkering goes, most of it is in the same location, but many traps are notieably shallower than the original design. Plus, the bunker to the right of 6 was filled in a while back, and the 12th green used to be surrounded by bunkers much like the 5th. Those are the most glaring changes I can recall off the top of my head.

The change I'd love to see would be relocating the 3rd green to it's old spot, jutting out into the lake. But that's a topic for another time.

HamiltonBHearst

Re:Raynor
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2004, 06:30:58 PM »


A lot more changes than that.  There was a hole by hole analysis of many of the holes which was great.  Only Yale administration and Roger Rulewich would not be able to tell the difference.

Sadly, some on this site think Yale is "good enough as is."

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Raynor
« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2004, 11:42:42 PM »
Hamilton,

Must we start this again?  No one here has ever said that Yale was "good enough".  We said it is very good as is, but could be better with the right person doing the work - that is not the definition of "good enough".  "Good enough" means we don't care if anything is done and that it doesn't need it.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back