[paul cowley]

...I'm surprised the no one has mentioned the most modern Alpinist, someone who has taken the feature to even greater heights....the incomparable Mr Dye!

now, can we please get back to the Arts & Crafts stuff.

[TEPaul]

Paul:

Good call there. Pete sure did reuse the "Alps" concept. I forget which hole it is at Old Marsh (like #6 or so) that has a mini-mountain right in front of the green completely blinding the whole thing.

Good call!

[DMoriarty]

First Patrick, let me clarify something.  I am not calling the berm behind the greens at Prestwick or NGLA the alp, or alpinization.   I am just noting that it is a feature of both greens, on Alps holes.  

I've often wondered if the large rear berm at # 3 at NGLA wasn't there for two purposes.
1  To act as a backstop or safety net for errant shots given the long and blind approach into that green.
2  To act as a protective barrier to those on the 4th tee.

I think MacDonald would beg to differ, or at least beg to offer another more strategic purpose. Here he is in 1914 in GI&OL, writing about the Alps in Prestwick in his article on NGLA's alps.  He seems to attach significant importance of the possibility of the golfer having a tough third with a downhill lie . . .

"When the player hits his second
shot across the summit of the saddle back hill called
the Alps he is completely in doubt about the result.
His ball may be on the green close to the hole, or it
may have fallen just short of the green into a serious
hazard, or it may have run over the green into thick
bent leaving a difficult down-hill approach. The
margin between the three results is so small that the
player is frequently pleasantly or unpleasantly disappointed
when he comes to the top of the hill and
surveys the result beneath him. The green lies in a
hollow with the bunker in front and a high bank
behind. If the ball carries far enough to get over the
bunker by only a foot it gets a running fall and may
go right past the hole into the bent beyond. Therefore
the difference between being in the bunker short
of the green or in the bent beyond the green is often
the difference of two or three feet in the carry.

Also patrick, your explanation is rather site specific.  How do you explain what appears to be the same feature at the Lido, where he had cart blanche with the land?  

Isnt it possible-- even likely-- that MacDonald considered this berm to be a key feature of the green area on Alps holes?

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

NO.

The configuration of the rear of the green on # 12 at Yale is completely different from the feature at # 3 at NGLA.

In addition, balls hit into the rear berm at NGLA are usually returned to the putting surface due to the steep vertical nature of that berm.

I can't address the Lido issue since I've never seen the golf course.   Are you qualified to analyze and discuss Lido and the "Alps" hole there ?

As to site specific, I believe I indicated that earlier.

TEPaul,

It's the 5th hole at Old Marsh and it has the directional marker at the top of the "Alps" as well.

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty,

NO.

The configuration of the rear of the green on # 12 at Yale is completely different from the feature at # 3 at NGLA.

George describes the 12th at Yale as "as conceived by Raynor."  He also writes that "years ago, the essential elements of this 'Alps' hole altered dramatically near the green site." (Evangelist, p. 241.)  

So I dont think the configuration at Yale #12 is at all dispositive.  That is unless you are qualified to discuss the configuration pre-changes, as well as MacDonald's contribution, as well as any changes in MacDonald's viewpoint on the issue over the decade and a half between the the article above and the design of Yale.

In addition, balls hit into the rear berm at NGLA are usually returned to the putting surface due to the steep vertical nature of that berm.

Somebody should have explained this to MacDonald when he was writing the above article, which aimed to guide architects around the country in building quality Alps holes.  

I can't address the Lido issue since I've never seen the golf course.   Are you qualified to analyze and discuss Lido and the "Alps" hole there ?

YES.  As a rational human being, I am qualified to consider and analyze abstract concepts and to learn through complex mental processes (such as reading) which do not always involve first hand experience.  For example,  I have over three decades experience analyzing three dimensional objects and scenes based upon close examination of two dimensional depictions of such objects and scenes, produced by a process commonly known as photography.  

In other words, looks to me like a berm is being contstructed behind that green in the photo above, and bunkers are being constructed in front of it.  Also, the photo of the releif map of the greensite, as depicted in George's book, also shows a berm behind this green.  

Was MacDonald kidding when he described the Alps hole in his article?   Or are you kidding now?  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

It takes a lot of Art and Craft for everyone to "just" get along and not get sidetracked.

On a side note, A older lady named, Ms. Emily Latella from Far Hills, New Jersey emailed me wanting to know why you guys have gone 10 pages long discussing Farts & Crafts on the Cider Track. She wanted me to also inform you that she won't be cleaning that mess up.

[T_MacWood]

Emily
Its Arts and Crafts sidetrack, not Farts and Crafts cider track.

This thread has taken a number of interesting twists and turns....several days ago TE said he would post the many good points, made on this thread, which he claimed shot down the premise of the A&C essay...evidently he's had trouble finding those points.

[Patrick_Mucci]

George describes the 12th at Yale as "as conceived by Raynor."  He also writes that "years ago, the essential elements of this 'Alps' hole altered dramatically near the green site." (Evangelist, p. 241.)  

Because you're not familiar with the hole you don't understand that all of the alteration was done in front of the green, not at the back of it.

As to George's alleged description, I don't accept it as Gospel as you do.[/color]

So I dont think the configuration at Yale #12 is at all dispositive.  That is unless you are qualified to discuss the configuration pre-changes, as well as MacKenzie's contribution, as well as any changes in MacDonald's viewpoint on the issue over the decade and a half between the the article above and the design of Yale.

Yes, I am qualified as none of the changes took place behind the green.  If you were familiar with the topography you'd understand that.[/color]

In addition, balls hit into the rear berm at NGLA are usually returned to the putting surface due to the steep vertical nature of that berm.

Somebody should have explained this to MacDonald when he was writing the above article, which aimed to guide architects around the country in building quality Alps holes.

I'm not so sure that CBM wasn't one of those, "do as I say, not as I do" guys.  I"m not prepared to view his writings in the context of the absolute.   I"m intimately familiar with the berm behind the 3rd green and how balls react to it.  
Are You ? [/color]

I can't address the Lido issue since I've never seen the golf course.   Are you qualified to analyze and discuss Lido and the "Alps" hole there ?

YES.  As a rational human being, I am qualified to consider and analyze abstract concepts and to learn through complex mental processes (such as reading) which do not always involve first hand experience.  For example,  I have over three decades experience analyzing three dimensional objects and scenes based upon close examination of two dimensional depictions of such objects and scenes, produced by a process commonly known as photography.

And over and over again it's been shown that photos don't tell the proper or entire story.

Since you've never layed eyes on Lido, I'd say you're entirely unqualified to be considered an expert on the hole and its features.[/color]

In other words, looks to me like a berm is being contstructed behind that green in the photo above, and bunkers are being constructed in front of it.  

How do you know, from what angle the photo was taken ?
Could it be from the front of the green, the side of the green, which side, the back of the green ?  Could the materials piled in the foreground and backround be for use elsewhere ?
Could they be greensmix ?

You don't know enough about the photo or the content of the photo to offer an expert opinion.[/color]

Also, the photo of the releif map of the greensite, as depicted in George's book, also shows a berm behind this green.  
If you'll look more carefully, on page 168,  you'll see no elevation changes behind the green, yet, on that same page on the 4th green, you'll see the elevation lines, just as you do on the 3rd tee.

In either instance, in the renderings on pages 168 and 172, you can't draw finite, absolute conclusions on how the golf course was actually configured.  You, as an attorney should know this.[/color]

Was MacDonald kidding when he described the Alps hole in his article?   Or are you kidding now?  

You'll never know  [/color]

[Craig Disher]

In either instance, in the renderings on pages 168 and 172, you can't draw finite, absolute conclusions on how the golf course was actually configured.  You, as an attorney should know this.

The drawings aren't very helpful on this point. But looking at the hole in stereoscopy a semi-circular berm definitely can be seen behind the green. There's a slight rise from the green to the top of the berm then a steep dropoff from there to ground level. Apparently the green was built up significantly - although not nearly as high as the alps feature in front - and a raised berm extends half-way around it.

[TEPaul]

"Emily
Its Arts and Crafts sidetrack, not Farts and Crafts cider track."

Tom MacW:

Are you sure about that?  

"This thread has taken a number of interesting twists and turns....several days ago TE said he would post the many good points, made on this thread, which he claimed shot down the premise of the A&C essay...evidently he's had trouble finding those points."

Not at all, I've had no trouble at all finding those points shooting down both the premise AND the conclusion of your A/C essay. It's all right there in your five part essay.  

I sure will write it but at the moment I'm writing the hole by hole architectural creation and architectural evolution report of PVGC.  

That takes some precedence over shooting down the premise and conclusion of your A/C essay.

[T_MacWood]

TE
I understand completely...first things first, you've been working on the PV analysis for some time and you should finish it.

Who we can we attribute the quote below to?

I'd be glad to try to explain why and how that happened in your essay on the A/C movement if you'd like but this email about six months ago from one of the better minds on the history and evolution of golf course architecture should give you some indication:

"I read his "Arts and Crafts" piece and never saw a single link established between fine arts and golf architecture. Style parallels and aesthetic similarities, sure, but any link was purely hypothetical. He's one of those "researchers" who never knows what to do with his research. In academia we'd call (i.e. "dismiss") them as "positivists," searching for independent facts of their own accord, w/o any relationship or judgment."

[SPDB]

It bears mentioning that the Alps hole at St. Louis CC conforms to MacDonald description of the qualities of the hole. It sits in a hollow behind a bunker and buttressed by a bank behind the hole.

[DMoriarty]

As for Yale, are you qualified to speak knowledgeably on MacDonald's contribution to the hole, as opposed to Raynor's.  They were two different people, you know.   Also, are you qualified to speak to any change of heart MacDonald might have had over the decades.  Or were the gears of his mind permanently stuck on his first utterance, confusing the concepts of consistency and correctness . . . like you?

I'm not so sure that CBM wasn't one of those, "do as I say, not as I do" guys.  I"m not prepared to view his writings in the context of the absolute.   I"m intimately familiar with the berm behind the 3rd green and how balls react to it.  
Are You ?

No offense meant, but I'll take what he says over what you do . . .

As for the berm behind the 3rd green, I am familiar enought with it to know that it is probably possible to maintain the grass on it higher than is currently maintained.  

Since you've never layed eyes on Lido, I'd say you're entirely unqualified to be considered an expert on the hole and its features.

Not so.  I never said I was an expert, just qualifiied to analyze.  And I have laid eyes on it.  In photographs.  

How do you know, from what angle the photo was taken ?
Could it be from the front of the green, the side of the green, which side, the back of the green ?  Could the materials piled in the foreground and backround be for use elsewhere ?
Could they be greensmix ?

Yes, they could be a nice uniform pile of greensmix, laid out in a semicircle around the green, a very significant pile of greensmix which MacKenzie himself chose to highlight in his article on the Lido.  

As for the angle, you might want to take a look at the excavation going on in the foreground, especially on the right side of the foreground.  Either they are burying bodies for the Mob or they are digging out bunkers.  Coincidentally, there are bunkers depicted in front of and at the right front corner of the Lido Alps in the photos.   Hmmm . . .

You don't know enough about the photo or the content of the photo to offer an expert opinion.

To the contrary, I just did.  One need not be an "expert" to interpret a photograph.

If you'll look more carefully, on page 168,  you'll see no elevation changes behind the green, yet, on that same page on the 4th green, you'll see the elevation lines, just as you do on the 3rd tee.

Not surprisingly, you are focusing on the wrong page.  Page 172 shows a berm, relationally in the same place as the photograph shows the berm.  You as a potentially rational human being, should be able to see this.  
_________________

But let's step back and weigh the evidence.  

On my side, we have:  Prestwick; MacDonald's description of the strategic merits of the berm behind the Alps green at Prestwick; A similar man-made berm behind the Alps green designed by MacDonald at NGLA; A photo chosen my MacDonald to depict his Alps green at Lide with a semicircular berm behind the green and with bunkers in front to give the proper line of perspective; and a detailed relief map of the lido which shows a berm corresponding to the one in the photo.  

On your side you have the alps at yale, designed by Raynor a decade and one-half later.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

"Emily
Its Arts and Crafts sidetrack, not Farts and Crafts cider track."

Tom's, Paul and MacWood,
Emily wanted me to tell you both, "Never Mind!"

[Craig Disher]

Re the Alps at the Lido

Doesn't this photo settle the issue on the berm behind the green? It was taken before the course opened and photos from 1940 show that the berm was still there just before the course closed.

[TEPaul]

"Who we can we attribute the quote below to?"

Tom M:

That was sent to me privately, not on this discussion group. If and when I speak to him again, I'll ask him if it's OK with him to attribute it to him. In my opinion, you should probably be a bit more concerned with what it says, and a little less concerned with who said it.  

[paul cowley]

boy....glad to see this thread is back on topic .

but less to the point....does anyone know how the sand areas at Whistling Straits were delineated for their last competition?...hazards or thru the green?

and TomP, would you consider proofing any of my future posts for content?...you are the man .

[DMoriarty]

It bears mentioning that the Alps hole at St. Louis CC conforms to MacDonald description of the qualities of the hole. It sits in a hollow behind a bunker and buttressed by a bank behind the hole.

Thanks Sean . . .  I was trying to find a photo or sketch of that hole but hadn't been successful.  But I am sure that Patrick will dismiss your observation somehow.   Perhaps you aren't qualified to draw such a conclusion . . . or perhaps he will say that you dont know your butress from a hole in the ground.


Craig.  That seems pretty dispositive to me.   But what says Patrick??
_______________________

To All:

I've seen a number of references in the old literature to an alps-type hole at Piping Rock.  Does it still exist?  What was/is it like?

[SPDB]

David -
The Alps hole still exists at Piping Rock, and, yes, a berm is found at the rear. However, it is not clear how much CB MacDonald worked on this course. There is the well known story that he was not given the interior of the land in front of the clubhouse (reserved for Polo), and passed the project on to Raynor in protest.

In an interview on this site, George Bahto discusses how, over his career, Raynor modified the Alps green complexes. You should check it out.

[DMoriarty]

David -
The Alps hole still exists at Piping Rock, and, yes, a berm is found at the rear. However, it is not clear how much CB MacDonald worked on this course. There is the well known story that he was not given the interior of the land in front of the clubhouse (reserved for Polo), and passed the project on to Raynor in protest.

Sean,   the reason I asked is that MacDonald references the hole in is article on Lido, saying that the Lido Alps hole is based on the Alps at Prestwick and is similar to NGLA 17 and the alps at Piping Rock.  

Thanks for the reference to the Bahto interview.  I have read it but it has been a very long time, and it is time for a refresher read . . .

[Patrick_Mucci]

As for Yale, are you qualified to speak knowledgeably on MacDonald's contribution to the hole, as opposed to Raynor's.  They were two different people, you know.
I'm as qualified as you, and more so, since I've examined the hole and feature in question, more than you have.[/color]  

Also, are you qualified to speak to any change of heart MacDonald might have had over the decades.  
How can you say with any degree of certainty or with any credibiltiy that he had a change of heart ?[/color]

Or were the gears of his mind permanently stuck on his first utterance, confusing the concepts of consistency and correctness . . . like you?

CBM was not known to be indecisive or unsure of himself, so it's likely that his mind was permanently stuck on his first utterance.

Are you also an expert on CBM's moods and mindsets ?[/color]

I'm not so sure that CBM wasn't one of those, "do as I say, not as I do" guys.  I"m not prepared to view his writings in the context of the absolute.   I"m intimately familiar with the berm behind the 3rd green and how balls react to it.  
Are You ?

No offense meant, but I'll take what he says over what you do . . .

And that's your failing, you take his word over his work, the evidence that's manifested in his product, the evidence that's in the ground, and I'll take that evidence over your interpretation every time.[/color]

As for the berm behind the 3rd green, I am familiar enought with it to know that it is probably possible to maintain the grass on it higher than is currently maintained.  

How high is it currently maintained ?[/color]

Since you've never layed eyes on Lido, I'd say you're entirely unqualified to be considered an expert on the hole and its features.

Not so.  I never said I was an expert, just qualifiied to analyze.  And I have laid eyes on it.  In photographs.
So a limited number of photos from angles you're unfamiliar with qualify you as an analyst.  I don't think so.[/color]  

How do you know, from what angle the photo was taken ?
Could it be from the front of the green, the side of the green, which side, the back of the green ?  Could the materials piled in the foreground and backround be for use elsewhere ?
Could they be greensmix ?

Yes, they could be a nice uniform pile of greensmix, laid out in a semicircle around the green, a very significant pile of greensmix which MacKenzie himself chose to highlight in his article on the Lido.  

Have you ever seen greensmix piled and sifted prior to its application to a green ?  If so, at what golf course.  If not, how can you make the above statement with any degree of certainty ?[/color]

As for the angle, you might want to take a look at the excavation going on in the foreground, especially on the right side of the foreground.  Either they are burying bodies for the Mob or they are digging out bunkers.  Coincidentally, there are bunkers depicted in front of and at the right front corner of the Lido Alps in the photos.   Hmmm . . .

I asked you, from what angle is the photo taken, and you ducked answering the question.   Is that because you don't know ?[/color]

You don't know enough about the photo or the content of the photo to offer an expert opinion.

To the contrary, I just did.  One need not be an "expert" to interpret a photograph.

That would depend upon the strength of your interpretive skills and your conclusions.[/color]

If you'll look more carefully, on page 168,  you'll see no elevation changes behind the green, yet, on that same page on the 4th green, you'll see the elevation lines, just as you do on the 3rd tee.

Not surprisingly, you are focusing on the wrong page.  Page 172 shows a berm, relationally in the same place as the photograph shows the berm.  You as a potentially rational human being, should be able to see this.

I'm not focusing on the wrong page, you're denying the evidence presented in the other page, neither of which have any degree of certainty with respect to the finished product.[/color]  
_________________

But let's step back and weigh the evidence.  

On my side, we have:  Prestwick; MacDonald's description of the strategic merits of the berm behind the Alps green at Prestwick; A similar man-made berm behind the Alps green designed by MacDonald at NGLA; A photo chosen my MacDonald to depict his Alps green at Lide with a semicircular berm behind the green and with bunkers in front to give the proper line of perspective; and a detailed relief map of the lido which shows a berm corresponding to the one in the photo.  


For you to equate the rear features at # 17 at Prestwick witht he rear feature at NGLA tells me that you haven't studied either in person.  There's no way one could call them similar.

The relief map you refer to is not a map.  It's a photo of a model that can't be used as evidence to support the existance or configuration of the actual features.  And, the "relief map" you refer to doesn't even conform to that which appears in the photos.

How are CBM's Alps holes at Piping Rock or The Creek ?
Do they contain the berm you refer to ?
Do they bear any resemblance to the 3rd at NGLA ?[/color]

On your side you have the alps at yale, designed by Raynor a decade and one-half later.

You're conveniently leaving off a few alps like holes that CBM designed that don't bear your signature feature.

And, how do you know the extent of CBM's involvement with the design of Yale ?[/color]

[T_MacWood]

"Who we can we attribute the quote below to?"

Tom M:

That was sent to me privately, not on this discussion group. If and when I speak to him again, I'll ask him if it's OK with him to attribute it to him. In my opinion, you should probably be a bit more concerned with what it says, and a little less concerned with who said it.  

It is no longer a private issue....you posted it on the Internet...presumably to make a point. It is only proper that you identify the source...otherwise it is nothing but an unattributed attack, and for all we know you made it up.  

As far what the person said, they are entitled to their opinion regarding not knowing what to do with my research and dismissing me as a 'positivist'. I'm comfortable I know what to do with my research, and he or anyone else is free to dispute any of my conclusions with their own research and conclusions. We look forward to you finally presenting your main points on the A&C essay.

Based on his comment about never seeing a link between the fine arts and golf architecture, I've got wonder if this person even read the essay or is familiar with A&C movement. The fine arts are hardly a part of the essay and only a minor part of the A&C movement.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

Are you sure that the green you refer to at St Louis isn't a punchbowl green, and not a green with a seperate, steep, offset berm.

Where is the rear berm on the Alps hole you cited at Piping Rock ?

Does it in any way resemble the rear berm at the 3rd hole at NGLA ?

Craig Disher,

I don't believe the photo you posted, taken from the 6th green and looking across the 17th hole toward the 10th hole provides clear evidence with respect to the size or configuration of any features located behind the 10th green.
But, you're far more skilled at analyzing that type of information than I am.

[T_MacWood]

The Alps at Camargo is similiar to the one at St. Louis, with the berm behind the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,   the reason I asked is that MacDonald references the hole in is article on Lido, saying that the Lido Alps hole is based on the Alps at Prestwick and is similar to NGLA 17 and the alps at Piping Rock.  

Yes, but he doesn't pinpoint his reference, and most believe it has to do with the intervening, elevated feature that must be traversed or navigated around, and not the features found at or behind the green.

If one looks at the photos you like to analyze, you can see that there aren't substantive elevation changes at Lido that would allow a prudent person to equate the configuration of the 10th hole with the 3rd hole at NGLA.

You've taken CBM's reference of one feature and applied it to another.[/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()