News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Gib_Papazian

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #25 on: March 24, 2004, 01:29:59 PM »
Craig,
No quibble with your quibble. The essay was not meant to be any more than an opinion piece. However, please review the word *often* in context.

Tom Paul,
The necessity of a Masterplan is crucial. I thought about touching on the subject, but the piece was getting a bit pedantic (and didactic) by the end. I was really trying to work towards the last couple paragraphs.

I think before Mingay uses it for his book, I am going to let *guesst* take a red pencil to it. . . . .

That stated, although a masterplan is a wonderful protection against future green committees with other ideas, methinks it is crucial to first make sure to hire the right architect first.

We are working hard towards that on my home track. Over the years, allowing successive GC's to modify our courses without a clear vision has been like giving a monkey a gun.

That is not to say that Olympic is not the product of evolution, jjust that we need to decide which time period the course had the best *look* and try and parrot the salient details with modern yardages. If that involves tieing everybody's hands in the future, so be it.

Small deviations from the masterplan are understandable, but if the tapestry doesn't match, you end up with a collection of unrelated ideas . . . . like the Ocean Course.      

Gentlemen (and guesst),

I did not mean for that piece to be an indictment of Jones Sr. Everyone seems to want to paint him with an either black or white brush. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

Jones Sr. - to me - is a perfect example of a man whose original creations were very good, even great. The redesign work was largely putrid. I believe that he made no attempt to blend his redesign work into the existing architecture because he felt that : A. His ideas were better, and B. Once the committee had a look at the results, it would lead to a complete remodel.

Same goes for Bob Graves.

I guess it all comes down (again) to whether you prefer an objective or subjective test, eh? I do not have a sense of the  post war 1950's, but my guess it that the architecture mirrored the tenor of the times. Big cars, powerful engines, self-assured machisimo. . . . . it fits when you look at it from that angle.
 
However, there is an element of hubris at work here. Out with the old and in with the new . . . . .

What I fail to understand is why Jones does not get his due for courses like Spyglass and Mauna Kea. Whether or not you like that particular style, you have to admire the juevos of the man. Think about #4 at Spyglass or the wild contouring and stylized bunkering at Mauna Kea.

I even wonder whether Augusta National is not more Jones than anything else.

 
       

George Pazin

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #26 on: March 24, 2004, 02:11:43 PM »
Excellent piece Gib.

Any chance you could do a small piece highlighting the changes that improved Olympic? That's the question I always find most fascinating: when does tinkering work? Certainly some of the all time greats were tinkered with, refined if you will - NGLA & #2 jump to mind, but it seems loads more were damaged through tinkering.

Gib's completed his homework assignment, and indeed set the bar quite high - how are the rest of you guys coming? :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Gib_Papazian

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #27 on: March 24, 2004, 02:48:34 PM »
George,
I think somebody posted this on GCA already, but here is the rough draft of a recent column I did for the San Mateo Times on the subject:

 

The United States Junior Amateur is coming to the Olympic Club this summer, and partly in preparation for it, the club is undergoing the most drastic modifications of their historic golf course undertaken since Sam Whiting redesigned the golf course in 1927.

Readers who have played or watched the various tournaments over the years will be shocked at the changes, mostly the result of removing hundreds of trees and acres of brush.

The history of how the course evolved is interesting in that the Lake Course has come nearly full-circle, 80 years after it was first laid out by Willie Watson. Though the Olympic Club’s Lake has long been known as an arboreal parkland, in recent years the layout had become badly overgrown.

Whether this contributed to a drop in rankings on both the Golf Digest and Golf Week “Top 100" list is a matter of speculation, there is no doubt that narrow, excessively penal golf courses have gone out of vogue in favor of more strategic layouts.

So what are the main changes? To begin with, massive tree removal to reopen the vistas on the leeward side of the hill overlooking Lake Merced.

Originally, the club purchased the land from the struggling Lakeside Country Club in 1917 and put the wheels in motion to superimpose a new course atop the existing layout. At the time, the property was made up almost entirely of sand dunes, with only a smattering of foliage.

After WW I, it was decided that the club would need two courses to accommodate the boom of interest and Willie Watson constructed both the Lake Course and what was then known as the Pacific Links - later changed to the Ocean Course.

Ironically, the Lake Course was considered the lesser of the two and went largely ignored by the press in favor of the spectacular Pacific Links, routed mostly on the bluffs overlooking the ocean. Unfortunately, this marquee layout did not last past the winter of 1930, where torrential rains washed most of the course into the sea.

The club opted to do some major redesign work of the Willie Watson courses and brought in Sam Whiting to reroute many of the holes and undertake an ambitious tree planting program once the fairways were established.

In this way, it can be said that the Olympic Club’s courses were built in reverse. Usually, tree-lined layouts are cut through existing forest, but Whiting converted the dune-scape into a parkland course with thousands of pines, cypress and redwood trees.

Golf courses are like gardens in that they need to be pruned and controlled, and as happened to many Golden Age courses, trees became sacrosanct in the minds of many members who ceased to view them as plants that needed to be controlled.

This condition of overgrowth eventually choked off most of the air and light essential for growing grass -  as well as making the course almost impossible for anyone lacking the skill to hit the ball archer straight and long on the perpetually damp fairways.

Now, visitors will find a completely different aesthetic, and one that brings back the flavor of the original layout. The Lake Course wriggles, twists  and writhes down the hillside, but the experience was disorienting because every hole was hemmed in by dense thickets.  Now, for the first time in more than 50 years, the sparkling vistas that surround the golf course are in full view.

The wind, never much of a factor in the strategy of the golf course  now demands golfers allow for firm fairways and swirling ocean breezes. In some measure, the native grasses, planted in place of the unkempt brush strongly resembles Shinnecock Hills.

The removal of so many trees on a highly ranked course is not unprecedented, but with the exception of Oakmont, site of six U.S. Opens, this is the first time in recent memory a “Top 25" club has had the courage and vision to admit their golf course was becoming a dowager and take drastic action.

In some respects, the improvement California Golf Club attained by removing more than a thousand trees emboldened the club to restore the course. It has been suggested that “Cal Club” is now in the same class as Olympic and San Francisco Club.

In conjunction with the tree removal, the club is considering the idea of extending the golf course with the construction of new tees. Following the U.S.. Junior this summer, Olympic has been honored with another United States Amateur Championship in 2008.    

Is another United States Open in the works after that? Perhaps, but players in future championships will find the Lake Course looking and playing more as a strategic links, instead of a claustrophobic march through a dripping wet forest.

</button>

George Pazin

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #28 on: March 25, 2004, 04:45:21 AM »
Thanks, Gib - I missed that the first time it was posted.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

T_MacWood

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #29 on: March 25, 2004, 06:53:41 AM »
Gib
Interesting history of Olympic--it sounds like they've created a new course or recreated the feel of the old course.

At what point did they call in Raynor? I've also seen Herbert Fowler and Max Behr's name associated with course in the 1920's. Is there much info on what they may have done, if anything?

Gib_Papazian

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2004, 02:55:11 PM »
Tom,
Joel Stewart is assembling the historical information on the work of guys like Behr and Fowler. The Lake is the product of evolution and even in my *era,* the club has played "musical bunkers, musical trees and musical cart paths."

You cannot ascribe a certain architect to the current golf course because it is a combination of Watson, Whiting, Behr, Fowler, Hunter (I think), Jones Sr., Jack Fleming, John Fleming, Zippy the Pinhead, Green Committees, Tom Wesikopf and Bill Love.

That stated, we FINALLY have a man in charge with an understanding of our shortcomings and the courage and gravitas to push through what is right despite occasional squawks from the boo birds.

As for Raynor, some of the information you are looking for is included in The Evangelist of Golf. Raynor's plans still hang on the wall, but were never started for a variety of reasons . . . WWI, a membership who later decided they wanted 36 holes and simple timing.

It is a terrible pity, because Raynor meant to make Olympic his "Lido of the West," high praise from a man who never resorted to hyperbole.

When we were planning on completely rebuilding our Ocean Course, I approached our President and pointed out that with some jiggering around of the plans that we could literally raise a Golden Age classic from the grave.

And it would have been the only *Lido* in the world.

The response:

"Who is Seth Raynor?"

The story of how the Ocean ended up in its current state is long and to revisit the circumstances only ends up aggravating me.



       
« Last Edit: March 25, 2004, 02:56:17 PM by Gib_Papazian »

Scott_Burroughs

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2004, 03:41:58 PM »
Gib,

If the Ocean course were completely rebuilt a few years ago, wouldn't part of it be in the Pacific Ocean right now and another part along the rocks below?

Gib_Papazian

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2004, 04:53:51 PM »
Scotty,

Not necessarily. We lost a good portion of the golf course on the west side of Skyline when the previous incarnation of the Ocean was destroyed.

However, the entire *new* Ocean Course is routed on the east side of Skyline. There is no point on the current layout adjacent to the shoreline; the *linksland* that is in danger of sliding only includes our Cliffs Course. I fear we will eventually lose it. The upper shelf -where eight of the nine holes were built - is hanging precariously to the edge of a 150 foot dropoff.

My thought was to build the new Lido on the same ground as the current Ocean Course. It could not be exact, but just as NGLA is full of representations of holes, the new Lido could have used interpretations of the original drawings.

For instance, instead of a Biarritz along the waterline, the hole could be placed on a high spot with a land form representing the water . . . . The Channel Hole could use waste areas instead of an ocean inlet.

The point is that we could have done far better than what we have now. . . . . The problem is that John Fleming layed out an excellent new routing, but a combination of his ideas and Weiskopf's left us with a collection of holes.

I mean, c'mon, we even have a short par-4 with a Church Pew  bunker. . . . . .

The golf course is decent and fun, but IMHO, it is a horrible lost opportunity. We'll get it fixed though. . . .

"The greatest economy exists in finality."

-Mackenzie.  

 

Mike Benham

Re:Gib Papazian's Preservation of Architecture as Art...
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2004, 05:38:30 PM »
Gib,

If the Ocean course were completely rebuilt a few years ago, wouldn't part of it be in the Pacific Ocean right now and another part along the rocks below?

Scott -

The cliff really isn't a cliff and the photo below helps illustrate that.  (Gib or Joel can correct me if my artistic drawing is a little off).

It has been described to me, USGS types, that the entire area from the beach to the other side of the O Club property is essentially one large sand dune.  I have heard that surveyors from the USGS mapped this early last century and that soil movement/erosion was always a risk for the property west of Skyline.

"... and I liked the guy ..."

Tags: