SPDB,

I understand your desire and attempt to duck the questions I asked you, and your failure to substantiate your statements, claims and theories.

I'll be happy to address your questions as soon as you answer the ones I asked you.

Pat - It is obvious to all who read your posts that you sympathize with anyone's efforts to not substantiate claims with facts.

You may assume for the purposes of getting you to answer my questions, that every suspicion you possess about my claims is true.

Now my questions please.

The gap created by the depression, then WW2,  and then recovering from WW2 was a very long period of time (1929 to 195? )  as many have mentioned.

The modern look was off and running by mid 1950s and reinforced by the television of the 1960s.

The few who made it through that huge gap of time, and knew of the classics,  favored their modern look.  

There was little or no connection to the work of past masters or sympathy to their work.

Ron P. is still correct.

John -

Where did you get the information that RTJ remodeled Sea Island? C&W?

I'm curious because everyone I asked at Sea Island last week swore that RTJ had never touched any of their courses.

Bob

From Brad Klein's bio sketch of RTJ

Trent was a founding member of the American Society of Golf Course Architects in 1947. Beyond his considerable abilities as a visionary of golf land, he acquired a well-deserved reputation as a brilliant salesman and promoter. He had an uncanny ability to meet the right people and to cultivate relationships with the giants of industry, and in some cases, the kings of countries.

That's just Brad Klein's opinion, you could be wrong.  

John Stiles,

SPDB,

Yes, you are correct. In fact my list is 'extremely' incomplete as the RTJ remodel list from C&W is extensive.

But, was the scope of the work at each one of these courses extensive ?  That's a critical element, and perhaps a flaw in your argument

 I picked some classic favs frequently mentioned at GCA and tried to pick courses from many architects.

Bob,

Yes. I am using C&W as a reference. I know of several (many ?) inconsistencies or errors in the book so I take everything with a grain of salt in that otherwise outstanding, fabulous, and incredible book.

But, the book fails to describe the extent of the work for each and every (r).

If a bunker, a single green or a single hole was modified,
the C & W book list the course as a remodel, and that's a flaw in describing the scope of the work and the legitimacy of the listing  

To say that RTJ remodeled GCGC would be disengenuous and a lie.

He changed one hole at the request of the membership.

On the extensive list of courses he is alleged to have remodeled in the C&W book, many were limited in scope, just like GCGC.

If you're really interested in the facts, the truth, then list the extent of his work at each course that he's alleged to have remodeled.

I think you may be very disappointed with respect to the scope of the work at each golf course listed as a remodel (r),
but then again that would burst a lot of hot air balloons

Pat - what would you then call RTJ's work at GCGC? He came to the course, and left it a different one than he found it.

SPDB,

Pat - I can understand how John's additions to the list of RTJ remodels to reflect GCGC has thrown you into a rage.  

I think assessing the scope of the work at each of these courses is a critical element in determining his influence and the realistic extent of his work.

Saying he remodeled an entire golf course when he only altered an occassional feature or a given hole would be disengenuous and inaccurate.

I answered your questions, or conceded that they were my speculation based on the inference that can be drawn from similar RTJ work at clubs across the country. What more can I offer?

I missed the concession

I wasn't at these clubs when they made the decision to hire RTJ, and what it was they told him to do. I suspect you weren't either,

This is where you seem to go wrong, time after time after time.  You suspect.  Why ?  Because you're lacking the facts.
And, in many cases, I have them.

Northern New Jersey is a fairly compact area, and members of the clubs in this area are pretty much interconnected through relatives, friends, acquaintances, interclub matches, local, state and MGA tournaments, etc., etc..

So, clubs like Arcola, who had the Parkway seize their land/golf holes, who sold off some of their land/golf holes to Butoni Macaroni and as a result had to create new golf holes are very familiar to me.

As is Crestmont where my father was a member in the 40's, where I used to fish in the pond on the 8th hole.

As is North Jersey where my father was also a member.

And so is Montclair which sits at the bottom of the hill that I grew up on, in Verona, where I used to sneak on, play as a guest, and play my high school matches on.  A club that ruined their 1st nine with the insertion of tennis courts.  
And, so is Green Brook where many of my father's friends and my friend's dads belonged.

And the same goes for Glen Ridge, Essex County, Canoe Brook and Baltusrol.

In addition my father traveled in the same golfing circles that RTJ did, they were friendly, and my dad discussed golf and golf related topics with me from the time I was a little boy

Now I can't speak to all of the courses RTJ was involved with, but I can speak to varying degrees to the nine (9) in my immediate area.  I would state that they offer a reasonable cross section of the scope of work that RTJ performed at each club and at clubs in general.

I think it's reasonable to say that I'm relatively qualified to evaluate and discuss the work RTJ was involved with when it comes to (r) at these clubs.

which is why I don't understand how you can posture your speculation about these clubs motives as fact-based, and mine as unsubstantiated speculation.

It's simple, I'm familiar with what took place at these clubs and you're not.

Whoever said Brad Klein's word is gospel ? I am merely offering it to corroborate what both Tom MacW. and I said was RTJ's well-known salesmanship ability.

There's a clear distinction between being personable, and selling yourself to others and representing his organization as a "marketing machine".
 
 ou rejected that claim with the proximity of your boyhood home to RTJ's offices, a fact that I would never dispute but of which I fail to see the relevance.

The relevance my naive and uninformed young man is that my dad and I were an intricate part of the country club world that RTJ operated in, familiar with the memberships of the clubs where the work took place, members of several of them, and an acquaintance of the man himself.  
Now do you see the relevance or do I need to get you a guide dog ?

You can continue to take Tom MacWood's word for it, afterall, he was in OHIO and probably a mere glimmer in his folk's eye at the time.  The choice is yours.

GCGC invited RTJ in to specifically alter # 12.
They made up their mind that the hole needed alteration before RTJ ever stepped on the property, another fact you didn't know.

Henceforth, I shall ignore your questions, as you only seek to disagree for disagreement's sake.  Sorry, but that's my take on it.

Tom MacWood,

I personally knew Arthur (red) Hoffman for about 50 years.
He was friendly with me and my dad before me.

How well did you know him ?

I suspect that you never met him and never spoke to him

But, lacking personal experience or the facts has never stopped you from making outlandish claims in the past.

Pat
Now why would I say I spoke with Red Hoffman, if I never spoke with Red Hoffmam? That is one of the more insulting things you've said to me....in a while.

Since you love dropping names....I was researching a subject and Ron Whitten got me in contact with Red, and Red got me in contact with Trent...we were on a first name basis.

I loved talking to Red, he was very entertaining. I spoke to him on more than one occasion. He had very interesting insight into RTJ, his sons and the entire RTJ machine as he called it.

John Stiles,

Often the outcome of the work can be a product of the contractor or the superintendent if the club chooses to do the work in house.  In addition, depending upon the nature of the engagement, and the club's willingness or unwillingness to pay for the architects ongoing services can have a substantial bearing on the outcome.

It's more complicated then meets the eye, and at each club, each job must stand on it's own unique circumstances.

I think one has to identify the scope of the architects work before attributing the term "remodel" to it.
As TEPaul aptly pointed out, as used in C&W's book, it's a broad catchall phrase that may not apply in many instances.

With respect to the classic architect, long since departed, this thread wasn't about them, but the alterations made to their courses post 1950, so I don't understand your referencing of them.

With regard to the term "disfiguring" and the context in which it was used, you should have attended the February 28th get together at Baltusrol, then you would have had a clearer understanding of the meaning.

The 12th hole at GCGC would be a perfect example of a disfiguration.  A hole now totally out of context with the rest of the golf course.  A hole that caused Tommy Naccarato to go from the 1th green straight to the 13th tee.
This hole could be deemed to be a great, unique hole that was eradicated in the 60's due to a variety of problems, mostly maintainance related.  Pictures have been posted on this site of the old, spectacular hole and the current hole.
Hopefully, when Tom Doak's plane lands at JFK or LaGuardia and he's on his way to eastern Long Island, he'll restore it.

We agree on the amount of alterations pre and post 1950, that's the subject of this thread, that I started, why wouldn't my opionion stand ?   I thought my agreement with Ron Prichard was obvious.

The "air out of hot balloons" wasn't directed toward you, why did you think that it was ?

To be in my 30's would be nice, unfortunately, I'd have to divide by two to get there.

This thread isn't about Ross, MacDonald or Flynn so I don't understand your comment.

Tom MacWood,

I didn't know if you were being cute or honest, and I do take you for your word .....just not your conclusions  

Red had a unique gravel toned voice, and it was interesting to hear him recount stories.

At one time RTJ was living every man's dream, to have his two sons come into business with him.
Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.
Having your sons take over your business can be the best retirement plan around, other times it doesn't work out so well.

Is there any possibility you two (or three guys) could kiss and make up or at least shake hands again and then come out swinging under the Marquis of Queensbury Rules of pugilism?



Look Sean, you know better than to ask Pat questions! He's the question man--not us. Just give him some answers and let him tell you that you can't read properly or you don't have the facts right! You know as well as I do it's gonna be that way anyway    

"TEPaul,
If I can kiss and make up with you I can do it with anybody."  

I wouldn't go that far Pat. You might not be aware of this but I shave extra close every morning in the hopes that might be that day you kiss me again!

SPDB,

At least there would be no anonymous posters  

And, the discussion and debates would be scintilating and heated, but, in the end, the results would be the same.

Pat,

re: post #66....

Yes,  I am well aware of what remodeling may and may not mean.  Yes, I am aware of what a contractor, architect, membership, and committee may or may not do and how all of that works together or possibly does not work well together.  This awareness is from experience.

However, if an architect changes a hole or even disfigures a hole, then he probably remodeled the hole and might say that they remodeled the course.  Unfortunately, that is how 'they' define that term.

My opinion is that many times a disfigurement starts with altering only one, two or three holes and then another architect changes one or two holes, and then this or that is changed.  All seemingly straight forward necessary changes and after 30 years you turn around and the course may be lost.  That is an old song and some at the GCA site can sing every verse.  I'm sure this was discussed at the B event.

Anyway,  I hope Tom Doak can remodel (?) your GC #12 to suit the memberships desire.   If Mr. Doak has any input, then he 'could' say in the world of architecture that he worked on GC and remodeled GC.  If he returns the hole to its original configuration,  or remodels to a membership dictate, perhaps not.  If the architect has ideas or thought that the club or committee or chairman or president desires to implement, then he has remodeled that hole. I doubt that many architects would say that they remodeled GC based on one hole but apparently some have.

You are fortunate to have it down to one hole with a known renaissance man winging in to help.

If you needed good luck on this emminent GC matter, I would extend yesterday's shamrock to you.  It doesn't appear necessary but.......

good luck with the weather.