I've seen enough low-low-high and high-high/low-high/low-low Ross holes to know that assigning a formula like that to Ross is trite at best.

Furthermore, I think one can pick up on some very different tendencies among various architects if you look at enough of their stuff.

For instance, in my opinion (and I think Wayne's too) Flynn was much more of a gutsy free flowing router across topography than Ross tended to be.

In other words, there just seem to be so many more holes on Flynn courses that went right over convex landforms on hole mid-bodies (ridges and hills) than Ross ever did.

Ross just seemed to prefer to route holes and their mid-bodies through concave landforms (valleys).

Tom, my admittedly small battery of Ross courses (about a dozen) simply does not corroborate your assessment.

First off, are we speaking about the Ross "brand" meaning courses overseen by the Ross office with men in the field such as JB McGovern and Ellis Maples, or are you speaking of courses with which Ross was at his most personally involved?

Your statement about routings seems to imply that Ross built holes through Valleys instead of across them? Am I correct? That way, the valley sides would be natural containment features... Are there any examples of a Ross hole routed as such?

Ross's work at Schuylkill and Jeffersonville (both of which I assume were done by McGovern) has no such examples.

I've seen Ross mass-produced courses with tees on upslopes, downslopes, greens in hollows, high points, and hillsides and landing zones of all different orientations.

Do they have a different "look" and "approach" than a Flynn course? Yes, but I can't find any formula yet.

Apart from the CC of York stuff, are there any other examples for comparison?

Did Ross study Raynor? Probably not.

Did Raynor study Ross? Probably not.

Did Nicklaus study C&C (at SH)?  Probably not.  

Tom,

I'm certainly not talking every hole, and I did ask as to what level of involvement for Ross qualifies, Schuylkill and Jeffersonville were most likely developed in office and Ross never saw the final product. I last played Torresdale a year ago and I'm still not convinced, the first hole qualifies and the first par 3 (4?) and 14, but then you get holes like 18 that hang off the edge of a hill... Furthermore, how much of Torresdale was changed by the Grant Avenue expansion and the loss of their second course?

I haven't seen GMGC, St. David's or Riverton.

If we aren't going to cite specific examples, then what exactly are we analyzing? Tendencies take data...

I think we're just barking up the wrong tree in looking at Ross's style, especially in routing.

Kyle:

GMGC's original Ross routing:

#1 high tee--valley---high green
#2 high tee--valley--up to the green
#3 high tee---valley--up to the green
#4 Ridge tee on the side of a deep quarry and across the deep quarry to the geen on the far edge of the quarry=tee--valley--and up
#5 High tee--down slightly to a canted fairway and up to the green
#6 High tee across a pond to the green beyond
#7 long par 4 across a side hill to green. There is no valley in that vicinity.
#8 high tee to a valley and waaay up to the green.
#9 High tee into a valley and waasy up to the green.

If you aren't getting the picture now I doubt you will and there's probably no reason to continue with this point.

Kyle:

I don't believe you understand what I mean by all this which very much includes the topography of the ground at Torresdale for golf holes.

Look at it this way;

You try to explain to me how Ross or any other architect could possibly have gotten more holes that went from high tees down and then back up than Ross did on that site.

How many other ways could other architects have routed Torresdale? How high can you count?

Flynn probably would have done one of his "inside nines/outside nines" on that property as he did at HVGC. For instance on #3 he might have done a long par 3 that  dropped down from a tee behind #2 to a green somewhere along the far end of the valley. From there he might've run a par 4 from about the present 3rd green site to the left towards the 5th green etc.  

"Furthermore, Ross showed he'd put greens on the low spots for par 3s and 4s on the back."

Kyle,

Nobody is saying that Ross or any other architect classic or modern were absolute in all they did.  You offer exceptions when there are bound to be many.  That doesn't mean that Ross didn't have a tendency to do something more than another architect.  Come on.  You must get the point.  Why be so oblivious to it?  I remember Tom Paul mentioning the number of high-lpw-high holes by Ross.  Once you start to bear it in mind, recognizing the design tendency (nothing more) is unavoidable.  

Speculating what one architect would do versus another is interesting but there are no assurances.  Considering the routings of architects, if it is to be done, has to be done with a complete understanding of all the grounds available, not the way it ended up being done.  Tom is very good at that and now devotes a lot of time to studying the golf courses.  Tom gives you examples of clear tendencies and you think a set of holes that go against the trend invalidates the trend.  It is not so.  

The Ross tendency does exist and is probably more systematic for the topo routings versus the on-site work.  I don't know the percentage of significant on-site work by Ross and exactly which ones they are (I think Brad has figured it out pretty faithfully in his book) but I would guess that such an analysis would bear predictable results.

"The inside and outside nines do exist on the property... just play the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th as 6-9."

Huh?  

Kyle,

Some courses were routed by Ross using a topographic map and then implemented on site by members of his staff with Ross site (and sight) unseen.  Other courses were designed and built by Ross's staff (McGovern for instance) with little or no input by Ross.  Some sites were visited by Ross and plans developed after careful in-person study and planning.  Thus there are three scenarios to consider, not two.  I didn't go back to check, but maybe the courses you mention fall into the second category and should be factored out of your analysis.

"Instead of playing the 6th hole after the 5th, walk an additional 10 yards to the 15th... and voila... inside and outside nines.  "

That is not how the routing progression was designed nor how it was played.  Yet you maintain that Ross designed inside and outside nines.  Are you satisfied with that conclusion?

"Seriously, your statement is essentially, "Ross routes courses from high point to high point except in cases where he doesn't.""

Because you think this way, you don't realize what we are trying to say.  Stick with it and it may come to you.

"So? Why bring it up as a demerit to Ross's abilities?"

It was brought up to demonstrate a tendency and a contrast in methodology.  Flynn and other architects differed in their routing tendencies.  Who was ranking ability as opposed to making observing tendencies?  You need an awful lot of specific information to make a determination about which approach is better on a specific site.  I don't see us doing that.  Applying any sort of intent to demerit Ross because of a different method of operation is your conclusion.  However, you may be right.  

If Ross's best courses happened to be those he spent the most personal time on and worked hardest at, how would you interpret the work to quality ratio?  If other architects spent more time on site to make sure the results are exactly according to their study and plans, might there be a consequence to such an approach?

As for T/F, I don't have any idea how Flynn would have routed that course.  But given the routing tendencies of Flynn and those of Ross, it wouldn't surprise me if they were very dissimilar, certainly perpendicular at times even if the same start/finish point was established.  

So when you say the corridors of Ross's design at T/F could, if the progression was changed, be made into an inside-outside routing, that does not indicate at all that routings by Ross and Flynn would have gone over the same topography in the same way.  That is absurd.

Again, I'm not giving Ross demerits for differing from Flynn, simply observing that they would likely find a far different routing.

As for Rolling Green, the topography of that very constricted site, dictated the routing.  Consider an even better example, Merion East.  There's no other way to route that golf course.  Anyone would have generally done the same things once the land available was established.  The starting points and finishing points for each individual hole would likely be different, but the general routing is dictated by the dimensions and by the topography.  You will find similarities and differences in some cases, it is when you see them over and over again (and especially when they competed for the same project--CC York and TCC, Brookline) where you begin to see the different tendencies played out.

"But I just don't see the significance in Ross using high point to high point every so often."

So let's not discuss it then.

I tend to agree with you with regard to Flynn and the Torresdale site. I think the only similarities would be in the beginnings and endings of the nines. I think Flynn would have hit the ridges and topo at oblique angles whereas Ross went straight up and down. I don't think Flynn's design style would have dictated an inside/outside routing as Tom said. An inside/outside routing, to me, implies that one nine would need to go around the perimeter and another contained within it. The perimeter of the property is entirely bordered by holes that parallel, so no, it's not absurd to say the holes would be over the same topography or down the same corridors. The only difference could be the location of the greens, tees and the direction (clockwise or anticlockwise).

Are you serious in saying that Rolling Green's property is constricting? I agree with you on Merion.... and Torresdale's property is the same shape... but not with Rolling Green - there's plenty of room to do a lot of different things there. The first hole could go in any direction but south, for example, as evidenced by the fact that 1, 3, 11, and 15 all are within a reasonable first tee distance from the clubhouse and all go in different directions. The sites at Torresdale, Huntingdon Valley and Merion East do not offer such discretion.

Sorry if I misinterpreted, but your post #48, both through wit and direct statement, implies that Ross's standards for quality were not up to that of Flynn's. I can explain the the percentage of work in the Top 100 quite easily, actually - only 100 courses could get on. Ross did more Top 100 courses than Flynn, but if it were a Top 500, how would that percentage change...

Come on Wayne... rank the Flynn clunkers... I'd love to see a battle between the old CC of Harrisburg, Flourtown CC, Plymouth CC and Doylestown CC ;-)

I don't keep track of the magazine rankings, but Flynn's percentage of courses in the classic 100 is about 25% of his existing course designs.  If that were the case with Ross, all the courses on the list would be Ross.

As for clunker Flynn courses, two of the ones you cite were redesigns (Flourtown--where he had to fix the Ross crap that preceded it   and Plymouth CC, which is on tight and fairly boring land).  CC Harrisburgh and Doylestown CC have been changed so much from its original design, it is hardly a Flynn anymore.  If you know what the original Flynn course looked like, you have more knowledge of the course than anyone I know.  Only recently, with the help of Jim Blaukovitch and David Gordon were we able to figure out the Flynn holes (what little is left of them).  Do you know which ones they are?

The current Flourtown CC has nine holes left of Flynn's redesign of the original Sunnybrook CC site that was Ross prior to Flynn.  The only Ross work on a Flynn course was a new green (14) and new tee (15) at Huntingdon Valley CC.  This was done after Flynn died and was probably the work of McGovern.  Flynn redid a number of Ross courses.  One course currently attributed to Ross never was one and is a Flynn:  Sewells Point.  One course that was attributed to Ross is now known to be a Flynn and always was one (Concord CC).