Should Seminole be restored?

[T_MacWood]

Pat
What year was the 18th at Seminole redesigned?

Wilson is guy that is not mentioned very often. If you go back to the early GD rankings in the 60's you will find as many of his courses as those of RTJ -- and Ross for that matter. I've only played a few of his courses, NCR is very good. It is stylisticly similar to Meadow Brook and W.Palm Beach, but very different that his 60's work, the bunkering is simpler in shape and it doesn't have a single water hazard -- I don't think Meadow Brook has much water either. While building NCR he redesigned some holes next door at Morraine, which are also very good -- I like par-3 15th in particular. Morraine has the distinction of being designed by two alcholics Nipper Campbell and Wilson -- I highly recommend it, the course that is.  

His style seemed to changed around 1960, I've always wondered if his visit to Melbourne in '59 might not have been responsible.

On the negative side, he was one of the first to start the redesigning Hollywood, his alterations to Bel-Air border on the criminal and he largely reponsible defacing Scioto.

[Daniel_Wexler]

Patrick's last post illustrates an interesting point.  I am familiar with several clubs bringing in architects for renovations/restorations whose credentials or good intentions some of us might question.  The rationale is that "we won't let anything bad happen to our golf course" and, assuming that the place is like Seminole and knows its stuff, this probably works perfectly well.

But I always find myself wondering: Why not just hire someone with a track record of NOT trying to leave their imprint upon the landscape in the first place and save yourself the need for such never-ending dilligence?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

I don't know the exact year of the changes to 18 and other green sites at Seminole, but it's worth looking into.

With regard to Hollywood, some members indicate that Bobby Jacobson, a very good player and green chairman for many years was primarily responsible for removing many of the bunkers and altering Hollywood.  As with Seminole, perhaps it was a collaborative effort, or perhaps Wilson was doing as he was directed.

Daniel Wexler,

What we sometimes miss is the direction the club wants to go in.  Sometimes a club has made up its mind that it wants certain changes, they hire an architect, tell him the changes they want and direct him to proceed with those changes.  I hardly feel it is the architects fault if the changes don't turn out well.

Each club has its own dynamic, politics and vision of itself.  Some are good, others poor.  In my limited experience, clubs that have political stability and continuity, a sense of their tradition, and knowledgeable leadership tend to preserve and protect their most valueable asset, the golf course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Daniel Wexler, Tom MacWood, TEPaul,

A club that I'm very familiar with retained an architect.  They wrote a letter to the architect indicating that the membership liked the golf course the way it was.
Included in the letter was a list of specific issues that the club would like to have reviewed.

So what happened ?

A RADICAL master plan was offered which dramatically altered the golf course.

Would you believe that some thought it a good idea to take this wonderful 1920's golf course and add three identical ponds with stone walls, reposistion three (3) greens and several tees, remove many bunkers, including greenside, split some bunkers into multi bunkers, unite some multi bunkers into single bunkers, etc., etc..

This proposal was eventually rejected, but some on the committee wanted to proceed with what I considered a wholesale disfiguring of the golf course.

This was no novice architect.

Where was Rees when I needed him   ?

My point is, had this committee been composed of a few different people, and had the board been composed of a few different people, this plan just might have become a reality.

So, sometimes the membership screws up.
   sometimes the green committee screws up.
   sometimes the board screws up.
   sometimes the architect screws up.
   sometimes all of the above screw up.
   sometimes you just have to be lucky.
   All of the time you need good leadership.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

You keep hammering away at this leadership/process point. Is there anyone on here who is saying that isn't important?

But please answer a couple of things for me:

1/ Do you believe that really good leadership can hire about any architect/contractor and get what they want?

2/ Or even--if a leadership/process is really that good why wouldn't they just go out and hire some machinery, pipe and stuff and some people and supervise them and get them to do just what they want? Why would they need an architect/contrator at all--even if any architect/contractor in the world can do the job the same way? Why would they even need an architect or a contractor at all? Why wouldn't they just do every restoration "in house" if the leadership is that good and that all important?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

To answer question # 1, if we are talking about a member owned golf or country club, you must first familiarize yourself with the bidding process and spending of the clubs money.

Let's state that the project to be undertaken is a substantive one.

The first part of the project is to retain an architect to provide drafts and eventually finilized plans for the project.  So, the first selection process begins, where you interview AVAILABLE architects to try to determine which one will be best for this project.  The architect presents the final plan and bid specifications along with cost ESTIMATES.

You then must obtain firm bids from AVAILABLE, RELIABLE vendors/contractors.

The second part of the project is convincing the membership to vote for the project and its approximate cost, or actual bid costs.

Now, you have constraints.  Availability,
Reliability, cost perameters, timing.

The contractor YOU want may be booked for the next three years, but the membership has voted to proceed with this project the day after Labor Day.

So, to answer your question, YES, I do think I can get the results I want with any RELIABLE, EXPERIENCED CONTRACTOR, because the architect and I are going to insure that happens through our legal contract with the General Contractor, including penalty  clauses, and our constant supervision of the
project.

It is important to note that the architect will visit the project very frequently, which will be in his contract with the club, and for which he will be compensated.

It is through proper management by capable leadership, that insures the success of the project.

I've got a 9:00 tee off, so I'll get to question # 2 this afternoon.

[TEPaul]

Calling Mark Fine!

Mark, would you please let us know what you're basing your certainty that all the greens at Seminole were redone by Dick Wilson on?

There are some really good researchers on this site who would love to know, I'm sure!

In a week or so I hope to be in touch with Barry Van Gerbig about this too and if it turns out that he doesn't know either, then I'm sure he too would be delighted to know since basically he's the guy who calls the shots down there!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark Fine,

Do you think that the Ross greens could have handled today's speeds ?

TEPaul,

Too bad George Coleman and Chris Dunphy aren't around.  I'm sure Chris knew the story A to Z.  Barry's family has been members there for some time, so hopefully he might know, then again, he may not.

I had heard from members that Wilson had redone every green site.  I'm sure Seminole must have retained records as they haven't experienced any clubhouse fires which so often erradicate a club's documented history.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Barry Van Gerbig's family has been a member of Seminole for quite some time? How about Barry Van Gerbig himself? Barry became a member of Seminole when he was a little over twenty MINUTES old! The entire membership committee came to interview Barry (cuddled at his mother's side) in the hospital and he passed muster without even a tough question or a sideways glance.

As a little kid Barry used to get dropped off at Seminole where he would remain for the day, each day. (This is Barry talking now from the podium to the entire Coleman Tournament field). Barry's Dad was a bit of a golf trotter and guess who was some kind of combination older brother/second string father to Barry? Dave Marr, the assistant pro at the time, was! Barry just loved that guy!

[T_MacWood]

Pat
Do the members know when Wilson redid all the greens? All at once or over a period of years?

What is their definition of redone -- rebuilt, redesigned, resurfaced or something else?

What was the reason for redoing the greens?

I wonder if it is possible they confuse Watson for Wilson?

[TEPaul]

Well, anyway, this has been an interesting topic but apparently one without much of an answer.

The question by Mark Fine was: "Should Seminole be restored?" But restored to what?
He claims that every green was redesigned by Wilson but doesn't seem able to document that fact. Others say they have heard that some members have said that Wilson redesigned all the greens but nobody seems to know if that's accurate either?

So my answer would be that no, Seminole should not be restored for two reasons:

1/ How can it be restored if the only green that is really known to have been redesigned (repositioned and redesigned) by Wilson is #18? And that's a fine green the way it is now. There is some evidence that at least two other greens may have been worked on by Wilson. Anything else may have just been normal and evolutionary regional maintenance practices.

2/ So, if no one can come up with what Wilson did redesign, other than what is mentioned above, how would anyone have the vaguest idea what to restore back to before that mysterious Wilson eighteen green redesign project?

This is a little like asking the theoretical question of; "Should Pine Valley be restored to the original Harry Colt routing?" (The routing that never existed). Or; "Should Cypress Point be restored back to the Raynor routing?" (Another one that probably never existed).

So again, no, Seminole should not be restored because other than #18 green the course is likely largely the same as it's always been.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

My apologies for a belated answer to question # 2.

For the same reason that I don't perform the surgery on my left anterior descending artery................ lack of training, lack of expertise, lack of experience at performing the task, and a lack of information in case something goes wrong.

Oh, and one other thing, I'm too close to the patient.

[Mark_Fine]

Sorry, been out playing golf (just played Doak's Atlantic City CC).  Wonderful "new design" but sad to see a historical Flynn track bulldozed under.  Good example of an owner "telling" the architect what to do.

Back to Seminole -

Tom,
Dan Wexler says he has the info. you are looking for so maybe he can elaborate.  

Ron Whitten explained to me recently that they studied Seminole's original greens (they had the original drawings) when deciding which Ross hole to incorporate into The Architects Golf Club.  Wilson redid all the greens including moving the 18th.  

Maybe Dan will share his info. in more detail.

Patrick,
How many of the dead guys greens could handle today's green speeds??  Not many!

Got to run to next tee time.
Mark

[T_MacWood]

Mark
What does redid all the greens mean? Redesigned, rebuilt, resurfaced?

Is it possible there is confusion between Wilson and Watson?

Might some inconsistancies between the Ross' drawings and the greens be the result of changes made during construction?

[TEPaul]

Guess what Mark?!

Dan Wexler's aerial isn't even determinant to him.

I have great admiration for Ron Whitten for putting together "Tthe Architects of Golf" but he doesn't know squat about if or who redesigned the greens of Seminole except what somebody told him and who on earth knows who that somebody might be?

Quit telling me who told you they were redesign by Wilson (or anyone else)! Prove it!! You know how to prove it, don't you??

[abmack]

I am resurrecting this thread after almost 15 years of dormancy because it now seems to be common knowledge that Coore-Crenshaw have been brought into Seminole to make changes. My friend told me last week that they have cleared out the shrubbery to the left of the 3rd green, a great improvement.







I'm not sure what they were brought in to do but In particular, I am interested in whether Coore-Crenshaw will do bunker work to restore the original character of Ross's bunkering and whether they might restore some of Ross's green contouring which (apparently) is all the work of Dick Wilson.
http://golfcoursehistories.com/SGC.html
 
I wonder whether anyone has anything to add on this subject.

[Tyler Kearns]

Interesting that work is commencing at No. 3.  Along with #18, the third is one of two green sites that have changed location over the years since Ross' original design.


TK

[Tom_Doak]

I was at Seminole in January, walking all 18 holes with their longtime superintendent.  Ben Crenshaw has been making visits there to consult, but there was no discussion of "making changes." 


Clearing out underbrush is not a big change; superintendents do it all the time.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Seminole has been consistently clearing out underbrush over the last few years.
 
No structural changes that I'm aware of.

[abmack]

I was at Seminole in January, walking all 18 holes with their longtime superintendent.  Ben Crenshaw has been making visits there to consult, but there was no discussion of "making changes." 


Clearing out underbrush is not a big change; superintendents do it all the time.

Tom,
That's what I meant. I was told that they have been retained but not what they have been asked to do.
The reason I bumped this post was to wonder, out loud, whether restoring Ross's green contouring and bunkering would be desireable since Dick Wilson supposedly rebuilt all of them following a hurricane in the 40s or 50s. I love the course and greens are very good as they are. Though I am not sure how much he changed them, if the changes were significant, given how good Ross's green contouring is at places like Whitinsville and Oyster Harbor, I’m inclined to think Ross's greens at Seminole might have been better than Wilson's.

[Patrick_Mucci]

ABMack, et. al.,
 
How different are today's greens at Seminole versus the greens as depicted on Ross's field drawings, circa 1929.
 
I don't know that making the assumption that Wilson altered all of the greens is an accurate or prudent premise.

[Tom_Doak]

The reason I bumped this post was to wonder, out loud, whether restoring Ross's green contouring and bunkering would be desireable since Dick Wilson supposedly rebuilt all of them following a hurricane in the 40s or 50s.  ...  I’m inclined to think Ross's greens at Seminole might have been better than Wilson's.

Andrew:


Pete Dye told me more than once that Dick Wilson had completely changed Seminole and he would like to restore it.


However, the membership was never interested in having him do it, and I doubt that's why they are talking to Ben Crenshaw, either.  That would be a pretty radical change considering the current standing of the place, and I would not describe the Seminole members I know as "radicals".

[Mike_Young]

Anybody ever heard the name Ernest Jones regarding Seminole?

[BCrosby]

Are you referring to the old golf instructor?

[Mike_Young]

Are you referring to the old golf instructor?

Nope...shaper....I think PD calls them Ernest Jones greens....he's been around for 30 years...from TyTY, Ga...