What a great Masters finish! Now, let me get back to this thread. Are we even close to setting a record for number of posts and views?
I may be misinterpreting some of the thinking here, but it appears to me that there is unhappiness by some that Tilly recommended the elimination of bunkers between the tee and the drive zone. One explanation for Tilly's actions that has been pretty much refuted is that Tilly changed his philosophy in 1935 and "Sold Out" due to the depression and other unknown factors.
It may be worth stating an obvious fact that reconstructing or modernizing golf course was not invented by R.T. Jones. In fact ,it started shortly after the first golf courses in America were built in the 1890's.
I thought it may be worthwile to post the following article from "Gleanings from the Wayside," in which Tilly talks discuss a solution for renovating an old style short par-4 -- which was fine for the gutta percha ball, but is not much of a hole with the modern golf ball. The article was published in 1937 and I am sorry I don't have the sketches available to post with it.
42. THE UGLY DUCKLING OF THE COURSE
ONE OF THE GREAT problems presented by course Reconstruction is the hole measuring from 300 to 325 yards. It is a legacy from the old days of the hard ball, the Gutta Percha, and then, when Bogie was tops and Par was unheard of, this type of hole frequently found its way to innumerable courses and indeed, it was a fairish sort of two-shotter. Then in 1901 the "Bounding Billie" or the first Haskell rubber-cored ball, put in an appearance and hand in hand with it came greater flights, gradually increasing distances with the passing years as annually there were improved methods of manufacture producing even farther flying balls.
Undoubtedly this feature has carried golf on to the tremendous popularity, which it enjoys today, but certainly for a time it played havoc with courses everywhere. It was not difficult to design new courses to meet the necessities of a longer game but to transform certain holes on existing courses, that they might measure up to this new condition, often was perplexing.
Immediately the ugly duckling of the old brood of holes strutted forth – the length mentioned in the opening paragraph. In the very early days of the rubber-core few indeed, even under the most favoring condition ever drove to the very apron of the green of such a hole, but they did get close enough to kick the ball up to the pin with almost anything for a second shot. And, as a matter of fact, the hole got to be known as a "Leveler" for any ordinarily good or even middle-class player would be nicely home with two shots of any description – almost. He could even top his drive badly and with a long iron be right on the green, or level with the opponent who had really hit one from the tee. So it came to pass that the rebuilders of holes devised a plan to check this. They greatly reduced the size of the green, surrounded it with close pits, particularly a most forbidding one directly across the front of the green, and then told the players to drive far enough to be able to hold such a green with a short pitch shot which had plenty of bite. This helped the situation until finally, with balls and clubs, too, providing greater lengths, some of the long boys began to reach that big front pit from the tee. These were told to use more judgment and if they were afraid of getting the pit with a driver to pipe down to a spoon, which was admirable advice.
But all the while the real sufferer was my old friend, the man of the great 90%, who cannot break 90 – and his wife and her friends along with her. These good people could not get far enough to carry that front pit at all and when they did they were forced to use such a long club that the ball would not hold the small green but go scooting over to the maw of the sand pit in the back – all of which the designers of the hole hailed with unholy glee, declaring that its excellent qualities were thus proved. But were they right?
In a measure they were, but to a far greater degree they were, and still are as I see it, very wrong, for they were depriving the great majority of the humbler players of golf of the pleasure in the game, which rightfully should be theirs – because they pay for it. But enough of playing more on that string! Those who read this are well aware of my sentiments.
Now let us regard the ugly duckling, as illustrated by Sketch A. Is it not possible to take this same length and without robbing it in the least of its testing qualities take from it the features which make it hideous to so many? I submit Sketch B as an answer. And what is more--it works by ample test and so must not be regarded as mere conjecture.
It will be noticed that Sketch B presents its long axis to the left of the fairway, which makes it necessary to place the drive over on that side for the Master Trap on the right-front spells trouble for the second shot coming in from the right and incidentally to the narrows of the green toward another trap, which is only a rear hazard if the unfortunate placement of the drive makes it so. As a matter of fact this trap on the left is not actually necessary for the Master Trap is the true guardian of the gate. It must be borne in mind, too, that the entire character of the hole might be changed by constructing the green with its opening to the right and reversing the whole scheme. The terrain and adjoining holes would influence the selection of this.
Now what is presented to the thought of the player on the teeing ground? Here he must place his drive over on the left half of the fairway to meet with a proper reception for his second, and as far as possible to reduce the length of his pitch-and-run or chipped approach. If one, Jimmy Thompson, looks out and really wants to go for the green, he may, BUT, that mighty blow must be played with greater-than-usual accuracy, which is precisely what I propose to make all very long hitters do. And now let us regard Mr. Humbleman. He has the opportunity of placing his second shot safely to the open side of the green, without the distressing fear of the old Obligatory route over the "Cross Pit," and feels that he may anticipate a careful 5, which after all is the hope of the 90 shooter. And if he is very fortunate with his approach he may get a par 4. We give him the same opportunity of knocking over a par as is given the par man to snare his "bird."
It will be noted that Sketch B requires but two pits at the most, instead of four as shown by A. Usually the outside slopes of the old type greens, are very sharp, making necessary constant hand cutting. The outside slopes of B are drawn out and blended to the ratio of one to six. Power machines will cut all slopes such as these. And such maintenance methods save considerable from the budget – which is most desirable, is it not so Brethren?
“Yea Verily!”