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.


wsmorrison

In reading Matt Ward's message regarding pronouncements made without seeing a large body of a given architects and especially from speaking with Ran the yesterday about Flynn, I was wondering if you can find a single course that represents that architect better than the remaining body of his work.

Ran and I were discussing Flynn's portfolio of designs and he is beginning to think that Flynn's concepts are best singly represented by Rolling Green.  I was a bit surprised.  I know how much he regards The Cascades, Shinnecock Hills, Huntingdon Valley, and other Flynns.  I was actually trying to make the case for HVCC but Ran was pretty convincing that Rolling Green was a truer representation to him.  I hope he'll see this and respond as to his thoughts on the subject.

No doubt that the National Golf Links would represent best most of the philosophies that Macdonald held dear.  What other architects' design philosophies might be well represented in a single course design?

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
How about these:

Pine Valley
Pebble Beach
Cypress
Friar's Head
Pinehurst #2
Riveria
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Cary, I think you are missing the point.

I actually would choose Pasatiempo as the course which best exemplifies Mackenzies style.

Ross at Pinehurst.

Spyglass for RTJ Sr.

Yale for Raynor

I've tried to think of a course for Tillie and Fazio but couldn't decide.

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Joel:

I was trying to be cute. I agtee with the back 9 at Pasitempo
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

Tommy_Naccarato

Without doubt, these are five schools of higher learning as far as Golf Architecture is concerned. (What I have seen and in NO paticular order.)

Classic

NGLA
Pine Valley
Riviera
Merion
Cypress Point
(I wish there was some way to put Yale in here, but thats my five)

Modern

Friars Head
Pacific Dunes
Rustic Canyon
Talking Stick
Apache Stronghold
« Last Edit: May 01, 2004, 03:57:31 AM by Tommy_Naccarato »

wsmorrison

Bill V, what's with the continued use of your nom de plume?
In any case, I guess I wasn't too clear about what Ran and I were discussing but you were right.  And I agree with what you and Matt said that you can't "get" an architect from a single course, but I was wondering if a course might signify to some of you the greatest embodiement of that architect's design philosophy.  Maybe some architects cannot be looked at this way.

Fazio at Shadow Creek (and maybe the upcoming Frederica GC on St. Simon's Island) would seem to be a fair representation.  I've only played 15 or so Fazio courses and have never been to Shadow Creek (read the book though) and it seems a reasonable choice.

What about Raynor?  Is Yale a good selection?
Banks?
Langford?
Thompson?  I'd like to hear from Ian Andrew.
Travis? Ekwanok?
Ross?  He's probably the toughest given the quantity.
Thomas?
Tillinghast?
Core and Crenshaw?
Colt?
Hanse?

Flynn may not be so difficult considering his output was relatively small.  I definitely have to think hard about this.  But for now:

I think the placement of the greens at Rolling Green is definitely emblematic of Flynn's use of placing them on points of land.  Huntingdon Valley is routed around and in a long valley and cannot represent Flynn's tendency to place greens nearly as well.

As to routing, Flynn liked to go all over the place, with slopes, across slopes and Rolling Green does a great job reflecting Flynn's bold routing ideas.

What is missing at Rolling Green is the prototype Flynn Sahara hole with an extended fairway that Flynn tended to use on a short par 4 like the 1st at Philly Country, the 4th at Huntingdon Valley, the 4th at Plymouth CC (Norristown), the Flynn redesign of the 4th at TCC in Brookline, etc.

The bunkering on Flynn's par 3s at Rolling Green are typical Flynn.  He systematically uses multiple bunkers on one side, cut into a hill if possible and a single bunker on the other side nearer to green level.  Flynn does this on all the par 3s at Rolling Green except for 16 where he uses one very large bunker cut into the hillside on the right rather than two.  HVCC does not demonstrate this philosophy at all.

The 3rd at Rolling Green is a prototype Flynn hole on downslopes where it appears the green slopes severely back to front when in reality it slopes front to back.  The 4th at Cascades is one of a number of other examples.  I can't think of a hole at HVCC like this.

I'm going to stay on this for a bit and see if I can come to agree with Ran.

TEPaul

Interesting question. I think firstly it may be hard to ever know what any architect's design philosophy is if he's bascially producing something for someone else. Certainly plenty of architects have probably been given carte blanche to do whatever they want on some great site but that's hard to know now with some of these older courses.

So for courses that represent the TRUE design philosophies of an architect it'd probably be best to point to those various on-giong "labor of love" courses that were done by men who weren't doing the course for anyone other than themselves or clearly doing it "Their Way".

We pretty much know what those courses are;

PVGC
Oakmont
Myopia
NGLA
Lido (the record shows he was given total carte blanche)
Probably Pinehurst #2 (basically a half career's work)
ANGC
And I suppose there're a number of others

As for William Flynn that would be very hard to know! Wayne and I put that question squarely to Flynn's daughter who is alive and well in Bryn Mawr. She definitely said he did not ever compare his courses to each other and that he pretty much loved most all he did and when it was over he just went on to the next one dedicatedly! Wayne, last night I found out CL is a active member of the Mayflower Society (or whatever their actual name is). Do you know what that means? Her mother was the real deal alright---a Boston Brahmin! Amazing!!

wsmorrison

Tom,

I recently saw that as well, I think it was in the Main Line Times.  I think she was also a past president (not sure if local or national) of the Daughter's of the American Revolution!  Of course, her ancestors were probably working for yours  ;)

wsmorrison

Tell me, Tom or anyone else that might know more than I.  What are the social implications of a Boston Brahmin woman marrying an Irish-Catholic lad at the turn of the century?  How might this connection have affected the relationships Flynn is known to have had among American aristocracy throughout his career?  I'll have to go back to my old professor Digby's (E. Digby Baltzell) Puritan Boston & Quaker Philadelphia.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2004, 08:09:14 AM by Wayne Morrison »

A_Clay_Man

Wayne- Your query is a hard one to answer. Maybe the reasons are many because most of these projects are collaborations or have had alterations. If that's true, one true design philosophy must be extremely hard to spot.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Certainly right now Pacific Dunes is the best representation of my philosophy, but I'm uncomfortable with the idea that it represents ALL of what I believe about golf.  

Some architects do have a highly defined style that could be represented by a single course, I suppose.  I would agree with Ran (or second-hand Ran) that while Shinnecock is Flynn's greatest course it is not necessarily the most representative of his style, or at least of the stereotype of his style.  [Pinehurst No. 2 and Donald Ross are a similar example.]

What I believe is that the great courses of the world are all radically different from one another.  I don't know how you can show that in ONE course, even when you think you've done as well as you could there.


TEPaul

Wayne:

Your query on post #9 is precisely what we're going to develop! It's no secret whatsoever that that "world" of the so-called American aristocracy of that time (the last half of the 19th and first half of the 20th century) was something interesting in this area we're dealing with---their clubs and golf courses.

Digby Baltzell wrote the books on that "world"---he was the single best chronicler of it. Digby was the one who coined the acronym "WASP". His conclusion of the history, evolution and ethos of that world was that in the latter half of the 19th and first half of the 20th century they basically controlled this country, economically, politically and socially! Economically and politically they were fairly accommodating of all--in other words they dealt with all in the manner of perhaps the English aristocracy's "ethos" of "noblesse oblige". There pretty much wasn’t any other way to do it if they wanted to stay realistic and not become completely insular or obsolete economically and politically. The economic and political (and occasionally social) interconnection of the “WASP” aristocracy and “Our Crowd” (the incredibly rich early Jewish world) is a very interesting one to chronicle and analyze, particularly in New York!

But in their social world the “WASP“ aristocracy not only closed their doors to all others but their own, they kept it completely closed and for far too long, according to Baltzell! And that’s precisely part of Baltzell’s point. The other part of Baltzell’s point about the “WASP” aristocracy is their own world revolved in too many ways----which included economically, politically and socially around their CLUBS!!

When Digby floated that conclusion the world of sociology said he was nuts to hang the “WASP” aristocracy’s entire “ethos” and the eventual evolution of it and the control they had on many things in this country on such an apparently minor thing (their clubs). But Digby said, “Wait a moment look at what happened in those clubs!” They did their own business, their own politics and definitely their own socializing in them and they let no one but their own into those clubs--not even as a guest! For accuracy it should be mentioned that by “clubs” Digby was primarily talking about  those “WASP” only eating, business and social clubs that were so prevalent in that early “WASP” world in the major cities but that it certainly did include their golf clubs and other recreational clubs---tennis, yacht, bathing, summer communities etc.

Digby’s final conclusion was that by doing business with others and politics with others the way those powerful WASPs did was one thing but closing others completely out of their social world (their clubs and their homes) ultimately created a situation where others eventually just went around them with their own worlds and power structures and the WASP world that had been so all powerful in so many ways (economically, politically and socially) basically was no more, certainly in the sense that their all encompasing power was gone!

So sure it could be significant as to how Flynn plied that “WASP”aristocracy’s world so amazingly successfully and basically became one of them inside the doors of their incredibly insular social world of their homes and their clubs! His client list is a virtual “Who’s Who” of that early American “WASP” aristocracy and obviously they felt a connection with his wife’s background. This is certainly not to discount Flynn’s own interesting and dynamic personality though!

The “Boston Brahmin” of which the Boston Gardners have always been on the  “Board of Directors”? The “Boston Brahmin” was probably at the absolute pinnacle of the entire American “WASP” aristocracy---they were basically here first----ie The Mayflower!

Put it this way--there’s this interesting little jingle that indicates the way they were and what they were;

“Good old Boston Town
The home of the bean and the cod
Where the Forbeses speak only to Cabots
And the Cabots speak only to GOD!”
« Last Edit: May 01, 2004, 09:35:17 AM by TEPaul »

ian

For Stanley Thompson, in my opinion, it's Jaspar Park

Here is a list of what I would think to be the typical features of a Thompson layout:

pleasant opening hole very often a mid length four, such as Jaspar's

elevated tee shots as much as possible loved to see the land, he loved drop shot par threes in particular. Many holes at Jaspar have elevated tee shots, and most of the par threes.

challenging finish the 18th is his best finishing hole, Dr. Mackenzie thought it to be one of the best in golf.

borrowed scenery every hole at Jaspar looks at a different mountain peak. This is even better than Capilano

using the best roll in the land he perfered contour to lakefront or seashore. He always looked for bold rolls to route holes through.

humour "Cleopatra!!!!", wicked sense of humour came out in some of his hazards, some were symbols too

deep flashed bunkers Jaspar's bunkers have the high lips and "continuously moving lines" comon with his traademark style.

alternate routes to the green Stanley gives you many carry bunkers, and a few in the fairways where the route is up to the boldness of the player

at least one very long par threethe 4th is 240 yards and one of the best holes on the course. Cleopatra is fairly long too

the heroic hole this is the missing element at Jaspar, Banff's Cauldreen Hole is the perfect example of Stanley's heroic hole. Somewhere in the round he always wanted "one great memorable shot" for players to remember. The 16th is over the lake on the 2nd shot, but just doesn't have the same impact.

course should not be too strenuous Jaspar is quite a friendly and playable layout.

wsmorrison

Tom P,

That is very interesting stuff, some of which I remember from my class with Professor Baltzell (although I was in a purple haze most of the time).  I still have his books so I'll reread them--although with your notes, I probably don't have to.  I definitely agree that we should address this in some manner in our book, although if it is of any great length, it might test our readers' interest--that is if we have any readers.  To the book project!

Ian,

I knew you'd come through.  That is exactly the sort of analysis I was looking for.  Now all I have to do is get to Jaspar Park someday and see what you're talking about.

Tom D,

Interesting points, all of them.  I'd love to hear how Pacific Dunes represents a good share of your design philosophies.  I know it represents some of the best work in golf design so it is clearly based on a great general philosophy.  Can you mention some specifics?  In the meantime, I'll go back to The Anatomy of a Golf Course and see what I can figure out.

Adam,

You summed up the difficulty quite well, thanks.  I'm also not convinced it can be done for a majority of architects and definitely for the reasons you suggest.  Interestingly, not many of Flynn's courses were substantially changed and this makes it a bit easier as a result.  It is, I think, an interesting thought process.

TEPaul

Wayne:

You know I don't even recall reading Digby Baltzell's books on WASPs and such. The reason I remember all that stuff is from those times I talked to him about it over the years--an aunt of mine was married to his brother---Jack Baltzell---a very interesting fellow in his own right and certainly very different from Digby.

Digby was certainly fascinated by that old WASP aristocracy world but his solution to how they could've avoided losing their power (sort of) is pretty interesting. He did maintain that by closing their doors completely to their social world to all others they ultimately lost the power they had but then I once asked him what would've happened in his opinion if they had opened their doors always. He said they would've intermarried more and melded together with other groups and cultures. But then I said if they did that they would've been losing that very thing they seemed so interested in maintaining that being sort of the purity of their bloodlines and their culture and such. He said absolutely. Then I said well then they would've lost the power they had anyway and he said not as much as they did the way they were.

ian

Tom Doak,

This is pure curiosity. Pacific Dunes is spectacular, no question, but why not High Pointe instead?

Could you point out where Pacific Dunes is a departure from High Pointe.

I understand that High Pointe was a very minimalistic approach right down the liberal use of hazards. Often key fairway or greenside slopes made up for the limited use of hazards, something which I greatly enjoyed.

(My guess) Is the major change in philosophy between the two is the use of sand both aestheticly and stategically?

The reason I ask is Cape Kidnappers really looked like a return to the High Pointe minimal style in the photos I have seen.

Just curiosity Tom, but I would love to hear your thoughts.

Ian

ian


If Huntingdon Valley (Flynn) or Aronimink (Ross) was designed to be an intentionally tougher than most of their work. For both architects, was it actually closer to their real philosophy (unencumbered by "fairness" for membership), or a comprimise to their philosophy to create that much extra difficulty.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
I've thought about this for Colt, but it's tricky because he had such a long career and designed courses over a diverse selection of terrain.  Many would naturally identify him with the heath courses, and yes he did design many of the heathland courses but even those amount to only about 20 courses.  He has courses with masses of bunkers like Tandridge (300 originally, although many filled now), Romford, Muirfield.  And others that have relatively few, like Portrush and Rosse's Point.

In the end I'd have to go with Swinley.  It's a course that leaves you in a daze.  A beautiful mixture of spectacular and subtle: everything works and I can't imagine anyone not falling for this course after just one round.  
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Ian,

Mainly I chose Pacific Dunes over High Pointe because the conditioning of Pacific Dunes allows you to play links golf exactly as I wish all my courses could be played, whereas High Pointe is far far from it.

In other respects you are right ... High Pointe has less bunkering and more greens contour, which I feel is the more important set of priorities.  On the other hand, High Pointe was my first crude attempt at building bunkers ... we've certainly gotten better at the shaping / esthetic part of the job since then.

Another difference is in how we approached the project.  At High Pointe I basically did 95% of the shaping and design by myself, both out of necessity and because it was my first chance to design on my own and I wanted it all!  Pacific Dunes represents the much more refined approach of putting a great team together and getting all of my guys involved in the construction of the course, each making their own contribution to the design.  I certainly prefer the latter approach.

You are the first to compare Cape Kidnappers and High Pointe, by the way.  Tom Ramsey was down there a couple of weeks ago, and he was the first to really single out the greens contouring, as opposed to the spectacular location.

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
You know, this post got me thinking of a twist to the subject.  What architect has had the freest hand in building a course?  This would be the best representation of 'his message' without outside influences.

JC

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Jon,

I don't know that there is a good way to define your question.  A "free hand" is not the same as total control.  Money is also an issue.

Certainly National Golf Links, Oakmont and Pine Valley are examples of a "free hand" at work.

I'm not aware that they make many jobs like that anymore, but I'm sure nearly every architect has had jobs where the client provided little or no input other than a general direction.


AndyI

TEPaul and Wayne M.:

I think that your exploration of the social network of the wealthy during Flynn's years and its influence on his work is fascinating.  It certainly is interesting how he was able to gain access and favor with such a large number of wealthy clubs and individual benefactors given his relatively small portfolio of courses.

It occurs to me that the socially and financially prominent of that time not only had favorite golf course architects that they shared and recommended to others of their position--they also had favorite architects as well.  I wonder if there might be any connection between Flynn and and the prominent architects for the wealthy at that time, particularly in areas where he did most of his work.

For example, in Philadelphia, Horace Trumbauer was the architect of choice for many wealthy homebuilders during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.   Indeed, Trumbauer built Lynnewood Hall, namesake of the Lynnewood Hall tournament at Huntingdon Valley (a Flynn course), for the Wideners. Might there have been any networking between Flynn and Trumbauer's firm?  HVCC's "new" (1929) clubhouse was built by Tilden & Register--don't know if there's any connection there--but HVCC did have some work done on their old clubhouse in Noble by Trumbauer.

I believe that Philmont's clubhouse (another Flynn), was also built by Trumbauer.  Seeburger & Rabenold, both of whom worked at Trumbauer's firm before striking out on their own, built the clubhouse at Seaview Golf Club (another Flynn!).   And Bala GC, another Flynn--guess who did the clubhouse?  Trumbauer.

Not sure if this means anything or not, but I'd love to know if any of your sleuthing turns up a connection!  It wouldn't surprise me if referrals were going one way or the other between Flynn and Trumbauer's firm, or perhaps with some of the other prominent "architects to the wealthy" of the time.

gookin

We all know where my bais lies, but consider the following characteristics at Fox Chapel for Raynor.

1) Redan - #6
2) Eden - #3
3) Short - #11
4) Biarittz - #17
5) Routing - All par three face in different directions so that wind conditions are never the same on any par three on a given day.
6) Alps - #7
7) Punchbowl - #2
8) Lion's Mouth - #9 (Still needs to be restored.)
9) Cross bunkers -  (Very prevelant in early design but still many need to be restored.)
10) Bunkers - Greenside are very deep with steep bunker faces. These features are as extreme as you will find on any course in this country.
11) Double Plateu Greens - #10 and #15 are exceptional examples.
12) Wide fairways to promote strategic options - in process of being restored.

While my experience with other Raynor courses is very limited, there can not be a much better collection of his well know features at one site.

TEPaul

Andyl:

That's an interesting question about some connection between golf architects and building architects or perhaps between Flynn and a Philadelphia building architectural force like Trumbauer.

In all our research we've never seen such a thing between Flynn and Trumbaurer or any other well known building architects and Flynn. If there was any at all perhaps the closest might have been the developer Clarence Geist (Philadelphia), architect Addison Mizner and Flynn in Boca Raton that Geist essentially completely created as one massive project!

Another triumverate of developer/building architect/golf architect was the almost duplicate projects of Mountain Lake (Florida) and Fishers Island with Ruth/Olmstead/Raynor.

There's absolutely no question, though, that those rich people, generally referred to as the WASP world did very much have their favorite building architects and golf architects. Just before and after the turn of the 20th century the massive boom of the so-called summer communities all up and down the East coast of America that were created and populated by this WASP world was evidence of this. There were scores and scores of these WASP vacation communities--all up and down the Florida East Coast (Flagler), the Sea Islands of Georgia, the shore of New Jersey, the North and South shores and the East End of Long Island, islands like Fishers, Newport, Edgartown, Watch Hill, the Cape in Mass and the numerous island and coast communities in Maine (Northeast Harbor, Islesboro etc)!

It's rather incredible that people from basically Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Baltimore, with a few from cities such as Chicago and particularly St Louis all used their various city architects to build for them in these combined WASP summer communities.

A very good example of this was something called Isleboro (or Dark Harbor) that was started as a corporation of rich WASP subcribers in the end of the 19th century. In many ways that community which still goes strong hasn't changed much in appearance from that time. The participants were the WASP world exclusively bascially started by Philadelphians but almost an equal original number from Boston and New York, Baltimore and St Louis.

In the last few years when reading about and tracking these types of summer communities and their golf courses and architects I began to wonder both why they sprung up so fast and why they included the same people up and down those East coast cities who all basically seemed to know each other.

As to why they sprung up so fast---there's this very common theme, and wording too, in many of those early prospectuses and community charters and by-laws etc.

That common wording is "dirty air"!!

Isn't that interesting? Obviously all these interconnected WASPs wanted to get their families out of the cities they worked in because they were frankly disgustingly flithy as a result of the pollution of the booming industrial revolution that was part of what made some of them so rich!

But how did that WASP world all come to know each other so well from city to city? That fact hit me like a ton of bricks when my dad died in 1992 and I was cleaning some of his effects out of his house. I came upon this little class book from the school he went to---called Groton School in Mass. His entire class was listed as to where they all went to college and in his class, something like 1932, EVER SINGLE member of his class went to Harvard, Yale or Princeton (except one from Calif. who went to Stanford).

So there you have it--they all knew each other from city to city and community to community up and down the US East coast because basically ALL of them went to the same schools and the same few colleges together. Anyone can imagine then how they all started to intermarry between city to city and so forth. This was true of my own mother and father and not only that my fathers sister and my mother's brother married!

And where did they all meet? In Islesboro (Dark Harbor) Maine when small children although my mother's family was from New York and my father's family from Philadelphia. And this is the same way it was in all those communities and cities in the WASP world that's sort of gone now compared to what it once was with its power back then.

There's frankly sort of a phenomenon going on right now in many of those old WASP summer communities. Many of those old families are still there but the powerhouses of many of those communities today are a new group made up of the new stars of American culture----the bigtime Wall Street tycoons and related financial businesses but particularly the Hollywood crowd!

Easthampton has the likes of Steven Spieberg a ton of others like him---so does Southampton, and even in Dark Harbor (a very small little Maine Island community made of those originally from that old WASP world of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and St Louis) my own great grandfather's house is now owned by John Travolta.

Why are those old WASP communities now populated by the new power culture? If you ask me, it's because they offer not only real privacy but it's nearly impossible to miss the fact that those old communities, their homes and the entire aura of them offer a style and a taste that's recognized as the real deal by an increasing number today!

That old WASP world was primarily English in cutlure (WASP=White Anglo Saxon Protestant) and even managed to marry their rich daughters into the British Royal world bigtime because they really had the status but often not the money!

I believe, as I've said on here that America stops and looks back from time to time and that Old WASP world and much about the way it was--the easy-going style that was one of true taste is one they've definitely looked back to. Frankly, it's what many of us on this website find so appealing about some of their golf courses, the aura of their clubhouses and everything about the way they were!

Just look at any of the ads of Ralph Lauren in the last 15 years and you can't help but notice what I mean by all this. Ralph Lauren (Ralph Lipshitz) recognized something appealing about that old WASP world, the look and aura of their clothes, perhaps 20 years ago and he turned it into a fashion powerhouse.

Such is the interesting cyclical culture of much about the way America is, in my opinion! Every country and culture seems to need something to aspire to at any particular time and that glamorous, easy going WASP world with it's taste and style but also its basically closed ethos was once sort of the American aristocracy.

Again, it's pretty much gone now as Digby Baltzell sort of predicted and tracked. It's probably been replaced by the movie and TV star and the new financial tycoons as the new American aristocracy and isn't it interesting that many of them actually live in the communities and houses of those old WASPs?
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 02:14:49 PM by TEPaul »

AndyI

TEPaul:

Man, I can't wait for that book by you and Wayne!  You two seem to have researched every angle thoroughly.  Thanks for the thoughtful response.

I wonder: what circles did Flynn travel in socially (as opposed to purely in business)?  Given his background that you alluded to, was he in any way part of that elite crowd, or was he a well-connected provider of services to it?