Jim Nagle (of Forse Design) said above;
"Tom Paul,
Ron (Forse) and I have been peaking it at this topic as we do others but rarely respond because of time. However this topic has kept our interest. Penobscot Valley, Orono, ME; Brook-Lea Country Club, Rochester, NY; Springfield C.C., Springfield, OH are just a few courses that come to mind where Ross plans clearly show duo's and a few triplets of bunkers that were implemented in the field. Often it appears as though the bunker could have simply been one large bunker with a berm added through the middle or offset to one side or the other. One thing we always keep in mind is that what shows up on Ross plans is not always what appeared on-site. If time permits we will researdh other plans and photos here in the office."
This is very interesting stuff (perhaps not to some on here but clearly to such as Tom MacWood and me (and obviously Forse Design and architect Ron Prichard) who have had an on-going discussion on some specific details of bunkering vis-a-vis restoration--Tom MacW generally views this subject as "architectural accuracy").
I mentioned to Jim Nagle that he should definitely be in touch with Ron Prichard about those Ross courses mentioned above that may have had those 2-3 set bunkers that Ron Prichard may not have been aware of when he did the restoration of Aronimink a few years ago. (Ron Prichard believed at that time that little Nearby Jeffersonville was the only Ross course he was aware of the had those unusual (for Ross) 2-3 set bunkers).
I just spoke to Ron Prichard (he was at Ross's Idlehour G.C in Lexington Ky.). He said something to me that leads me to correct something I had previously reported on here about the thinking by Ron and Aronimink before the bunker restoration took place.
I said I thought Ron and the club believed that Aronimink was originally constructed with those 2-3 set bunkers in place of the single bunker placement Ross called for in his "field" drawings. And that in effect, they, in the recent restoration were recreating bunkers from Ross's own drawing that may never have originally been built at Aronimink.
The correction is that Ron Prichard never did think that and he says he has the evidence to prove it. He's certain Aronimink was originally built with those single placement bunkers from Ross's plans and the bunkering was changed at some point in the ensuing 5-7 years.
Who does Ron Prichard suspect changed the bunkers into 2-3 bunker sets (mostly fairway bunkering)? He suspects it was probably J.B. McGovern! He also said that we should not always think in a one dimensional absolute way that very little work was done to change courses and existing architecture throughout the depression era. He said we should understand that both architects and particularly laborers were willing to work for almost nothing in that era rather than not work at all and in fact a good deal of redesign of this type took place in the depression years of the 1930s (that was certainly true of my course, nearby GMGC, that had Perry Maxwell come through on three separate occasions in the 1930s to redesign five of our Ross holes). J.B McGovern was also a long time member of Aronimink G.C. both at their former course and the present one.
I think this gets even more impressive and interesting as to the extent of research and and a search for historical understanding and accuracy some of these restoration architects go through in an attempt to get restoration architecture correct and accurate to what it really once was. It gets more impressive because apparently Ron Prichard (and perhaps Forse Design) has actually done earth work analysis to determine exactly how those old bunkers may have been built a singles and later broken up into sets or 2-3s. They believe a form of architectural archaeology exploration proves how those single bunkers were latter separated. Here from Jim Nagle is an example of that;
"Often it appears as though the bunker could have simply been one large bunker with a berm added through the middle or offset to one side or the other."
So this is all good stuff and just goes to disprove some of MacWood's point that some of these restoration architects (MacW thought Prichard and Aronimink made the wrong bunker decision at Aronimink by not restoring to those 2-3 set bunkers) may not be doing comprehensive enough research when they restore some of these early courses, particularly their bunkering. It looks to me as if Forse & Co and Ron Prichard are doing and have done a ton of research and they appear to have applied it with some real historic-oriented logic!
Maybe there are some poor restorations going on out there but there're also plenty of good and architecturally accurate ones, which has been my point on restoration all along, and despite the claim made by Tom MacWood that Aronimink may have made an incorrect or inaccurate decision with their recent bunker project it appears historically quite certain now they didn't make a mistake at all in original architectural accuracy. At it also appears one of the primary reason they made an accurate architectural decisions was due to some really comprehensive and very logical RESEARCH!
Furthermore, I think this is one of the reasons GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is so neat. Most probably wouldn't care or notice about this type of architectural detail or historical accuracy but for those who do care, and some really DO care, you have a pretty good chance of finding on here or finding a way to get it found through here.
