[Joel_Stewart]

I played SFGC recently and took this photo of the new 13th.  This is "Little Tillie" which was destroyed in the 1950's and recently restored by Tom Doak and crew.   The top photo is a split photo showing the original hole.  The bottom photo (of the split photo) is another hole at SFGC.  The bunkering is consistent with the other holes, obviously the rough edge bunkering has been long gone.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joel,

Thanks for sharing, although I must admit that it's difficult to see much in the way of details from your pic.   It does have a bit of the look of the 13th at Merion, but that might be just the diffuse angle.

Since you've been there, would I be inappropriate to ask for your impressions of how the new/old 13th, 14th, and 15th play, particularly as contrasted against their predecessors/successors?  

I was one of those who was not a big fan of the Harold Sampson holes, but from aerials I've also not been wowed by the originals, although that's hardly fair given the one-dimensionality.  

Your thoughts and impressions are most appreciated.

[Lou_Duran]

Joel,

Are the three recovered holes better because of how they play or due to aesthetic consistency?

 

[Joel_Stewart]

I'll have to post more in a few days because I'm taking the family away for a few days.   The 13th (Little Tillie) was maybe a little disappointing for me because I was expecting something more dramatic, such as the 7th at Pebble or 15th at Cypress Point.   It doesn't seem to be that penal if you miss the green.

The 14th plays straight downhill, I hit driver- 9 iron into the middle of the green.  There is a huge deep bunker in front of the green which looks like a 4 leaf clover and the green is shaped from back to front.

15 is really nicely bunkered (pictured below from the fairway) and plays uphill.  The blue tee is across the 11th fairway and would be a monster from that tee.  I elected to play the white tee on this hole and had driver 8 iron.

More later.

[Pete Lavallee]

Is the ban on photography at SFGC still in effect, or are you "taking the family away for a few days" to avoid retribution?

[Kevin_Reilly]

Joel, where did your drive on #14 go...is there room to the right?  

Did you have a downhill lie for your approach?

Does the fairway bunkering on #15 come into play?

[Joel_Stewart]

Joel, where did your drive on #14 go...is there room to the right?  

Did you have a downhill lie for your approach?

Does the fairway bunkering on #15 come into play?

Yes and yes on #14.  I hit a fairly big drive on #14 from the blue tee and was even with the bunker on the right.  My lie was ever so slightly downhill.  

The left bunker comes into play on #15 as well, at least from the white tee.   One of the problems they may have is the back tee on both #9 and #15 are so far back is the fairway bunkers are now not in play.

Below is the view from the left side of the fairway on #14 and a little closer in.  If you look closely at the top photo you can see the 2 different shades of green of the fairway, one being the old fairway and the other the new fairway.  Whats unusual is that the big deep clover leaf bunker is not visable which I assume is what they wanted.  You can not run the ball onto the green.  RTJ Jr. played here last week and was not very complamentary of the work on this hole.

[PThomas]

so overall Joel do you like the changes?

[TEPaul]

Joel:

Let me ask you something, although you may not know the answer.

Obviously they had those photos when they did that restoration so why didn't they put those cool little Tillie rugged grass-line edges back into those restored bunkers?

I know they are capable of doing that kind of restoration/construction work so was it because they just didn't want to do it that way or was it for maintenance reasons or some other reason?

I think the next new wave in restoration architecture is going to be not only to more exactly match the "look" of old architecture, particularly bunkers and their surrounds but to also "hold" that look through time with applied maintenance practices (something that perhaps heretofore has never been attempted before). Why didn't they do that there? Those old photos you just showed are about as indicative as they can be of a particular bunker surround "look".

I think those new bunkers look pretty good for bunkers but compared to the cool jaggedy grass-line look of those old bunkers the new bunkers look pretty sanitized. Why is that?

[TEPaul]

Joel:

I'll tell you one course that appears to have gone to extremes to match the exact look of old bunkers from photos and the job was done in-house---eg Shinnecock. The bunker guy up there, a part of the maintenance department, Adam Jessie, apparently was fanatical about matching the exact look of the old bunkers to their in-house bunker project. Why aren't more architects and clubs doing what Shinnecock did?

[Tom_Doak]

Joel:  RTJ, Jr. has never been complimentary of anything we've done at SFGC, but I don't put too much stock in that.  (And, I don't think it's worth repeating on Golf Club Atlas, especially if the criticism isn't specific -- Bobby can always come on here and say what he thinks.)  Have you ever heard of Bobby being complimentary of anyone else's work anywhere?

On that bunker in front of #14, we did find the original floor of the bunker as we dug it out, and it was clear that the floor of the bunker sloped significantly away from the line of play so that the bunker was invisible from 150 yards out.  It surprised the heck out of me, but between the aerial photos and what was still in the ground, I'm pretty sure we got that one right.

Tom P:  The work at SFGC has been done in three stages.  At the initial stage, we only rebuilt the greens and whatever greenside bunkers needed to be worked on as part of that, and we asked the Board whether to return those bunkers to the lacy-edged look or keep them in harmony with the rest of what was out there.  

They voted for the latter, because they liked what they had, they were comfortable maintaining them, and they didn't want to commit to rebuilding all the rest of the bunkers.

In the two later stages we have added back original bunkers, first some that were abandoned, and now at the three restored holes, but there are still at least 30-40 bunkers that haven't been touched.

Now, sure, some guys would strongly recommend rebuilding ALL of the bunkers to the "original" style, although then we would have a debate over whose style that was and when it existed.  (There is some good evidence that the bunkers in Joel's pictures are the work of Billy Bell, just after 1930.)  But I am not in the business of trying to upsell my clients in the name of history.  Most everyone who has ever played SFGC thinks the bunkers are beautiful in their present guise, and they are just as effective regardless of whether the edges are lacy or not.

Interesting that this project sounds so controversial in this thread, since the board and green committee at the club seem to be thrilled with it and even the complaints have been quiet ones.

[T_MacWood]

Let me ask you something, although you may not know the answer.

Obviously they had those photos when they did that restoration so why didn't they put those cool little Tillie rugged grass-line edges back into those restored bunkers?

TE
Those rugged-line edge are Billy Bell's not Tilly's.

I'm not certain why they didn't restore them to the look in the photo, but I think I know. My guess is they were designed to blend with the evolved look of the existing bunkers on other 15 holes. There might not be more beautiful set of bunkers in golf. It was the right decision IMO.

[Tom_Doak]

PS to Joel:

That original photo of the 13th you have is taken from about 40 yards past the tee on the right, where it's a bit higher and you have a better view of the green and bunkers.  If you'd taken a picture from the same spot today, the edges are different, but everything else is pretty similar -- because we went back there and looked at it about ten times a day.

It did not seem like an easy hole to me when we played it.  The target is narrow and the green slopes right to left, so you CANNOT afford to miss in the right-hand bunker, where most misses tend to go.  Urbina got up and down from over there, but only because he hit the flagstick with his bunker shot.

[TEPaul]

TomD:

Thank you so much for your reply to me on post #10. The reasons you gave are real reasons and the reasons that happen today and are some very good reasons.

They also ALL happen to be the very same reasons that other clubs make these decisions---eg Aronomink and Prichard on the bunker style they chose to do in their recent restoration project.

I think it's pretty ironic that the next post on this thread was from Tom MacWood who's willing to debate and criticize me and Aronimink and Prichard endlessly for the bunker project done on that course but when decisions are made at SFGC by the club for the very same reasons in your project there he apparently doesn't say a word.

He tends to hide behind some of the things you've said on some things to support and rationalize some of his arguements and points on some things to do with restorations.

But you gave the same reasons at SFGC that Prichard gave me at Aronimink and I gave Tom MacWood. He won't let the Aronimink bunker project go as a mistake but now that you give the very same reasons he has nothing to say.

I love it---and THIS TIME I hope the hell he learns something and learns something about restorations and the decisions that get made regardless of the architect. If he won't listen to me or Prichard at least he may listen to you re SFGC because you just said all the same things we did with re Aronomink.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

I agree with you that those SFGC bunkers are very beautiful but IMO not as beautiful as those Tillie/Bell bunkers in those old photos were.

But the point is the club appears to have gotten precisely what it wanted and according to Tom Doak they are very happy with it. A lot of it probably had to do with maintenance descisions and such as with the decision making Aronimink.

Should it be otherwise?

Those Doak SFGC bunkers don't look identical to those photos so why wouldn't you accuse Doak of his own interpretation of Bell bunkers and the "Bellification" of Bell bunkering as you accused Prichard of the Rossification of Ross bunkers at Aronimink and other courses or as you've accused Rees Jones of getting a part of one bunker wrong on one hole at Bethpage?

Is there really any question if Rees Jones or Prichard had done those bunkers in the recent photos above of SFGC you'd be all over them for everything that's wrong with restoration projects today?



TomD:

I think those SFGC bunkers look great despite the difference in the grasslines and I'm happy to hear the club is so happy with them.

Should it be any other way?  

[T_MacWood]

Tom MacWood:

But the point is the club appears to have gotten precisely what it wanted and according to Tom Doak they are very happy with it. A lot of it probably had to do with maintenance descisions and such as with the decision making Aronimink.

Should it be otherwise?

 

Is that the point? The members of Scioto, Inverness, Garden City, Equinox, Augusta National, Pepper Pike, Boca Raton, Bel-Air, Sea Island, Ponte Vedra, Hollywood and Lake Shore were initially happy too. I suppose you believe we should applaud those remodeling jobs as well.  Shouldn’t we have a more discerning approach when studying these decisions and results?

I'm certain that maintenance is an important factor. The funny thing about the rational given at Aronimink, we heard just about every thing but maintenance.

Tom MacWood:

Those Doak SFGC bunkers don't look identical to those photos so why wouldn't you accuse Doak of his own interpretation of Bell bunkers and the "Bellification" of Bell bunkering as you accused Prichard of the Rossification of Ross bunkers at Aronimink and other courses or as you've accused Rees Jones of getting a part of one bunker wrong on one hole at Bethpage?

 

You appear to be totally confused. As you now know (hopefully) Ross used a number of different bunker styles throughout his career – some of it was due to stylistic changes over a long period, some of it was due to sensitivity to site, some of it was due to his associates, some of it was due to what he inherited from a previous architects that he chose to save.

Rossification is the common practice of using one stereotypical bunker style when restoring his courses…especially in the cases where Ross did not build that style of bunker originally at the given course.

As far as I know Billy Bell pretty much stuck with one style throughout his career (a quite beautiful and striking style IMO)…at least that seems to be the case with his courses prior to WWII.  SFGC is an example of what his bunkers evolve into as they age gracefully. Doak chose to emulate that evolved look in order that the new bunkers would blend with the old.

Doak (and the club) could have chosen the Merion route (your route) and dug up all the beautifully evolved bunkers on the entire course. But I don’t think that would have been a good idea for several reasons: 1) the evolved bunkers are among the most beautiful in the world 2) if you dig them up you will have destroyed Bell’s (and Tilly's) original work forever 3) there is no guarantee you will be able to rebuild the bunkers to replicate what Bell originally created 4) it would be a very expensive proposition

Rees only got part of one bunker wrong at Bethpage? As far as I can tell he didn't get one bunker right on the entire course.

Tom MacWood:

Is there really any question if Rees Jones or Prichard had done those bunkers in the recent photos above of SFGC you'd be all over them for everything that's wrong with restoration projects today?

 

Thankfully we don’t have to worry about what my reaction might have been.

[Joel_Stewart]

Thank god a few people finally have responded to this thread. I was really doubting the few responses from such an important and historical restoration project.

Tom Paul:  I don't have much to add to what Tom said other than their is a faction of people who would like to restore the bunkers back to the ragged edge bunker style but costs and putting the membership in a construction mode (again) doesn't seem like the right thing to do at this point.

Another club that has really tried to restore the bunkers originally is Cypress Point although I'm not sure they did it the correct way.  They have gone so far as to use the stabilized bunker seal (a combination of granite and fiberglass) to form a permanet lining of the bunkers.  For the lack of a better term, its like a swimming pool liner to keep the edges intact.  My fault with CPC is they did the work mainly in house (with help from Bunker Masters)  and trusted their long time pro to determine their edges.

Tom Doak:  I thought the RTJ Jr. comments would get a rise from you  

I was told that you had very little photographic evidence of the "little tillies" green contours (no close ups) so you basically had to wing it on the size and contours?  

[Tom_Doak]

Joel:

Restoring an old green is pretty much always a matter of "winging it" as far as the contours.

The green committee had hoped that we could use the previously existing 14th green as is for Little Tilly, but there was too much slope from front to back for that to work.  To me, it was clear that they had utilized the original green for that hole, but modified it so it could receive a shot from the other direction.  So, we built up the back a bit, but it still slopes from front to back.  The green also slopes from right to left a lot, but we did have one crisp picture which appeared to show a bit of a contour holding up the back right hole location, so we added that contour to give it a bit more complexity.

And my question about RTJ Jr. was not rhetorical -- have you ever heard him say a good thing about anyone else's work?  I understand he is not fond of having us do the work in his backyard -- I wouldn't want him working at Crystal Downs, either.

[Joshua Pettit]

I recently saw the restoration work at SFGC of holes 13, 14, and 15.  Renaissance did a fantastic job.  The very convoluted Tarantula bunker on 15 is quite impressive.  You could get lost in it.  The photo doesn’t do it justice.  I found it very difficult to capture the true essence of the bunker in a single frame.  

Tom:
My only question was with regards to the left greenside bunker on 13.  I would assume that the restored version is pretty representative of what the aerial showed.  I suppose if the club had decided to restore the lacy edged look it wouldn’t stand out so much.  

[Joel_Stewart]

Josh:
Good photo and good point on the Tarantula (corrected spelling-duh).

 I see you had blue sky the day you took photos, my day was gray, a little windy and wet.  I purchased a 7.1 megapixel camera and still my photos turn out to be crap.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

Regarding your post #16, it is absolutely everything that is wrong with you, your rationale and your modus operandi on this board. You read and digest what's convenient to your point and you just ignore or avoid the rest.

For instance, I wrote a pretty comprehensive post pretty much to you explaining my continuous position on the bunker project at Merion that's completely and prevalently recorded on the back pages of this discussion secton and you either didn't read it or knowingly just chose to ignore it just to perpetuate your same old unrealistic boring purist point.

The irony is that you and I are probably basically on the same page on golf architecture but you seem to concentrate your efforts on criticizing those who are trying to do the right thing for golf architecture rather than those who really are butchering it.

God only knows why you do this. I suspect it's probably to compete for attention as some sort of researcher/writer with people that you instinctively feel know more about all this than you do, simply because you refuse to get involved in ways they do.

There's a lot to do out there for the restoration and preservation of golf architecture and I will continue to reserve my greatest opprobrium for people who act as you do in the grand scheme of things.

In my opinion, that a guy like you criticizes the projects of a Ron Prichard the way you have is a cruel joke that everyone should be aware of.

You and your sensibilities for classic architecture don't hold a candle to that man and they never will. The reason is you're nothing more than a bookworm and in the real world of architecture, nothing more, and that'll never cut it very well.

[Tom_Doak]

I believe the bunker is the Tarantula.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I'm really glad you finally got the opportunity to restore these holes to their original design.   From my viewpoint, I think the three replacement holes were out of character and I've said that here before, which was hardly an original idea.

Still, what I've yet to hear from anyone is what made any of the three original holes particularly noteworthy, besides consistency with the original look and feel.  

Little Tillie seems to be the sort of cute, short par three that the course needs, but I think I need to hear more about the 14th and 15th.   How well do they stand up to other great par fours on the course like 2, 3, 8, 10, & 12?

[Joel_Stewart]

Tom:

Does the club plan to plant trees between 14 and 15?  The area I am referring is about 300 yards down the right side of the fairway on #14.

[Tom_Doak]

Pretty much everyone agrees that 15 is an excellent hole.  If you're not on the back tee, it's not too hard to get past the Tarantula and open up the green from the right side of the fairway; but from the back, if you don't hug the bunker off the tee, you have to play over quite an array of sand for your approach.  It is not quite as dramatic looking on the ground as I would have figured from studying the aerial photos for years, but it's a really good hole.

The 14th is the one which has taken any of the "criticism".  The tee shot is pretty wide open in that a long hitter will get past the Tarantula most days [the hole IS into the prevailing wind], and there has been a lot of discussion that the hole needs to have more penalty value on the right.  Yet, I think the second shot from there is really difficult, played off a hanging lie to a small green which slopes away to a steep drop off the back.  And you just can't leave it in the right front greenside bunker, which is easy to do if you're trying not to go long from that angle.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()