Who designed the Old Course?

[T_MacWood]

The Old Course had existed for a few hundred years when in the latter part of the 19th C the links experienced a dramatic transformation which altered the way it played and became the model for modern strategic golf design. The old Old Course was hemmed in by the whins and when they were destroyed hazards that once were side hazards became in effect central hazards...when one chose play into the newly opened ground. A narrow path was replaced by width and choice.

Was the destruction of the whins deliberate (for safety or strategic purposes), orchastrated by someone or some group....or was it a natural phenomenon (because of increased play and trodding down) with the resulting transformation being more or less happenstance.

[TEPaul]

Someone on here like Rich Goodale would probably be the one to add the specific names and dates and events but apparently the old course was widened under the direction of Sir Playfair and perhaps carried out by the likes of Allan Robertson. The reason given was the golf course had become more crowded than ever before at that time and had just become far more dangerous as players played up and down corridors at each other apparently sometimes not much more than 40 yards wide. I seem to remember the cost of widening the course by removing a lot of the natural vegetation was something like 50 pounds.

As for actual architectural design it seems credit has been given to Allan Robertson for designing the 17th green and the Road Hole bunker that might be considered to be the first dedicated man-made features of significance in golf architecture. Of course Old Tom is given credit for the 18th and other improvements.

If you're asking who was responsible for combining the first few holes and reducing the course from 22 holes to 18 in the 18th century you got me. Maybe it was William Morris' great grandfather who was beginning to dream of the English Arts and Crafts Movement that was to sweep the entire world and powerfully influence everything, including the great Golden Age of golf architecture around the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century.

[Brad Klein]

You can tell the Big Guy upstairs designed its drainage features because the place doesn't have any catch basins.

[ForkaB]

Tom M

Read Tom P's post below.

Tom P

I have no idea who did the original routing.  It was in the 1850-60 period when (under the influence of Playfair) the course was widened.  Anybody interested in the changes made then should read James Balfour's book.  After that, most of the changes were realitvely cosmetic, except for the changes to 1, 17 and 18, as you mentioned.

Brad

Good point, but I can't think of a catch basin on any true links course I have played, but then I have never looked for one....

[T_MacWood]

Rich
Were the whins removed at the same time the course was converted from 9 to 18 holes? I was under the impression the massive whin removal or die back came later.

I wouldn't discount the changes to the Old Course in 1904-05...they were quite controversial and hotly debated.

[ForkaB]

Tom

My understanding that at least some whin removal was required to widen the course, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the programme was ongoing.

As for the 1904-5 changes, I don't remember reading of any of importance.  What are you thinking of?

[BCrosby]

In a conversation with David Joy a couple of years ago I asked him where the width of the playing corridors at TOC came from. He said he didn't think it was a conscious design decision but rather the result of various practical considerations. One of them was handling galleries. As the Open and other matches got more popular, room had to found to get people around the course. But he said he had no hard evidence for that.  

Bob

[TEPaul]

Seems to me that asking who designed the Old Course is something of an inappropriate or unnecessary question. Since its history and TOC is obviously the most famous, scrutinized and analyzed golf course in the history of golf and the story is the golf course just sort of evolved from play way, way back hundreds of years before man-made or man-designed architecture was even thought of, I'd tend to just go with the fact that it never was actually "designed". People just started playing on it hundreds of years ago and the rest is history. The fact that it's so narrow doesn't even give routing considerations or alternatives much latitude. There's little question in my mind that TOC preceded golf course architecture itself by perhaps up to three centuries, and that fact in and of itself is perhaps one of the most interesting and unique aspects in all of golf, not to even mention in the subject of golf course design and architecture too.

Tom MacWood:

May I ask you why you asked this question? If it's to attempt to assign the beginnings of golf architecture much farther back than I suggested a week or more ago, as well as the proposed starting date of golf architecture by this USGA architectural archive initiative, perhaps you should look elsewhere than TOC to try to do something like that. Or perhaps you feel there is a ton of information about the architectural beginnings of TOC that's out there somewhere that nobody's noticed or considered and that you might be able to somehow unocover that and bring it to light. Again, I think TOC's history is pretty well known and what isn't is probably so far back as to be permanently shrouded in the mists of time.

[T_MacWood]

Rich
Its my understanding there was some limited whin removal at that time (when two holes were first planted in the majority of greens), but the outward and inward nines still followed pretty much the same course.

I was reading some descriptions of the old Old Course from Hutchinson & Low and they give the impression the dramatic loss of the whins occured between 1885 and 1900, and that it was due to natural causes or least not due to a deliberate act.

Low & Hutchinson believed the loss was due to increased play. I wonder if the beginning of the end for the whins may have been when the New Course was constucted....from what I understand that course was more or less carved from the whins (which bordered the outward 9 on the Old) and it may have started a domino effect.

The 1904-05 changes were made in reaction to the rubber-core ball and the loss of the whins. There were large number of new bunkers built...especially on the outward nine to replace the lost whins. There were also new tees built on almost all the holes significantly increasing the length of the course. The 11th green was also altered. Hutchinson, Fowler and Everhard were among the loudest voices promoting the changes, but the main man credited was John Low.

The pros condemned the changes (with a few exceptions); the amatuers praised the changes (with a few exceptions). It was a subject for hot debate.

[mike_beene]

Al Gore

[ForkaB]

Tom

There is a well kent picture of the links in 1880 which seems to show an Old Course (at the time the only course) without any significant whins.  What is now the New and Jubilee courses was a mass of whins and used by the local townspeople as a place to hang and bleach their clothes.

I'm pretty sure that the expansion in the 1850-60 period involved an effective doubling of the width of the course and the creation of what are now the 2nd to 6th fairways and the right hand side of their greens.

I can't fathom what Hutchinson and Low were thinking aloud about.  Maybe the land that is now the New and Jubilee courses?

[T_MacWood]

Rich
What do you mean by without any significant whins? Does the photo show a ban of whins between what would become the New Course and the outward-nine of the Old?

When the bunker project was being debated no one questioned the loss of the whins. If the recollection of Low, Huthcinson, Everard and Fowler aren't good enough another good source is Guy Campbell and Bernard Darwin in the History of Golf In Britain. Its difficult to question the great grandson of Robt. Chamber's creditibility (and Low, Hutchinson, Everard, Fowler and Darwin's for that matter); he was as well versed on the history of St. Andrews as anyone.

[ForkaB]

Tom

The picture shows an Old Course (at least the first 3-4 holes) free of whins and the land between the Old Course and the sea (now New and Jubilee courses) full of whins.

I don't understand your last paragraph.

[ForkaB]

I'll have another read of Balfour's book this weekend and see what it implies.

[ForkaB]

Sean

The difference between Balfour and the other sources is that he was there when the major changes were made and reports from first hand experience.  The others (to my knowledge) are only repeating hearsay evidence.

Regardless, its a good read and will give me something to do if the weather in Dornoch doesn't cooperate this weekend.

R

[TEPaul]

"Were the whins removed at the same time the course was converted from 9 to 18 holes? I was under the impression the massive whin removal or die back came later."

No. Apparently it may not be well known when golfers began to play TOC back again, instead of playing out and perhaps walking back in but that may've begun in the 17th or even the 16th century or even earlier.

In 1764 the first four holes were consolidated into two holes making the course effectively 18 holes instead of 22 holes. The fact that the course was considered to be 22 holes before 1764 would indicate golfers had been playing back in for some time using essentially the same hole corridors, greens and cups they had played out on.

So before 1764 and perhaps for a good long time golfers had apparently been playing those 22 holes utilizing 12 cups and shared hole corridors. When the course was reduced to 18 holes in 1764 golfers were still playing out and in along shared fairway corridors app. 40 yards wide utilizing 10 cups.

In 1832 the practice of cutting two cups in the common out and in greens was established even though players were still playing out and in along those app. 40 yards wide shared hole corridors. Before two cups were cut on the common greens an etiquette existed where the group that arrived first on the common green with a shared cup could putt out first.

In May of 1857 St Andrews approved a code of 22 Rules, decreeing for the first time that one round on the links, or eighteen holes, should be reckoned a match, unless otherwise stipulated and from that point on golf followed that 18 holes stipulation of TOC which had been designated "Royal and Ancient" in 1834 by King William IV.

Between 1848 and 1850 with the advent of the gutta ball beginning to replace the featherie TOC was becoming more popular, more crowded up and down those out and in shared app 40 yard wide hole corridors and consequently far more dangerous.

At that point app 50 pounds was allotted to begin clearing the whins on either side of those app 40 yard hole corridors thereby widening the golf course and incidentally turning it into more of a "strategic" course. It seems that Robertson was responsible for overseeing this clearing undertaking with perhaps Hugh Playfair decreeing that it be done. He also built the 17th green and the Road Hole bunker often believed to be the first dedicated man-made golf architecture of real consequence---eg the actually manufacturing of a green site and bunker.

Did they do this with the intention of creating "strategic" golf? It doesn't sound like that to me. It sounds to me like they did it to alleviate congestion and danger and came to realize that one could then choose various directions to play instead of having to hit up and down those app 40 yard wide shared corridors to common greens both out and back in again. Obviously an app. 40 yard wide shared fairway corridor with whins on either side and with golfers coming at you at all times didn't leave much room for direction options of the "strategic" kind.  

But according to one old salt at St Andrews, nobody ever got killed in all those years preceding the clearing back of the whins except some old "cuddy".

When C.B Macdonald who spent two years there (1872-74) at college and learning and falling in love with golf proclaimed that golf at St Andrews in those old days was so different and so simple, apparently he wasn't shittin'.

[Marty Bonnar]

In 1764 the first four holes were consolidated into two holes making the course effectively 18 holes instead of 22 holes.

TEP,
I've heard/read that statement for so long now, that I'd come to accept it as truth.
However, if you 'consolidate' 4 holes into 2 of an existing 22 hole golf course you're left with 20 (not 18).
Do you know anything of 2 lost holes (I seem to recall talk of the Course running up to where the Bruce Embankment is now - behind where the R&A buiding currently stands, where the bandstand is).

Maybe Rich or one of our R&A members might have further detail?

FBD.

[TEPaul]

Martin:

If you consolidate four holes into two holes and you play those two hole twice that would be 18 actual holes. Right.  

That was done around the middle of the 18th century. Around the middle of the 19th century apparently two additional holes were added---eg at least #18 by Morris and what else, #1? So, at that point, maybe two holes were lost or obsolesced, I don't know.

I've never been to TOC and I don't know much about it other than what I've read, but it would seem odd to me that for a couple of centuries everybody has done the math wrong.  

But what the Hey, maybe since we're all into this new spirit of restoration those two lost holes should be revived and restored and brought back into play.

If they were then golf has to follow that example because we're talking the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews. So what the hell would that make golf then----20 holes or 22 holes?

You tell me because I can't figure it out. I guess I have a mental math blockage this morning.  

[T_MacWood]

Rich
The course Balfour describes sounds almost like a combination of the reverse Old Course and the rightside Old Course.

Balfour does comment about the loss of whins - on both sides - so the course was clearly wider than it had been, but it also is clear there is just one corridor going out and coming back. He says although the incoming holes follow the same ground the holes coming in play much differently...he then goes on describe the inward holes.

The course Balfour is describing is the course that Hutchinson and Low were trying to restore...as much they could. Although the whins were not what they had been ages ago there were still a intregal part of the design in the 1880s.

Nearly all the bunkers down the rightside on the outgoing nine were planted in 1905. The 11th green was altered then too. The 17th green in relation to the road was modified. There were cross bunkers built at the ninth to punish the topped shot...there were some other bunkers planted in the middle of the course as well. Interesting the 12th hole was widened at this time.  

And almost as controversial as the new bunkers were the new tees which had always been right off the back of the previous green. Its my impression the new tees pretty much solidified the right hand course as the medal course.

[paul cowley]

TomP states "Between 1848 and 1850 with the advent of the gutta ball beginning to replace the featherie TOC was becoming more popular, more crowded up and down those out and in shared app 40 yard wide hole corridors and consequently far more dangerous."

Its interesting to note how much design can be effected just from equipment changes alone....not necessarily a direct change by the hand of any one man, but more an incremental creeping of smaller changes, as evidenced most boldly at the Old Course.

Considering that the modern ball flies twice as far as its feathery forerunner, its not hard to calculate the space requirements as a consequence......and the design additions needed to fill and adapt to this increasingly larger space.

[TEPaul]

"And almost as controversial as the new bunkers were the new tees which had always been right off the front of the previous green. Its my impression the new tees pretty much solidified the right hand course as the medal course."

First of all, it was the Rules of Golf that altered the entire concept of teeing off. The requirement for teeing off had most certainly not always been right off the front of the previous green. Up until 1875 teeing off was required to be a certain amount of clublengths from the previous cup, and not from the front of the previous green or somewhere else. That clublength requirement started out as one clublength and by 1875 had stretched out to no more than twelve clublengths other than a few designated areas by the Conservator of the Links.

Back in those days a "green" was also defined as 20 yards from the cup excluding hazards. In 1875, even though some tees were still up to twelve clublengths from the previous cup, for the first time the Conservator of the Links was able to designate certain other areas for "teeing off" obviously to protect the course.

[TEPaul]

"Its interesting to note how much design can be effected just from equipment changes alone....not necessarily a direct change by the hand of any one man, but more an incremental creeping of smaller changes, as evidenced most boldly at the Old Course."

Paul:

Good morning General.

It's even more interesting how much design can be and has been effected just by the evolution of the Rules of Golf.

The slow "clublength by clublength" creeping away from the previous cup or hole of the teeing ground to eventually become designated areas first in 1875 and then in 1888 changed the design of architecture and courses too.

Not just that but the whole idea of the "spatial" in golf was transforming too and getting far more expansive. A good example of that is those old drawings, paintings and then early photos of golfers teeing off and putting. Can you believe how close to them everyone was? Those people are all over the player. If that was today those players would stop and scream; "Would all you people mind getting the F... out of my face so I can play my shot!"

How and how much the Rules of Golf has changed golf and golf architecture is a huge subject for another time but I think if those on here contemplated the weight and extent of it, it would absolutely blow their minds.

After a time Max Behr even began to cast what the Rules were doing to golf and golf architecture into a MORAL context and tone. Essentially he began saying that the Rules of Golf were making some areas "evil" or sinful and other areas "good" or Godly, ending up with his description of that horrid moralizing witch of a schoolteacher, Mrs Grundy, making otherworldly penal bunkers to make you pay for your sins for going into them.

[T_MacWood]

The question remains were the whins deliberately destroyed between 1885 and 1900 or did they just die off (as Hutchinson implies).  

[BCrosby]

A point of clarification. Whins are not gorse. My understanding is that whins are wispy tall grasses and that gorse is the knarly bush.

Wasn't it gorse that was removed and the corridors widened in the late 1800's?

Or do the Scots view the two terms as interchangeable?

Bob

[T_MacWood]

Bob
Its my understanding the two are interchangeable...also sometimes called furze.