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.


TEPaul

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #75 on: June 18, 2002, 07:21:54 AM »
Ahh, for Goodness sakes MikeC, don't even give the accusation of "Rees bashing" a single thought. Don't you know by now that according to Pat Mucci saying something nice about Coore and Crenshaw with nary a mention of Rees Jones constitutes serious "Rees bashing"?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #76 on: June 18, 2002, 07:25:00 AM »
Any guesses on the bunker restoration architect of Ridgewood, whose bunkers Patrick claims bear a strange, uncanny resemblance to the new bunkers at Bethpage??   ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #77 on: June 18, 2002, 07:40:25 AM »
Tommy
I wouldn't characterize it as bickering. I was simply trying to clear up a little misunderstanding about my research abilities and the accuracy of my research. Old Pat had misrepresented my comments while attempting to bring my conclusions into question, I'm sure it was an honest mistake. My conslusions should be tested and questioned - we all make mistakes, but unfortunately in this case Pat tried his favorite tactic of disqualifying the opposing arguement by misrepresented my comments. It is an effective tactic especially if you are either unprepared or unable to discuss the architectural details.

As far as the assignment it would deserve more space than a simple post on a thread. To effectively analyze all of Tillignhast's bunkering you would have to cite dozens of courses. How his style evolved over the years. Which courses he personally supervised and which courses were the result of local talent. You would have to illustrate what alterations have subsequently been made to the bunkering (like Dick Wilson's at WF). You would have to explain that SFGC was actually a redesign of an existing golf course which no doubt had an effect on the results or that the sparcely bunkered Brook Hollow was at one time comparable to PVGC in bunkering scheme. I'm not prepared to do devote the time the assignment would deserve (I breifly discussed his tendencies in my Bethpage essay) and I'm pretty sure everyone is getting a little tired of the talk of Tillinghast and Bethpage.

I will comment onwhat I beleive are the facts on Bethpage (which I have stated more than once):

*Rees should be credited for following the original routing - which appears to be the strength of the golf course.

*Based on the 1938 - other than the waste bunkers on #5 and #7 - the original placement of the bunkering was often ignored.

*The new bunkers are not reflective of the character of the original bunkers -- they now feature enormous capes and bays and extravagent grassy protrusions (a number of whales tails) -- and are more reflective of Rees Jones than anything produced by Tillignhast, including WF and Ridgewood.

*David Fay and Rees Jones decided to that they would emulate WF's bunkering - they considered WF's greenside bunkering to be Tillinghast's best. Its a matter of opinion if they were successful in recreating their goal, I don't think they were.

From my perspective (as someone who appreciates Tillinghast's genius and who believes that Bethpage was one of his greatest masterpieces) I am disapointed that they chose to ignore the details of the original design. I'm sure it can be explained away by citing a mandate. But it seems to me the frequent reference to mandate is a convenient cover for questionable architectural decisions and cover for those who are uncomfortable discussing the architectural details.

I don't fault anyone who believes the current course is fabulous and believes it is a huge improvement over Tillinghast's original vision -- everyone is entitled to their opinion; taste in golf courses is subjective; you can not ignore the dramatic improvement in condition. Nor should my questioning of the remodeling be construed as my belief that the current course is not tremendous or even that I believe it is bad golf course. Watching the Open has only increased my desire to play the golf course and it was very strong before.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Gene Greco

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #78 on: June 18, 2002, 07:49:36 AM »
Gib:

For gosh sakes. GO PLAY THE BLACK!

It IS a must see. Skip the schmaltz and play some rough golf.

I still can't believe any publication ever left it off their top 100.

I've played this course a thousand times since 1969 and know of few other courses with a better routing.

It is a massive golf course and dwarfs all other Tillie designs in scope and size.

I just spent three days walking the course forwards and backwards 30-40 holes each day. The bunkers are freaking fine. They were nasty before and SOBs to deal with now. They're wild and wooly and can HURT not only your scorecard but your own physical person, the way bunkers ought to be.



« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"...I don't believe it is impossible to build a modern course as good as Pine Valley.  To me, Sand Hills is just as good as Pine Valley..."    TOM DOAK  November 6th, 2010

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #79 on: June 18, 2002, 08:08:07 AM »
Speeking of Rees bashing. Not long ago I said I believed the hire of Rees at Medinah was a positive development and was greeted by a throrough Mucci beat down. I guess even a postive mention is considered a form of bashing - at least from me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #80 on: June 18, 2002, 11:15:40 AM »
Tom MacWood:

There is only one way to truly experience the vastness and uniqueness of the Black -- PLAY IT!

It is without question a brawny, big, muscular style course that would make Tillie smile. I agree with some others who've mentioned that the Black was even more demanding in the grand old days when equipment / balls were no where near as good as you have today. I've played the Black well over 200 times in the last 30 years, however, veterans of the Black who've played the course since just after WWII have told me the olden days were even tougher than what you find now. ;D

I've said before that my own preference would have been for the Black to continue with its' wild and scraggly look. Some of the bunkers still have that "edge" to them but a return to that form would have worked a bit better in my mind. Ditto with the high grass blowing in the wind.

I credit Rees Jones for his work in fine tuning what Tillie / Burbeck, et al did. Rees didn't get carried away as others might have and hijacked the elements that make the Black such a superior course. Did he add some bays, grass extensions and the like? Sure -- but the intrinsic qualities of the course are still there. Land in any bunker and you'll find out pronto. ;D  

For all those people with an opinion of the Black who have NEVER played it you would do yourself a huge favor in seeing this sensational layout with your own two eyes.

I agree completely with Gene -- how the Black was dropped from the 100 best listings even when it was in poor shape is still amazing given the depth of the qualities of its layout. It just shows you much people care about make-up instead of the skin that lies underneath it. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #81 on: June 18, 2002, 11:19:05 AM »
Unquestionably, the experience of playing the course before was marred by pace of play as much as it was by conditioning. One of the great aspects of the course that was apparent to all who watched the open was its ebb and flow strategically. Hard to get into the intrinsic rhythm of the course when one waits 20 minutes on every tee box. Very critical for NY State to continue to be vigilant about pace as more and more will clamor to experience the course.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #82 on: June 18, 2002, 11:19:49 AM »
Matt
Who has expressed an opinion of the Black's quality without playing it?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #83 on: June 18, 2002, 11:33:14 AM »
Matt et al
How do you compare the current layout to the orginal course as seen in the 1938 aerial? What new features introduced by Rees do you think are improvements to the design and what features seen in the original layout would you have liked to have been restored (other than the appearance of the bunkers)?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

GeoffreyC

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #84 on: June 18, 2002, 11:37:21 AM »
Tom- please post the 1938 aerial of Bethpage if you have it.

Thanks.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #85 on: June 18, 2002, 12:01:09 PM »
Tom, I second Geoffrey's request. Absolutely!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #86 on: June 18, 2002, 12:02:33 PM »
Tom,

I third it.  It would be interesting to see the 38 aerial in comparison to the recent AOTD shot provided by Scott Burroughs.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #87 on: June 18, 2002, 01:03:25 PM »
I thought it was hanging in the clubhouse and was readily available. I take it it wasn't in the official program.

Unfortunately I don't have a scanner. Another problem is the golf course is broken into two seperate frames. I have requested a sharper photographic version, mine is a photocopy (I'm hoping with the course in a single frame). When I recieve it I'll send it to Tommy and have him post it. In the mean time maybe Matt Ward can scan his copy and post it. Or maybe RW has the aerial and a scanner.

If not I will try to answer any questions.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Lewis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #88 on: June 18, 2002, 01:28:40 PM »
Bunker shapes? Craggy or rounded? Positions? Green shapes? Is there any fescue in the rough?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tillie

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #89 on: June 18, 2002, 02:17:57 PM »
Perfect rounded edges, god forbid, are those found in natural sand dunes?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #90 on: June 18, 2002, 02:44:40 PM »
I came across this on the internet. I know it is not particularly germane to Bethpage. Nevertheless, it is an account of the bunker restoration of another Tillie course, by the arch. who seems to establish himself as top-notch restorer of Tillie courses, cf. Newport, and others - witness Lawsonia.

Bunker Restoration at Golden Valley
By Craig Surdy, CCM

Bunkers on the Golden Valley Country Club have been masterfully returned to the original A. W. Tillinghast style. The overwhelming majority of comments received has been of excitement and support over the amazing transformation. The project has been a resounding success and will stand as an improvement to this great golf course in which the members of the Golden Valley can take great pride.


TILLINGHAST’S ORIGINAL DESIGN


The Golden Valley Country Club had its start in 1914 when a group of golf enthusiasts built a nine-hole golf course on the present grounds. This original design was altered in 1917 and in 1919 was expanded to 18 golf holes. These holes were redesigned again in 1924. It was in 1926 that club members were successful in persuading Mr. A.W. Tillinghast to undertake a full redesign of the golf course. A.W. Tillinghast was then and still is considered one of the grand masters of golf course architecture. The Golden Valley Country Club is one of only two Tillinghast golf courses in the state of Minnesota; the other being Rochester Golf and Country Club in Rochester, Minnesota.

Tillinghast worked with the Golden Valley Country Club from 1926 until 1929 to complete his unique design. We are fortunate to have a copy of Mr. Tillinghast’s original drawing (shown below) which illustrates his master plan for our golf course. Also shown below is a copy of an old aerial photograph taken some time after Tillinghast redesigned the golf course. This photograph provides a good look at his deep grass-faced bunkers trademark. Note the lack of trees on the golf course and the land that Golden Valley city office buildings now occupy.


CHANGES TO TILLINGHAST DESIGNED BUNKERS

There have been many significant changes made to the original Tillinghast designed golf course. Most notable are the moving of the eighth green and the ninth tee, the addition of the pond on #17, and the significant bunker work.

The pictures of Golden Valley's bunkers on the preceding pages show that Tillinghast designed the golf course with deep sand traps displaying grass faces. The bunkers on the golf course today have lost much of the Tillinghast flavor. Most noticeably, the grass faces of the bunkers have all been replaced with sand. This change, made in the early 1960’s, was to improve the visibility of the sand traps from the approaching fairway. Sand faces did improve visibility, but also contributed to plugged and unplayable lies. In addition, rainwater often washed the sand off of the steep faces making bunkers unsightly and unplayable. Rain also added soil contamination to the sand and increased grounds crew labor costs needed to repair the damage.

Many of Tillinghast’s original bunkers have been altered in shape and size. Some bunkers close in proximity have been joined to form one larger bunker, as is the case on the right side of #4. The very deep bunkers have been partially filled in to facilitate easier entry and exit.

These changes occurred over time and during several bunker projects aimed at modernizing the golf course. Attitudes have since changed. More and more, golf courses around the country are realizing the mastery of the classic golf course architects, such as A.W. Tillinghast, and the true beauty of the original designs.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #91 on: June 18, 2002, 02:45:38 PM »
Part II

BUNKERS AND MOTHER NATURE

The most dramatic impact Mother Nature has on bunkers is in the quality of the sand. In time, all bunker sand becomes contaminated. Foreign particles are introduced from several sources. The major contributors being soil erosion from bunker faces and rainwater run off from surrounding areas. Decaying leaves, twigs, acorns and grass clippings have an impact as well. Poorly drained bunkers, which hold standing water, attract more debris and thus increase contamination.

Contaminated sand becomes inconsistent from bunker to bunker, depending on the quantity and makeup of the contaminants. Most often, contaminants bind with the sand and produce a hardened playing surface.

Contamination is inevitable but it can be slowed. Tillinghast designed the golf course with grass faced bunkers. This design technique aided playability and greatly reduced the soil contaminants in the sand. In addition, Tillinghast built subtle berms around the bunkers to keep rainwater runoff from entering the traps. Over time, weather and foot traffic wore these berms down so that they became indistinguishable.

Time and maintenance practices have contributed to the changing of bunker design. Turf grass encroachment into bunker areas, changing mowing patterns and golfer wear and tear has changed bunker shape.


ACTUAL vs. EXPECTED RESULTS

The restored bunkers at Golden Valley have far exceed the original expectations of the Board of Directors, Classic Golf Course Architect Ron Forse, contractor Jeff Hartman, golf course staff, and the vast majority of the Golden Valley members. At the onset of the project we had an idea as to how we expected a restored A.W. Tillinghast bunker to appear. This idea was formed by old photographs of some bunkers that were taken before the original Tillinghast design was altered. These photographs are one-dimensional and were taken of only a few of the bunkers on the course. They were incapable of displaying the grandeur exposed when the bunkers on hole #1 were completed last September. It was then, standing looking at what Tillinghast had created some 73 years ago that we knew the Bunker Restoration Project was going to surpass our expectations.

A few old photographs and the expertise of one of the finest classic golf course architects in the country could not accurately predict how each bunker was to unfold. Each and every bunker was a story in itself. Architect Ron Forse would diagram the outline of each bunker to be restored using the topography of the land and his in-depth knowledge of A.W. Tillinghast’s style. Contractor Jeff Hartman would then open the ground and search for signs of the original bunker layout. It became clear from the layers of dirt and sand that over the years there have been three separate bunker projects that have altered the original design. In every case Hartman was able to find a layer of rich yellow sand used by Tillinghast in 1926 when he constructed the original bunkers. Hartman followed this sand, ignoring any preconceived ideas as to the bunker shape and excavated each bunker to the exact size and depth of the original bunkers. The shape and depth of many of the bunkers were easily predicted. However, a good number of the bunkers were complete surprises. Many had been moved several feet, some were far deeper than originally thought, others were much closer to the green, in one case even several feet into a green. Throughout the project the mastery of A.W. Tillinghast was not questioned. Each bunker was restored as it was when it was originally constructed.


ACCURACY OF RESTORATION EFFORTS

At the onset of the Bunker Restoration Project we had but a few old photographs showing the original Tillinghast bunkers. In October of 1998 we were able to obtain a 1938 aerial photograph of the entire golf course which provided a good deal more information. The aerial photo gave us a very good reference as to the actual footprints of each bunker on the course but because the picture was taken at a high altitude it could not accurately depict elevations. We could not accurately determine bunker depths and mound heights. For these critical measurements we relied on the expertise of contractor Jeff Hartman.

Hartman approached each bunker more as an archeologist than an earthmover. He tediously removed earth a few inches at a time searching for the bottom of the original Tillinghast bunkers. The first bunkers to be restored were around the first green. Upon opening the bunkers Hartman immediately found the evidence of previous bunkers projects. Two separate layers of soil and sand were found on top of a layer of yellow sand that was identified as the sand used by A.W. Tillinghast in 1926. The fact that earlier bunker projects had not disturbed the original sand bottoms proved to be extremely fortunate. Hartman was able to follow this yellow sand to establish the exact outline of each Tillinghast bunker. The newly discovered outline was always very similar to what was expected because of knowledge gained from the aerial photograph. The few surprises occurred when determining the exact depth of the original bunkers. We knew from the old photographs that some of the original bunkers were deep but the exact depth of each bunker was a mystery until the original bottom was revealed. In nearly every bunker we were able to determine the original size, shape and depth and restore them as they appeared when Tillinghast crafted the golf course years ago.


QUALITY OF WORK PERFORMED

The Green & Grounds Committee and Board of Directors are very happy with the quality of work performed by both Classic Golf Course architect Ron Forse and Construction Contractor Jeff Hartman.

Ron Forse is well known in the golf architect arena as a master with classic golf courses. He is presently working on three Tillinghast golf courses around the country. He has been retained by the Newport Country Club (one of Tillinghast’s finest) which is one of the five original founding clubs of the USGA. Ron is a frequent contributor, as well as being the subject for numerous articles in golf course trade journals.

Hartman Construction is a local firm, which has being doing work at the Golden Valley Country Club for many years. Jeff Hartman’s reputation is rapidly growing as evidenced by the amount of work he is forced to turn down from many out of town golf courses. Ron Forse, who has worked with countless contractors around the country, says that the quality of work done on the Golden Valley Bunker Restoration Project by Hartman Construction is the finest he has witnessed anywhere. Considering the source this is high praise indeed.

News of the fine work being done at the Golden Valley Country Club permeated the golf community and before long Ron Forse was receiving many calls from other Minnesota golf courses. Last September a delegation from Rochester Golf and Country Club toured the newly restored bunkers. Rochester is the only other Tillinghast golf course in Minnesota. Rochester was so impressed they immediately began a dialog with both Forse and Hartman on a possible bunker project of their own.

Understanding the qualifications of both Forse and Hartman it is still the end result, which speaks most highly of the quality of work done. We feel the members of the Golden Valley Country Club received an extremely high quality bunker restoration job that far exceeded our expectations.




« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

SPDB

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #92 on: June 18, 2002, 02:46:12 PM »
Part III

GOALS OF ORIGINAL PLAN

The Bunker Restoration Project plan addressed five main goals in the spring of 1998, which were:

Sand faces of all bunkers be returned to grass.
Adequate drainage be constructed to carry water out and away from the bunker.
Worn berms be replaced to steer runoff water away from bunkers.
Bunkers be restored to the original Tillinghast style.
New sand be placed in all bunkers.
These five goals provided the basis for the plan to rebuild each of the bunkers on the golf course. All five goals were achieved in the Bunker Restoration Project.


FINANCIAL REPORT

The Bunker Restoration Project was allocated a budget of around $400,000. This figure was the best estimate of time and materials needed by contractor Jeff Hartman to achieve the above goals. As the project progressed and more information became available (such as the 1938 aerial photograph) more was learned about the original Tillinghast layout. At times this new information revealed features not included in the plan. The Board openly endorsed these additions understanding that any omission would detract from the original Tillinghast design of the golf course. A list of the additional features is as follows:

New tee on hole #8.
Reinstate right front bunker on hole #2.
Add berm to rear of hole #5.
Drain bunkers on hole #6 to creek.
Move right fairway bunker on hole #9.
Reinstate two rear bunkers on hole #12.
Restore left bunker on hole #15 to two bunkers.
Add berm to left side bunker on hole #16.
Add berm to right side bunker on hole #16.
Add berm to bunker on hole #17.
The original plan stated that there were no plans to reinstate bunkers which had been removed from the golf course and there were no plans to return the bunkers to their original depth. The plan also stated that Classic Golf Course Architect Ron Forse would be consulted on additional changes needed to bring the bunkers back to the Tillinghast style. In preparation for the Bunker Restoration Project Mr. Forse prepared an in depth evaluation of the golf course. Having worked on several Tillinghast golf courses Forse said that our golf course was truly an exceptional effort by one of the century’s very best architects. He felt strongly that any deviations from the original design served to only weaken the integrity of a Tillinghast masterpiece. He counseled the club to return every bunker to the original depth and reinstate all bunkers removed over the years. The Green & Grounds Committee agreed with Mr. Forse that the bunkers should be restored to their original depth but felt that only a few of the removed bunkers should be reinstated. Bunkers that once existed on holes 1, 2, and 3 were not reinstated while the three bunkers listed above were replaced. The Board approved the Green & Grounds recommendation to alter the original plan and the project was altered.

The fact that estimates could not accurately determine the depth of many of the bunkers on the golf course became a factor in the overall cost of the bunker project. The vast majority of bunkers were completed in the budgeted time. However, when the original depth of several bunkers was discovered and they were far deeper than projected, Hartman Construction was forced to spend considerably more time to restore each one.

The original plan did not include the tenth hole because it had been remodeled during the Corps of Engineers flood control project in 1993. Once the first few bunkers were completed last September it became obvious that, if left untouched this hole would be glaringly out of character with the rest of the golf course. The Green & Grounds Committee recommended that the bunkers on hole #10 be restored in the same manner as the bunkers on the rest of the golf course.

The Green & Grounds Committee has addressed the entry and exit issues with regard to some of the steeper bunkers. Plans to install steps flush into the faces of the rear two bunkers on hole #4, the back face of the right hand bunker on hole #6, and the rear two bunkers on hole #12 have been approved. The committee has instructed Superintendent Mike Olson to mow the bunker faces to a height of 3" so as to cut down on the number of golf balls that may end up in the grass faces. Mike reports that once his full crew is in place in early June the bunkers will be maintained in this fashion. Mike also comments that in spite of the 5 inches of rain we received during a short period of time in May, the bunkers were always in play. Unlike our experiences with the old bunker design, none of the new bunkers washed out nor did any dirt from bunker faces wash into and contaminate the new sand. It is important to remember that the bunker project is not yet complete and the new sod placed around the bunkers is still taking root. Maintenance practices will evolve as we learn more about the playability of each hazard. Mike Olson and his crew will continually monitor conditions and playability issues of the new bunkers and adjust maintenance practices accordingly.

The Bunker Restoration Project met each of the objectives it set out to accomplish. The end result has given us a much more authentic A.W. Tillinghast golf course which is certainly something of which we all can be very proud. In giving the golf course back the heritage that was removed by earlier bunker projects we truly have taken a wonderful golf course and restored it into a magnificent golf course.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #93 on: June 18, 2002, 03:11:11 PM »
Sean,

Great stuff!  Thanks for posting it.  

It's interesting that Golden Valley had old pics to work from  which showed the bunkers having grass faces.  Incidentally, in Tillie's own writing, he argued that it is preferable to "flash some sand" for the very visibility reasons cited in the article.

But, I'd caution anyone to assume that ALL Tillie bunkers were so formulated with grass faces, or any other stereotype.  Just as there is no real "Ross" style bunker, but many various styles often dictated by "site-specific" factors (i.e Seminole), there is surely no one Tillie style, either.  

You have everything from Winged Foot or SFGC flashed to the very top lip, to Baltusrol, which is about halfway up the face, to the grass-faced bunkers as described at Golden Valley.  

Anyone looking at enough pictures of the classic courses near the time of their inception would find that design "rules" and "stereotypes" were meant to be broken by all of them, and frequently were.

I just think that it's very slippery footing when any architect charged with restoration comes in with some pre-ordained idea of what existed before based strictly on a narrow view of an architect's "style".  Instead, it's important to be site-specific as the original architects were, and as Forse seems to be here.  And always, pictures (and Handwork!!!!!!!!, as noted in the article) are CRITICALLY Important.  
    
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:06 PM by -1 »

Paul Turner

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #94 on: June 18, 2002, 03:48:07 PM »
Ridgewood bunkers compared with Bethpage bunkers:

Having walked both courses; from my memory, I would say that the bunkers generally not too similar.  I can't remember seeing the Bethpage's long "finger" shaped bunkers at Ridgewood which were usually banked into the steep rises to the greens.  

Isn't the sand more flashed up to a sharper lip at Ridgewood?  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom MacWood (Guest)

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #95 on: June 18, 2002, 07:13:04 PM »
Jeff
There are a multitude of bunker shapes. Quite a few I'd characterize as regular in outline, not exactly rounded, more angular with soft corners, with few abrupt changes in outline, pretty typical of Tillinghast. But there are also quite a few boldly shaped bunkers, some of the most irregular shaped bunkers that I've seen of Tillinghast. The 3rd had an irregular waste-like bunker that flowed back toward the tee. The 4th had a number of interesting bunkers down the left, the glacier bunker was was longer, running farther down the right, with an interesting irregular outline with very subtle grass buldges, no protruding capes and bays, no 'fingers'. A waste bunker off the tee on the right. The bunker guarding the green was larger flowing out more toward the tee and was more regular in outline. The 6th fairway and green featured huge irregular bunkers - a very cool looking hole with a lot of strategic interest. The 10th and 11th. The bunkering around the 16th green was another that stands out.

Unfortunately it's difficult to make out the green shapes (and the fairways for that matter). The photo is fairly small and dark. I'm not sure if they did that so I might better make out the bunkers or if it is because it's a photocopy or it's just the nature of these aerials. Obviously you can't make out any fescue from the aerial, but from the ground photos I've seen there was no sign of fescue, although some of the bunkers have some rough edges. In the ground photos the bunkers appear to be flashed and subtle grass bays and/or faces. Not unlike old photos of Ridgewood or Winged Foot. The current bunkering of the 17th is almost identical in appearance - maybe a little more grass showing, but not much.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #96 on: June 18, 2002, 07:45:59 PM »
Tom MacWood,

I stand by my comments relative to your criticisms of Hollywood, Atlantic and Bethpage, courses you've never layed eyes on.  You can probably add Ridgewood too.

Aerial photos are nice, but, unless you're on the ground you can't make an intelligent analysis of the holes, course and its playability.

Mike Cirba,

Do you think the bunkers and bunker shapes were substantively changed at Ridgewood ?

TEPaul,

You continually make allegations that I've said something, yet when pressed for an accurated quote you never seem to be able to produce it, so please stick to the facts, and try not to misquote me.

Paul Turner,

You need to get back to Ridgewood or see your eye doctor, the bunkers are similar if not almost identical.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Turner

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #97 on: June 18, 2002, 07:48:47 PM »
No they're not!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #98 on: June 18, 2002, 07:56:55 PM »
Paul Turner,

I was there yesterday for the entire day, Yes they are, and you definitely need to see your eye doctor.

Perhaps you strayed onto the public course next door   ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Turner

Re: Rees On Bethpage Et Al
« Reply #99 on: June 18, 2002, 08:14:52 PM »
Patrick MucciPatrick

No problem with my eyes.  And if you walked Bethpage last week you must have the memory of a mollusca  :)

I recall there being some similarities, but not as close as you claim.  I don't see how you can reconcile the small clusters of bunkers around the green or 3rd Centre and I don't recall the very large bunkers, say on 7th East or 2nd West, being similar at all.  

Do you have any pics of Ridgewood? Email me, I'll post them here and you can prove me wrong.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »