My 1st Donald Ross course

[Tom Yost]

Was this indeed Portsmouth Elks?

Doug said McDermitt, and according to Google maps, there is a McDermott and an Elks golf course just about 4 mi NW of Portsmouth on Rt 104.

Side note:  In my youth, I three times rode in the annual TOSRV (Tour of the Scioto River Valley), an annual 2-day, 210 mi round trip (Columbus-Portsmouth and back) bicycle rally.  The TOSRV route passes by the Elks golf course on RT 104, however, I can't claim to have any recollection of noticing any Ross features.  


Tom

[Garland Bayley]

Meanwhile, thanks Andy and Shivas. I think it is OK to just let Garland be Garland. My skin is really quite think [perhaps that's not all? ].


Doug

Gotcha!

[Garland Bayley]

Again, the people at the course claim the design has been purposely kept intact.

And seriously, what do you think they're going to say?  "We've got a Ross design that we've destroyed with underfunding and neglect?"

"You seem to be overly contentious in this thread.  I believe that the forum and I would like you to be less pompous."

[Garland Bayley]

Doug,

Why don't you critique your review for us so that we know you have something on the ball.

Right now it doesn't seem like you have much going for yourself.

Alright, Alright, I admit this had poor tone. I am sorry I didn't take the time to come up with the point I wanted to make without sounding so negative.

Was "asking you to critique yourself and try to do a better job.
Nothing more, nothing less." a better way of saying it without the negative tone?

My writing abilities were never appreciated by my instructors either, and I should try to do better.

[Tom Yost]

I have no Ross on my resume, so I certainly can't speak from personal experience, but is it possible that the Ross experience may have been overhyped to the point where Doug was anticipating something it could never be?  Is Ross' style is so subtle as to be underwhelming?  Or does one have to be a member of the haute monde to get it?

I think of the Jackson Pollack analogy - to the NY city art crowd, a creative genius, but to Joe Everyman, a guy who's work looks like a child's paint splatters.  Not saying Doug is average at all, just drawing a parallel and playing devil's advocate.  

For what it's worth, I was disappointed after my first listen to "Kind of Blue."

Maybe Ross is something that has to grow on you.


Tom

[Brent Hutto]

Tom,

I'm not sure what the stereotypical idea of a "Ross course" for a first timer might be. Funny question, that. My first discovery of this forum and site was upon doing a Google search for Pine Needles before my first trip there a few years back. I knew it was supposed to be special and that Ross was one of the handful of architects I'd ever heard of but didn't know precisely what that implied about Pine Needles.

Perhaps Doug can think back on what mental images or preconceptions he had when seeking out his "1st Donald Ross course" and let us know. For my part, the only thing I can recall for sure was the expectation of turtle-backed, small greens (a la Pinehurst #2) and to a certain extent those were present at Pine Needles. But honestly, the little public course with a no-name builder that I learn to play golf on for $15/round had greens that were smaller and with at least as many fall-off sides as at Pine Needles (and more than at Mid-Pines).

At several years' remove my mental image has evolved to comprise mainly a compact and efficient routing with canny use of elevation change and with greens that are to some extent throwbacks to the days of slower putting speeds (tilts and fall-offs) and less concern about wear and tear (smaller than the modern average). I guess I also expect bunkering that's more "random" in terms of not following the same presumptions as a modern course about the landing or turning distances for tee shots and with at least a few cross hazards or bunkers set well back from greenside.

[Doug Ralston]

Doug,

I think it's safe to say that sometimes the qualities of a design can be subtle, and one play isn't enough to really appreciate some of those subtleties. I don't profess to have the keenest eye for golf architecture, but still, there have been holes and courses that I dismissed after one play, and only after several rounds did the strategies and, at times, brilliance of the design reveal itself to me.

Doug,

This is very, very true.
Sometimes architecture can be hard to figure out.  Yet, once you do figure it out, it seems so easy.
And that is brilliance by means of design.

It is fun once a hole finally 'clicks' after several times playing it.

Jordan;

I do know what you mean about sometimes having a course grow on you with subsequent plays. I can think of several like that [Aston Oaks, a nice little Nicklaus near me, for one.]

This site was clearly born with traditional courses/architect to be the emphasis. I am a good example of the 'masses' who almost never get an opportunity to play and appreciate the type courses many of you access. I admit the courses I like are mostly 1990 to present. 'Wow factor' does play a good role, though I have liked some with somewhat less.

But there have been a few older courses I liked too. Jim Sweeney showed me a Langford & Morreau [sp?] that I liked without playing, and no one would accuse it of much 'wow!'. And a Lexington KY public from the 1920's called Picadome turned out to be subtle around the greens and a very challenging thoughtful course. In fact, I rate it higher than the Elks course we have been addressing.

Strangly, I find few courses from say 1960-1990 that impressed me. I thought, for example, that Trent Jones' 'Otter Creek' was not as special as it's press releases.

Again, I certainly admit my biases are formed by my experience like most others are. It will always be difficult for me to be comfortable on a course as 'cramped' as Elks was. I do not blame Ross, he had what he had to work with. But my expectations of interesting greens and challenging protective bunkers was just not realized at all.

I will not give up on Ross. Though Sweeney named Hamilton Elks, which I do not have access to, JK [Barney?] was correct that if we can get a deal, we must try French Lick. As far as I know, there are no Flynn, McDonald etc public available to me.

So I guess I must just become an 'authority' on great modern architects like Art Hills, Reese Jones  . Ok, how about Ed Ault, Michael Hurdzan, Tim Liddy etc.

Thanks for all the responses. A lot to think about.

Doug

[Mike Hendren]

Doug, stand your ground; my perception of Ross is that he doesn't truly stand out in terms of architectual ability to consistently bring the absolute best out of the land he was handed.  

Shivas, surely you have several examples to support your perception, but I'll accept just one example of a site where Ross under-achieved.  

Mike

[Tom Yost]

What about an exercise to take what is known about Ross and compare to Doug's experience at the Portsmouth Elks.  Maybe us newbs can can gain a better understanding and appreciation of the trademarks and nuances of Ross' style?

Brent Hutto:
"At several years' removed my mental image has evolved to comprise mainly a compact and efficient routing..."
Garland Bayley:
"when someone goes to an 18 hole course built on 110 acres of land and complains about the fairways being too close together and the tees being too close to the greens..."
Brad Klein (from donaldrosssociety.org):
"Ross had a genius for sound routings, with very little walking required from one green to the next tee."
Doug Ralston:
"...the fairways are so close that we spent most of the day either playing from paralell fairways or having countless others playing from ours..."
"Many of the tees were SO close to the previous greens that one must fear for their safety..."

I'm not thnking to engage in a discussion as to the quality of the design but more of a look at the things we might observe as characteristic of a Ross design.

What else?

[Doug Wright]

What about an exercise to take what is known about Ross and compare to Doug's experience at the Portsmouth Elks.  Maybe us newbs can can gain a better understanding and appreciation of the trademarks and nuances of Ross' style?

Brent Hutto:
"At several years' removed my mental image has evolved to comprise mainly a compact and efficient routing..."
Garland Bayley:
"when someone goes to an 18 hole course built on 110 acres of land and complains about the fairways being too close together and the tees being too close to the greens..."
Brad Klein (from donaldrosssociety.org):
"Ross had a genius for sound routings, with very little walking required from one green to the next tee."
Doug Ralston:
"...the fairways are so close that we spent most of the day either playing from paralell fairways or having countless others playing from ours..."
"Many of the tees were SO close to the previous greens that one must fear for their safety..."

I'm not thnking to engage in a discussion as to the quality of the design but more of a look at the things we might observe as characteristic of a Ross design.

What else?

Tom,

I think you left out from Brent's post one of the most important attributes of Ross: "canny use of elevation change." Through use of topo maps (as is commonly known he didn't even visit many of the sites for his courses), Ross routed holes and created greensites that adeptly used the topography.

[Tags:]

Tags: