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: California 1930
« Reply #100 on: July 09, 2008, 10:03:19 AM »
Again, as I mentioned a couple of times on this very thread (and previously), I think some of what was going on in California, both in the minds of some from a particular contingent out there just before and around 1930, as well as on the ground just may have been the zenith of architecture in America.

Somehow that doesn't sound like a regional east coast bias to me.

Chip Gaskins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #101 on: July 09, 2008, 10:16:24 AM »
How about Green Hills Country Club in Millbrae? I hope to play in a few months...

http://www.greenhillscc.com/club/scripts/section/section.asp?GRP=8456&NS=PG

Dr. Alister MacKenzie designed Green Hills (known then as the Union League Club of San Francisco) in 1929.

Thomas MacWood

Re: California 1930
« Reply #102 on: July 09, 2008, 10:36:27 AM »
 
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter

Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al

Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie

Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell

Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell

Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville

Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell

San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell

Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting

Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting

Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas

Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan

Lake Merced -  1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie

Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Harding Park - 1925 Watson

Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie

Orinda - 1925 Watson

Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?

Castlewood - 1927 Bell

Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie

Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler

Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter

Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie

Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?

Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter

Lakeside - 1924 Behr

Montebello Park - 1928 Behr

La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell

Royal Palms - 1925 Bell

Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn

Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn

Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas

Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell

Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell

El Caballero - 1928 Bell

Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke

Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke

Brookside - 1928 Bell

Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell

Rancho - 1921 Fowler

Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth

Hillcrest - 1922 Watson

Hacienda - 1920 Watson

Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr

Flintridge - 1921 Watson

San Diego - 1922 Watson

Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr

Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
 

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #103 on: July 09, 2008, 01:42:22 PM »
Tom MacWood,

I am curious as to whether Travis ever did anything in California.  I know he put in for he job at Brookside but it was given to Bell, who was finishing up Riviera at the time with Thomas.  I do no know of any job he did.

Also, I recall seeing and may have somewhere a plea from Hunter to Travis asking him to come out to California to help stop the general carnage that Fowler was inflicting upon the landscape.

__________________________________

TomPaul, I am not surprised but a little concerned that you fail to acknowledge any East Coast bias in how we look at golf course architecture.  Almost all of the big tournaments were in the East, with an occasional trip to the Mid East (What you would call the Mid West) Almost all of the writers we turn to were in the East.  Almost all of the Major Magazines were from the East.   All there was in the West were golfers and golf courses, almost all of which came and passed unnoticed in the East. 

But for the fine work of Shackelford and Wexler, one might think the only two architects that existed in the west were Thomas and Macdonald.  One wonders whether many would even bother with Thomas but for his Philadelphia connections.   

As for the multitude of Wilson threads, I think if you go back and look you will find that they generally consist of a mass of posters purportedly defending the honor of Wilson and other Philadelphians, and only one or two trying to look at who else might have had an influence.  I have not started a single Merion thread since I posted my In My Opinion, and I don't intend to anytime soon.  My role has been responding to the avalanche of hard feelings that my essay created.   That in and of itself is pretty good evidence of bias.

Wilson was a great man and contributed greatly to gca and agronomy in particular, but there are other great stories out there, many of which never get told at all. 

Take Norman MacBeth.  Most here probably have no idea who he is.  He too was heavily involved with the USGA's green section. He to was an amateur architect with a real job.   He was an excellent Amateur golfer,  many times the California Champion over a period of decades, and apparently heralded as the second coming of Harold Hilton.  But he settled in Los Angeles and went to work building roads.   Something tells me that if had been producing holes like the one below in New York or Philadelphia, we would know quite a bit more about him.



Perhaps if more knew he spent some time in Pennsylvania before he moved to California he would get a bit more recognition. 
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 01:44:51 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #104 on: July 09, 2008, 01:43:04 PM »
Tom MacW -

Interesting about Watson. I had thought of him as more prolific than good, but maybe I've got it wrong. His big course - Olympic - I'm not much impressed with as architecture. A big, tough course with very pretty trees and a huge clubhouse but I'm not sure what more there is to say about it. I'm not familiar with the other courses Watson did in California. I would love to hear from the west coast guys about their quality.

I did play Belvedere in Michigan a couple of summers ago (a course Watson did late in his career) and was impressed.

As for the nor'eastern bias thing, don't get this Atlantan started.

Note that among the criteria for the first go-round of the USGA list (it is open to revision or expansion at any time, btw) was that names be generally known to the public. That was a criterion because of internal sign-off reasons at the time it was compiled. The list was limited to 15 architects. Watson and others missed out in part because there were better known designers out there. Getting Leeds in was difficult for that reason. But as we learn more, certainly Watson ought to be considered.

Bob  






David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #105 on: July 09, 2008, 02:27:32 PM »
Let's not forget Watson's crown jewel was lost, The Ocean course at Olympic. Had it survived it no doubt would be considered one of the finest in the country.









"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

TEPaul

Re: California 1930
« Reply #106 on: July 09, 2008, 03:12:18 PM »
David Moriarty:

It will never cease to amaze me what people like you and Tom MacWood say on here about what I know about architecture or any particular architect. Neither one of you have any idea what I know or don't know, what I've read, what I've done etc. I don't know either one of you and you don't know me. For either of you to state on here what I'm interested in and not interested in is preposterous.

You must be under some delusion that all I ever do with architecture is write on here. I'm afraid not. So do me a favor and try not to tell me or anyone else what I'm interested in or not interested in or what I know or don't know.

Furthermore, your essay on here about Merion created a stir not because of some east coast or Philadelphia bias but because it's assumptions and conclusion are just inaccurate. It's pretty much as simple as that. The attribution given to Macdonald and Whigam by Merion is accurate and the attribution given to Hugh Wilson and his committee by Merion is accurate.

The story of his trip abroad in 1910 is very likely inaccurate and probably did not come within a half century of the routing and design and creation of Merion East. The point is that has nothing to do with what Wilson and his committee did at Ardmore in 1911. Wilson and his committee routed and designed the East course with advice and suggestions from Macdonald and Whigam, just as the architectural record has said.

As far as California architects and its architecture particularly from the late 1920s and on, it has always completely fascinated me and I'm most certainly not anaware of any of it. It's certainly not as if I've never been to California and many of those courses.

So stop trying to tell me or this site what I know or don't know or what I'm interested in or not interested in. Neither of you have any idea, that's for sure.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 03:14:23 PM by TEPaul »

Thomas MacWood

Re: California 1930
« Reply #107 on: July 09, 2008, 03:24:13 PM »
Tom MacW -

Interesting about Watson. I had thought of him as more prolific than good, but maybe I've got it wrong. His big course - Olympic - I'm not much impressed with as architecture. A big, tough course with very pretty trees and a huge clubhouse but I'm not sure what more there is to say about it. I'm not familiar with the other courses Watson did in California. I would love to hear from the west coast guys about their quality.

I did play Belvedere in Michigan a couple of summers ago (a course Watson did late in his career) and was impressed.

As for the nor'eastern bias thing, don't get this Atlantan started.

Note that among the criteria for the first go-round of the USGA list (it is open to revision or expansion at any time, btw) was that names be generally known to the public. That was a criterion because of internal sign-off reasons at the time it was compiled. The list was limited to 15 architects. Watson and others missed out in part because there were better known designers out there. Getting Leeds in was difficult for that reason. But as we learn more, certainly Watson ought to be considered.

Bob  


Bob
IMO Olympic Lake looked to be much more interesting in the early years before they planted the trees. The few pictures I've seen of the Ocean Links has always impressed me (thanks David).

I think you can divide Watson's career into two phases. An early phase in the 1890s and 1900s that was pretty crude. He made a trip abroad in 1911 to study modern golf architecture, which was a turning point and the period afterward produced some excellent courses, all over the midwest and in California. His other claim to fame is collaborating with Robert Hunter and Billy Bell in their first design experience...although I suspect they had as much an influence on him as he on them....nothing wrong with that in my book.

I don't get too caught up in the top or most influential 15 or 30 architects. I understand that USGA list must stay with American architects and has to look at all eras. I'm focused mostly on pre-WWII and try to look a little more globally.

DM
I have not found any design activity with Travis out west although I think he died in Colorado. I get the impression Travis was a major factor in Barker's success and popularity, and HH did some design work out west, however none in California that I know of.  
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 03:36:26 PM by Tom MacWood »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #108 on: July 09, 2008, 03:31:14 PM »
Aside from Thomas and Mackenzie, will there be any golf architects who practiced in the West on in the list of 15 that the USGA is honoring? 

Bob Crosby,  I am curious as to why the USGA would go with only architects that were known to the public?   If they are already well known to the public then what is the point?   Wouldn't golf be better served if the USGA actually delved into the architects and courses that deserve recognition but haven't been recognized?   

____________________________

TEPaul,   I did not say what you know or don't know.  I said most on here no nothing about Norman MacBeth or others like him.  I stand by that.    As for what you know and don't you, you wax and wane incessantly, and you constantly write about how much you know, but rarely do you ever offer anything new on here, except for Society gossip from the days of yore.   Yawn.

Plus, whenever anything new comes up you backtrack immediately, either claiming you knew that all along, or that, despite past claims, it really wasnt your area of focus.


You really don't think that playing a few West Coast courses gives you an expertise on the history of golf architecture in the West do you?   

Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #109 on: July 09, 2008, 03:34:18 PM »
Wasn't Dunn at one time a design associate of Travis'?
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Thomas MacWood

Re: California 1930
« Reply #110 on: July 09, 2008, 03:37:43 PM »
That is a very good point. If Travis did work in California JD Dunn would be the logical place to look.

TEPaul

Re: California 1930
« Reply #111 on: July 09, 2008, 04:04:53 PM »
David Moriarty:

The USGA Architecture Archive started with app fifty of the most significant courses and app fifteen of the most significant Architects of American architecture essentially because it has to start somewhere and that's as good a place to start as any. It involves a helluva lot of time and effort. I hope in some years it can cover most of everything about American architecture and those who worked here. Personally someday I would like to see it cover architecture and architects world-wide.

If some of you out there have what you think are some differences of opinion or if you have information on architecture or regions and their architects that you think is important enough to be treated differently then just try to make a cogent case as to why that is and then just make what you know available to us. We've posted a few times who to get in touch with. Don't just complain about what it's doing, get involved and try to help out if you really have the interest in some of what you're saying on here.



"TEPaul,   I did not say what you know or don't know.  I said most on here no nothing about Norman MacBeth or others like him.  I stand by that.    As for what you know and don't you, you wax and wane incessantly, and you constantly write about how much you know, but rarely do you ever offer anything new on here, except for Society gossip from the days of yore.   Yawn.
Plus, whenever anything new comes up you backtrack immediately, either claiming you knew that all along, or that, despite past claims, it really wasnt your area of focus."


As far as I'm concerned you can take those remarks and others like it and shove them up your ass!  :)


"You really don't think that playing a few West Coast courses gives you an expertise on the history of golf architecture in the West do you?"

Of course I don't think I'm an expert on the history of golf architecture in the West. To be able to do that I figure I'd probably have to live out there. It's only what is generally recognized as the most significant architecture out there that I've seen or tried to study. What I'm really interested in, however, is that contingent made up of the likes of Behr, Mackenzie, Hunter, Thomas and perhaps a few others who were out there and who I think were all in on some really fascinating and futuristic ideas and concepts for architecture. A lot of that revolves around Behr's writing, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm most definitely not unfamiliar with that.

But there sure are plenty of others I want to know more about including the heathland architects, especially Fowler. I know quite a bit about Park and sure want to know more, and certainly Emmet and some of the New England courses and architects I'm not that familiar with such as Stiles. I'm always looking for more on Travis too, and Langford and Moreau, Strong etc. The Fownses will probably be a new project too, what there is from them and about them. The Oakmont history book turned up one fascinating item. I'm sure not done on Leeds either, or even trying to find out more on Yale's Pryde---he may've been an important original architectural educator of a few of America's most imaginative architects.

But Willie Watson, William Bell, Norman MacBeth, Chandler Egan, Robert Hunter, and certainly Marion Hollins I always want to know more about. I might even have a tremendous lead on Hollins I'll be checking out hopefully shortly (maybe I'll even find Raynor's routing ;) ). Her Women's National was pretty amazing. Matter of fact, that entire push for dedicated women's courses back then is a fascinating subject that virtually petered out and not much is known about. Rand Jerris seems fascinated by that unique aspect. Even Crump was going to get into it if he hadn't died. He'd interviewed a couple of the top women amateurs on that. Can you imagine finding those notes or letters?

There's a lot to do and a lot to look into, so again, David Moriarty, try not to tell me what I know and don't know or what I'm interested in and not interested in---basically you have no idea. The only thing I don't ever want to get into is trumping up some revisionism on courses and architects I'm not totally familiar with as it seems both you and MacWood are prone to doing. And if what I write on here bores you then try not to read it. That way you won't feel you need to make insulting remarks like those above.     
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 05:18:59 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #112 on: July 10, 2008, 12:12:09 AM »
David Moriarty:

The USGA Architecture Archive started with app fifty of the most significant courses and app fifteen of the most significant Architects of American architecture essentially because it has to start somewhere and that's as good a place to start as any. It involves a helluva lot of time and effort. I hope in some years it can cover most of everything about American architecture and those who worked here. Personally someday I would like to see it cover architecture and architects world-wide.

If some of you out there have what you think are some differences of opinion or if you have information on architecture or regions and their architects that you think is important enough to be treated differently then just try to make a cogent case as to why that is and then just make what you know available to us. We've posted a few times who to get in touch with. Don't just complain about what it's doing, get involved and try to help out if you really have the interest in some of what you're saying on here.

Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you.  As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project.   Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?

As to the USGA's selection process, let me take a guess. . . of the 15 architects chosen, I'll guess that a full one-third of them are from the "Philadelphia School."   I hope I am not correct, but if I am, wouldn't that seem to be a bit much from a metropolitan area that was notorious for its bad courses up until about 1912? 

Quote
As far as I'm concerned you can take those remarks and others like it and shove them up your ass!  :)

Why do you put a winking smiley face after telling me to stick my remarks up my ass?  Do you think the smiley face makes your comment any less inappropriate or offensive?   Is it yet another way for you to avoid responsibility for your own behavior?   

Quote
Of course I don't think I'm an expert on the history of golf architecture in the West. To be able to do that I figure I'd probably have to live out there. It's only what is generally recognized as the most significant architecture out there that I've seen or tried to study. What I'm really interested in, however, is that contingent made up of the likes of Behr, Mackenzie, Hunter, Thomas and perhaps a few others who were out there and who I think were all in on some really fascinating and futuristic ideas and concepts for architecture. A lot of that revolves around Behr's writing, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm most definitely not unfamiliar with that.

But there sure are plenty of others I want to know more about including the heathland architects, especially Fowler. I know quite a bit about Park and sure want to know more, and certainly Emmet and some of the New England courses and architects I'm not that familiar with such as Stiles. I'm always looking for more on Travis too, and Langford and Moreau, Strong etc. The Fownses will probably be a new project too, what there is from them and about them. The Oakmont history book turned up one fascinating item. I'm sure not done on Leeds either, or even trying to find out more on Yale's Pryde---he may've been an important original architectural educator of a few of America's most imaginative architects.

But Willie Watson, William Bell, Norman MacBeth, Chandler Egan, Robert Hunter, and certainly Marion Hollins I always want to know more about. I might even have a tremendous lead on Hollins I'll be checking out hopefully shortly (maybe I'll even find Raynor's routing ;) ). Her Women's National was pretty amazing. Matter of fact, that entire push for dedicated women's courses back then is a fascinating subject that virtually petered out and not much is known about. Rand Jerris seems fascinated by that unique aspect. Even Crump was going to get into it if he hadn't died. He'd interviewed a couple of the top women amateurs on that. Can you imagine finding those notes or letters?

This post is a good example of what I am taking about.  You go on and on, drop the names of a dozen designers and one USGA official, tell us what you have decided is important.  But as far as I can tell you have offered absolutely nothing of substance the conversation.  I've gone back through the entire thread and it is the same for every post.  You insult Tom MacWood, me, a few designers who you don't know anything about.  You tell others to research things that you are interested in.  But you offer absolutely nothing of substance to the conversation.  Nothing.

Quote
There's a lot to do and a lot to look into, so again, David Moriarty, try not to tell me what I know and don't know or what I'm interested in and not interested in---basically you have no idea. The only thing I don't ever want to get into is trumping up some revisionism on courses and architects I'm not totally familiar with as it seems both you and MacWood are prone to doing. And if what I write on here bores you then try not to read it. That way you won't feel you need to make insulting remarks like those above.

Don't worry, I rarely read your posts.  But it is distracting and annoying when you stick your nose into conversations where you have nothing to offer. This detracts from those conversations.  Bogs them down with unnecessary pomposity.     

You often say there is much to do.  You also often say what you find interesting and plan to look into.   I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago.  If you spent 1/2 the time researching that you spend pontificating on this site, you would be the most knowledgeable man in golf.  Yet for a man with your resources, interests, and connections, your contributions are rather minuscule.  Take away Wayne's coattails and there is even less.  Since all you are apparently interested in is waxing philosophically, at least have the courtesy to quit polluting others' efforts with your pompous pontifications.

Thanks.

[If you'd like, you can insert one really big winking smiley face here.]
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Re: California 1930
« Reply #113 on: July 10, 2008, 08:25:26 AM »
"Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you.  As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project.   Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?"


David Moriarty:

I don't care if you addressed questions to Bob Crosby. If you insist on putting a question on here about something both of us are involved in I feel free to answer it. If you want to direct a question only to Bob Crosby then IM or email him instead of putting it on this discussion forum. That's an option you're aparrently not willing to consider in your ongoing campaign to challenge clubs and people. You may have your ideas on how this website should work and I have mine. If you think it's unproductive to help out the USGA Architecture Archive that's fine with me. It probably is unproductive for someone like you. I'm no gatekeeper but I am involved in it. A month or so ago you put a post on here that was pretty insulting regarding it with me involved in it. I won't forget that! Frankly, judging from that preposterous essay on Merion you did I think it's wholly unproductive for you to get involved in anything to do with golf architecture research. You don't further the cause, rather you detract from it.


"I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago."

You've been around where for eight years? Around this website? So what? Apparently you think this website is the only thing happening in architectural research and that's apparently part of your confusion. It probably is for you but certainly not for some of the rest of us. Some of us get involved with clubs and projects but that's something you neither do nor seem to understand how to do properly. Perhaps you've tried and it wasn't possible. I don't think anyone should wonder why that is.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 08:39:49 AM by TEPaul »

Thomas MacWood

Re: California 1930
« Reply #114 on: July 10, 2008, 09:50:52 AM »
Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter

Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al

Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie

Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell

Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell

Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville

Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell

San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell

Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson/Whiting

Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson/Whiting

Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas

Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan

Lake Merced -  1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie

California GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Harding Park - 1925 Watson/Whiting

Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie

Orinda - 1925 Watson

Sonoma - 1927 Whiting

Castlewood - 1927 Bell

Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie

Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler

Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter

Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie

Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?

Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter

Lakeside - 1924 Behr

Montebello Park - 1928 Behr

La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell

Royal Palms - 1925 Bell

Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn

Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn

Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas

Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell

Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell

El Caballero - 1928 Bell

Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke

Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke

Brookside - 1928 Bell

Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell

Rancho - 1921 Fowler

Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth

Hillcrest - 1922 Watson

Hacienda - 1920 Watson

Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr

Flintridge - 1921 Watson

San Diego - 1922 Watson

Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr

Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 09:01:07 PM by Tom MacWood »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #115 on: July 10, 2008, 01:45:28 PM »
"Tom, My unanswered questions regarding the archives were directed to Bob Crosby, not you.  As for getting involved and trying to help out, I don't think that would be at all productive, especially since you seem to have appointed yourself as gatekeeper of the project.   Is there any Body in golf on whose behalf you do not claim to speak?"


David Moriarty:

I don't care if you addressed questions to Bob Crosby. If you insist on putting a question on here about something both of us are involved in I feel free to answer it. If you want to direct a question only to Bob Crosby then IM or email him instead of putting it on this discussion forum. That's an option you're aparrently not willing to consider in your ongoing campaign to challenge clubs and people. You may have your ideas on how this website should work and I have mine. If you think it's unproductive to help out the USGA Architecture Archive that's fine with me. It probably is unproductive for someone like you. I'm no gatekeeper but I am involved in it. A month or so ago you put a post on here that was pretty insulting regarding it with me involved in it. I won't forget that! Frankly, judging from that preposterous essay on Merion you did I think it's wholly unproductive for you to get involved in anything to do with golf architecture research. You don't further the cause, rather you detract from it.

The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him.  In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them.  Naturally.

Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website.  Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea.


Quote
"I've been around for something like eight years, and you still have the same to-do list you had eight years ago."

You've been around where for eight years? Around this website? So what? Apparently you think this website is the only thing happening in architectural research and that's apparently part of your confusion. It probably is for you but certainly not for some of the rest of us. Some of us get involved with clubs and projects but that's something you neither do nor seem to understand how to do properly. Perhaps you've tried and it wasn't possible. I don't think anyone should wonder why that is.

That's rich.  You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums?  You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine?   I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay.  How about you post it and we take a look at it?

___________________________________________


DM
I have not found any design activity with Travis out west although I think he died in Colorado. I get the impression Travis was a major factor in Barker's success and popularity, and HH did some design work out west, however none in California that I know of. 

Wasn't Dunn at one time a design associate of Travis'?

That is a very good point. If Travis did work in California JD Dunn would be the logical place to look.

Tom and David Stamm,

I think there is reference to a John Duncan Dunn routing for Brookside, or reference to one, so he may have been invovled with Travis at the time.   If either of you needs to know, I'll try to dig it up.

I also recall reading somewhere that John Duncan Dunn was commission to do two 9 hole courses on Catalina Island sometime in the 20s.   I think they were to be separate 9 holes but designed and built at the same time.   Not for the list, but it might be something Dunn done.
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Sean_Tully

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #116 on: July 10, 2008, 03:41:06 PM »

Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter

Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al

Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie

Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell

Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell

Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville

Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell

San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hard to say what he was working from but Whiting was making a number of changes to the courses there almost as soon as he got there. I have gone through a lot of newspaper articles 1920-1927 every sports page!, and whiting is almost always mentioned and Watson almost never except for his proposed changes. Fowler was there before him as well, but changes with property lines changed everything. In 1925-6 I can't say for sure Behr came up to Olympic to look at the proposed changes drawn up by Whiting and approved of them. Shortly afterward they would team up at Capuchino Behr as the  Architect and  Whiting as the Construction supt.
Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting

Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson, 1927 Whiting
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas

Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan

Lake Merced -  1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie

Califronia GC of SF - 1918 Lock, 1920 Macan, 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1918 version was the old SFG &CC, and I have yet to track down the architect of that course. Lock was involved in the new course until he was let go and Macan came in and finished the job.

1925-6 Lock and Macan 1927 MacKenzie and Hunter


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harding Park - 1925 Watson



A Watson design that was tweaked and finished by Whiting.


---------------------------------

Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie


I have an article that puts Egan there as  well going over the proposed routing.


----------------------------------------------------

Orinda - 1925 Watson

Sonoma - 1927 Whiting/Watson?


No mention of Watson, just Whiting

------------------

Castlewood - 1927 Bell

Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler

Seqouyah It looks like the original course was possibly done by committee that included Jack Neville
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter

Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie

Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?

Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter

Lakeside - 1924 Behr

Montebello Park - 1928 Behr

La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell

Royal Palms - 1925 Bell

Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn

Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn

Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas

Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell

Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell

El Caballero - 1928 Bell

Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke

Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke

Brookside - 1928 Bell

Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell

Rancho - 1921 Fowler

Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth

Hillcrest - 1922 Watson

Hacienda - 1920 Watson

Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr

Flintridge - 1921 Watson

San Diego - 1922 Watson

Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr

Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell



David and Tom

John D. Dunn was also slated to do a course at Caves Landing with Thomas and another architect I can't recall.

Travis came out to California to see Hunter's new course at Berkeley CC. Travis and Ross both played a large part in Hunter's early background of architecture.  I believe that Hunter was instramental in getting Watson at BCC and to  do some work at Claremont at around the same time that BCC was in construction.

It is interesting to note that Hunter brought Whiting to America. He had lessons from him on one of his trips to the UK and he must of left a lasting impression. During construction at BCC they had some strikes and were forced to stop some of the work. The club allowed Whiting to take work at Olympic and the rest is history.

Tully

Thomas MacWood

Re: California 1930
« Reply #117 on: July 11, 2008, 07:16:27 AM »
Sean
Did Whiting ever became a full-time golf architect or did he just dabble in contruction and design on the side? Did he do any solo designs other than Sonoma?

Cypress Point - 1928 MacKenzie/Hunter

Pebble Beach - 1919 Neville/Grant, 1920 Fowler, 1927 Mackenzie, 1929 Egan/Hunter/et al

Pasatiempo - 1929 Mackenzie

Riviera - 1926 Thomas/Bell

Los Angeles (North) - 1921 Fowler, 1927 Thomas/Bell

Bel-Air - 1927 Thomas/Bell/Neville

Ojai Valley - 1924 Thomas/Bell

San Francisco - 1918 Neville?, 1920 Tillinghast, 1930 Bell

Olympic (Lake) - 1924 Watson/Whiting

Olympic (Ocean) - 1924 Watson/Whiting

Meadow Club - 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Stanford - 1930 Bell/Thomas

Monterey Peninsula - 1925 Raynor, 1926 Hunter/MacKenzie/Egan

Lake Merced -  1922 Lock, 1929 Mackenzie

California GC of SF - 1920 Macan/Lock , 1927 Mackenzie/Hunter

Harding Park - 1925 Watson/Whiting

Sharp Park - 1929 Mackenzie

Orinda - 1925 Watson

Sonoma - 1927 Whiting

Castlewood - 1927 Bell

Claremont - 1903 Smith, 1920 Watson, 1928 Mackenzie

Sehouyah - 1914 ?, 1920 Fowler

Berkeley - 1920 Watson/Hunter

Union League (Green Hills) - 1929 MacKenzie

Del Paso - 1916 ?, 1921 Fowler?

Valley Club of Montecito - 1929 Mackenzie/Hunter

Lakeside - 1924 Behr

Montebello Park - 1928 Behr

La Cumbre - 1917 Bendelow/Bryce, 1925 Thomas/Bell

Royal Palms - 1925 Bell

Lake Elsinore - 1925 Dunn

Lake Norconian - 1928 Dunn

Griffith Park - 1923 Thomas

Fox Hills - 1927 Thomas/Bell

Sunset Fields (No.1 + No.2) - 1927 Bell

El Caballero - 1928 Bell

Annandale - 1906 Watson/O'Neil, 1919 Watson, 1923 Bell/Croke

Pasadena - 1920 O'Neil/Croke

Brookside - 1928 Bell

Midwick - 1911 Macbeth, 1929 Bell

Rancho - 1921 Fowler

Wilshire - 1919 Macbeth

Hillcrest - 1922 Watson

Hacienda - 1920 Watson

Victoria - 1903 Heath, 1918 Fovargue, 1924 Behr

Flintridge - 1921 Watson

San Diego - 1922 Watson

Rancho Santa Fe - 1929 Behr

Agua Caliente - 1929 Bell
« Last Edit: July 11, 2008, 07:21:53 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re: California 1930
« Reply #118 on: July 11, 2008, 11:05:01 AM »
"The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him.  In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them.  Naturally.

Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website.  Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea."



David Moriarty:

I guess it's understandable that a guy like you would say things like that to someone who disproved the assumptions and conclusion of your ridiculous essay on Merion. If that's what you call an original idea I think golf course architect could very nicely do without it.



"That's rich.  You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums?  You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine?   I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay.  How about you post it and we take a look at it?"




Yes, you probably should've used it in your essay. There's a considerable amount of valuable research material you should've considered before writing your essay, but you didn't. Perhaps you thought you could cover yourself somehow by explaining in your essay there would be a Part Two. What a joke that is---eg "Oh, and now, because I didn't have important material available to me at the time, here's Part Two correcting all the factual inaccuracies and mistakes I made in Part One including all my premises and the essay's conclusion! ;)

The problem is if you'd actually seen most of it even you probably wouldn't have written an essay like that in the first place, and the rest of us wouldn't have been subjected to some of the inaccuracies of your on-going "learning process" or whatever the hell you call it with Merion. Your "learning process" with Merion should more appropriately have been on this DG rather than in a section where it might be passed off as an accurate history of Merion. You call yourself a researcher, right? Why don't you find those essays on the Philadelphia School of Architecture from the GAP Magazine and also in the US Amateur program? You've certainly never shared a thing with me, so why should I do your research for you?   ???


The answer to your question to Bob Crosby of why the USGA Architecture Archive decided to do the better known architects first instead of lesser known architects is because they understand that even if the names may be more familiar to the public interested in using the archive the details of those men and what they did are not generally or universally known.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2008, 11:56:20 AM by TEPaul »

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #119 on: July 11, 2008, 12:57:59 PM »
What ever became of Berkeley CC? Is that what is now Tilden Park?
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #120 on: July 11, 2008, 03:49:49 PM »
"The reason I asked Bob Crosby is that he seems to be reasonable gentleman and in full possession of his faculties and I thought it might be possible to get a straight and intelligent answer from him.  In contrast, while you have gone on and on in response to my questions, you have have not bothered to answer any of them.  Naturally.

Again, you prove to be the Warren G. Harding of this website.  Your posts are still nothing but a swarm of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea."



David Moriarty:

I guess it's understandable that a guy like you would say things like that to someone who disproved the assumptions and conclusion of your ridiculous essay on Merion. If that's what you call an original idea I think golf course architect could very nicely do without it.



"That's rich.  You spend 16 hours a day online, yet you save all your good and original research and ideas for other forums?  You mean like your article on Philadelphia architecture for the GAP Magazine?   I don't have a copy of that, but maybe I should have used in in my essay.  How about you post it and we take a look at it?"




Yes, you probably should've used it in your essay. There's a considerable amount of valuable research material you should've considered before writing your essay, but you didn't. Perhaps you thought you could cover yourself somehow by explaining in your essay there would be a Part Two. What a joke that is---eg "Oh, and now, because I didn't have important material available to me at the time, here's Part Two correcting all the factual inaccuracies and mistakes I made in Part One including all my premises and the essay's conclusion! ;)

The problem is if you'd actually seen most of it even you probably wouldn't have written an essay like that in the first place, and the rest of us wouldn't have been subjected to some of the inaccuracies of your on-going "learning process" or whatever the hell you call it with Merion. Your "learning process" with Merion should more appropriately have been on this DG rather than in a section where it might be passed off as an accurate history of Merion. You call yourself a researcher, right? Why don't you find those essays on the Philadelphia School of Architecture from the GAP Magazine and also in the US Amateur program? You've certainly never shared a thing with me, so why should I do your research for you?   ???

More bombastic bullshit from the Prince of Pompous Proclamations.

YOU haven't disproved a single thing in my essay.  So far Wayne has come up with one CBM letter which did not contain a description of a routing, as I thought it might.    As usual your contribution has been to cheerlead and to post and post and post and post and post . . . and post.  Nary a substantive contribution in site.
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #121 on: July 11, 2008, 03:54:49 PM »
This war has many fronts . . .

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #122 on: July 11, 2008, 03:55:52 PM »
Here is a photo of the 18th green at Castlewood from 1927.  Looks like fun.

Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #123 on: July 11, 2008, 04:02:18 PM »
Great photo, David!
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Sean_Tully

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: California 1930
« Reply #124 on: July 11, 2008, 05:20:10 PM »
Tim

Berkeley CC is known today as Mira Vista.


David

I have the same photo of the 18th. Too bad one would never guess that it is from the current course.

Tully

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back