Olympia Fields South

[Dan Taylor]

GCA poster and  Chicago Sportswriter Tim Cronin,  has written a review of the re-opened South Course at Olympia Fields.  See below:

http://www.southtownstar.com/sports/cronin/1043738,070808sptcronin.article

[Bill_McBride]

Congrats to Jeff Goldman, who was deeply involved in this project.

[Gerry B]

jeff goldman is a star.  initial reviews from the members is that it rivals the north course. will be there later in the week - can hardly wait.

[Tim_Cronin]

Dan, thanks for helping my page views. Would have written several hundred words more but space is tight in newspapers these days. If the column was structured like the public course reviews we do, it would have gotten an eagle, maybe a double-eagle. Which is to say, four or five stars, movie review-style.

And yes, kudos to Jeff, who could understand why I was still drooling after I finished. Great course.

[PThomas]

chocolate drops are back, how cool!

congrats Jeff and to all involved

[J_ Crisham]

Played here  last Friday-One hell of a course! Very difficult but fair. Impressed with how well it has come in. # 1,2,6,9,10,12,15were my favorites.Hats off to Jeff Goldman and his crew. What a great compliment to the North Course.   No club in the Midwest with 2 courses of this caliber.            Jack

[Mike Nuzzo]

Jeff,
Congratulations on your efforts.
I look forward to hearing more.
Cheers

[Carl Nichols]

Was supposed to be spending a long weekend in July playing both courses at OFCC with a group of old friends (one of whom is relatively new member), but a recent injury is keeping me from playing these days.  This article, and my buddy's recent emails about the South course, have me very disappointed to be missing the trip.

[JWinick]

I've played the South about 6 times already and it's awesome.   For the most part, I liked all the changes that were made.   On a couple of holes, I wished Steve Smyers went further.  There's no question it's difficult: an informal survey I conducted of about 10 rounds found not one golfer came close to his handicap.  One scratch player I know shot an adjusted 88 on his first round.   

The South is still somewhat of a work in progress - the newly expanded greens will be usable sometime next season.   But, the membership is very pleased.  Jeff Goldman did a phenomenal job striking the right balance between the architect and the membership.   While I love Steve Smyers work, his courses can be very difficult and I think the finished product benefited from the membership's input.   

[Paul Carey]

Is this Steve Smyers first renovation based on the original architect's plans?  I know he redid Isleworth but that seemed to be a redesign rather than a renovation.

Why isn't he the Open Doctor?  He is much more interesting than Rees and this project may indicate that he is better at a real renovation.

[Thomas MacWood]

Is this a remodel, restoration or combination?

This ia a Bendelow course? From what I understand the South course was original course #1 or mostly #1. That course was laid out by Collis as a temporary course in 1916 and redesigned by Watson and Bendelow in collaboration the following year. And then likely altered by Daray in the 20s.

[Jeff Goldman]

Your kind words and thoughts are very much appreciated (as are Tim's good words), but......

Guys, I was just a bean-counter, tour guide, and chief worrier.  The real kudos go to Steve Smyers, his design partner Patrick Andrews, who lived at the club for 3 months (really; he stayed in one of our rooms), OFCC Director of Grounds Sam MacKenzie, who had overall control of the project as club representative and did ALL the grassing, and Wadsworth Golf Construction Company, who hit the right beans.  The Architects and Sam controlled the project details, and me and my committee weighed in on big policy questions, counted the beans, and watched them to do their work.

Tom, Tim has it right, the work was a combination.  In certain areas, the Architects restored lost features pretty closely -- chiefly green expansions some lost bunkers, and certain lost landforms; elsewhere, they worked off the old patterns in remodeling; and, they put in new back and forward tees, and a completely new 3rd hole (and greatly revised the 13th).  Also, as you say, it isn't completely clear who is responsible for what, but it does appear that Bendelow is most responsible for the routing and most of the holes.  Work may have been done by Watson (who I think did design the 9th hole, which came from one of the other courses), Daray, Harry Collis and even possibly Willie Park (as you have pointed out to me).

Regardless, the work has gone over very well with the membership, which is  most important.  As chief critic, I must say it is an absolute blast to play, and my first thought after finishing 18 is to go back to 1.  I do still think that some of the bunkering will be controversial.  For example, on the 4th hole, a 540 yard par 5, they put back a jumbo "Himalaya" bunker short left of the green.  Better players going for the green in 2 now have a real risk (Steve was at the club last Tuesday, played in our regular Tuesday shotgun, and knocked it in there ), while the rest of us won't get near it, but will have it blocking our view if we play second shots safely to the left rather than skirting a fairway bunker to get to the right side for our approach.  The aesthetic still seems a little much to me, but it plays fantastic, which, as Shelly Solow never ceases to remind me, is what counts.  And most of the rest of the course is just gorgeous, with many more open vistas and views across the course, etc.  And now that I have had a chance to see how the course plays as a whole, it appears that virtually every one of their choices made real strategic sense.  

I'll be interested in seeing what people think.  As Jon Winick says, we're basically in grow-in mode, and it's going to take a year or so before it really starts to play like it's supposed to.  As to playability, again, though, it was Steve and Patrick that shortened 4 holes from the regular tees, left every hole but one with an open front, and put back a lot of bail-out and run-up areas.  And hey, last week I shot a net 65.

I'll get some more pictures up at some point.

Jeff

[Thomas MacWood]

Jeff
Didn't Collis originally layout #1?

[Jeff Goldman]

Tom,

He laid out what was called a "temporary" course soon after the club was organized, I think in 1915 (based on info from the club records and some stuff you sent me), but my recollection (I don't have the stuff in front of me) is that it did not survive in any form, and so I don't think he should be given credit for the course on based on his original one.  However, I do think that he was later consulted on some other changes.  My recollection is that an article from the club magazine in the early 1920s discusses some changes to the course, and lists Collis and a couple other architects who were consulted and approved the changes.  To what extent any specific architect designed them, or did what, is hard to know.

Jeff

[Tim_Cronin]

To chime in on a couple of things:
After we played No. 4, Carol Mann (a delightful lady whom the club made an honorary member a week ago Monday) said to us, "Look back from the green and you can see how you should play a hole." And that's especially true of No. 4, thanks to that huge bunker short and left of the green. She loved the green complexes in general.

Collis was there first, and the temporary course he laid out was used as some sort of a template for No. 1 -- remember, the current eighth and ninth were from No. 2. I haven't seen all the material that Jeff has access to, but the Chicago Tribune reported the course opened July 23, 1916 (53 weeks after the club was chartered) with a mix of sand and grass greens.
On Jan. 7, 1917, the Tribune reported the course was being remodeled for permanent use by Tom Bendelow and Willie Watson, and was renamed Course No. 1.
On Feb. 15, 1922, the Chicago Evening Post said Bendelow was credited with No. 1 and No. 3, Watson with No. 2.
Various reports have James Foulis remodeling the first hole in 1919, Jack Daray overseeing the combination of No. 1 and No. 2 in 1946, and Larry Packard coming in in 1982. And you've got to know there was internal tweaking along the way as well, if only in the shrinking of the greens.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tim
I would estimate I have seen half a dozen reports that Watson and Bendelow in collaboration redesigned course #1, all these reports came in while the course was being redesigned or immediately afterward (circa 1917). But you went with the 1922 story. Why?

Also based on the speed of Bendelow and Watson's redesign, is it likely they significantly altered Collis's routing?

[tlavin]

I am thoroughly biased, of course, since I'm a member at Olympia and since I sponsored Jeff Goldman after meeting him through this site, but I must say that the work on the South Course is at once visually impressive and eminently playable.  Smyers was working with a cobbled together golf course that was assembled with parts of three courses. 

Determining the provenance of some of the design characteristics would be somewhat difficult, although I doubt that it would inspire the venom that we saw on the Merion threads.  Given this history, Smyers was essentially liberated to absorb the collective golf course and attempt to get a feel for its most alluring characteristics.  The bunkering work was aided by a bunch of old photographs and the greenside bunkers in particular have a great, old-time feel to them.  The chocolate drop mounds are surely the most dominant characteristic that one sees from the tee.  There were a number of holes on the "old" South that had these sort of mounds, but Smyers interpolation is far more intimidating, yet playful.

Probably the most impressive work came on a number of admittedly vanilla holes.  The third was a banal one-shot over a creek that only came into play on a horribly missed shot.  When one stood on that tee, there was a small tree-lined hillside to the left.  Smyers opened it up and created an uphill hole that looks like it has been there forever. 

The 8th hole was a five-wood, five-iron par-4.  The strategy was necessitated because there wasn't enough room in front of the creek to hit driver.  Now, the tee is moved back as much as 60 yards for the back tees, allowing/demanding the driver from time to tome.  The 11th hole was a 310 yard par-4 with a creek forty yards in front of the green and a double oak on the right side of the fairway about 100 yards from the hole.  Now, the tree is in the middle of the fairway, with a number of menacing bunkers sprinkled about.  The tree is very old and has been damaged in a number of storms, but the placement of the bunkers makes one think that it might be an even better hole when it falls.

The 13th hole was a bit of an orphan, on treeless reclaimed farm land, with a gentle dogleg left to a spectacularly right-to-left canted green.  Smyers built up huge bunkers on the left side, creating a daring cape-style approach for the bold player and left a large bail-out for the more timid among us.  He also cut a small stream out of an existing pond that will catch some traffic as well.  The old 14th was a short, pure-pabulum par three that has been rejuvenated with a delightful assemblage of big chocolate drops.

Now is not the time for a complete write-up of my thoughts about the South Course, but I can't leave the topic without giving Jeff Goldman and Steve Smyers my best compliment of all.  The old South Course was at times too difficult for high handicappers and too easy for low handicappers.  The new South Course is now more playable for high-handicap members and more challenging for low-handicappers. 

That, in my judgment is the essence of great renovation work.  Interesting visual changes combined with better playability for average players and more challenge for low handicappers.

My grade for the old South would have been a Doak 6.  The new course might be an 8.

[Tim_Cronin]

Tom: Just passing along the info I have. Not endorsing either one yet. Another source says Watson and Bendelow collaborated on No. 3. A thorough examination is planned, but I have another book I'm writing first about another Western Ave. club.
Terry: If that tree falls, Jeff will be looking to see who disconnected the lightning rod on it.

[Dan Moore]

Based on the articles I've seen the Collis course was temporary and opened in mid-1916.  At the time Collis was the greenskeeper at Flossmoor CC across the street from Olympia Fields.  Bendelow and Watson each spent a couple of weeks in late 1916 working on plans for two permanent courses to be constructed in 1917.  One report I've seen from 1916 indicates they each laid out one course.  A 1917 article also states  Bendelow and Watson each laid-out one course.  Play on the temporary course continued in 1917 while the other two courses were under construction.  A 1917 report indicates Watson and Bendelow remodeled the first course and indicated there were plans for Donald Ross to handle the 4th course.  A 1919 article indicates Willie Park planned to make his first visit to OF in 1919 "to put the finishing touches" on the 3rd course and consult on the other two. 

[tlavin]

Tom: Just passing along the info I have. Not endorsing either one yet. Another source says Watson and Bendelow collaborated on No. 3. A thorough examination is planned, but I have another book I'm writing first about another Western Ave. club.
Terry: If that tree falls, Jeff will be looking to see who disconnected the lightning rod on it.

I do love the smell of sawdust in the morning, but that tree has never bothered me.  The hole is so short that the tree provides both a defense and some strategic decision-making.  Were the tree to finally fall, the bunker located immediately south of it would serve essentially the same purpose, IMHO.

[Jeff Goldman]

That's exactly right.  They put the bunker in the center basically to move the tree farther down the fairway into the line of play.  Better players used to just hit a 3 iron over the tree, and had 100 yards in.  Now they got to think about what they want to do a little.  Without the tree, the center bunker would be more exposed, and would give the option of playing short of it.  Given the slope of the green, to get it close you might have to be on the correct side of the middle bunker, depending upon where the hole is.

No hablo ingles' about whether the hole would now be better without the tree.

[Dan Moore]

I love the tree on the 11th.  Its one of the quirks that makes the South so fascinating.  Its interesting to note that the 14th hole at Flossmoor across the street also has a centrally located tree.  Collis is credited with redesigning that hole in 1915 into a tricky 296 yard par 4. 

[RSLivingston_III]

Tom: Just passing along the info I have. Not endorsing either one yet. Another source says Watson and Bendelow collaborated on No. 3. A thorough examination is planned, but I have another book I'm writing first about another Western Ave. club.
Terry: If that tree falls, Jeff will be looking to see who disconnected the lightning rod on it.

I do love the smell of sawdust in the morning, but that tree has never bothered me.  The hole is so short that the tree provides both a defense and some strategic decision-making.  Were the tree to finally fall, the bunker located immediately south of it would serve essentially the same purpose, IMHO.

Terry,
Is Jeff still in charge of the clubs history? Didn't he have some insights into who did what and when? I remember talking with him many years ago about the Park, Daray, Olympia Fields, Highlands connections.

[Jeff Goldman]

Ralph,

There is no better researcher or historian on these issues than Tim Cronin.  His access to sources and records is amazing, as is his dogged pursuit of the facts.  Tom obviously is right there too, though I do think he may occasionally credit some sources at the expense of others.  Dan Moore has also contributed items which seem to indicate that Bendelow is most responsible for the course.  I tend to believe that it is hard to know for sure who did what, because I do not consider any sources to be infallible.  Unless I have something that seems definitive, of which there is very little, we cannot know for sure who did what.

My view that Bendelow should get most of the credit for the course is from a number of sources.  The earliest club sources (from 1917 and 1918) indicate that Bendelow was the designer credited with most of the work.  As Tom MacWood has pointed out, other articles from the late teen and early 1920s indicate that others had a hand at least.  However, Bendelow was also credited with specific aspects of the course.  An article by George O'Niell from Sept 15, 1918 credits Tom Bendelow with the design of the course.  That article is part of a series of articles on great holes in Chicago, and discusses the great 6th hole, then the 8th of course 1, and gives Bendelow sole credit.  George O'Neill might know.  Anyways, if Bendelow is responsible for nothing more on the course than that hole, then he should be honored indeed.  It is one of the best Knoll holes around.

I can list the following as NOT Bendelow's work:  The second green, which was a punchbowl and was redone in the late 1970s or early 1980s.  The third green, even before the Smyers work.  It was originally a completely blind par 3, and a new visible green was constructed in 1921 or so.  I have pictures of both.  The 5th hole was originally a 360 yard par 4, but was shortened to a 210 yard par-3 when the first 100 yards were sold off in 1946 with most of courses 2 and 3.  the green complex may not have been changed.   I think a new 7th green was built in the 1920s.  We have a picture which I believe shows a new green built in 1924 or so.  Smyers and Patrick disagree, and believe that the pic shows a huge, almost double-green with new bunkering.  8 and 9 were from course 2, which is generally credited as a Willie Watson design (but again there are competing views from various sources).  In any event, the 8th hole was made up of most of the 1st hole (tee and fairway) and the green site of  17, which was rebuilt by Oscar Miles during his tenure.  12 was changed from a 300 yard par 4 to a 200 yard par 3 by moving the green forward to the face of a hill in 1922 or so.  The historic picture I have posted of 14 has bunkering that looks like nothing on the rest of the course, and more like the work of Park than anything else, but we don't know.  Finally, the 17th green was rebuilt in the 1970s also.

Other than these items, some of which Bendelow could have been consulted about (though there is nothing in the club minutes or magazines from the time indicating that he was), it appears that Bendelow should probably be given most credit for the rest.  However, it isn't without doubt.  It would take someone like Tim to finally set the record to rest.

Jeff

[Thomas MacWood]

My view that Bendelow should get most of the credit for the course is from a number of sources.  The earliest club sources (from 1917 and 1918) indicate that Bendelow was the designer credited with most of the work.  As Tom MacWood has pointed out, other articles from the late teen and early 1920s indicate that others had a hand at least.  However, Bendelow was also credited with specific aspects of the course.  An article by George O'Niell from Sept 15, 1918 credits Tom Bendelow with the design of the course.  That article is part of a series of articles on great holes in Chicago, and discusses the great 6th hole, then the 8th of course 1, and gives Bendelow sole credit.  George O'Neill might know.  Anyways, if Bendelow is responsible for nothing more on the course than that hole, then he should be honored indeed.  It is one of the best Knoll holes around.

Jeff
What are the club sources and what exactly did these sources say about Bendelow's involvement with #1?

Are you saying that all the newspaper and magazine reports at the time were wrong about Collis originally routing the course and Watson and Bendelow collaborating on the remodeling?

The O'Neil article does not claim that hole or course #1 were designed by Bendelow. O'Neil allowed a number of pros and golf architects to choose a hole to be included in his series. Bendelow chose that hole. There is no mention who designed it.