What work is being done to Mid Ocean?

[Ran Morrissett]

I understand that Doak et al have been working on it this year - what has been done to date - anyone know? The 15th was part of the project and I hope that the 7th receives its long needed help.

Cheers,

[Gib_Papazian]

Ran,

After clearing out the brush surrounding the Cape Hole, I would start with the 14th hole. It is obviously a Leven, but last time I was there, the bunker on the left side of the fairway was just a pathetic little sliver and did not really function properly to guard the best approach angle.

I just love the hillocky bunker complex in front of the green, it might be my favorite feature on the golf course just for its intrinsic elegance.

The 7th is putrid, you are right. I saw a guy make an ace there on my last round and thought to myself when it dropped that Macdonald would be sickened by that silly looking pancake.

They might restore the bunkers around the green on the 8th hole, too.

As far as the Eden, the bunkering always looked a little plain to me and the contours ought to be steepened. I wish I knew exactly what it looked like before the Jones modifications.

The 4th hole is fuzzy in my memory. Was there an Alps bunker there? How about now? I also wonder what the 12th looked like originally. That shoulder of hillside off the tee is interesting, but the bunkering around the green looked at bit Jonesian.

George? Tom? Anybody?  

[John_McMillan]

Ran -

Maybe Doak will chip-in with  some more specifics of the project, but I think it's pretty low-key stuff.  My understanding was that the club was interested in moving up in the magazine ratings, and asked Tom how to do that.  Doak's advice (though presumably not how he would keep the course if he owned it), was that maintenance drove a lot of the ratings, and they needed to be greener and faster.  I think most of the work is related to re-doing the greens and making them run a little faster, and keeping the rest of the course in a more "kept" look.

I didn't get the impression that re-working any of the hazards of holes was part of the plan.

[Ran Morrissett]

Gib,

That stuff along Mangrove Lake is protected, so I think you (we) are out of luck. And 12 is definitely a Jones green complex.

The supporting cast of holes (2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, and 16) seems unusually weak to me - either Macdonald features are MIA or Macdonald left the project in a huff or Jones hit those holes hard or something. Also, the point has been made on this site before that the 18th could/should have been more of a thrilling clifftop finisher and I agree - given the cliff's height, surely salt water spray concerns aren't but sooooo great?

John,  Mid Ocean has a good level of support to crack into GOLF's world top 100  but if its weaker holes don't get some help (i.e. infusion of appealing character/features), I know one vote that it won't get. For instance, Yeamans Hall is so much more solid hole for hole - and truer to the architect's original intent with its greens FAR and AWAY superior to the tinkered with ones at Mid Ocean - that I certainly would like to see it make it in ahead of Mid Ocean.

Cheers,

[John_D._Bernhardt]

I played with a member last september in scotland and he indicated a fairly significant amount of restoration was in the works.

[BCrosby]

I hope Doak does more than what John M. indicated.  There is so much that might be done.

A couple of thoughts:

- Move the Eden green to the left, closer to the ocean, where I believe it once was.  It would set up again flush with the horizon, as at TOC.  Restore the bunkering.

- No 6 is a harder hole than it appears.  Your drive has to be hit to a fairly narrow slot off the tee (too far left and you are blocked by trees left, too far riight and the ball takes the severe left to right slope and you are in the right rough).  Still, the green is mediocre.  The hole suffers also because it follows no. 5.

- No. 7 is a mess.  

- Anyone know what the original no. 9 looked like?  It strikes me that there is a lot of Jones there too.

-  No. 11 can't be MacD.

-  I agree, move the 18th green right, much closer to the ocean.  It will bring into play the rock cliff in the right rough.  There's also lots of room behind the green to extend its length.  Downwind it plays pretty short.

Bob

[Chris Hervochon]

Had the pleasure of playing Mid Ocean in a Jr. tournament for 4 days in late March, so I know the course pretty well, and being a CBM fan I tried to study the course as best I could.  To me, they can improve the course in such ways:

1-  Get rid of some of those god forsaken trees on the left

2-  Something has to be done here...a driver and an 8 iron is not a par 5

3-  Restore the bunkering and green contours, move the green a wee bit to the left

6-  Something has to be done to this green.  Into the wind, it's a pretty tough hole

7-  Why does everybody hate this hole???

9-  Just plain sucks, the most ordinary hole on the course

10-  A little work to the green, and right GS bunker.  Is it me or did there use to be bunkers on the right of the fairway?

11-  I actually like this green...not sure what the hole looked like originally

12-  Bland green after an exciting drive

13-  The contours of the Biarritz need to be strengthened

14-  restore the right bunker and extend it up the fairway...shrink the green

17-  An abomidable form of a redan...this green is a bad bad bad redan

18-  Shift the green to the right, not back because of the danger of the practice range.

I played this course in all conditions and thought it a great test, even to this day.  It requires all the shots but i still don't understand why nobody likes number 7?

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

Ran,
We talked about this a few weeks ago.  My comments are based on my last visit, which was last August.

The green was being reworked on 2 (perhaps expanded??).

Same green work on 7, 10, 17 (which also had some bunkers being tinkered with and 18th.

I like 15 though, despite the short length, I thought it was solid, what is being done there?  

Chris has seen it since, so maybe those are completely finished.  I played with a member, who seemed to think that it was going to amount to very little change in the current course, which is too bad.

How hard would it be for Doak to move the green, while leaving the current green in place?  Does anybody know the distance to the water from the current green?

Chris,
As for seven, the green is too big and lacks any character, and the cart path and walking path don't help it any.

As for nine, I think this is one of the stronger holes on the course.  Good drive with plenty of strategy and a tough approach to a neat green that seems impossible to hit the ball beyond the hole.  I think 6, 8, 10, 12 and 16 are all worse than 9.

[Mike_Cirba]

My oh my, aren't we being pretty tough on venerable old Mid-Ocean??  I can think of few places I'd rather play.

Ran; what the heck is wrong with 2, 8, 14, and 16?  Have you played out there in a good 2-3 club wind?  They have the kind of variability that I would think you'd love.

Just make 2 a par four and then what would everyone say?  You can't beat the perched green setting.  

I agree with the general comments on 7 & 11, which stood out as poorly conceived and even worse to look at.

Chris;

Could you tell me why you think 12 is awful?  Once again, I believe the green setting is nothing short of majestic.

And finally, I have my own thoughts about 17, but what about the green do you object to so vociferously?

[Tom Doak]

Basically, we are resurfacing the greens to Champion bermuda [the same as Yeamans Hall].

We completed four greens in 2001 and seven more this summer (1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 15 and 17).  They'd done the sixth a couple of years ago without our help, so six are left:  3, 4, 8, 13, 16 and 18.

The fourth, eighth and sixteenth greens are all so steep that I believe we have to soften them a bit for the Champion.  There isn't a spot on the fourth green with less than 3% tilt, and all but the front of it is 5% or more.  Some spots are fully 10%!

We have discussed the possibility of building the third green further to the left (all the way to the ocean's edge) and moving the eighteenth green over to the right to overlook the beach.  Still don't know whether the club will approve this.  I have my reservations:  the pictures clearly show the 18th green has always been where it is, although it appears that some of the land currently to the right of it has been built up over the years from sand off the beach.  My guess is that it was a more dramatic setting in 1922 than today.

I've looked at the old pictures of the golf course pretty closely, and I can't agree with most of the "improvements" suggested, since they would not be restorative.  There was no pond near the seventh green originally, but it was the same size and shape as today.  The one interesting feature was a much wider fairway on the eighth hole which went up onto the ridge to the right of the present fairway -- from there you'd be level with the green for the approach!  But the club seems to have no interest in clearing that many trees.

[Tom Doak]

P.S.  Our thanks to Jim Craig, who did the finish work for the seven greens this summer, on loan to us from Bill Coore's staff.  All of my own crew are busy now in Texas or Philadelphia or New Zealand.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ran,

It's interesting, on a site that reveres the classics and classic architects, and reviles alterations to those works, that some would propose changing a CBM work.

What standards do we adhere to

[BCrosby]

Pat

I think most of the changes suggested in this thread are directed at removing the work RTJ did at Mid-O in the early 60's and restoring CBMacD.  There is some ambiguity about exactly what RTJ did do, but we can make reasonable guesses.

Personally, I hope Doak is given a free hand to do a restoration.  I had heard he was.  Doak seems to be saying, however, that a full restoration, given the extensive nature of the RTJ changes, would require more money than Mid-O is inclined to spend at this time.  

A shame.

Bob