One question for Alister Mackenzie

[Jeff_Mingay]

I was recently very fortunate to visit Cypress Point Club. For those of you who haven't had this wonderful opportunity, Cypress Point is as remarkable as I presume you've imagined. However, the 18th hole (as you may have heard) is a real "head scratcher".

By comparison, the rest of the course (including the most inland holes, which play through a forest) occupies relatively open ground. Then, the home hole is routed through an ultra-narrow corrdior, amidst a grove of beautifully gnarly cypress trees. From the tee, it looks like there's almost nowhere to go!

As Mackenize described years ago, these trees are rare beauties (which is perhaps why they didn't cut more?). But the odd look and claustrophia nature of this hole is startling. And, in reference to historic photos (see below... and, this photo makes the hole look 'wide'!), Cypress Point's 18th hole has changed very little since opening day... aside from the removal of a few bunkers. These trees have always been there.  



Ironically, too, I find the hole to be well-routed over interesting terrain. It's just the trees?

If I could ask Alister Mackenize one question, I'm thinking it'd be: "What's the deal with eighteen at Cypress?"

Frankly, I'd also be expecting a really, really interesing answer 

[Cory Brown]

Jeff,

This is a great question.  I unfortunately have not yet had the opportunity to play Cypress Point Club, but I believe that this is one of those holes that breaks all of the rules and is the better for it.  If you had a course full of them it would be ridiculous, but I think Mackenzie saw these amazing trees and routed a beautifully quirky hole through them.  Would a modern architect be able to design a hole such as this today?  I would think not, but this was Alister Mackenzie at Cypress Point Club during the golden age of golf course architecture. 

[Bill_McBride]

Is it possible the trees that are currently in the fairway were there from the beginning?

That doesn't really seem possible to me, mainly because there was supposed to be an island tee back behind the current tee and it wouldn't make sense to have a 400 yard finisher with big trees in the fairway!

As it is today I think you could lay up short of those trees and play over or between them.  I don't think the open fairway shown in the photo above really exists today.  The tree that appears to be overhanging the fairway appears to actually be on the extreme right edge of the fairway.  I know because I have played the hole twice and been in those right side trees twice!

[David Stamm]

The 18th has been duscussed many times before. From Robert Hunter:


"The last hole takes us along a very narrow route back to the clubhouse. This hole will require better play than the others and while it is short, it is amazingly difficult and is, perhaps, in it's contours and landscape, the most beautiful in the world."


Shackelford sums it up:

"The 18th is often criticized, but MacKenzie's intention was simple. Build a stern closing hole that required two well struck shots to reach the final green. In was not a hole of subtle or intricate strategic interest like others on the course, just a tough finish to help decide matches."


I had no issues with 18. I thought the hole was very interesting, but I could see others not caring for it.



If we think it's tough now, imagine if that alternate tee was ever able to be implemented. Wow!

[Jeff_Mingay]

David,

I'm not criticizing the hole. As the title of this thread indicates, it's simply a question I'd like to ask Dr. Mackenzie; because again, I'm sure his answer would be really, really interesting.

Bill,

I did notice a cypress tree leaning toward the fairway short-left of the green, for example, which certainly impedes the approach more than we see in the historic photo I've posted. I suspect the fairway's become even tighter over the years, since late 1920s, as these cypress' have grown and leaned.

What appear to be "replacement trees" have been planted, too, right of the fairway for example, where the big bunker in the hillside used to be. This bunker no longer exists.

Cory,

Glad you think this is a great question, because I actually hesitated posting this thread. I've thought a lot about this hole since my visit though, and am looking for some insight... it's an interesting subject, architecturally; both the hole's original design and its evolution.

I like your "follow up question", too. What if a contemporary golf architect finished a course of "Cypress Point quality" with a similarly, seemingly odd hole? What would the contemporary reaction be?

[David Stamm]

David,

I'm not criticizing the hole. As the title of this thread indicates, it's simply a question I'd like to ask Dr. Mackenzie; because again, I'm sure his answer would be really, really interesting.

 

I know you weren't, I was just expressing my own views on the hole as well as sharing what others have said, that's all.

[Damon Groves]

I have been lucky enough to play Cypress but have played Pasatiempo which ends on a par 3. I bring it up to say simply clearly MacKenzie was fine with the unconventional and I think we are thankful he was.

"Golf is a game, and talk and discussion is all to the interests of the game. Anything that keeps the game alive and prevents us from being bored with it is an advantage. Anything that makes us think about it, and dream about it is all good and prevents the game from becoming dead."

- Alister MacKenzie

I think he would have loved GCA

[Jim Nugent]

Given the rest of the routing, what other choices did Mackenzie have for #18? 

[Bob_Huntley]

Jeff,

Go to the SEARCH button and plug in the "18th at Cypress."

You will get an earfull.

Bob

[Michael Dugger]

One of the alternatives to the current 18th was to re-route the entire course perhaps in reverse.....

If you was to search the archives they'd find numerous folks have proposed how one could have used the Cypress Point property differently...

[Neil_Crafter]

For what it's worth here is the section of the plan that was prepared in 1926 which encapsulates Mackenzie's routing as it was at the time. This is the same plan that is included in Geoff Shack's CPC book. I recently bought a 1928 original photograph of this plan on eBay. The plan was not drawn by Mackenzie, but by a San Francisco artist called Albert Barrows, presumably using a Mac sketch as a base.

This version shows the tee as planned out on a rock and the hole appears as a straightaway. The course card says it was to be a hole of 350 yards from this tee position. I think when this tee site was abandoned as being too difficult, the green position was moved back and to the right, closer to the clubhouse, making a distinct dogleg to the hole and giving the hole the 365 yard length from the "mainland" tee.

[Neil_Crafter]

Oh, and one more thing, here's another of Mac's triangular green shapes shown for 18. He drew many of these while in Australia.

[Tom_Doak]

Neil:

Good answer!

The truth is probably that MacKenzie was stuck with the present 18th when he couldn't convince Sam Morse to let him build the island tee.  He was committed to 15-16-17 and a clubhouse site, and without the back tee, his 18th was too short, so he had to move the green up the hill.  I think most modern architects would have built a similar hole under those circumstances ... maybe I would have taken out ONE more tree, but it's hard to cut down a tree like those.

Bill M:

The picture Jeff posted is from underneath the big tree in the left half of the fairway.  It was taken in 1929, and as you can see, the trees were all there to begin with, although they are somewhat taller today.

[TEPaul]

JeffM:

I know what you mean about your initial reaction when first seeing CPC's #18 hole. I had the same sensation when I first saw it and played it. My first thought was that it looked from the tee like you were supposed to hit the tee shot into a grove of trees. But once you get out to your tee shot you can see there's more room than it looks from the tee.

However, the real head scratcher to me was why in the world Mackenzie created bunkers within groves of trees, particularly on the right (and some pretty elaborate bunkers on the right within those trees)?

I have no idea why he did that but one should notice that he did the same thing (create bunkers amongst trees) on #17 and dead in the middle of the fairway!

I know it still doesn't explain why he created elaborate bunkers within existing trees but I suppose it's possible that Mackenzie had already built #18 before he was forced by Morse to give up the back island tee and bridge on #18 and go inland and to the right with the tee.

We're all aware that the idea of a double hazards (bunkers surrounded by trees) is not supposed to be a good architectural idea but clearly Alister Mackenzie must not have been saddled by that particular opinion! 

[TEPaul]

Neil:

By the way, I said I would get you that info about Mackenzie and Hunter getting him to the Del Monte Peninsula.

The letters were between William Beers, the editor of Golf Illustrated to C.V. Piper (US Dept of Agriculture and the USGA Green Section). Beers mentioned that Mackenzie had been in to see him in New York in February 1926.

Piper mentioned to Beers that he did not know Mackenzie was in American and that he would like Mackenzie to stop in to see him in Washington D.C. and he asked Beers how he could reach Mackenzie. Beers told Piper to write Mackenzie c/o Robert Hunter, Del Monte California, as he would be out there for at least a month.

When Mackenzie stopped in to see Beers at Golf Illustrated in New York he left Beers with the impression he had invented the contoured green on flat land. 

Piper wrote Beers stating he didn't see how that was possible over here as there had been contoured greens on flat land in America for 15-20 years.

Here's some pretty interesting but tragic trivia about this exchange between Beers and Piper. Piper's last letter to Beers was dated Feb 6, 1926. Beers wrote him back on Feb 11, 1926, the same day Piper died!

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You observed, "The truth is probably that MacKenzie was stuck with the present 18th when he couldn't convince Sam Morse to let him build the island tee..."

I've never had the privilege of even driving up to the gates so I have no idea, but would it be possible for the membership to build a tee box on the island today?
 

[Jeff_Mingay]

Phil,

It would be almost impossible to build a tee that makes any sense on the tiny rock island you're refering to. It seems there's a property line (fence/hedge) that interfers with this option now, too.

It must have shrunk a least a bit over the years, but this rock island is tiny. The plan for the proposed suspension bridge in Shackelford's book seems a bit odd as well. I don't know how that ever would have worked out, and looked even half decent.

What other options did Mackenzie have for the 18th, here? Well... this gets back to the title of this thread; I'd love to ask him 

Again, this is not a bad hole. I imagined it with Mackenzie's elaborate bunkers re-installed in the hillside at right off the tee, but more cypress trees cut, to create an improved (in my opinion) view from the tee = very interesting hole. There just seems to be too many cypress trees "in the way". (Though as Tom Paul states, there is more room out in the fairway than the view from the tee suggests.)

[Bill_McBride]

For what it's worth here is the section of the plan that was prepared in 1926 which encapsulates Mackenzie's routing as it was at the time. This is the same plan that is included in Geoff Shack's CPC book. I recently bought a 1928 original photograph of this plan on eBay. The plan was not drawn by Mackenzie, but by a San Francisco artist called Albert Barrows, presumably using a Mac sketch as a base.

This version shows the tee as planned out on a rock and the hole appears as a straightaway. The course card says it was to be a hole of 350 yards from this tee position. I think when this tee site was abandoned as being too difficult, the green position was moved back and to the right, closer to the clubhouse, making a distinct dogleg to the hole and giving the hole the 365 yard length from the "mainland" tee.

That island tee makes this one of the most romantic drawings in golf art! 

That drawing clearly shows no trees planted within the fairway corridor.  I distinctly felt that there were trees that you either had to hit over or curve around in order to hit the fairway.  Was I hallucinating?  Mind you this was in the mid-2000's.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Bill,

There are definitely trees "in the way". You weren't hallucinating!

I wonder if someone like Morse, for example, was against letting Mackenize and Hunter cut more trees in this area? Or did the designers actually elect to leave them?

As for the island tee, this chunk of rock must have shrunk over the years, from the battering it takes from the sea?

[Tyler Kearns]

Given the rest of the routing, what other choices did Mackenzie have for #18? 

Jim,

Could Mackenzie have finished with a gentler dogleg left that ended below the clubhouse? I haven't laid eyes upon that piece of the property, so I ask those more fortunate, could that have worked?

Tom,

Geoff Shackelford's book clearly illustrates these double hazards, including a bunker/tree combo to the right side of No. 1 fairway. These are real head-scratchers to me, a rather penal hazard from such a strategically-minded architect. Had he included this feature once for artistic merit I wouldn't think too much about it, but it was repeated a little too often here.

TK

[Neil_Crafter]

Tom D
I don't think we should underestimate Hunter's input into this hole - he was "Johnny on the Spot" for the day to day stuff at CPC while Mackenzie was galivanting around the globe, and he was probably the man tasked with getting Morse to OK the island tee. What is curious is that Morse even allowed expenditure on engineering design of the suspension bridge before pulling the pin. Or perhaps Hollins okayed the expenditure before needing Morse's final sign off on the idea?

It would be interesting to know how many (if any) Cypresses suffered in the making of the current 18th? I suspect quite a few. The second half of the hole, especially in photos from the green looking back show a cleared corridor from the green back to the dogleg corner, within groves of cypresses. I would bet there were a number of cypresses here originally that got cut down to make way for this fairway and the green. So what would one more mean a bit further back up the hole?

Jeff M
I am curious about your source of the photo you posted above - it doesn't look like any in the 18th section of Shack's book? I suppose the island may have got a little smaller from erosion in the 80 years since. I recall looking at that island when I played CPC and thinking it would be a crazy/brave move to put a tee out there! I think if they had ever done it the tee would have been washed away a few times in storms, probably along with the bridge.

TE
Thanks for the reference to Mac visiting Beers at Golf Illustrated in Feb 1926. It would sound as though Piper died before Mackenzie got to visit him in DC - is that a fair assumption?

Bill
Yes, it is a romantic drawing for sure. Tully in SF is on the job of founding out more about Albert Barrows the artist. When you look carefully, you can see he has even drawn in one of those old sand/water holders at each tee!

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tyler,

George Waters (who I was walking around CP with) and I talked about the possibility of an 18th hole that bent left from the current tee, and finished under the clubhouse. It seems there's not enough room there for more than about a 300-yard hole (I could be wrong), and they would have had to cut many more cypress trees to make this work!

Interesting observation, too, about bunkers behind trees. There are three instances I can think of in the original design at Cypress Point where this was the case, including the right-side fairway bunker at the first you mention (no longer exists); a right-side fairway bunker at fourteen (no longer exists); and, the right-side fairway bunker at eighteen, too (no longer exists) = so-called double hazards.

Neil,

I suspect they had to cut a bunch of cypress trees to make the 18th hole, too. Why not a few more? Which, again, leads back to the title of this thread 

Unfortunately I don't recall the source of the photo I've posted above. It was on my hard drive (am I to be sued?!). I also have a photo of the tee shot, today, taken during my recent visit. (I'm not posting it though, for the same potential legal ramificatons!)

[TEPaul]

"It would sound as though Piper died before Mackenzie got to visit him in DC - is that a fair assumption?"


Neil:

That appears to be an accurate assumption. I can't see that Mackenzie ever visited the US Dept of Agriculture golf agronomy research station either in DC or Arlington Va. Piper died in Feb, 1926 and then Oakley presumably ran it until 1931 when he died but the fact is Oakley was also very sick throughout most of the late 1920s and early 1930s and was there much less than I thought, The section was technically run after Piper by a man named Cunningham and then Montieth later.

I don't think Mackenzie ever went to see any of them but I know Alison did. Frankly, it seems to me that the east was more Alison's section and the west (and some midwest) was Mackenzie's. Of course ANGC was the exception (and to a much lesser degree Melrose with Maxwell).