[Joel_Stewart]

The tee on #9 has been there for a while.  I'm going to guess they put it in before the US Amateur.   

One time I played there with a member who has a house on the 9th hole.  He said the club used Eddie Merrins (their long time head pro) as a consultant to determine if Fazio's ideas are valid.

[Tom_Doak]

Joel:

Interesting you say that as it was Eddie Merrins who introduced me to the member who was complaining about all the old changes, and he seemed to agree back then.

But it's hardly uncommon for long-time pros to be players in club master planning, for good or for bad.  Some examples:  Jim Langley has had a fair amount to do with the restraint at Cypress Point, I think.  Fred Muller sits on the green committee at Crystal Downs, and Gil McNally (recently retired) was always on the committee at Garden City.

[mike_beene]

A few weeks ago there was some more work being done to the right of the 1st green.The big bunker,which I think is a couple of years old,is being changed again but I am not sure what is being done.

[Jon Spaulding]

Is that a new tee on #9, or did you always hit over the 8th green?  I sure don't remember that.

Wait ... I think I remember from Geoff's book that in the old days #9 was a driveable par 4 with a ravine in front of the green.  So they must have fixed it by putting in a back tee where you can't drive into the ravine.

The creek in front of #9 has been filled in (I "think" the green was also moved as well) and the hole now plays about 420ish up the hill. I was told that Merrins put the tee in and that it had been there for some time. It's simply dreadful.

[Damon Groves]

My cousin who works for one of the golf companies played Bel Air recently and loved it. Needless to say he is not that well read in the golf architecture side of things so he did not understand a lot of what I was asking about that I knew from Geoff Shac's book. With that it shows that for the average golfer Bel Air is still a nice track. However, for us that know what the course used to be and what was done to it, it is all very sad.

Maybe one day the club will get someone to truly restore the place. Until then, I am glad I have not had a chance to play as I would be too depressed to see the carnage.

[Eric Pevoto]

That drop area on the front of #9 tee is weird.  Not a good sign imo.

[Forrest Richardson]

It is Dennis Wise from Fazio's Arizona office (not Tom Marzolf) that has been working at Bel-Air. I also saw Mr. Merrins and he said the work would continue for "several years", but I am not sure what work. Did not get a chance to get into that detail. Some of the work shown here was done a long while ago — I think Tom D's assertion that the club has been responsible is fairly accurate.

My first visit to Bel-Air was in preparation for the Routing book project — I recall being somewhat mystified at the ponds and rock work, but thought "Hey, that Thomas was very clever..."

[Jon Spaulding]

I fully agree that the club bears responsibility......and ultimately the members that make up the club.

Fazio is currently a member. According to their head pro, very recently: "all proposed changes/improvements to this course go across Tom's desk for approval or rejection".

I take that to mean that he is judge/jury with respect to current work going on.....and said work is an ABSOLUTE ABORTION.

[Lou_Duran]

Jon Spaulding,

Your turn to the dark side is now complete.  You are one of the boys.  I look at the pictures you provided and think that Bel-Air is a pretty cool course.  Can't wait for the invite!

[Jon Spaulding]

Luigi - I believe we want the same thing....a fraternity which a) deals on both sides of the GCA force by day and b) goes cougar hunting at night.

For the record, I enjoy Fazio's original designs; Shadow Creek and Pine Barrens being favorites to date. Whatever camp that puts me in....so be it.

I simply find the evolution of Thomas' work into "just" another good course (which I would rate between Shadow Creek and Oak Creek) very disheartening......kind of like the economic stimulus package offered forth by our anointed savior.

[John Mayhugh]

Luigi - I believe we want the same thing....a fraternity which a) deals on both sides of the GCA force by day and b) goes cougar hunting at night.

For the record, I enjoy Fazio's original designs; Shadow Creek and Pine Barrens being favorites to date. Whatever camp that puts me in....so be it.

I simply find the evolution of Thomas' work into "just" another good course (which I would rate between Shadow Creek and Oak Creek) very disheartening......kind of like the economic stimulus package offered forth by our anointed savior.

You can't be doing much late night cougar hunting if you're posting at 6AM.

The point about Fazio's work is a very good one.  I've enjoyed a number of Fazio's courses, but see no reason a Thomas classic should be turned into one.

[Jon Spaulding]

Reckoned you'd have auto notifications on any thread that came up with the word Cougar.

I'm likely to cougar hunting what 1490 out of 1500 of the people on this site are to GCA.......utter fascination with not having done it and discussing how great it must be. Normally that's way better than sealing the deal.

Icky. 

[Lou_Duran]

JS,

One of the problems that I see with Fazio ("Fabio") bashing is that what is being bashed is likely not the doings of the man but that of any number of prior architects, superintendents, green committees, head pros, influential members, etc.  Fazio and other "name" architects may be simply renovating the existing course to make it "better" as defined by the decision makers at the club- the employers.  A question which is not typically posed is if the "original" design was thought to be sufficient or acceptable, why was it changed.  (I know, it is a bunch of know-nothing rich white guys who don't have anything better to do but to desecrate holy ground just running amuck!)

Regarding Bel-Air, I am unaware that it was ever considered to be in the same class as LACC-North or Riviera.  I've only played it once, perhaps before "Fabio" came on board, and enjoyed my time there.  I think both of the Fazio originals you mentioned and which I've played (not Oak Creek) are far superior courses, but I am much more a fan of modern gca than some here.  And no, I am not on the evil one's retainer though I wouldn't mind.

I do look forward to some day getting back to LACC and seeing the restoration work of Hanse and Shackelford.  Hopefully the economy will settle and the club will give a green light to the whole project.  Who knows, maybe it will make such a strong statement that Riviera and Bel-Air may be moved to follow suit.  Don't despair.  Assuming that the California Coastal Commission is not involved, most anything that Fazio or anyone else has altered can be undone.       

[JNC Lyon]

JS,

One of the problems that I see with Fazio ("Fabio") bashing is that what is being bashed is likely not the doings of the man but that of any number of prior architects, superintendents, green committees, head pros, influential members, etc.  Fazio and other "name" architects may be simply renovating the existing course to make it "better" as defined by the decision makers at the club- the employers.  A question which is not typically posed is if the "original" design was thought to be sufficient or acceptable, why was it changed.  (I know, it is a bunch of know-nothing rich white guys who don't have anything better to do but to desecrate holy ground just running amuck!)
   

In the case of Bel-Air, I seem to remember a quote from Dick Wilson when he was doing his renovations of the Mae West 12th.  One member saw him removing the large mounds that made the hole so distinctive and asked Wilson why he was doing this.  Wilson responded, "blind shots have no place in golf" and that was that.

In all honesty, the argument that the architects are "just responding to the wishes of the client" is BS.  By agreeing to do such renovation work, the architect is agreeing to destroy the old golf course.  If the architect does not want to do this, he shouldn't take the job.  I remember Pete Dye saying he was considered for the work at Oak Hill and Inverness, but he couldn't bring himself to make changes to such classic courses.

No, the blame rests with the architect just as much as the committee.  I've seen George Fazio's notes about Oak Hill from the mid 1970s.  If he had had his way, every green would have been moved and the course would be wall-to-wall trees--even more than it is today.  Of course, the members initiated the changes because they were concerned more about sucking up to the USGA than the legacy of Ross's East Course.  But they still had to find an architect who was irreverent enough to make the changes.  It's even more frustrating because the architect has remained the same over the past thirty years, and golf courses are still making the same atrocious partial redesigns that ruined classic holes at Oak Hill and Inverness.

[tlavin]

Two true statements about golf courses:

1.  They are not arboretums.  Translation:  Get rid of the trees that get in the way of viewing or playing the course or properly growing the turf.

2.  They are not shrines.  Translation:  I love LACC and Riviera as much as anybody.  I suppose that means that I love the work of George Thomas.  But I also love Bel-Air, even though it seems to have had as many facelifts as Joan Rivers.  The members own the club and the golf course and if they want Fazio to do the work, then he'll do the work.  If he doesn't pay as much historical and/or architectural homage to Thomas for your taste, then you can surely turn down the next invitation to play.  Me?  I might prefer a faithful restoration, but I'll be happy to play the Fazio re-do as well.

[Jon Spaulding]

Agree with Lou and Terry's points. I would not turndown an invite to Bel-Air over my objections to the recent work.

Do think that at one time it was held in the regard as LA North and Riviera; not "as" good, but not that far off either. When we're talking 8-10 range on the Doak scale, it's nitpicky.

Just find this one a little different as Fazio is a member, architect, and alleged ruler of the greens committee. That has to foul up the checks and balances. Can't wait for LACC to do the work, as this can't help but influence the direction that the other Thomas courses take in the future.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()