[Jason Topp]

This is a 1950 Stanley Thompson's course on which Tom Lehman's firm did a renovation within the last couple of years.  I came across this terrific photo documentation of the work today:

http://www.northoaksgolfclub.com/cma_images/web/newsletters/20092175151Lehman%20Renovation.pdf

I have never played the course so I cannot comment on the quality of work, but it is interesting to see the process from beginning to end presented in this fashion.  The tree clearing benefits are very pronounced, even for what looks like a relatively modest tree clearing project.

Presentations of this sort could be very effective marketing tools for renovation architects and green committee members urging changes.

[Robert Thompson]

My -- the course's bunkers had little to do with Thompson, and what is with all those added little ponds? Ugh. This is supposed to be one of Thompson's last great works. Land looks good, but the fairway lines have clearly shrunk and the bunkers have nothing in common with Thompson's work.

[Mark_Fine]

Does anyone know why they didn't consider a restoration of the course or at least renovate it so it looked like Thompson?  I know nothing about the course and it may not have been worthy.  Was just wondering?

[Jeff_Mingay]

Isn't Tom Lehman a registered member, here?

It'd be cool if he chimed in.

I'd actually like to know why he's wearing jeans at a private golf and country club 

[Scott Witter]

Jason,

You are correct re: the impact of the visual (photos & graphics in combo) aids to make for effective communications, but I believe many architects have been doing this and other similar techniques for years now, I know I have.  However, if this were my work, I would have clearly wanted it to appear much closer to a Stanley Tompson bunkering style and character.

I have of course no idea if Tom Lehman did any histoirical research on Thompson to prepare for this effort, but I agree with Robert Thompson about the bunkers they are not in keeping with ST and it does apear that the land would set up very well for Thomson's flair for great bunkering.

[PCCraig]

This is a pretty cool presentation.

The white sand bunkers, if they are natural or not, look really good.

[Chris_Blakely]

Jason,

Thank you for sharing.  My first reaction was that the presentaion was nice; however, I felt as Robert did that the bunkers do not look like Thompson's at all.  I also did not like the work on hole #7 softening the ridge surrounding the right side of the green.  What a cool hole - a little blindness is not a bad thing!!!

Chris

[Dan Kelly]

Would one of the critics please explain what he means by: The bunkers don't look like Thompson's?

I'm not disagreeing (because I'm not qualified to agree or disagree); I'm just asking.

Thanks.

[Philippe Binette]

I like the stuff done there... It doesn't look like it was a restoration.

The bunkers have a nice balance, there are not too wave like most people tend to do with that style.

I think they are a great team, Tom Lehman is really intense with his design work and Chris Brands has a very interesting perspective on the game.

Where is that course exactly?

[Dan Kelly]

Where is that course exactly?

Just north of St. Paul.

It was built on the farm of railroad tycoon James J. Hill -- the "Empire Builder."

Thompson's last course, I think.

[Robert Thompson]

Dan -- Whirlpool in Niagara is probably Thompson's last official course. Opened in 1951.

I have no idea whether the club wanted a restoration or renovation. Clearly bunkers were moved, as the plan dictates. I also have not seen photos of Thompson's work, though I understand the club has plenty of them.

Not all Thompson bunkers were wildly flashed. It depended on the scope of his budget. I have no idea about North Oak, though I suspect it was a high profile job.

That said, I'm not questioning Lehman's work. He puts a lot of effort into his design work -- there is no debating that, as Philippe points out. And I agree the bunkers look pretty good, though I have no idea whether they resemble the work Thompson did. Some of Lehman's plan indicate making the bunkers closer to the Thompson originals, so he was at least looking at some photos. Who knows what guidance the shapers had?

[Chris_Blakely]

Dan,

Here are some pictures of some Stanley Thompson courses that I have saved from other posters (possibly Robert Thompson's or Ian Andrew's old blog):

Here is a picture from Jasper circa 1930



Here is another of Highland Links hole #17:



And here is another picture at Jasper - Devil's Caldron hole:



And finally here is a link to Ian Andrew's website where he did the restoration at St. George's:

http://www.andrewgolf.com/

If you go to renovations, there are some pictures at St. George's.  I have others but am hesitant to post them (I believe the course is private).

Chris

[Scott Witter]

As Philippe said, this probably wasn't a restoration--it appears doubtful that it was and who are we to say...the club may not have wanted one anyway.  As one of Thompson's last courses it may also not have had the budget to justify his dynamic and flaired bunkering for which he was known.

Looking at the construction pictures it does appear that the crew was solid (they certainly had a lot of workers!) and methodical with their efforts and careful about disturbance.  I didn't see much in the way of drainage pics, but given the location and slope of some bunkers, they probably gave it due consideration.  I also noticed that many bunkers had linings installed...at least on the steeper slopes so this tells me someone was concerned about washouts, protecting their hard work as much as possible and extending the life of the bunkers.

[Jeff_Brauer]

It may be a sympathetic renovation, who knows?  There are some very real issues in restoring a course to the flash bunker type. It appears they are flattening the bunkers and adding liner to bring it to todays desired playing conditions.  Building back high flashes (if that is indeed the style used by Thompson there) would introduce some maintenance problems.  Besides, it appears that the course had redone their bunkers in house, or perhaps using local gca's for maintenance reasons years ago.

BTW, my firm did some proposed re-routing there about 18-20 years ago when they wanted some more housing lots.  Nothing was ever done with that plan.

[Jason Topp]

I cannot tell from the photographs why the bunkers on this project are inconsistent with the bunkering in the examples of Thompson's work provided above.  I have always understood flashed bunkers as bunkers sweeping up so that the lips are pronounced and sand visible at the front of the bunker.  Many of the new bunkers appear to have that look to me.

Showing my ignorance . . . .

[Chris_Blakely]

While I am no Thompson expert, the first thing I thought of when I saw the restored bunkers was WOW those have little to none of the Thompson flair that I have seen from his old photographs or some of the restoration photos from Ian Andrew.  I do like the restoration of lost green area, elimination of greens and the widening of fairways to restore strategy / bring back into play certain bunkers.

Chris

[Dan Kelly]

Just a few quick observations after zipping through that plan in about five minutes.

-- I don't understand the hyper-white sand. Sure doesn't say "Minnesota" to me. Lends an
unnecessary artificiality to the look, IMO. The bunker shapes look much more interesting, to my eye, than what was there before.

-- I like the removal of the front bunker on 9. Should make the hole even more fun for the long hitters going for the green in two.

-- I'm surprised there appeared to be no tree removal on 14. I'd love to have heard the discussion of that subject.

[Lester George]

Phillippe,

How would you describe Chris Brands' "interesting perspective" on the game?

Lester

[Philippe Binette]

When working at the Prairie Club, we were talking the length of the course... close to 8000 yards which to me, at first, was maybe a bit too much...

but Chris said something like;
you know, when you think about it, imagine how hard the game was in the early 1900's...  on a 6300 yards course, with slow fairways, no sand wedge, a ball that goes nowhere, scruffier roughs etc.... those players from the past would look at today's game and say; this is easy...

the courses should be around 12 000 yards to follow the rate of progress...

it is a perspective that I had never heard before. And it struck me as a smart reflexion from a different angle on the game.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Penguin,

With all due respect, I don't think Chris Brands is the first person to think about how the game was played then versus now. While interesting, this is an obvious fact. And if 12,000 yards today is the 6,300 yards of, say, 1900 (or whenever)... so what. Maybe 6,300 yards was too long then?!

8,000 yards at the Prairie Club though? Like places such as Kiawah and Whistling Straits and Erin Hills, I presume they've constructed this 8,000 yards set of tees more for variety (dealing with different winds) and potential flexibility into the future than to actually set the course up at 8,000 yards on any given day.

That would be ridiculous, considering I suspect a majority of prospective Prairie Club golfers need about 6,200 yards max. to enjoy golf in that environment (as you know, I've been there).   

[Philippe Binette]

The Prairie Club dunes course is a par 73...

I don't know if a 8000 yards course would be ridiculous for two scratch players battling it out in a match... I mean, you throw all the green in regulation and whatever by the window and you just find your ball and hit it again... 

I wouldn't suggest to built an 8000 yards course for an everyday member or public course... but for a destination course like the Prairie Club, that you play 4 times in 2 consecutive days a year, why not...  the course is wide and is going to play firm and fast. After all too built that superlong course, you only need to built 5 or 6 tee boxes.

[Lester George]

Phillippe,

Thanks for the post and the explanation.  I find myself agreeing with Jeff on this.  8,000+ yards (or anything approaching it), no matter how often you play it, sounds pretty boring to me.  I may be in the minority with my thinking but anything that long sounds like an attempt to get attention or bolster someones ego.  I have talked at length with Mark Amondson about the Prairie Club and understand most things, just not that.

Just my opinion.  Means nothing.

Lester

[Philippe Binette]

I don't want to talk for Chris Brands...

but I doubt Chris wants to built every course 8000 yards, what I appreciate of him is adopting the perspective of not being bothered by the numbers or some other preconceived rules.  A lot of freedom in his attitude toward design, that's always great.

About 8000 yards, of course it's not fun for everybody... but so it probably is for a tour player to go at a course with some width and hit driver wedge or 9-iron on every hole.

I'm not suggesting that it is the solution for better golf or even protecting par if that means something to you. I just think (personal reflexion) that there was enough flexiblity at The Prairie Club to do that, to put some lost back tees.

When you design a golf hole with an approach over a dramatic features (not 18 of those though) or you develop a strategy for an approach where the player can use the ground and all that stuff, thinking the player will come in with a 4-5 iron and then you see, not tour player, just your good amateur at the club come in with wedges, taking all the stuff you thought about out of play... what would you do?

It's an age old debate... If you put 8000 yards on the card just to stand apart, than it's useless... At the Prairie Club, it doesn't look like it's what they want to market. They were not trying to built an overly long course I think, they just tried to built the best possible holes.

[Lester George]

Phillipe,

I hope and trust you are correct.

Lester

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()