Groundbreaking/Revolutionary Courses

[TEPaul]

"TEP
Why is Oakmont's routing one of the best ever?

How many bunkers did the 1903 course have?"


Tom MacWood:

I note both your questions but I ask you to go back on this thread and reread what I've already written because both your questions are more than sufficiently answered to the best of my knowledge and to the best of the knowledge of Oakmont and its competent historians.

I have to admit that after watching some movie the other night something in it so reminded of the way you carry on on this website by your asking the same questions over and over and over again even if the ones you are asking the questions of supply the answers to you loud and clear over and over again!

It's in the movie "Fracture" and in the hospital the nurse tells the lawyer asking her endless questions if the comotose patient will not recover somehow in some way so he can question her about who shot her, and the nurse tells the lawyer-----"No she will never recover consciousness and I've explained to you many times why she will not recover consciousness---but do you think if you keep asking me the same questions over and over and over again, somehow you will get the answer you want?"

The lawyer paused and thought about that for a time and said: "No, of course not, but that's what I do."

At that point the lawyer left the hospital and of course the patient never did recover consciousness.

What you should try a bit harder to do, Tom MacWood, is read and consider the answers people give you to your questions in the first place because if you do there is no need at all for you do ask them over and over and over again the very same questions as you so often do on here! If that's what you do, and it is what you have done on here for so many years, it is both a real waste of time and truly unimpressive.

[Robin Doodson]

Mac,

i had the pleasure of playing Machrihanish Dunes a few weeks ago and IMHO it is  a truly revolutionary golf course. It is an absolute joy and could possibly be the worlds one and only truly sustainable golf course. This course goes beyond minimalism in not only it's design but also in it's maintenance. i really hope that people get to experience and understand what Southworth are trying to achieve there as everyone in the golf industry (especially GCA's) could learn an awful lot from it.

robin

Robin

I haven't yet played Machrihanish Dunes, only flown over it But I do think that there's a fair bit of hype in what you say there, for one thing I would guess that there is quite a few courses round the remote parts of the UK who have a minimalist maintenance regime, and not because of their Planning Permission either. Its been many years since I played it but Brora springs to mind as do the courses mentioned on the Shetlands Island thread.

Seems to me that they are truning a negative into a positive by means of a bit of spin.

Niall

Niall,

No doubt you are correct but what a wonderful bit of spin. there really is no negative about this truly sustainable method of golf course development. there is not a golf course in the world that can't learn something from mach dunes and their maintenance methods. a lot of their restraints are imposed by governing authorities but other clubs should be starting to self impose sustainable management upon themselves. in 20 years time legislation is going to change the way that we maintain golf courses for ever. We will no longer be able to get away with our current wasteful uses of resources such as water, fuel and power. Pesticides are already being outlawed in a number of countries around the world. expectations are going to have to change.

i watched the golf from dubai at the weekend and listened to Greg Norman proudly state that all the bunker sand had been shipped in from the US as it was the same as they use at augusta. need i say more. this is neither financially or environmentally sustainable management of a golf course. any GCA who thinks that this is acceptable practice should never be allowed to break dirt on another project. Imagine the carbon count of transporting that volume of sand from the us to the bloody desert. are they going to continue to do this for the life of the golf course? i seriously doubt it, so what was the point of doing it in the first place other than a bit of spin.

yours aye

robin

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
I went through your posts following my request (three times) you explain why Oakmont's routing is one of the best ever, and you never did explain why...but I never expected you would.

Do you know how many bunkers Oakmont had in 1903?

[Mac Plumart]

Tom M...I've re-read Tom P's posts and I see clearly the reason he thinks the routing is groundbreaking/revolutionary.  Therefore, for the purposes of this thread I am 100% satisfied regarding Oakmont and it groundbreaking/revolutionary status...of course this is just my thoughts and desires regarding this thread...others might not be satisfied.  Another thread specifically on Oakmont would certainly make for an interesting read...in the meantime, I think I am going to try to get my hands on the club history that Tom Paul mentioned in order to learn more about the course/club and its history.

Robin...I couldn't agree more.  I think all of the great old school architects would scoff at moving sand across the globe to put it in bunkers at a course that is located in the DESERT!!!!  Also, I am on-board with Mach Dunes...it appears significant and worthy of study in my book.  But once again, this is simply my thought and opinion.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom M...I've re-read Tom P's posts and I see clearly the reason he thinks the routing is groundbreaking/revolutionary.  Therefore, for the purposes of this thread I am 100% satisfied regarding Oakmont and it groundbreaking/revolutionary status...of course this is just my thoughts and desires regarding this thread...others might not be satisfied.  Another thread specifically on Oakmont would certainly make for an interesting read...in the meantime, I think I am going to try to get my hands on the club history that Tom Paul mentioned in order to learn more about the course/club and its history.

Robin...I couldn't agree more.  I think all of the great old school architects would scoff at moving sand across the globe to put it in bunkers at a course that is located in the DESERT!!!!  Also, I am on-board with Mach Dunes...it appears significant and worthy of study in my book.  But once again, this is simply my thought and opinion.

Mac
I did not ask him why it was grounbreaking or revolutionary, I asked to explain why he felt the routing was one of the best ever. He did not, and I do not anticipate he ever will so there is no reason to bring it up again.

Why is The Country Club being the first country club in 1882 groundbreaking or revolutionary or important to golf architecture history? What is the significance for golf architecture that North Berwick allowed women first? How did you come up with Bethpage being the first great municipal course? What about TOC?

[Mac Plumart]

Tom M...

Good points.

On North Berwick and The Country Club were "curveballs".  The posters suggested them as groundbreaking and revolutionary as the first club to allow women and the first country club.  Not architecutal based...but the more I thought about it...quite groundbreaking/revoltionary without question.  So, I put them on the list to help with context and understanding of how the "golf world" was evolving.  Your point is well taken regarding architecture, but the courses and reasoning for mentioning them fits the definition of the thread.  Hence their inclusion.

Bethpage was a last minute addition by me...great point on TOC.  Would it be better suite to call it the first great AMERICAN muni?  Or do you have any other suggestions regarding this specific course or the muni category as a whole?

Thanks!!

Mac

[Niall C]

Tony

For what its worth, and I've mentioned it before but the guy who owned the Kelvinside area of Glasgow, up and coming posh area around 1890's had a course built by Old Tom and Willie Fernie, basically the Nicklaus/Doak combination of the day and restricted it to "residenters" of Kelvinside ie. you had to have bought a house from him to be able to play.

The course was built in 1894.

Niall
[/quote]

Thanks Niall , I missed your previous reference and until someone comes up with something earlier then as far as I'm concerned that's the clear favourite for the Title of First Housing Development.

I’m assuming it’s an NLE?  Was it particularly well thought of and how long did it last?  Have you had the chance to look at period coverage because I wonder how well known it was.  What was it called and did it eventually become housing?  Sorry for all the questions but it’s something I’ve long wondered about.

I’ll try and find a thread where I posited the idea that one of the reasons why the Walton Heath, Sunningdale (not Woking as above – my mistake) and Huntercombe were breakthroughs was because they were paid for by Developers, not a group of local businessmen, who wanted something special to promote their developments. I remember Tom Doak saying that they were breakthroughs because they had recieved more time and effort than other courses. It seems that the two ideas happily overlapped and it was only later that housing came to mean formulaic golf.


Sean I believe Sunnigdale and Walton Heath were both financial successes for the moneymen who owned the land around the courses.


Melvyn must be pleased another first by Old Tom that the Americans have picked up so enthusiastically!  


DM and TEP thanks for the well argued posts which I'll read carefully, but for now I think I'll decline the opportunity to debate M. with you.  


[/quote]

Tony

You are quite correct, the course is now housing. How long it lasted I'm not quite sure but it did make it in to the next century. It was Melvyn who put me onto it and I managed to find a course plan in a newspaper which I think Melvyn has maybe posted before. It was very much like all the other early inland courses playing over what ever hazards were on the ground, in this case hedges, rail track and slag heaps. It was only 9 holes but it did sit on a hill and I would imagine would have had quite extensive views at the time before the surrounding development took off.

I'm not sure what part the golf course played in the part of the marketing of the housing but I suspect it was no where near as prominent as subsequent developments elsewhere. For instance there was no housing situated around the boundary of the course, that was about a quarter mile away (at least when the course was built).

Robin

I totally agree, sand to the arabs is like coals to Newcastle. Legislation will change attitudes but right now I think the economic climate will change things even more.

Niall

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac,
As resort courses go, the first in the U.S. was the Hotel Champlain Course at Bluff Point-on-Lake Champlain. This place was built in 1890, at a time when many folks took to the mountains in the summer. A lot of courses were being built in the Catskills also, and out west.

Whether or not it was 'great' is a matter of opinion (although there is a photo caption in an article describing it that way), but at least it had grass greens, 45 years before Pinehurst converted theirs from sand.

[TEPaul]

"Mac
I did not ask him why it was grounbreaking or revolutionary, I asked to explain why he felt the routing was one of the best ever. He did not, and I do not anticipate he ever will so there is no reason to bring it up again."


Tom MacWood:

My explanation of why I think the routing of Oakmont is really good is contained in the last two paragraphs of post #114. I guess you missed it or didn't understand it for some reason. Mac Plumart said he certainly understood it. That is just part of why I think it is a really good routing.

And I never said Oakmont's routing was the best ever. What I said is I think it is one of the best I have ever seen. You really do need to quote people correctly if you are going to take exception with what they say or if you are going to ask them questions about what they mean about what they actually said.

As far as how many bunkers Oakmont had in 1903, I have no idea about that and I would very seriously doubt anyone knows that at this point for reasons I would be glad to explain to you if you are still interested in that specific subject.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac,
Tillinghast gets credit for the course that is there now, but Bluff Point seems to predate him.

[DMoriarty]

Mac,

I am having a hard time understanding what you mean by "Groundbreaking/Revolutionary."  Does ""Groundbreaking/Revolutionary"  simply mean that some here and now like it?   Or does the course of feature of the course have to be something new and different?  Something that took golf course design in an unanticipated direction?   Something that brought something unique to the conversation?

Oakmont is a good example.   Subjectively, people could argue about the merits of the original routing and some might really like it, but that doesn't make either the course or the routing "Groundbreaking/Revolutionary" does it?   How did Oakmont's routing change the game?   What was unique about it compared to everything else that existed at the time.    Whether or not it is an excellent routing seems beside the point.  

[Tom MacWood]

Bethpage was a last minute addition by me...great point on TOC.  Would it be better suite to call it the first great AMERICAN muni?  Or do you have any other suggestions regarding this specific course or the muni category as a whole?

I believe the first muni was Van Cortland Park, followed by Franklin Park is Boston or maybe Jackson Park in Chicago, and then Cobbs Creek. Off the top of my head Harding Park and Sharp Park predate Bethpage-Black and were both excellent courses

[Mac Plumart]

Great stuff guys...I will amend as appropriate.

David M...groundbreaking/revolutionary, at least for what I am getting at in this thread, is indeed as you said...

 "Or does the course of feature of the course have to be something new and different?  Something that took golf course design in an unanticipated direction?   Something that brought something unique to the conversation? "


The idea sprung into my mind with Mike Malone's thread concerning Friar's Head.  The course sounds great, but he seemed to contend that it brought nothing new to the table.

NGLA seems to fit the bill 100%, the first heathlands course seem to fit the bill, etc...

Oakmont appears to be up for debate...I don't know if it is worth our time continuing to debate it unless someone has a driving passion to be "right" and prove someone else "wrong."  Concerning its routing...it certainly could be groundbreaking if it was the first great routing and.or the first course whose routing didn't need updating throughout its history.  But I don't have the in-depth knowledge to make that call and perhaps no one does.  Therefore, I don't know if continuing to debate it will bear any fruit.

Oakmont could also be groundbreaking regarrding it becoming the first "tournament quality" course (or whatever monicker you want to put on it) with its fast greens and bunkering...see Ted Ray's comments.  It could also be revolutionary for being the first great "penal" course.

But per your earlier post...a lot of this is subjective and many times more than one answer could be correct.  For example, the first great muni.  Harding and Sharp Park...or Bethpage.  Perhaps the CA courses were first, but maybe someone doesn't consider them great, but they do consider Bethpage great.  Subjective.

But without question, this thread should give someone interested in learning about truly groundbreaking and revolutionary courses some great leads for independant study.

[Tom MacWood]

Oakmont is not up for debate, but I'm sure you'll find some category to put it in.

Make your case for Bethpage. The fact that the course was built in the midst of the Depression and right before WWII limited its impact, and the fact that it fell into disrepair for a long period did not help either.

[Mac Plumart]

Tom M...

Give me a little time on Bethpage, I will get back to you on it.

Thanks,
Mac

[DMoriarty]

Mac,

I appreciate the question as it is similar to my approach with much of this stuff, especially the early stuff.   I usually think of it in terms any other medium or discipline, asking why is it influential, significant, or important, and how does it fit into the bigger picture of the story of golf course design.   So I am with you as far as the question goes, but think it worth pointing out a few things.  

At least some (if not most) of the answers provided are debatable, and the answers are much more starting points for further inquiry than anything else.  And I while some of the answers are interesting, some of them seem to be out there with nothing backing up the claim.   Again take Oakmont, which you suggest might be revolutionary as the first "tournament quality course."   I am not even sure what that means, but I am sure that nothing like that has ever been proven up around here.   If there are verifiable facts that support this theory then so be it, but until those facts are introduced, it seems a bit of a stretch.  Verifiable facts are the building blocks of all legitimate historical analysis.  

That is, unless we are just here to gossip about the way we think it might have been.  

Likewise with your classification of Bethpage Black as the first great Muni in the United States.  One would think it would have been considered such, as it is probably considered the best muni now, but things don't always work out that way.   It may be that Bethpage didn't really become significant or ground breaking in any significant way until they hosted the USOpen.  I doubt this is the case, but it is possible.  My guess is that if Bethpage is significant it is because it was part of a large multi-course project.  Or it could have been the first municipal course to have been built to be as difficult as the most challenging private courses.   I don't know.  

So in the case of Bethpage and Oakmont at least, I don't doubt they are significant but I don't think anyone has made a good case for why or when.  I look forward to learning about the verifiable facts and learning from the analysis if and when the case is made.  

[Adam Clayman]

Mac, I haven't read all the replies, but earlier you asked what happened between '03 and '39. I was curious if you were asking that question solely in the arena of the golf course and it's architecture? Or, if you were open to the possibility that something happened to the attitudes of golfers, as a possible reason for the change in perception?

I'll go back now and probably read it was already discussed.

[Mac Plumart]

David M...EXCELLENT points!!!  I couldn't agree more.  What I am learning, more than anything, from this thread is that to find the answers to a question like the one I asked you have to do a lot of work.  I am pretty sure that we won't have a definative list any time soon...but I am 100% sure that I will have a lot of great information/data to use regarding my further studies.  Again...you made/make a truly excellent point in your last post...truly excellent!!!

Adam C...again, truly excellent point.  That shows a deep level of thinking and understanding of inter-personal and sociological interactions.  Or in other, more technical speak...you are the man!!!!  Seriously, great point!!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac,
You know,  there's nothing wrong with finding more than one groundbreaking/revolutionary course per category.
For instance, Pinehurst may be more revolutionary than Bluff Point, but it wasn't earlier, and so forth.

[Mac Plumart]

Jim...agreed.

For example, I have the first landfill course and the first "great" landfill course. 

In my mind Pinehurst was/is revolutionary and great.  Perhaps these other courses are worthy of being on the list...but I am just not able to be definative on them as I don't know all of them.  Therefore, I have to rely on the group for input.  Input regarding the first of something is kind of easy...but the first "great" of something is another story.

But to your point...agreed 100%.  That is why I like all the posts/ideas being mentioned.  We can sifted through the names, research, think/ponder, discuss, include, exlude, etc.

[TEPaul]

Mac:

I don't think there is anything particularly revolutionary or groundbreaking about Oakmont's routing; that wasn't my point. I simply said it is one of the best routings I've ever seen and it looks remarkably similar in that 1903 stick routing plan (the year the course was built). But I sure do think given how early Oakmont was some of those greens are truly impressive "natural landform" architecture and should be studied by those interested in the evolution of golf architecture.

If Oakmont was truly revolutionary or at least unique for anything it would probably be the extreme penality of the bunkers (and perhaps the total amount of bunkers Fownes finally got to) and how Fownes had a rake designed to furrow them (I doubt anyone ever did that on purpose like that before or since). That was definitely revolutionary and it also happed to be perhaps one of the most generally unpopular things ever done to bunkering and it was eventually discontinued.

The green speeds of Oakmont were apparently truly revolutionary but that's another story and a very interesting one since they were apparently much faster than any other course all the way back in the late 1940s and early 1950s at least, perhaps even earlier.

[Bradley Anderson]

Oakmont had very fast greens in 1927. And in addition to being fast they were in the most excellent condition.

I will do some more digging on this to see if they were the first club to have ultra-fast greens.

[Tom MacWood]

Work with me here...I finished reading Scotlands Gift recently...CB MacDonald comes back from Scotland and has nowhere of quality to play...he tries to fire some people up to build some good courses...Chicago springs up, Myopia, GCGC, Oakmont, etc, etc, etc...but then he talks about NGLA being what appears to be groundbreaking in his book...now given it is  HIS book, so perhaps self-appraisal may not be the best recommendation...but it appears to be at least one of the first great courses in America...but if these others are to this day listed as the Top's in the world, what was wrong with them then...was nothing wroing with them...when did they become great?  Etc.

In his book CBM quotes an article he wrote in 1905 in which he said it was generally conceded the best courses in America were Chicago, GCGC and Myopia. I don't recall him ever mentioning Oakmont. Where did you read that?

[Mac Plumart]

Tom M...good pick up!

[TEPaul]

"Oakmont had very fast greens in 1927. And in addition to being fast they were in the most excellent condition.

I will do some more digging on this to see if they were the first club to have ultra-fast greens."


Bradley:

By some old accounts I've heard Oakmont's greens were the fastest extant. There were apparently a couple of reasons. Fownes insisted on two primary facets;

1. extremely penal bunkers---eg hence the famous Oakmont weighted furrow rakes.
2. Extremely fast greens.

With the latter apparently his primary greenskeeper, Emil Loeffler, came up with some inventive ways on his own to get much lower mow heights than other courses----he essentially filed his bed-knives down as much as possible, and he had the crew sharpen the blades every day. I know a man who cut those greens in the late '40s as a kid and he said it was really hard work as he had to put the mower handle into his waist and push like hell.

I'll have to check to see exactly when Loeffler became Oakmont's head greenskeeper.