What Do We Think of Abercromby?

[JNC Lyon]

I have been lucky enough to play three of J.F. Abercromby's six courses during my trip to England.  

I was thrilled with the Addington.  The terrain is unbelievable, and the routing gets the golfer through rough golfing ground in magnificent form.  The par fives at 2, 12, and 16 are my favorite set of three-shotters from my trip.  Yet Addington comes up a wee bit short for me because of the greens.  Scott Warren, I know what you are going to say: the terrain was so wild at Addington that he had to give the golfer a break on the greens.  Of course, the two most extreme greens can be found at 12 and 13, holes which also possess the most dramatic land on the course.  I just love wild greens, and a course that does not have a ton of interesting greens is going to lack something for me. Furthermore, there is a rumor that Colt did some work at Addington after Abercromby's original layout.

My second Abercromby experience was Worplesdon.  Worplesdon might be a notch below Addington, but it is still a very solid heathland layout.  I particularly impressed with the greens and centerline hazards at Worplesdon.  Yet I also heard that Willie Park, Jr. had some serious involvement with the architecture at Worplesdon.  Like many of the London courses, it is very difficult to say which architect designed what features.  So many architects worked on so many different courses in the early 1900s.  However, those centerline features, fairway bunkers, and wild greens said "Park" more than they did "Abercromby."

I played my third Abercromby this week at Mill Hill at the end of the Northern Line.  Sandwiched between the A1 and the M1, Mill Hill plays up and down through undulating but not severe land.  The course has a few interesting holes.  7, my favorite hole on the course, is a strategic par four requiring players to hug a creek on the right for the best angle of approach.  3 is a neat short par across a creek.  5 and 13 have two fun elevated greens.  14 is a fun, sidehill short four.  Despite these highlights, the course is bland more often than not.  It has few strategic driving hazards to dictate play, and the greens are subtle but unexciting.  I felt like I was playing golf in Pennsylvania rather than suburban London.

After these experiences with Abercromby, I hasten to wonder how important he was to Golden Age GCA?  When considering these three layouts together, I notice that all three share FLAWS more than they share strengths.  Addington and Mill Hill lack exciting greens, while the greens at Worplesdon appear to be Park creations.  Addington and Worplesdon do not have a good short par four between them.  Addington and Mill Hill are short on fairway bunkering, and the driving hazards at Worplesdon also seemed to be Park's doing.  Clearly Addington and Worplesdon are great golf courses, but there are hints at both that other, more accomplished architects made the courses what they are today.  Did Abercromby build great courses?  Or did he lay the groundwork for more accomplished architects to do their thing?

[Scott Warren]

Abercromby worked on The Addington his whole life. To suggest he laid out a course that Colt then "fixed" isn't correct, in my opinion.

I agree with you about Mill Hill in most regards, but I do like that he used intersting driving hazards like uneven ground, humps and bumps etc rather than simple smacking bunkers down everywhere.

What I think you have overlooked perhaps a bit is how dramatic the land is at both Mill Hill and The Addington. Far more undulating and steep than is ideal for golf. I think his routings on both courses are brilliant.

[Tom MacWood]

It is well documented Colt and Abercromby collaborated at The Addington-Old, and the same with Park and Aber working together at Worpledon. Park and he may have worked together Coombe Hill too, I'll have to check.

It was generally acknowledged Addington-New (NLE) was Abercomby's masterpiece and would've probably qualified as a great course. And he did more than 6 courses, I'd say closer to 15 to 20 designs/redesigns.

[Scott Warren]

Tom,

I recall the suggestion that Colt's involvement at The Addington was "well documented", I just don't recall ever seeing the documents. Were they ever posted on here?

[Sean_A]

I too would like to see the documents concerning Colt at Addington.  I recall seeing them before and not really getting much of an idea of what Colt actually did and that it could have been an "advisory" role rather than a directly paid contract job. 

There have been lots of rumours about the greatness of Addy New, but they are neither here nor there.  What we do have is a course Aber sat on for at least a few decades.  If any course is to give us an idea of Aber's ideas and work, Addington is the it.   

Ciao

[Mark Chaplin]

Jon - make sure you check out Knole Park at Sevenoaks before you leave.

[Phil_the_Author]

I think he did his greatest work when he finally teamed up with Fitch... 

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Even if you don't get to play it, have a walk over Coombe Hill. The 14th is a very good short par four which was highly praised by Bobby Jones. The short holes are strong and there are some demanding longer par fours such as the 5th, 8th, 11th and 16th. The ground is much less dramatic than Addington. I have to say that Bovey Castle is now prohibitively expensive, which is a shame because as Manor House Hotel course it was great fun with a stream affecting play on just about every hole going out.

[Mark Pearce]

I played Manor House last year (the "World Corporate Challenge" or some such nonsense) an d thought it was a course of two halves.  The front 9, with the river was good fun (helped by the fact that I only required 33 strokes to complete it) but the back 9 was far more ordinary (not helped by the 50 strokes I needed to get round).  If it was local I'd play it again but it wasn't a great course, just on the basis of the back 9.

[JNC Lyon]

If Abercromby worked on the Addington his whole life, then I am guessing the course is more his own than any other.  Yet he still could have had a serious amount of help from Colt, no?  I would love to hear more about this partnership.  I would also love to see something about the second course at the Addington.

I did enjoy the routings at both Addington and Mill Hill.  The routing at Addington is especially good for how severe the terrain is.  I was not impressed with the routing at Worplesdon.  Much of that is due to the road crossing to get to the best holes at 11-14.  Nevertheless, I would say that Abercromby is an excellent router of the golf course from what I have seen.  How many architects could have handled the terrain at Addington as well as he did?  I do not think the land is nearly as tough at Mill Hill as it is at Addington, but I still think it speaks to Abercromby's skill as a router.

I guess my ultimate question is: Does Abercromby belong in that group of early British architects of Colt, Park, Braid, Fowler, and Simpson?  Or is he a notch below?

Knole Park and Coombe Hill sound great.  I might fit them in before I leave, but if not I will play them on a return trip.

[Tom MacWood]

Here is a thread from a few months ago.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,42237.0/

[Sean_A]

What stands out mostly is that we still have no definitive answer on what Colt did at Addy beyond an advisory role - which could be as little as "yes, those are good ideas Aber". 

Ciao

[Tony_Muldoon]

What stands out mostly is that we still have no definitive answer on what Colt did at Addy beyond an advisory role - which could be as little as "yes, those are good ideas Aber". 

Ciao

Which is quite possibly what he said to Rolland at Rye, MacKenzie at Alwoodley, Ross at Old Elm, Crump at Pine Valley and and a good no of others.

 I wonder what else he said to each of them?   

 We'll never quite know will we, but we know enought to say he had real input at all of those courses and each is unique?

Colt what a guy.


 

[Sean_A]

What stands out mostly is that we still have no definitive answer on what Colt did at Addy beyond an advisory role - which could be as little as "yes, those are good ideas Aber". 

Ciao

Which is quite possibly what he said to Rolland at Rye, MacKenzie at Alwoodley, Ross at Old Elm, Crump at Pine Valley and and a good no of others.

 I wonder what else he said to each of them?   

 We'll never quite know will we, but we know enought to say he had real input at all of those courses and each is unique?

Colt what a guy.


 

Tony

I am quite happy to class Colt as one the very finest archies, if the not the finest, without having to resort to hearsay to pad out his resume. 

Ciao

[Ulrich Mayring]

IMHO Colt wasn't THE superstar yet at the time Aber got started (Worplesdon, 1908). Willie Park Jr. would probably have been the main man and Fowler was in business as well. So Aber is part of the very first group of architects we generally associate with the Golden Age today - that alone makes him important. He also has a first of his own: at Coombe Hill (1909) he became the first architect to use aerial views in routing a course (by rising up in a hot air balloon).

Ulrich

[Sean_A]

JNC

To answer your question, I think Aber is 2nd, maybe or 3rd tier of the ORIGINALS.  No matter what we think of his work, there is not nearly enough to place him up with the big boys - Colt & Dr Mac.  I am also not sure if he really did enough to hang with Park Jr, Fowler, Alison and perhaps Simpson (though I am less convinced about Simpson because I know less of his work).  That said, 3rd tier in that company is no slouch - its all relative.

Ciao

[Tony_Muldoon]

Sean perhaps I was being oblique, but I find the following interesting.

A)   Abercromby seems to have favoured partnerships. Was he not confident in his own opinions?  Despite this you are right, in the early days his peers held him in the highest regard.

B)   Colt tells Suttons of hundreds of courses he’s been to see, but he’s confident they will get the order at The Addington.

C)   Colt also collaborated with, White of Sunningdale, Alison, Morrison etc, etc. Hawtree’s biography constantly tells us how adept he was in his dealings with people.  Clearly he had a fabulous talent for collaboration and in assessing his input into any particular project one needs to be aware of his ability to contribute to some of the finest of all courses when others had and equal or even more important role.  Whatever he contributed it is surely no coincidence that these courses are amongst the greatest we have. To use a term like “hearsay” might be seen as trying to diminish his importance in a particular course when the weight of opinion seems to suggest that the common element in these great and varied courses is Harry Shapland Colt. IMO it is harder to argue that he just happened to know a bunch of talented people who produced their greatest works when he was part of the team but without any significant input from him.

D)      Look at the documented  "colaborative" courses above and the tell me those courses are padding in anyones resume?

E)   Colt was a modest man, particularly in comparison with many of his peers. I too wish I knew what what's Abercromby  and what was Colt’s at the Addington; however I feel that dismissing him from having a significant input here as "hearsay" is case not proven, as the weight of evidence suggests otherwise. I.e. its upto you to prove that Colt was wrong to put it in his adverts etc, when I know of no evidence of him making false claims elsewhere etc, etc etc.

F)    Hence I conclude Colt deserves secondary credit at the Addington.


Ciao
 

[Sean_A]

Sean perhaps I was being oblique, but I find the following interesting.

A)   Abercromby seems to have favoured partnerships. Was he not confident in his own opinions?  Despite this you are right, in the early days his peers held him in the highest regard.

B)   Colt tells Suttons of hundreds of courses he’s been to see, but he’s confident they will get the order at The Addington.

C)   Colt also collaborated with, White of Sunningdale, Alison, Morrison etc, etc. Hawtree’s biography constantly tells us how adept he was in his dealings with people.  Clearly he had a fabulous talent for collaboration and in assessing his input into any particular project one needs to be aware of his ability to contribute to some of the finest of all courses when others had and equal or even more important role.  Whatever he contributed it is surely no coincidence that these courses are amongst the greatest we have. To use a term like “hearsay” might be seen as trying to diminish his importance in a particular course when the weight of opinion seems to suggest that the common element in these great and varied courses is Harry Shapland Colt. IMO it is harder to argue that he just happened to know a bunch of talented people who produced their greatest works when he was part of the team but without any significant input from him.

D)      Look at the documented  "colaborative" courses above and the tell me those courses are padding in anyones resume?

E)   Colt was a modest man, particularly in comparison with many of his peers. I too wish I knew what what's Abercromby  and what was Colt’s at the Addington; however I feel that dismissing him from having a significant input here as "hearsay" is case not proven, as the weight of evidence suggests otherwise. I.e. its upto you to prove that Colt was wrong to put it in his adverts etc, when I know of no evidence of him making false claims elsewhere etc, etc etc.

F)    Hence I conclude Colt deserves secondary credit at the Addington.


Ciao
 

Tony

Strange, to me the common element is a group of uncommonly good archies. 

You may well be right that Colt deserves secondary credit at Addy and many other courses.  The question is what is that secondary credit?  It may be a smidgen, but more than the next guy in line - there is always a next guy in line - no?  Colt's collaboration may be connected with his seed dealings and this could well be agronomy collaboration rather than design or perhaps a comb.  Its all very fuzzy and therefore the reason I call it hearsay.  We must not forget that other archies of the time were imo just as talented as Colt, perhaps moreso.  Colt stood on the shoulders of very capable archies.  In any case, I am like Doak, unless we know if a guy had significant input to earn co-credit or significant credit, I tend to think he shouldn't be given credit at all.  I don't much see the point in saying "Colt did something, but we don't know what".

Ciao

[Tom MacWood]

Tony

I am quite happy to class Colt as one the very finest archies, if the not the finest, without having to resort to hearsay to pad out his resume. 

Ciao

Hearsay? What exactly are you looking for to prove Colt was involved?

[Neil_Crafter]

Interesting thread.
Can I just make a small plea to JNC to correct the spelling of Abercromby in the title.
Not wanting to seem pedantic, but.........
Neil

[Sean_A]

Tony

I am quite happy to class Colt as one the very finest archies, if the not the finest, without having to resort to hearsay to pad out his resume.  

Ciao

Hearsay? What exactly are you looking for to prove Colt was involved?

Tommy Mac

If you don't know what Colt did how can you say he is a co-designer?  Being "involved" is a different matter because it is a sufficiently vague term which can imply most anything depending on the reader's biases.  The only specific word I have seen for Colt in connection with Addy is "advisor". To me, this means Colt was not a designer, but offered suggestions which may or may not have been acted upon.  In other words, Colt was not a decision-maker.  This is why associates don't get credit for course design unless the main man says so.  I know it isn't a perfect way to look at things, but without specific info, I think it is the best way to decide who the archie(s) are.


Ciao

[Tom MacWood]

Sean
Do you believe Colt was possibly guilty of false advertising when he listed the course as one of his designs in his magazine advertisements and the five pamphlets in which listed all his courses?

[Tom MacWood]

Sean
Isn't hearsay a rumor? In my opinion it is more than a rumor that Colt was involved in the design of Addington - two articles by Darwin, one by Alison, and numerous advertisements and pamphlets. I'd say that is well documented.

[Sean_A]

Sean
Isn't hearsay a rumor? In my opinion it is more than a rumor that Colt was involved in the design of Addington - two articles by Darwin, one by Alison, and numerous advertisements and pamphlets. I'd say that is well documented.

Tommy Mac

What is well documented?  What do the documents state?  What did Colt do?  Was it enough to be called a co-designer or are we in the vague territory of "input"?  I don't think Darwin is anywhere near infallible. I seem to recall him writing that Alison designed Burnham's 17th when the changes are clearly outlined in Colt's 1913 report.     

Ciao

[Neil_Crafter]

Sean
Please don't be guilty of the same thing you are accusing Tom Mac of in regards to 'proof' - you say "I seem to recall" regarding Darwin and his apparent misattribution. If you have evidence of this I would suggest you check and possibly post it if you can (as I would like to see it given I have been researching Darwin for 5 years or so), because from my knowledge Darwin was rarely, if ever, in error in these attribution matters. Remember he was a friend and contemporary of men like Colt, Alison, Mackenzie, Fowler etc. and it was his job to find out what they were up to for his various writings for the Times, Country Life etc etc etc.

I doubt we will ever know precisely what Colt did with Abercromby at the Addington, but there is well documented evidence as Tom listed that he was involved in some way. Can you provide evidence he wasn't involved? Pretty hard to do that I would have thought given the evidence to the contrary.

Similarly I am trying to see if Mackenzie was involved in the design of the Eden with Colt. I have now just found that he went to St Andrews in July 1920 as part of a week's northern trip of consulting to other Scottish and northern England courses - and consulted upon both the New and the Eden. Exactly why I don't know and whether he was just consulting as the available partner (this was right at the start of the partnership) is most likely. Whether this suggests a pre war involvement in the design of the Eden may be drawing a long bow. Fascinating either way.

cheers Neil