[mark chalfant]

Does  anyone know if the very bold, original hole 12th was designed by Walter Travis, or did Devereux Emmet come up with the design ?
Any photos of this gem  in old books ?


thanks

[Tom_Doak]

Mark:

I've looked though a lot of their old records and photos, and I honestly don't know.  Pretty much none of the pictures go back further than Travis' first involvement in the course, and amazingly, he didn't write about it anywhere I've seen to either take credit for it or defer.

If I had to bet, though, I'd bet it's Travis' green.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I dont know the answer, but I do know that I love the "new" 12th hole there.
Such a great tough par 3...for some reason not many people like it though

[Patrick_Mucci]

In the days after 9/11 there was a good deal of apprehension on the part of drivers using the various tunnels under the Hudson and East Rivers.

A TV reporter was interviewing drivers waiting to enter either the Holland or Queens Mid-Town Tunnel.

After hearing from a few drivers the TV reporter approached a New York City cab driver and asked him if he was afraid/concerned that the terrorists would try to blow up the tunnel.

His classic, "New York" response was.
"They should blow it up, you can't get through it anyway"

That reminded me of the 12th hole.

They should blow it up.
They had the opportunity about 10 years ago, but, a party who shall go nameless, blew it.

Hopefully, that project will find it's way back onto the front burner in the near future.

[Tom MacWood]

It was part of Travis's redesign.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

patrick.......
I assume that means we differ on this point

[Tom_Doak]

My understanding is that there are plenty of members who think the current green ought to be blown up, but not so many who would support a restoration to the 1920's version of the hole.  I think I've been asked on at least two occasions to come up with my own design for it, and demurred.  Part of me would like to see it restored, and part of me knows that they would never be happy if it was restored faithfully.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

My memory is a little fuzzy, but, I think that there was universal agreement that the dual mounds would not be within the putting surface.  Hence there was noone advocating for a 1920 restoration, rather a 1936 restoration with modification on the location of the mounds.

And, as I recall, you presented a rather good rendering for restoring the hole to that configuration.

Recently, on two seperate days, I had 3 guests and 7 guests, and without prompting, 9 of them suggested that the hole seemed out of context with the rest of the golf course.

Now these are golfers ranging in handicap from 19 to 1, so it's a nice cross section of golfers who noticed the disconnect.

Maybe next year.

[Tom_Doak]

Pat:

Anyone would identify the old green as being out of character, too.  That's why it got changed.

[Charlie Goerges]

I think that there was universal agreement that the dual mounds would not be within the putting surface.

I have seen a photograph which would suggest the opposite. I'll have to see if I can dig it up or not.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

Anyone would identify the old green as being out of character, too.  That's why it got changed.

Tom Doak,

I have a long letter from Mel Lucas, the superintendent, and that's not why the green was changed.
It had more to do with ineptness and vandalism than the character of the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think that there was universal agreement that the dual mounds would not be within the putting surface.

I have seen a photograph which would suggest the opposite. I'll have to see if I can dig it up or not.

Charlie,

I have the photos, and, you don't know what you're talking about.
I suspect that you've misread some posts.

[Charlie Goerges]

Indeed.

[Peter Pallotta]

Stop mis-reading posts, will you Charlie?  And if you insist on mis-reading posts, here's a trick I use to still end up smelling like a rose: always post the most obvious and oft-repeated gca.com-worthy opinion you can.

Peter 

[TEPaul]

If anyone wants to know the truth of whether or not those old inline mounds were mowable to greenspace the man to ask is definitely Mel Lucas.

Pat:

You better ask Mel to the Sept 17th meeting. I know you have a letter from him but I don't really know if you know him. If you don't have his number I'll give it to you or call him for you myself.

THAT guy is a real, real valuable asset when it comes to the type of architectural history I tend to call "golf architectural archaeology." And now I have heard he has compiled an enormous research work on greenskeepers going back to the very beginning of that business and practice and science! He is something else on the history of golf agronomy.

Do you know how many millions of gallons of water Mel's predecessor at GCGC put on that golf course?

[Patrick_Mucci]

If anyone wants to know the truth of whether or not those old inline mounds were mowable to greenspace the man to ask is definitely Mel Lucas.
He's certainly familiar with that issue.

You better ask Mel to the Sept 17th meeting.

If I do, other than you, he'll be the only one there.
But, I might invite him to my Sept 27th meeting.

I know you have a letter from him but I don't really know if you know him.

I do

If you don't have his number I'll give it to you or call him for you myself.

I have it

THAT guy is a real, real valuable asset when it comes to the type of architectural history I tend to call "golf architectural archaeology." And now I have heard he has compiled an enormous research work on greenskeepers going back to the very beginning of that business and practice and science! He is something else on the history of golf agronomy.

Do you know how many millions gallons of water Mel's predecessor at GCGC put on that golf course?

Yes.
That was one of the problems with # 12 and the entire golf course

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

Wouldn't you prefer to see it returned to Greenspace, or at least closely mown grass?

After seeing what we believe is the one green at Cobbs Creek (the old 15th, which is also today's unfortunately neutered 10th) that we believe was done by Travis (it's such a one-off compared to the low-lying greens on the rest of the course that we almost HAVE to credit him), which Geoffrey Walsh dubbed, "The Tie-Fighter", some of the parallels to the 12th hole at Garden City are unmistakable.




The 12th at Garden City;

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wouldn't you prefer to see it returned to Greenspace, or at least closely mown grass?

Mike, at today's putting green speeds, steep mounds would be impossible to mow.
There were two schools of thought.
1  Less dramatic mounds within the putting surface.
2  Dramatic mounds outside the putting surface

After seeing what we believe is the one green at Cobbs Creek (the old 15th, which is also today's unfortunately neutered 10th) that we believe was done by Travis (it's such a one-off compared to the low-lying greens on the rest of the course that we almost HAVE to credit him), which Geoffrey Walsh dubbed, "The Tie-Fighter", some of the parallels to the 12th hole at Garden City are unmistakable.




The 12th at Garden City;




Mike, thanks for the photos.
The bunkering is great and the unique mounds ... well, very unique.

It would be great to see it restored, even if the mounds weren't quite as steep..

Since the mounds are near the perimeter of the green, does it really make a difference whether they're mowed to putting surface height or fairway height ?

[Dave Falkner]

As i look at those  2 pics I cant help but think of the 4th at St Georges on that basis I would have to say Emmett

Ill see if I can rustle up a pic

[Bradley Anderson]

Patrick,

I have posted a picture of an early Mackenzie course (below) where he intentionally maintained the mounding around the greens with the same mowers that were used to mow the putting surface. I'm not certain but I suspect that they simply mowed the perimeters with less frequency that the putting surface, and that effectively produced a different texture of grass. In other words, it was the same mower, at the same height of cut, except the mounds were cut maybe twice a week, whereas the putting surface was cut four times or more. With less frequency those mowers would actually have a slightly higher and coarser textured turf than the putting surface - the clipping rate of the manual mowers wasn't very efficient. The height of cut of these mowers wasn't too effective below a 1/4 inch, so I would guess that those mounds were about 1/2 an inch when they were freshly groomed, but they might get up to more than an inch high at times, and you probably didn't get as much roll off these as you might think. 

I have always thought that it was this kind of mowing technique that would have been used on those GCGC mounds. But after they stopped making those manual operated sidewheel mowers it probably became impossible to maintain those mounds with the motorized mowers that were much heavier. And then when mowing heights were lowered it became even harder.

I repeat that this is all a guess on my part. But in either case, I can't imagine maintaining short cut on those kinds of slopes on a year like the one we have just come through. It's one thing to maintain short turf on hillsides, but on mounds where you have a sharp summit like this it would be pretty hard not to scalp the top unless you had a manual mower. And you would be watering it constantly at the top. I'm pretty sure you would have drainage problems and wet spots all around the foot of these mounds too.

[Bradley Anderson]

[Mike Cirba]

I'm sorry, but perhaps the reason we love the ODG's is because they were simply so insanely crazed.

Is that pic of Bradley's like Bizarro World on Acid, or what?

[Bradley Anderson]

Mike,

If you squint long enough you can see the Cheshire Cat is whispering in the good Doctor's ear.  

[Sean_A]

I'm sorry, but perhaps the reason we love the ODG's is because they were simply so insanely crazed.

Is that pic of Bradley's like Bizarro World on Acid, or what?

What do you mean?  How else were mounds such as the photo depicts (which are still quite numerous on courses throughout the UK) to be cut?

This conversation is interesting because Phil the Author has made an argument that Bethpage Black used to have more wild greens with crests at the edge of the green which were cut at green height back in the day.  This is why he thinks BB's greens were designed by Tillie and that now they are in a greatly altered state.  Either way, I don't see why those mounds can't be restored at fairway height because they aren't pinnable hole locations anyway, but at fairway height they could still impact play on the green. 

Ciao

[TEPaul]

"You better ask Mel to the Sept 17th meeting.

If I do, other than you, he'll be the only one there.
But, I might invite him to my Sept 27th meeting.  "



Thanks for mentioning that Pat. At the rate I'm going I probably would show up on Sept. 17. And it ain't exactly around the corner either. I don't know what it is----maybe about 150 miles but if I get clear sailing and no interference in front of me that's only about an hour and seventeen minutes the way I drive! Are you thinking I might get arrested? No way, I've got the latest in radar and such detectors but frankly with my vast experience with this kind of thing I don't even need it because I can actually smell a cop about five miles away even going about 120MPH. Hell, I might even borrow my best friend's Maserati sedan. In that thing I could be there in under an hour.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()