[Tom MacWood]

The image of Myopia is 5.4.1902 from the Boston Globe. As usual TEP is wrong about the geometric features....never has anyone claimed to be an expert on a course knowing so little.

Again I will ask the question who had a more impressive resume in 1900?

[Tom MacWood]

In a 1901 interview in the Chicago Tribune Tweedie on the money invested in golf courses:

"One million dollars is a low estimate on golf grounds. Some clubs own the land, while others lease it, but in any case the grounds have to be prepared, sodded, bunkered, and, perhaps, provided with water hazards.A good golf grounds needs at least 200 acres. Two hundred acres of good grounds in easy reach of Chicago would cost $200 an acre for the land alone. Several clubs are as large as this-the Onwentsia, Wheaton, Homewood, and Midlothian clubs have 200 acres or more, each. The Midlothian, for instance spent $35000 on a clubhouse alone, while it has cost some of the other $100,000 to complete houses, fences, and fields. In three of these grounds the water hazards are nature's work, but the Wheaton club pumps water into an artificial pond."

more later....

[Tom MacWood]

Tweedie continues:

"There are between thrity and thrity-five clubs in Chicago. Some of the grounds are as far away as Wisconsin, but they are supported by Chicago people.

Now, no golf enthusiast can play through a season for less than $250, counting fares, fees to caddies and equipment for the field. There are individuals who pay ten times that much for the pleasures of the game. One man in Chicago, for instance, has 128 drivers alone. With other clubs in proportion. These 128 drivers, at $2.50 each, represent $320. I doubt if anybody who plays golf at all spends less than $20 as the season's legitimate expenses."

An average golf player of moderate means cannot equip himself for the game under $20. The enthusiast may spend $300 to $400 without being considered extravagant. Counting a possible 3000 golf players of all degrees in Chicago, it has been figured that they pay out not far from $450,000 a year for the game.

With many of these players, railroad fares are necessary and form a considerable portion of a the expense. Care of club's grounds and the fees of the caddies are items of expense that are heavy in the aggregate. Club dies and clubhouse bills are in proportion, so that a golf suit and selection of the golf clubs are only the beginning of the game.

From the first peep of green in the spring, until the first, or even the second snow, the Chicago golf enthusiast finds an open season for the game. It may cost the city thousands of dollars annually, but every golf player is confident that he has his money's worth when the snow and cold at last put an end to putting and to the job of the caddy.

[TEPaul]

"As usual TEP is wrong about the geometric features....never has anyone claimed to be an expert on a course knowing so little."


Tom MacWood:

Is that the best you can do?  

If you think you know something about the architectural history of Myopia, let's see you try to identify all the original holes of the 1894 course. I've asked you that before, a number of times, but you always ignore or avoid the subject.

I wonder why?  

As for geometric, Myopia basically never was. It's old fashioned looking for sure, particularly its cross features of mounding and berm bunkering but the architecture of it is amazing, particularly about 11-12 of its greens. It has always had some cross bunkers on it and partial cross-bunkering but if you think that makes it geometric you sure don't know much about golf course architecture or its history and evolution.

But with you and Myopia, that's somewhat understandable since you've never been there or seen the place. Finding some old drawing of it from a newspaper really doesn't cut it even though you seem to think it does.

Nevertheless, if you think you know something about the architectural history of Myopia, and you've contended on here that Willie Campbell designed it, let's see you compare the 1894 nine to the 1896 "Long Nine" and the 1900 eighteen hole course.

Can you do that or are you going to ignore and avoid it again because you don't really know Myopia's architectural history other than what you've seen in Edward Weeks' book which you have criticized as inaccurate, I might add?

[Sean_Tully]

Very cool image that is similar to the St. Andrews one if I recall correctly. This show Tweedie's father at his contemporaries at Hoyloke.


Tully

[Mike Cirba]

I think those drawings of Myopia are very interesting, but also very revealing in the shortcomings of a two-dimensional image to convey architecture.

While Myopia did and still does have some cross-bunkering, to claim it is/was largely indicative of the geometric architecture prevalent in that time period is really not accurate.

That may also be the case with the drawing I presented of Tweedie's ACCC, but I don't think so.    Atlantic City is a dead flat property and where Myopia is really best described as utilitarian, lay of the land architecture on really interesting landforms with fairway level greensites, ACCC was completely manufactured and built up.

[Tom MacWood]

Herbert Corey Leeds

And thankfully his 1890s product to that affect is still pretty much all there for us to see---at least those of us who are actually willing to make the effort to actually go to Myopia to see it!  

Mike
Who said "it was largely indicative of the geomteric...."? What I asked was: what golf architect in America did not using geometric features in the 1890s? TEP claimed Leeds did not, and the schematic clearly shows he did. I say we give Tweedie his due and not blow out of proportion or exaggerate the work of others. We need some historical perspective.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I'm all for that but I think where Leeds should be given credit is as the first American designer who worked primarily with diagonal, as well as full-frontal, crossing hazards.

I think his trips abroad were responsible for this approach, and while Tweedie should be given credit for pre-1900 volume of courses, I'm still not sure architecturally how he differs from say, Willie Dunn or Willie Davis, or some others practicing at the time.

Leeds WAS clearly different, and was the best example of American architecture that utilized old world diagonal concepts prior to Travis's work at Garden City in 1906-07, and prior to NGLA.

[DMoriarty]

Mike, You seem to be extremely selective about your use of these old maps; rather dismissive of some and gushing with praise for others, yet I am not sure I see the distinctions in the actual drawings.   Not drawing any conclusions about Myopia, but one thing worth noting is that many of the cross hazards at Myopia were not marked "bunkers" but were marked "cops" which connotes the above ground hazards, usually high man-made ridges.   As I recall, you've dismissed plenty of designers for using such features. 

As for how Leeds differed from the likes of Willie Dunn and Willie Davis and Tweedie, I think perhaps you may be selling some of them a bit short.   After all, aren't you just going by two dimensional drawings as for basis for dismissing them? 

[Mike Cirba]

David,

Both drawings are admittedly very crude and any distinctions I'm drawing are due to personal observation having been on both sites.

While ACCC is flat and open, Myopia is typical rollicking New England countryside, so the two-dimensional representations really suffer in accurately showing that important dynamic.

I think the larger point in relation to this thread is that we know what Leeds built and what his end-product was because so much of it is still there today, and we also know that it was a giant leap forward in American architecture.   In fact, some foreign golfers from Great Britain were astounded by how advanced it was in comparison to others here at the time.  

What I'm questioning is simply what Tweedie's architectural qualities were, and why he should be noted and acknowledged for anything beyond the volume of pre-1900 courses that Tom MacWood cited in this thread.  

Did he advance the art in any way but quantity?   I'm not sure I've seen any evidence of that yet.

[Peter Pallotta]

Mike, David - if you haven't already, check out Neil Crafter's thread on an article by Charles Ambrose -- and especially Paul Turner's comments. 

For me -- and in the context of this thread -- it highlights that the 'art' of early gca is circular rather than linear, i.e. the process is not like that of astronomy or space exploration (with one discovery building upon the one before), but more like the dynamics of popular music (changing independent of/in parallel to 'new' knowledge).  While principles are involved and understanding deepens in gca, changing tastes and times trumps all (just like rock music is neither an advacement nor degradation of classical music, it's just different) 

Two cents.

P

[Tom MacWood]

I think the larger point in relation to this thread is that we know what Leeds built and what his end-product was because so much of it is still there today, and we also know that it was a giant leap forward in American architecture.   In fact, some foreign golfers from Great Britain were astounded by how advanced it was in comparison to others here at the time.  

Mike
Do you know what Leeds built? Are you taking into account that Willie Campbell designed the original nine at Myopia and that Leeds spent a couple decades perfecting the course?

Eight of Tweedie's courses hosted major championships in the early years...what golf architect of the 1890s had a comparable resume? IMO it is important to judge architects relative to their time, and I believe HJT deserves to be recognized as one of the most important early architects. If Tweedie was based in Philadelphia, NY or Boston, rather than Chicago, would you be singing a different tune?

[TEPaul]

"Are you taking into account that Willie Campbell designed the original nine at Myopia?"


Tom MacWood:

You don't learn much do you? First of all, three members of Myopia Hunt club laid out the original 1894 nine. That was before Leeds came to Myopia. In 1896 Leeds created the "Long Nine" on which the 1898 US Open was played (in 1898-99 he created the full eighteen holes that is virtually the same today). I've asked you about ten times if you can describe the holes of the 1894 nine or if you understand the differences between the original 1894 nine and the Long Nine, but you ignore the question every time. Why is that? 

Obviously the reason is you don't understand the architectural history of the course and you also obviously don't know what it looks like because you've never been there and you've never seen it.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
This thread is about Tweedie, if you want to discuss Myopia start another thread or continue the thread (see below) in which I debunked your theory, actually the theory presented in the club history. The same club history that had no idea Campbell was involved with Myopia or worked at Myopia. Of Campbell's original nine the old 4th or old Alps hole was the only hole that is not part of the expanded 18, although it appears the green is the green for the present 11th.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,40810.0/

[Mike Cirba]

Peter,

I think that's an interesting observation, but would slightly disagree in that I think the cyclical nature of architectural evolution was more evident in Great Britain by the early 1900s than in those early formative years in the US.   Here, I think that there was a somewhat linear learning curve that progressed into cyclical after reaching some degree of critical mass in a growing number of "experts" here who studied the classics abroad.   I do think it took Leeds, and Travis, and Macdonald, and Wilson, and Fownes, and Ross, et.al. to bring US architectural knowledge up to a reasonable standard of sophistication and excellence before the cyclical fads debating the merits of the details could take place.

Make sense?


Tom MacWood,

I'm not sure anything was ever "debunked" here for certain as you claim, and I don't think that's germane to the larger point that by the very early 1900s, Herbert Leeds was known as the guy who had studied the classics and turned Myopia into the first superb American golf course, as seen in the following articles;






As far as Tweedie's involvement with early tournament courses, and whether my questioning is based on some regional bias, I'd simply mention that two early US Opens were played at the Philadelphia Cricket Club, a course of very little architectural merit, even for the time period.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kirkaldy and Herd said that Myopia was better than St. Andrews.

 

Yeah, I'm really going to give credence to anything else they say. 

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Alex Findlay wasn't much of a fan of St. Andrews either, nor was Hugh Wilson. 

I think the point was their praise for the overall golf architectural knowledge and on-the-ground accomplishments of Leeds at Myopia.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
What golf architect had a comparable resume in 1900? Eight of these courses hosted major championships....not just one, eight. And most of them hosted multiple championships. Obviously he was doing something right relative to his era.

Aurora, IL
Belmont, IL
Exmoor, IL
Glen View, IL
Hinsdale, IL
Midlothian, IL
Bryn Mawr, IL
Homewood, IL
Westwart Ho!, IL
Skokie, IL
Jacksonville, IL
LaGrange, IL
Onwentsia, IL
Park Ridge, IL
Quincy, IL
River Forest, IL
Rockford, IL
Ouilmette, Wilmette, IL
Washington Park, IL
Winona, Winona Lake, IL
Terre Haute, IN
Marshalltown, IA
Louisville, KY
Lake Harbor, MI
CC of Atlantic City, NJ
Hotel Victory, Put-in-Bay, OH
Fountain Springs, Waukesha, WI
Maple Bluff, Madison, WI

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

if you'd be so kind, and if it's handy, which of his courses hosted which majors during which years?  Thanks.

[Greg Ohlendorf]

Mike,

Homewood CC (now Flossmoor) hosted the 1920 PGA and the 1923 US Am. It also hosted the 1906 Western Open.

Greg

[Mike Cirba]

Greg,

Thanks for the info on Homewood (Flossmoor).

Would you say that the course that hosted the 1920s events was essentially as Tweedie designed it, or had it been refined by others by that time?   I don't know the answer, but am interested to learn more.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
I'm not aware of any course designed in the 1890s that hosted a major championship in the 1920s that was not significantly redesigned. Do you know of any examples?

You cannot judge 1890s golf architect by the standard of the 1910s or 1920s. You have to judge an architect by the standard of his era. I'll ask you one more time what golf architect had a comparable resume to Tweedie's in 1900? Either you know of one or you don't....its pretty simple.

[Greg Ohlendorf]

Mike,

The IMO piece I wrote on Flossmoor contains the following details on the work Harry Collis did at FCC following the original Tweedie layout. I should note that today, 15 holes are still located in the original Tweedie corridors. Some may have originally been par 4s that are now par 5s, or vice versa, but Twedie's routing is still very intact. He created an out and back layout (which after a second clubhouse fire was altered by Collis) that utilized the best natural land features the site had to offer.

From my IMO piece...

While Flossmoor’s routing still follows much of Tweedie’s original layout, several holes and the green complexes of the course can be attributed to an English import from Blackheath, Harry Collis, who worked at the club from 1905 until 1929. A fine player, Collis was originally hired as the Club’s professional in 1905. At the urging of the Club’s president, Collis took over full-time greenskeeping duties in 1911 with the responsibility of bringing out the full potential of the golf course. Collis immediately began upgrading the course and eventually became known as an accomplished agronomist who created a popular grass mixture for putting greens called Flossmoor Bent.

Collis’ most far-ranging improvements followed the devastating 1914 clubhouse fire and the decision to relocate the clubhouse to the middle of the property on the west side of the grounds. The clubhouse move eliminated the original out and back links style routing to enable both nines to start and finish at the new clubhouse. Collis went to work on the course and in 1915 he debuted two holes: a short par 3 7th hole, which called for a mashie shot over a pond, and a new finishing hole that combined the old par 3 14th and par 4 15th holes into what is now the uphill par 5 18th hole with its green located in front of the clubhouse (as it was on the old 18th). Reports from 1915 also indicate that Collis reconfigured the 14th into a tricky 296-yard par 4 that rewarded placement over length to create a hole that adds great character to the course. At some point, Collis added the signature Flossmoor bunker to the 16th hole, which was previously unprotected in the front (the grass fangs are not visible on the 1939 aerial and probably were a later addition). To accommodate the new clubhouse, the first tee was pushed east, creating a gentle dogleg to the right.

Another important Collis addition to the course came when he shortened the 5th hole from a par 5 to a 447-yard par 4 and moved the tee on the 6th hole back by 100 yards, creating a slight dogleg right. Originally just 315 yards, the 6th was extended to 417 yards. Homewood’s homegrown champion golfer Warren K. Wood considered the new 6th the best hole on the course in the 1920′s. Bobby Jones labeled it “The Difficult Sixth” after Max Marston made the first of three consecutive birdies in the afternoon round of their match to start a stirring comeback that paved the way to Marston’s victory in the 1923 U.S. Amateur.

The hand of Collis is most clearly evident in Flossmoor’s remarkable green complexes. Collis’ Flossmoor Bent can still be seen in the pleasing variety of green, yellow, red, and brown hues, which lend a mottled, old school look to the green surfaces. The smooth, quick greens are quite varied with some on the smaller side and others quite large. Many, like the 11th and 12th, take full advantage of natural slopes, and others like the 4th, 6th, and the treacherous 14th have slopes which flow off mounding built into their green pads. Green side mounds built by Collis are a unique characteristic of Flossmoor. A particularly noteworthy example is the use of small mounds surrounding the bunkerless 12th green, which creates a punchbowl effect.

Greg

[Dan Moore]

Hi Greg.  I'm sure you did not intend to claim those paragraphs were written by you since they are clearly from the part of your IMHO piece that I wrote on the architectural evolution of Flossmoor.  I just want the record to be clear.    Thanks. 

As Greg points out the routing of Flossmoor in its 1920's major championship version consisted mostly of holes laid-out by Tweeide.  Collis definitely improved the course probably most significantly in constructing its superb green complexes, but Twwedie's routing of the original course and its use of natural terrain was superb.

Here is my take on what Tweediie accomplished at Flossmoor put in the context of the era in which he worked.  Also from my part of Greg's IMHO piece. 

"When assessing an architect of Tweedie’s era, it is important to understand the limitations of that period. Architecture at the turn of the century consisted primarily of laying out the routing of the course. Construction techniques and budgets were minimal and greenskeeping techniques and staffs were rudimentary. The emphasis among the best architects was on the routing where they worked to fully utilize the natural features of the course and locate tees, hole corridors and green sites accordingly. That Flossmoor was laid out with uncommon architectural skill for the era can be seen in the magnificent use of Flossmoor’s natural landforms on such Tweedie originals as 11, 12, and 15.

The 11th, Spion Kop, is only a little longer today than when Tweedie laid it out as a 130-yard par 3 in 1900. It features a terrific uphill approach to a well-bunkered green set on a plateau. The green, one of the best on the course, flows with the natural slope of the land from front left to rear right. The hole was named after a hilltop fortress that was pockmarked by artillery shells in the Battle of Spion Kop on January 24, 1900, a turning point in the Second Boer War.

The 12th was originally a 450-yard par 5 with the tee adjacent to the 11th green. The drive from the hilltop needed to be placed in the valley as close to the creek as one dared. The second was blind, up and over the crest of the hill, then downhill the last 100 yards to another fantastic bunkerless green running away from the player with the natural slope of the hill. Still a wonderful hole today, one can only imagine how good this hole was in 1900.

The 15th, another of Flossmoor’s many distinctive par 4′s, is described by the Club as one of the best driving holes anywhere. A large oak guards the left side of the gentle dogleg left and the fairway drops into the valley formed by the old creek 190 yards from the hole. The creek must be traversed on the way to the green. A green expansion by Hearn has added several new hole locations.
Despite dramatic changes in the game and a relocated clubhouse, it is quite remarkable that today’s course retains much of Tweedie’s initial routing and many of the best holes follow the imprint of the Tweedie originals. "

I think if you compare Tweedie's work in Chicago to that of MacDonald at the orginal Chicago Golf and Whigham at Onwentsia, his work comes out ahead. 

 

[Greg Ohlendorf]

Dan,

I certainly was not trying to take credit for your material. My point was that the information on Tweedie's work could be found on the GCA site in the piece that I posted. It is clearly credited to you in that piece. Hope you didn't take offense.

Best,

Greg

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()