[Mark Bourgeois]

The intrepid Nick Norton trundled down to the British Library recently in connection with the Mackenzie Timeline Project and uncovered this gem, an article in the September 1924 Golf Monthly.

What I'm wondering is, the 11th has been regarded as a 'freak' for decades upon decades, yet of all who have safeguarded the course during that time, only the current caretakers decided it was their responsibility to 'fix' it. Why is that?

Would be cool to compare a recent survey to Mackenzie's.

[Tim Liddy]

Thanks for this article, Mark. Golf and golf course architecture has so much more depth when it is discussed as match play instead of worrying about a medal score. Dramatic hazards have become our biggest loss from this obsession.

[Ronald Montesano]

Has this hole been reproduced well anywhere? I remember during my one play having no idea how to manage it, made 5 or so, left as baffled as I entered.

With all the discussion of templates, this one would seem to be a certainty for homage.

[BCrosby]

Great find. Thanks for posting.

At about the same time Harold Hilton published an article criticizing the Eden.  The gist of Hilton's argument was that the hole was not very good because you could play the hole with a putter (That is, there was no cross hazard that needed to be carried. Joshua Crane had a similar criticism of the hole a couple of years later when rating TOC.).

I suspect that MacK had Hilton's and other, similar criticisms in mind when he notes at the outset of the piece how controversial the hole was.

The ascendancy of strategic golf architecture in the 1920's is in many ways tied to the rise in the standing of the Eden and Road Holes. You don't hear many people condemning them these days as bad designs. We tend to forget how many people (especially pros) didn't like the holes back in the day.

Bob

[Tom_Doak]

Has this hole been reproduced anywhere? I remember during my one play having no idea how to manage it, made 5 or so, left as baffled as I entered.

With all the discussion of templates, this one would seem to be a certainty for homage.

Reproduced exactly?  No.

Attempted?  Many times.  Pretty much every Raynor / Macdonald course has an "Eden" hole, but for some reason they are not much like the 11th in terms of the shape of the green or the depth of the bunkers, and I've never seen one that really allows for a running approach into the green.  

Macdonald famously believed in having a cross hazard well short of the green so you couldn't just putt the length of the hole -- which MacKenzie is arguing against here -- but he did leave the approach open.  It's just that usually the ground is not firm and there's a severe upslope in front of the green, so there is no way a low shot is going to make it onto the green.

I've tried a version of the hole three or four times ... 15th at High Pointe [though it was a drop shot], 13th at Beechtree, 2nd at Old Macdonald.  The last of these is probably the best version I've done [and the only one which remains standing], but we didn't get the little ridge at the front left correct.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Bob

Funnily enough, I believe Hilton was one of the unnamed top notch golfers Mackenzie mentions.

[BCrosby]

Mark -

Yes, along with J. H. Taylor and Harry Vardon, who both felt about the hole much as Hilton did.

As TD notes above, I had forgotten that CBM (of all people) had the same complaint about the Eden. 

Bob

[Mark Bourgeois]

Notice in the survey the green near and behind Hill bunker was not regarded as pinnable back then. Why did the current caretakers feel this was a new problem that history called on them to solve?

Interesting use of the term "island green" by Mac.

[Bill_McBride]

Dr. MacKenzie goes on to state that the putter might not be the best plan because the contours at the front of the green would draw many putts into Strath or Hill.  As I know from bitter personal experience, escaping from Strath can be a daunting proposition!   When I return to St Andrews in May I will carry a lob wedge to Scotland for the first time.

Great find, that's a terrific article.  I loved the reference to Bobby Jones picking up and Vardon also losing an Open there. 

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Mark - very enjoyable.

It's good for me to remember that people say a lot of things. How the criticism that the 11th 'could be played with a putter' gained any traction amongst serious minds back then is beyond me. (As if many golfers tried it, and as if -- amongst the few who did -- many came away with anything better than a bogey, and as if -- even if a rare bogey was achieved that way -- it reflected badly on the golf hole.) It serves as a good warning against agreeing too quickly with what today's serious minds have to say about this or that.

More and more I'm starting to believe that the first and most important principle of gca is 'leave the damn golf hole just the way it is!'.  As with Rembrandt's Prodigal Son that Tommy has posted -- only with Time and Silence and Attention will the beauty and meaning and nuance and essential 'isness' of a work of art or an old golf hole become apparent.

Peter

[John Percival]

In the 1959 US Open at WF, Billy Casper laid up all 4 rounds at the long 3 par 3rd. Each day he made par and ultimately won the event. Doesn't Eden also allow for such 'strategy'? In fact, if the pin is set beyond the Strath bunker, the short, left play may be most prudent. Of course, a left pin would be a practically inaccessible pitch, but the 20-25 foot par putt would be preferable to the ping pong scenarios listed (and laughed about).

[Sven Nilsen]

More and more I'm starting to believe that the first and most important principle of gca is 'leave the damn golf hole just the way it is!'.  

It is a thought that has occurred to others before (Golfers Magazine, April 1916).

[David Kelly]

More and more I'm starting to believe that the first and most important principle of gca is 'leave the damn golf hole just the way it is!'.  

Shakespeare's 103rd Sonnet:

"Were it not sinful then, striving to mend,
To mar the subject that before was well?"

[Jim Sherma]

Has this hole been reproduced anywhere? I remember during my one play having no idea how to manage it, made 5 or so, left as baffled as I entered.

With all the discussion of templates, this one would seem to be a certainty for homage.

Reproduced exactly?  No.

Attempted?  Many times.  Pretty much every Raynor / Macdonald course has an "Eden" hole, but for some reason they are not much like the 11th in terms of the shape of the green or the depth of the bunkers, and I've never seen one that really allows for a running approach into the green.  

Macdonald famously believed in having a cross hazard well short of the green so you couldn't just putt the length of the hole -- which MacKenzie is arguing against here -- but he did leave the approach open.  It's just that usually the ground is not firm and there's a severe upslope in front of the green, so there is no way a low shot is going to make it onto the green.

I've tried a version of the hole three or four times ... 15th at High Pointe [though it was a drop shot], 13th at Beechtree, 2nd at Old Macdonald.  The last of these is probably the best version I've done [and the only one which remains standing], but we didn't get the little ridge at the front left correct.

I remember reading that the Gordons had the hole surveyed in order to create a reproduction on Saucon's Grace course. The different turf conditions does not allow it to play the same. From a reproduction standpoint, at least initially, it might be as close as they come.

[David Stamm]

Great article, Mark. Thank for sharing. I've played a few holes that have attempted to copy or emulate the hole. I look forward to the day of seeing the genuine article.

[Peter Pallotta]

More and more I'm starting to believe that the first and most important principle of gca is 'leave the damn golf hole just the way it is!'.  

Shakespeare's 103rd Sonnet:

"Were it not sinful then, striving to mend,
To mar the subject that before was well?"

Nice! And to paraphrase Julian of Norwich: "It was necessary that there be sin, but all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well, as long as committees and chairs and architects leave well enough alone".

[Tom_Doak]

I remember reading that the Gordons had the hole surveyed in order to create a reproduction on Saucon's Grace course. The different turf conditions does not allow it to play the same. From a reproduction standpoint, at least initially, it might be as close as they come.

I just looked on Google Earth, since I didn't remember the hole from having been there.  I can see the hole in question, but there is only fairway the last 20 yards in front of the green, and the "Strath" is dead center on the green.  More importantly, I highly doubt the bunkers are anywhere near as severe or the green is anywhere near as tilted as the real thing.

[Thomas Dai]

There is a current thread entitled "Does playing with hickories better reveal a golf course?" - http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,60183.0.html

Not attempting to teach grandmothers to suck eggs here, but I believe it would be beneficial in understanding the aspects Dr Mack' is writing about if the hole were to be played in as near a method as possible to 1924, ie from his stated 148 yardage, from the same tee-green angle and with hickory shafted clubs with heads made before 1924 plus a ball that plays as near as possible to the period as can be acquired. And with bunkers full of footprints. It would probably help if the green weren't cut for several days beforehand too, but that may be too much to ask.

I really do believe that playing with equipment of the day helps the understand why an old course, any old course, was built like it was. Not just hickory period courses either, but courses from say the later 1930's to around 1990 when played with persimmon, steel shafts, blades, wound golf balls and a SW with no more than about 56* loft.

Another current thread, namely, "What did Harry (Vardon) carry" may also be relevant here - http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,60155.0.html

Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Years ago, someone posted a picture of the topo map of the Eden (pre-renovation) which was instructive.  I copied it, but can't seem to paste it.

I was never impressed with the Eden, or shall I say purported copies of the Eden, because HHW wrote that the paired hazards were the key - avoid the deep Strath bunker too far left, and you get in the Hill bunker.  

In reality, it is the ground contour that make the original, not the hazards.  The crumpled ground in front made it plenty hard to run up  reliably and the very steep back to front made it hard to putt from beyond the hole.  With modern standard 2% greens, it is really a more straightforward carry the bunker or don't shot, resulting in a longer putt.

[Carl Rogers]

....
I've tried a version of the hole three or four times ... 15th at High Pointe [though it was a drop shot], 13th at Beechtree, 2nd at Old Macdonald.  The last of these is probably the best version I've done [and the only one which remains standing], but we didn't get the little ridge at the front left correct.
[/quote]
Tom, wouldn't you say the 11th at Riverfront has several characteristics of the Eden?  as well as the Short?

[Jim Hoak]

Thanks for this Mark. Golf and golf course architecture has so much more depth when it is discussed as match play instead of worrying about a medal score. Dramatic hazards have become our biggest loss from our obsession with the medal score.
/quote]



Good comment on match vs. stroke play.  That is so true of much of the impact on golf course architecture--as well as golf in general.  I don't know why that has happened in American golf; most of us play 90%+ of our golf as match play.  Yet we maintain this obsession with a score for handicap purposes.  Maybe people don't know that the USGA encourages picking up when out of a hole and estimating what the score probably would have been.  You don't need to count everything to put a handicap score in.

[Craig Disher]

Thanks, Mark. In the drawing, I like the absence of any defined border for the putting surface. To me, that suggests that putting was possible through the green although with the limits Mac placed on the hole locations, within those limits the putting surface was much better. With such severe penalties surrounding the green, if a match opponent put his ball in the Strath or over the green, wouldn't it be wise to run the ball from the tee short of the green, putt on and gracefully take a bogey?

The best copy might have been #3 at The Lido.

[Tony_Muldoon]

I've probably told this before.


First time on the Old it took an age to get round the hook.  Stood on the 11th tee for what seemed like hours. As the group on the green are finishing up I hear a caddie saying it came over here and he starts to walk in front of us (playing 7).  A second voice pipes up ”It can't be that far right”.
It is with some shock that I recognise the speaker having played with him a couple of times.  I then realise where the ball I had noticed by the 10th green, came from. I call for attention, say Hello and wait even longer while they play on.

I hit what feels like a fine 5i (I can remember it like yesterday even though it was more than 5 years ago) but it's pulled a little and the ball keeps moving until it disappears into Hill bunker.  When I get to it I decide a really open face and full swing 'might' get me out of this cavern. Success! But the ball doesn’t want to stop any time soon and I'm now inside my amigo on the 7th part of the green. He invites me to play first. Well maybe I rushed the read but more likely I focussed to much on the final third. As soon as it started to roll it headed left, and then a bit more left and then into Strath!

And that gentlemen is how I managed to get up and down from Strath for a 5!

To answer your Question mark – I'm sorry I have no idea. Why would anyone choose to fiddle with a legend when they lack the courage to call for a drone strike on the 9th ?

[Jim Sherma]

I remember reading that the Gordons had the hole surveyed in order to create a reproduction on Saucon's Grace course. The different turf conditions does not allow it to play the same. From a reproduction standpoint, at least initially, it might be as close as they come.

I just looked on Google Earth, since I didn't remember the hole from having been there.  I can see the hole in question, but there is only fairway the last 20 yards in front of the green, and the "Strath" is dead center on the green.  More importantly, I highly doubt the bunkers are anywhere near as severe or the green is anywhere near as tilted as the real thing.

Tom

I did a search and found this:

It is true. William Gordon hired a surveyor in Scotland to send him the exact specifications of the Eden at TOC. So at Saucon, you can find the Hill, Shelley and Strath bunkers, as well as a severely sloping back-to-front green. Perhaps the biggest difference is that there is no water behind, which is somewhat odd because the Saucon Creek winds throughout the property. The Gordons had plenty of opportunity to build a green in front of the creek.

I once emailed David Gordon to ask why. He said "Dad did not like hazards behind greens. He felt that going long was penalty enough."

I believe that I had read or heard this from a different source as well but can't remember where. Not sure how exact the replica was or remains, but there does seem to be something to the story. Perhaps Bill can supply more details than I can.

[Mark Chaplin]

Thomas of course someone standing on the first tee in 1924 would have come across an 80 year old shaking their head at the new equipment and smooth conditions on the course. We forget TOC is very old indeed and MacKenzie's time was a blip on the chart of time just as much as today is.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()