Jim Finnegan interviews Rees Jones

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Spotlighting his work in the Philadelphia area:

http://www.mainlinetoday.com/Main-Line-Today/May-2015/Architect-Spotlight-Rees-Jones/

This is NOT the late Jim Finegan

[Cliff Hamm]

 It is with interest that I read his comments about Galloping  Hill. I grew up playing golf at Galloping  Hill when they had mats for tees and many of the fairways had gopher tunnels.  Haven't played it since the early 70s.

 While I live out of state now, I do drive-by on the parkway from time to time. What is most noticeable is the ostentatios  club house that was built.  No comparison with the old clubhouse and that is not a compliment.

Has anyone played the Hill in the last few years?I look forward, I think, to  giving it a try this summer.

[MCirba]

It's interesting that he views each of his courses as successes from a playability, architectural, and presumably financial standpoint.  I wonder if the owners of each of those properties would share his assessment?

[Tom_Doak]

The logic of this quote escapes me:

"We have to expand courses to 7,500 yards for the Mike Davises of the world. But these courses are usually never intended to play that long: they need the extra length to give them the flexibility to have drivable par 4’s and shorter par 5’s. Most of the courses that get bumped up to 7,500 yards really only play 7,200-7,300 yards—it’s all about having setup options within the big number."

We need to have tees at 450 yards so they can shorten the hole?  Is that just to give more credit to the guys who are setting up the course?

[A.G._Crockett]

It's interesting that he views each of his courses as successes from a playability, architectural, and presumably financial standpoint.  I wonder if the owners of each of those properties would share his assessment?

Um, no.

[Nate Oxman]

How could he play golf at Yale and not be influenced by the course?

[A.G._Crockett]

It's interesting that he views each of his courses as successes from a playability, architectural, and presumably financial standpoint.  I wonder if the owners of each of those properties would share his assessment?

Mike,
I don't know where you are these days, or if you are still spending time in Georgia.  But Echelon in Alpharetta would be a pretty massive "Fail" on each of those; playability, architectural, and financial.  It would make a pretty good case study of things NOT to do.

[Peter Pallotta]

To Tom D's point/question above, and noting that Mike Davis has announced that he's looking at using uneven teeing grounds at CB, I think that Rees is implying (and recognizing) something quite specific, i.e. the changing narrative in regards to US Open Venues and US Open 'set ups': in 1951 the talk was about RTJ's redesignof Oakland Hills; in 2004 it was about how Mr Meeks lost control of Shinnecock; in these last few years, it's about how Mike D can brilliantly set up any course/any design as the perfect US Open challenge.

It is a narrative that is increasingly supported by the admiring media and cognoscenti alike; but to me, far from highlighting/celebrating the original designs and original architects, this trend seems to be moving towards making all golf courses interchangeable, save for their geographic location, i.e. so we get one US Open 'set up' in the southeast and then one in the northwest, and then a US Open 'set up' in the east and one in the west etc.

I think that is what Rees is implying, and thus suggesting that he is through his design decisions merely supporting what the 'keepers of the game' want.

Peter

[MCirba]

A.G. Crockett,

I'm still in the Philly area and have played all of the courses mentioned in the article.   In fact, last week I played another original Rees course, the "Forest" course at Fiddler's Elbow Country Club in NJ.  

I was being kind asking the question.   Personally, I find it remarkable that he builds essentially the same golf course irrespective of what the natural landforms or terrain he's been given by Mother Nature.

Of the courses listed, Huntsville is by far the best, but I still view it as a missed opportunity because there are over 300 acres of really beautiful land that I would have loved to see what someone a bit more easy on the land would have been able to do.   Instead, it's a Doak 6 or 7 essentially because it's tough to imagine anyone not being able to find some good golf holes out there.

[Jeff_Brauer]

The logic of this quote escapes me:

"We have to expand courses to 7,500 yards for the Mike Davises of the world. But these courses are usually never intended to play that long: they need the extra length to give them the flexibility to have drivable par 4’s and shorter par 5’s. Most of the courses that get bumped up to 7,500 yards really only play 7,200-7,300 yards—it’s all about having setup options within the big number."

We need to have tees at 450 yards so they can shorten the hole?  Is that just to give more credit to the guys who are setting up the course?

Not sure if the writer got it a bit wrong (it happens) or if Rees may have meant that IF you have a 300 yard hole, you need a few that can extend further to keep the total yardage at 7200 or so.

Rees is right about the typical set up. From my talking to folks, most tournament courses are set up no longer than 7200, mostly to protect the lower half of the distance field.  Talking with the U of I coach, he said the college courses are that length. And, as the No. 1 ranked team, he has only 2 of 10 who average over 300 yards, so most can't play much longer than that.

I also noted that Sand Creek Station, when played for the Publinx, didn't set up much over 7000 (max 7400) due to the windy conditions.  For the Kansas Am, they set it up at 6700 and only a few broke par.

BTW, Rees is one of the nicest and classiest guys in the golf biz.  He has always been great with me, starting with the first time I met him about 35 years ago when I was a green as peas apprentice with Dick Nugent, and he offered me a ride and sat and had a drink with me.

He can be funny, too.  Two years ago, we were paired at Lookout Mountain for the ASGCA meeting.  He had just had shoulder surgery and this was his first round in a year.  The weather was perfect, and he was waxing eloquently about how great it was to be playing golf again.  He hit the first green in regulation.  He  was still waxing when he missed a two footer for par,  He yelled out (with a smile) "I hate this game!"  I appreciated that sense of humor about how quickly your feelings can change......

[Mike Nuzzo]

Jeff
You didn't give Rees a 2 foot putt for par after an injury layoff?
Tough crowds at these ASGCA events.

IMO the mistake wasn't by the writer, but by Rees or the USGA.

Cheers

[Steve Lang]

  its nice to have options

like at Rees' Black Lake, one of the one shoters, plays 120-236 yrs

[Tom_Doak]

Not sure if the writer got it a bit wrong (it happens) or if Rees may have meant that IF you have a 300 yard hole, you need a few that can extend further to keep the total yardage at 7200 or so.

Rees is right about the typical set up. From my talking to folks, most tournament courses are set up no longer than 7200, mostly to protect the lower half of the distance field.  Talking with the U of I coach, he said the college courses are that length. And, as the No. 1 ranked team, he has only 2 of 10 who average over 300 yards, so most can't play much longer than that.

I also noted that Sand Creek Station, when played for the Publinx, didn't set up much over 7000 (max 7400) due to the windy conditions.  For the Kansas Am, they set it up at 6700 and only a few broke par.

Jeff:

I understand what you're saying, but I still don't get it.  Why build 7500 yards worth of tees when even the best amateurs in the state or the country aren't going to play the course at more than 7000 or 7200? 

Why not just design a couple of good short par-4's, instead of making them all long and then letting Mike Davis sort out which ones he wants to play from the forward tees?

Or is everyone taking too much credit here -- Mike Davis for having to exert his influence on the set-up instead of just playing the course as it was designed, and Rees for implying that he had that in mind all along?

[Jeff_Brauer]

What? An architect trying to get extra credit? I have never heard of such a thing!

Seriously, it is a confusing quote.  And it may be that the notion of a 7200 yard course is just too strong for them to let go of, even after playing Merion at sub 7K.

I really just don't know......

[Adam Lawrence]

Jeff
You didn't give Rees a 2 foot putt for par after an injury layoff?
Tough crowds at these ASGCA events.

Oh, they are. They grind on every putt, and if you try any banter, you get excommunicated.....

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff
You didn't give Rees a 2 foot putt for par after an injury layoff?
Tough crowds at these ASGCA events.

IMO the mistake wasn't by the writer, but by Rees or the USGA.

Cheers

Mike,

When you join, we will play your first round together, and I will concede the first two footer you have. Deal?

Adam,

Same deal for you if we ever get paired!

[Mike_Young]

So often the interviews with sons of golf architects confuse me.   

[Pat Burke]

Jeff:

I understand what you're saying, but I still don't get it.  Why build 7500 yards worth of tees when even the best amateurs in the state or the country aren't going to play the course at more than 7000 or 7200? 

Or is everyone taking too much credit here -- Mike Davis for having to exert his influence on the set-up instead of just playing the course as it was designed, and Rees for implying that he had that in mind all along?
[/quote]


     Perfect

[Steve Lang]

  I can just hear the complaints.. pros play the tips 4 days in a row, perfect weather conditions and no or constant wind lead to 30 under par winner! 

[MCirba]

That photo looks like Huntsville #3.

[Steve Lang]

  Mike,

I think this is it.   good eye,  fairly close play without the visual business,, would have to generally agree ... that left bail-out area and entrance, though looks like only 4 tees vs 9 at Black Lake (owned by the UAW, they don't mind having to upkeep more tees)

#3 Huntsville GC  (looks to play 113-183 yds)

[MCirba]

Steve,

It's also the 11th at Fiddlers Elbow Forest course I played last week.

[Steve Lang]

  Mike, Do i detect a template hole?    Does Rees have a name for it?  Though angled green in this design.  

I found #8 at Fiddler's Elbow CC.  Appears to play 103-173 yds.




ps.  is it luck or do you seek out Rees' courses?

[Kyle Henderson]

Mike, Do i detect a template hole?    Does Rees have a name for it?  Though angled green in this design.  

I found #8 at Fiddler's Elbow CC.  Appears to play 103-173 yds.




ps.  is it luck or do you seek out Rees' courses?

The playing characteristic of this hole are emulated on just about every golf course on the PGA Tour. The only real tell as to Rees' design repetition is the choice to extend the bunker so far back to the tee. This choice would seem to increase maintenance costs without impacting players of single digit handicaps.

[MCirba]

Steve,

Over the years I've been fortunate enough to have played 14 of Rees' original courses, another 4 where he was involved or partnered with his dad, and 16 where he did revisions.   

He certainly has his style.