Are great courses left alone?

[John Connolly]

I played Shoreacres the other day and subsequently reviewed its aerial imagery through the years. I was struck at how little the course has changed - its routing, its green configurations, its bunkering, etc. I know tees have been added to lengthen the course but little else. And it got me wondering. Is it a testament to Raynor's work that is has remained static? Or to the membership's understanding of how great the course is and to therefore leave well enough alone? Any other examples of great courses that have been left, relatively speaking, undisturbed?

[BHoover]

There was a recent thread about a restoration at Shoreacres. So that would suggest the course had not been "left alone" at some point in its history, thereby necessitating a restoration. Shoreacres isn't alone either.

I wonder instead if the courses that have been "left alone" tend to be the ones that did not have the money to be messed with over the years?

[Joe Hancock]

To Brians point, there is a 9 hole Ross course in Ionia, MI that likely will never need to be restored, as it hasn't been changed. It might not survive much longer, but that's the economics of the situation. Where money is limited, so is the "messing with".

[John Connolly]

Brian,


A periodic flossing of the teeth (tree removal, returning fairway width, recapturing putting surface area) is not what I'm getting at. I'm referring to the need to add or remove bunkers, shift a green, re-route a segment of the course.

[Kyle Harris]

I can't say agree with the premise that any course could be shown to be left alone based on what would likely be less than a dozen aerial images.

Twelve days of snapshots over 80+ years of history doesn't prove much.

[Mark Chaplin]

Even Swinley Forest "the only original Colt" has had 400 yards of new tees in the past year.

[John Connolly]

When greens don't move, bunkers remain relatively unchanged, and the routing is exactly the same, I'd say that's a course that's been pretty much left alone. I'm not saying it is exactly as it was when first created but no one seems to have adjusted much there. We all know courses evolve - that's not my point. But when you look at a place like ANGC, it's had major surgery - not so at Shoreacres. And this is not a thread to pick apart what may have happened at SA.

[John Connolly]

Even Swinley Forest "the only original Colt" has had 400 yards of new tees in the past year.

What has significantly changed at Swinley Forest other than lengthening?

[Greg McMullin]

Brian, I would put forward Highlands Links as a course that has been largely unchanged in it's 75 years. Original routing, original greens (13 was raised many years ago due to flooding).

Brian,


A periodic flossing of the teeth (tree removal, returning fairway width, recapturing putting surface area) is not what I'm getting at. I'm referring to the need to add or remove bunkers, shift a green, re-route a segment of the course.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Brian, I would put forward Highlands Links as a course that has been largely unchanged in it's 75 years. Original routing, original greens (13 was raised many years ago due to flooding).

I think Ian could give us a lot of insight on this but certainly trees have changed the course a hell of a lot over the years.  And didn't the dragon shaped bunker (on #5 I think) change through the years.  I also think that Graham Cooke made a lot of changes about twenty years ago that many folks thought were detrimental.

[J_ Crisham]

I believe if the culture of the club is to host tournament golf then change is mandatory  to defend against the modern ball, equipment , player , conditioning etc. If you are discussing a nice members course then the likelihood is much less that a greens committee will create a beast-  although here in Chicago , Butterfield succeeded in creating a brutal course that is way beyond their typical members ability.

[Niall C]

Even Swinley Forest "the only original Colt" has had 400 yards of new tees in the past year.

Mark


I recall getting a guided tour by the then greenkeeper at Swinley where he proudly pointed out all the trees they had removed to create vistas, the bunkers they had added and as well as at least one new green. I'm always fairly dubious at claims that courses are untouched or that what we see now is entirely the work of the original architect. Just thinking of the various courses where I have been a member, it is amazing to think how the tinkering that goes on year on year adds up to some significant changes over the course of even 10 to 15 years even if the routing remains basically the same.


Niall

[Tom_Doak]

One of the least-touched courses I know of is Crystal Downs.  Because it was a summer club for the membership, they didn't want to take it out of play with silly revisions, and they didn't want to spend a lot of money on it, so very little construction was ever done.  It's one of the only courses I've seen where the bunkers shrunk over time [grass growing down into them] instead of expanded [due to edging].


But I guess it depends what you mean by "left alone".  In spite of the above, someone planted a bunch of trees in the 1960's, and it took until a few years ago to remove them all.  Also, heavy sand topdressing on the mucky greens has built up the greens relative to the surrounds during the time I've been around the course, and where the green had shrunk a bit before the topdressing program started, hole locations were lost.  [We have started to do work on a couple of these areas this fall ... there are a lot more to do.]  Further, the nature of the roughs has changed completely from 30 years ago due to new irrigation and more management; I am trying to steer it back to how the course used to play. 


So, even leaving a course alone is not enough, it is always trying to change in subtle ways.  Still, to me, it's better to leave it alone as long as you can, than let different architects tinker with it.  I have seen some bad examples of the latter in the past week.

[Niall C]

"It's one of the only courses I've seen where the bunkers shrunk over time [grass growing down into them] instead of expanded [due to edging]."

Tom

That's an interesting comment. From a purely UK, or indeed Scottish point of view I think the opposite has happened. I suspect that's partly due to grass growing down and encroaching into the bottom of the bunker as you suggest for Crystal Downs and also through necessary bunker rebuilding sandy faces are being replaced either by revetteding or worse, from my POV, grass faces.

You can see that happening from the old photo/new photo Mike Cirba posted on a thread on Lytham and also from old aerial pictures of various courses that Mark Rowlinson posted a while back. If that's not happening in the US then I wonder why ? What are the different drivers for change ?

Niall

[John McCarthy]

Could some of this be simply due to good luck?  No flooding that destroyed a green, no tornadoes, no bacterial blight, no roads encroaching, finances good so no land sell-off?  And no professional tournaments where the membership gets embarrassed about the best players in the world shooting three under par?   

[Tom_Doak]

Could some of this be simply due to good luck?  No flooding that destroyed a green, no tornadoes, no bacterial blight, no roads encroaching, finances good so no land sell-off?  And no professional tournaments where the membership gets embarrassed about the best players in the world shooting three under par?

Keeping tournaments away is an excellent preventive measure.


Flooding destroying a green is generally not just luck; you shouldn't put a green in a location where it will be destroyed, unless the whole project is in a flood plain of course.

[Brett Wiesley]

I played the Country Club of Troy in Upstate NY this Summer.  It's a Walter Travis course that hasn't changed much at all since original design.  The pro noted this was due to the club being very modest in means and membership....no $$$ no Change!  Great little gem of a track if you are in the area.

[Niall C]

Brett


Just to play Devil's Advocate, how do you know the course hasn't been tampered with ? At some point in the dim and distant past, the greens might have been rebuilt, the bunkers done in a different style, not to mention incremental changes made year on year that can add up to a whole lot.


Niall

[Jud_T]

It depends on your criteria for great courses.  If it's to challenge the best players, have history and hold tournaments like a large chunk of many top 100 lists, then they've pretty much all been f*&$ed with at some point;  so you really need to clarify what you mean by great.

[Ian Andrew]

Brian, I would put forward Highlands Links as a course that has been largely unchanged in it's 75 years. Original routing, original greens (13 was raised many years ago due to flooding).

It's not unchanged Greg.
I posted this thread to outline the changes.


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,62138.msg1476085.html#msg1476085