[Matthew Rose]

"69 percent of the membership at Oak Hill Country Club in Rochester, N.Y., voted to restore its East Course to the vintage 1925 Donald Ross design. With the club contracted with the PGA of America to host two major championships in the the next six years, Andrew Green will be handling the changes to holes that had previously been redesigned by Tom Fazio and Robert Trent Jones III (sic). Green will have tour player input from Rochester native Jeff Sluman, the 1988 PGA champion. Ground breaking will take place just after the club hosts the Senior PGA Championship in 2019. "


http://www.golfdigest.com/story/uihlein-another-koepka-pal-to-keep-an-eye-on-snedeker-turns-the-tables-and-back-to-the-future-at-oak-hill

[Gary Sato]

How many classics has Fazio worked on that needed to be rebuilt by another architect?


Merion
Bel Air
Pinehurst #4

[Tom_Doak]

Yay for Oak Hill.  My host from 38 years ago, Mr. King, would surely approve, if he's still alive.

[Greg Gilson]

I only played OHE once (almost exactly 1 year ago) ...but the "new" holes were definitely quite jarring. Its a wonderful club with a great history so this is a good move, I think.


Who is Andrew Green?

[Matthew Rose]

I'm looking at an aerial.... the old par-3 fifth hole looks like it is still maintained. I assume this is original and would be brought back into circulation.

[Anthony_Nysse]

How many classics has Fazio worked on that needed to be rebuilt by another architect?


Merion
Bel Air
Pinehurst #4

C&C are also in a Oakmont, where Fazio has been involved for years.


Andrew Green is also doing Inverness where Fazio changed the layout in the 70's.

[Mike Schott]

Maybe this will spur Oakland Hills members to revisit their no vote on a similar restoration on the South course.

[John Blain]

I'm looking at an aerial.... the old par-3 fifth hole looks like it is still maintained. I assume this is original and would be brought back into circulation.

Matt-
The hole I believe you are referring to was not part of the original Ross design. It was a hole that was put in for the 1968 US Open. The club/USGA decided to take the par 3 sixth hole out of play and replace it with the hole that you are looking at. I believe the decision to do this was made due to the fact the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open. The hole that was put in for the '68 Open is now used as a practice hole or put into play when a hole on the golf course is closed for whatever reason. I want to say the hole put in for the '68 Open was designed by Davis Love, Jr. but I am not totally sure. It's not a bad hole but there is nothing too memorable about it.
Best Regards,
John

[Ronald Montesano]

Paging Berckman's Nursery...

[Tom_Doak]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

[BCowan]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Tom,


The original routing at Inverness won't work because the 7th was squeezed in and too close to 17th green.  They are Re creating 1 ross par 3 and Nichols par 3.  The 8th green is moving.  If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range.  Can't wait for 2018.

[Rob Marshall]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Members have told me that a new 5th is going to be added where the practice green is located John referred to. The current 5th hole will play to a new green located approximately where the current 6th green is located. I don't think that would effect the 7th tee. Things may have changed since I was told that.

[Chris_Blakely]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

I've heard many of the members (at Inverness) did not like the fact that all the par threes face in the same direction.  As a result the wanted the new par three to face in the opposite direction.


Chris

[John Blain]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Members have told me that a new 5th is going to be added where the practice green is located John referred to. The current 5th hole will play to a new green located approximately where the current 6th green is located. I don't think that would effect the 7th tee. Things may have changed since I was told that.

Rob-
I think you are correct that the "new" fifth hole will be what is now the practice hole that you see when you drive into the club. I just can't imagine them trying to shoehorn in the original par three sixth.

I have also heard that they will be filling in the pond on the par 3 fifteenth which tells me they probably won't be going back to the original Ross hole where the green sat on top of the hill left of where the 15th tee is now and the teeing area was short and right of the fourteenth green.
I'm curious what the plan is for hole number 18. That green is one the worst greens ever built, IMO. Hopefully they will go back to the original green which was 40-50 yards back from where the Fazio green now sits. I never saw the original Ross green but I have heard from several older members that it was one of the best greens on the entire property. But they blew it up so they could put bleachers in for the major tournaments!


Rob- Hope you are well and look forward to seeing you at Crag Burn in September for the NYSGA Senior Am.


-John

[Niall Hay]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Tom,


The original routing at Inverness won't work because the 7th was squeezed in and too close to 17th green.  They are Re creating 1 ross par 3 and Nichols par 3.  The 8th green is moving.  If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range.  Can't wait for 2018.

"If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range." - strong statement.   

[Ari Techner]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Tom,


The original routing at Inverness won't work because the 7th was squeezed in and too close to 17th green.  They are Re creating 1 ross par 3 and Nichols par 3.  The 8th green is moving.  If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range.  Can't wait for 2018.

"If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range." - strong statement.   

I'm sure it will be much improved but Inverness doesn't have anywhere near 9+ potential. Getting rid of the Fazio won't get rid of the mostly boring monotonous straight holes on the back 9.

[BCowan]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Tom,


The original routing at Inverness won't work because the 7th was squeezed in and too close to 17th green.  They are Re creating 1 ross par 3 and Nichols par 3.  The 8th green is moving.  If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range.  Can't wait for 2018.

"If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range." - strong statement.   

I'm sure it will be much improved but Inverness doesn't have anywhere near 9+ potential. Getting rid of the Fazio won't get rid of the mostly boring monotonous straight holes on the back 9.

13-17 are outstanding holes, with 14 being the best hole on the course IMO.  14 and 17 have legs.  I'll go with Dick Wilson's quote of him referring to Inverness as a Rembrandt.  Inverness is the acid test for someone getting a great golf course. 

[Ari Techner]

the original par 3 sixth was somewhat "crammed in" and too close to the seventh tee, eighth green, ninth tee, etc. That routing was fine for everyday member play but not too practical for a US Open.

That's why I was somewhat surprised that the club is going to restore the Ross routing ... I never saw the original hole but it's a pretty tight space there and they will lose length on #7 [I think] if they put the original #6 back.


Of course, I am presuming that when they announce a "restoration" they really mean it ... I have not seen the details.  I've heard that the "restoration" of Inverness includes the creation of two brand-new holes to replace the two Fazio holes, and also "re-creating" one of Ross's old par-3's at a new location, because of similar issues to do with gallery flow and overall length.

Tom,


The original routing at Inverness won't work because the 7th was squeezed in and too close to 17th green.  They are Re creating 1 ross par 3 and Nichols par 3.  The 8th green is moving.  If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range.  Can't wait for 2018.

"If done well it will be in the Doak 9+ range." - strong statement.   

I'm sure it will be much improved but Inverness doesn't have anywhere near 9+ potential. Getting rid of the Fazio won't get rid of the mostly boring monotonous straight holes on the back 9.

13-17 are outstanding holes, with 14 being the best hole on the course IMO.  14 and 17 have legs.  I'll go with Dick Wilson's quote of him referring to Inverness as a Rembrandt.  Inverness is the acid test for someone getting a great golf course.

Do not forget that Dick Wilson had a legendary drinking problem and was likely many sheets to the wind when he made that comment.  (If in fact he did at all)


If Inverness is the acid test for someone getting a great golf course does that mean you fail the test because you consistently over rate it?

[BCowan]

...

[Matthew Rose]

So there was a par-three sixth hole before there was a par-three fifth. Sounds like it won't exactly be the original routing then unless they somehow bring back that hole.


I had no idea they were doing Inverness too, but I guess it is interesting how all these old venues feel the need to un-Fazio themselves.

[Ari Techner]

Most greats had drinking problems.  The passage was from the clubs centinnal book, are u questioning that?  Usually folks are honest as hell when they are drunk.

Let's see I believe Doak gave it an 8 as is, Cirba gave it an 8 too.  I have it at a 7.6, hardly overratting it.  To say it can't be a 9-9.5 with Fazio removal is laughable. I pass the test with flying colors.  Many nuances most miss and criticizing the back 9 is rather amatuer, for they are good-great holes.  Most judge a course by how spectacular the land is and don't value character. 

Atleast YOU think you pass the test with flying colors hahahaha.

I never said it wasn't a good golf course and I'm sure it will be better when they are done but 9+ is one of the very best courses in the country and Inverness isn't close to that.  Despite you spending a lot of time there growing up. 

Your saying it can be one of the very best in the country but then describe the holes on the back 9 as good to great.  Hardly a strong defense.  And insult me as being "amateurish".  THAT is laughable.


You need to get out and see more.  Your lack of experience continues to show through in your strong opinions. 

[BCowan]

....

[Ari Techner]

Most greats had drinking problems.  The passage was from the clubs centinnal book, are u questioning that?  Usually folks are honest as hell when they are drunk.

Let's see I believe Doak gave it an 8 as is, Cirba gave it an 8 too.  I have it at a 7.6, hardly overratting it.  To say it can't be a 9-9.5 with Fazio removal is laughable. I pass the test with flying colors.  Many nuances most miss and criticizing the back 9 is rather amatuer, for they are good-great holes.  Most judge a course by how spectacular the land is and don't value character. 

Atleast YOU think you pass the test with flying colors hahahaha.

I never said it wasn't a good golf course and I'm sure it will be better when they are done but 9+ is one of the very best courses in the country and Inverness isn't close to that.  Despite you spending a lot of time there growing up. 

Your saying it can be one of the very best in the country but then describe the holes on the back 9 as good to great.  Hardly a strong defense.  And insult me as being "amateurish".  THAT is laughable.


You need to get out and see more.  Your lack of experience continues to show through in your strong opinions.

I've been to 2 top 10 courses and worked construction at 1 of them.  I've seen enough to know what I think is excellent.  Uve played maybe once and most bunters don't like it  .


Actually there are few courses that are highly ranked that I care to see.  My strong opinions can be backed up with why I like or love something.  Using the play more top courses line doesn't impress me with someone resume.  I have preconceived notions coming in and they usually turn out right.


Your answer with the back 9 was amaurish it was lacking specific details why u didn't care for it and I could care less what uve played.  It has the potential to be one of the best in the country IMO.

Insulting me as a "bunter" when you hit it no further than I do and I've kicked your @$$ everytime we have played together is amateurish.  I'm glad you have no interest in traveling around and seeing many of the great courses and will continue with your ill informed strong opinions.  You can't possibly know what has the potential to be one of the best in the country when you haven't seen most of the other contenders.  I'm sorry I engaged you in the public forum and will try not to do so in the future. 

[BCowan]

..

[Keith Phillips]

Boys, you are both coming off as petulant d+cks...it's the 4th of July, can't we all just get along??!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()