News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


T_MacWood

Re:Would Wilson be more apprecited...
« Reply #25 on: October 18, 2003, 02:28:01 PM »
TE
Don't you think Flynn's aerial game tendencies were a continuation of what was done at PVGC by Crump and Colt. Throughout the 20's the common criticism (by some like Taylor and Simpson) was too much aerial game in the US. Many seemed to produce courses that empasized target or aerial golf to some degree--Pasatiempo, Hirono, Timber Point, St.Georges, Oyster Harbors, Riviera, Purlborough, Brook Hollow, Sunningdale-New, etc.

And wasn't elasticity pretty much a common theory among most of 'golden age' architects?

I'm not familiar with a definitive 'scientific' architecture...what do you know about this concept and its origin?

What is the source of idea of an American 'championship' golf course?

Of all the golden age architects I would have thought Stanley Thompson would have been the likely transition architect--looking at his production in the 20's, especially in the 30's and even in the 40's and early 50's.

You also can not forget the revolutionary designs of MacKenzie in the 30's: Bayside, Jockey and ANGC.

Adam_Messix

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Would Wilson be more apprecited...
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2003, 02:28:42 PM »
The question that I would have is how has the Flynn style evolved from him to his sucessors, namely Wilson, Gordon, and later Joe Lee.  

The one thing that I noticed playing a Joe Lee course earlier this year was that the green surrounds appear similar to that of Flynn in terms of the position of the greenside mounding with the exception that the mounds are taller and less subtle.  Am I off base in what I am seeing, or this just an evolution of the Flynn style?  
« Last Edit: October 18, 2003, 09:40:05 PM by Adam_Messix »

TEPaul

Re:Would Wilson be more apprecited...
« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2003, 06:53:48 PM »
Tom MacW:

Elasticity was a fairly well known technique coming out of the Golden Age and its architects. MacKenzie mentioned it in writing early on. Flynn used the concept extremely well, I think, on some of his known "championship" designs most notably Shinnecock where it's still being used!

The concept of "championship" design I believe mostly emanated out of the design laboratory of Pine Valley that so many visited and collaborated on during construction. Crump's idea there evolved into a golf course strictly for high caliber play--strictly! His thought was to improving the performances of Philadelphia's best players on the national level by a tougher type of course to train their games on. The golf course was in no way intended to be for the average or mediocre player and Crump did not hesitate to make that fact known!

I believe this influence had a direct and impactful influence on the idea of golf courses that were designed for championship play (not exclusively but definitely for that purpose) and when William Flynn got that kind of green light from a client he very much went for that type in spades! There are many influences on Flynn that are apparent in his much of his work and style and one should not forget how early PVGC was and also that Flynn did a good deal of work there.

"Scientific design" was an idea that was talked about by Tillinghast and also some of those that reviewed golf courses being built after WW1. An article in a Boston newspaper by a well known local sports writer discusses the merits of new concept of "scientific design" by Flynn (and Wilson) on the new golf course at Kittansett.

Some of Alister Mackenzie's designs were revolutionary in my opinion too--frankly Mackenzie may be the architect whose later work I admire most of any architect but I don't know that I'd call it a "transition" into the "Modern Age". It's a shame it wasn't what transitioned into the Modern Age as the Modern Age may have been better for it! Mackenzie's real application of "naturalism" in architecture is perhaps the one thing that "Modern Age" architecture failed in most. Some of the "Golden Agers" advocated it strongly and hoped it would be vastly improved when the art evolved and advanced.

Adam:

There are some real similarities, in my opinion, between the work of William Gordon and Flynn and to a degree between Dick Wilson and Flynn paticularly in the manner of bunkering the approaches to green's I think! I don't see all that much similarity in the rear of Gordon or Wilson greens though to how Flynn constantly sort of saddled green backs (pulling up strings). This combined effect probably had something to do with his greens being labeled "potato chips". It's only natural that Gordon and Wilson would resemble Flynn since both worked for him for the good part of two decades.

T_MacWood

Re:Would Wilson be more apprecited...
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2003, 10:41:54 PM »
TE
I'm not sure when it began, but the idea of a 'championship course' began before PV. One of the first references to the concept I have read was an essay written by Harold Hilton in 1906.

Weren't there many examples of testing or championship designs in the teens and twenties, even further back if you consider GCGC, Princes, Oakmont and NGLA 'championship' designs--which I do.

The first mention of 'scientific' course making I have seen was by Horace Hutchinson in 1908.

It seems to me that MacKenzie and Thompson would be the two logical choices as transitional architects pre- and post- WWII. That's pretty much what HW Wind and RTJ wrote at that time.