Del Paso CC-Fowler? Soon to be redone?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat, Right now its in a room I can't get to because my cousin is asleep in my office/library/central research center

But I'll try to touch on it because it was a reference about Fowler, and how he had little patience for his unknowing clientele who had no idea of architecture but were always quick to opine. His response was that he usually flew off at the handle at them; or to that extent. Such is Sean's implications of me--as if I didn't already know I'm certifiably wacko.

But he fails to see the extent of Cliff's original posts where he (Cliff) is simply trying to dis-credit Mindy and switch attention from us certifield wackos. He wants to "Spin-it" if you will! (who he doesn't understand just how well read and versed some are about the subject on GCA or their abilities at finding research.)

At that time, I had already had, as did others, a few email conversations with Mindy. This turned into a phone conversation, and from these conversations I find her to be a highly-intelligent woman that is ready to search out the best resource for her club's cause; as well as its her job as a member of the Del Paso greens committee. Her chore is a typical one--a faction of green committee who wants their course to look and play like Serrano at Durado or Granite Bay-yet, the membership is based of mid to high-handicappers who love to play as much as the low handicappers do. They do it for their leisure, enjoyment and competitive bent. They love their course, and several other factions of the green committee do not fully understand the neccessity of a very costly redesign of a course that has suited them nicely for 83+/- years. Yes, it may need work, but to fully reroute the course as well as build a beheamoth that won't be anything like Fowler's work, only a representation of what Kyle Phillips feels is along the "Classical Lines" of Fowler's work. To me, that is more then enough reason to research all of this.

Simply put, I think someone is trying to bully her into submission, and from what I can tell you from the conversation I had with her, it isn't going to work.

So, Sean, if I had an extra copy of GAOGA I would send it to you, but I don't, but I still think you should have one or at least Tosh, so he can see how wrong he got those bunkers at Merion!   But as I have said before, that I know there times that I'm very harsh and thats because I just can't stand to see another Merion or Riviera or Oak Hill or Bel Air or any of Max Behr's courses, and so on and so on.  The list is ad infinitum.

So instead of harping more on this--lets try to find some information for this really passionate lady who wants to learn Fowler and his body of work as well as restore order to a wonderful private member's club that could be the same as anyone in a million in regards to their maintenance and upkeep and original design intent. Sean, you live much closer to Far Hills then I do. Why don't you put down the books for a second and get over there and do four hours research of Fowler with Paul Turner or anybody else that wants to learn, and has no problem with the 3000 mile barrier between Sacramento and New York.

I will guarantee you it will be totally exhilirating when you find something that might be of great help, and in truth it really feels great when you do!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy Naccarato,

Wouldn't anything done in the TRUE SPIRIT of Fowler mandate the preservation of his routing of the golf course.

Isn't the routing the soul of the golf coures ?  His true spirit ?
Isn't that what endures long after features erode and evolve?

If you're going to dramatically change the routing, then you are destroying Fowler's TRUE SPIRIT.

There are no if, or buts about it, you're disfiguring and forever destroying his work.

How can a club that knows nothing of Fowler's work, declare that a total revision will preserve the  "true spirit" of Fowler's work ?

Have plans been submitted which reflect the recreation of Fowler's true spirit ?

Forrest Richardson,

I believe that Oakmont never considered re-routing their golf course, let alone changing a hole or two.  Oakmont's work has been along the lines of a faithfully restoring what mother nature, and perhaps a green chairman might have planted or narrowed.

[George Pazin]

George says: "I do hope things go well at Del Paso, but I have to admit, pretty much anyone saying they intend to duplicate "the spirit" of someone else's work scares the heck out of me."

Yet, George also says the Fownes, creators of one of America's most teasured courses, apparently desired to duplicate the spirit of links courses being built across the sea. Thankfully George was not around in 1902-3...but certainly it is great having him around now.

Surely a learned man such as yourself can see the difference between attempting to emulate the spirit of someone else's style and emulating a style of golf. Or perhaps not.

As for the second part:

I will also not dig deep into his hundreds of posts in which he applauds certain designers, designs and ideals...for doing so would only serve to point out that he truly does embrace the concept of the duplication of "the spirit" of someone else's work."

I do indeed laud designers who attempt to learn their craft through deep thinking, critical reflection, etc. I'd be surprised if any of my posts indicated that I felt an architect was accurately attempting to duplicate the spirit of someone else's work. Even my many posts on Oakmont, which to my recollection are the only posts I've made regarding specific restoration work, are comments on the course itself, not on the work carried out by the various parties involved.

I also see a difference in an original designer of a course attempting to emulate the spirit of another designer, and designer over another designer in his spirit. If Brian Silva chooses to emulate Raynor's spirit in creating Black Creek, I think that's very interesting. If he chooses to redesign one of Raynor's original courses in the spirit of Raynor, I'd say that's not a good thing. Look at the result's of Fazio trying to emulate the spirit of George Thomas. I don't think there was any malicious intent, but that didn't stop a bad thing from happening.

Lastly, when I say a statement scares the heck out of me, that most definitely does not mean it is automatically wrong - it means all the red flags are up & I think it's time to do some serious thinking and rethinking of the issue at hand. It is indeed possible that someone could build a better course than the work of the original architect. It just seems to happen so infrequently that I think prudence would win out. For all his written devil may care, let's let things evolve attitude, I'd be surprised if Rich Goodale would encourage someone to come in and remodel Dornoch in the spirit of the previous work done. Similarly, I'd be equally surprised if you were to say to one of your clients 20 years from now, sure, let someone else redo this course I created in the spirit of what I intended.

The most insightful comment on this entire thread was Tom MacWood's simple observation: Why would anyone want to play a course created in the spirit of a master when they can play the real thing?

[SPDB]

Tommy - your thread is informative, and is a pretty good example of what I was looking for. By describing the background you have qualified your remarks (but not necessarily justified them).

Your comments about Fowler are interesting. Nevertheless, whatever Fowler did in the context of an employee/employer relationship doesn't give you the same authority.

I sincerely hope that Cliff and Mindy do what's right by the membership, and resolve their differences to the satisfaction and approval of the WHOLE club. Hopefully that means a thoughtful and sympathetic restoration of Fowler's course. If, however, a majority of the club members want something different, who are we to argue with them, regrettable as it may be?

I can only imagine how this thread would turn out if we substituted "Los Angeles CC (North)-Fowler? Soon to be redone?" in the title, and swapped George C. Thomas, Jr. for Kyle Phillips.
It does illustrate that these are hard questions.

[ForkaB]

George

If you look back at my last post on this thread (and my body of "work" on this site), you will see that you are wrong--I am in fact very much open to the possibilites of improving Dronoch.  It has been done before, many times--why not again?

I know Tommy has puffed you up a lot on this thread, but the only home runs being hit here are from Sean.  He hasn't put a foot wrong yet and all the Kings horses and all the Naccaratos and MacWoods and Pazins and even Muccis have done nothing to even make him wobble sitting up there on his wall.  Keep it up, SPBD (and Forrest)!  .......and the rest of you--raise your game if you want to play or take your balls home and sulk.  This whole thread, started so positively by Mindy and Cliff has become a non-content, petulant no-brainer.

IMHO, of course.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sean, Lets just say that my comments were done in the Spirit and Classic Lines of Fowler--you see, I want it always to be my way and my way only!   Actually, the over-seer of construction of Fowler's LACC North was Captain Thomas. Not really sold on many of Fowler's principles, Thomas choose to remodel the course in the late 20's and that course is the course that made it the reputable one that it is today. Thomas wasn't the first to disagree with Fowler's Principles--So did MacKenzie, who did in print say that he didn't agree with many of his designs, but still respected his knowledge and fundamentals. Or something to that extent.

So you see Sean, if you get over to Far Hills, you can help in uncovering this lack of proper material on Fowler. It will be of great help in this cause.

George, seven home runs in one Game is more then All Star material, it's hall of fame.

Pat, as eloquent as ever!

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

I think a flaw exists in your assumption that Cliff Henry is a member of Del Paso.

If Cliff is an employee, and as I've indicated many times before, if you take the King's schilling, you do the King's bidding, his official position is predetermined irrespective of his personal opinion.

Cliff may not be in a position to consider any course of action other then that course of action as dictated by his employer, and as such he must support and promote that position, with his architectural blinders on.

He never answered the questions I posed to him.
Yet, he maintained that the project would incorporate the true spirit of Fowler's work.  How can you do that if you don't know what that is.

And, Tom MacWood is 1000 % correct, why strive to play someones guestimate or interpretation of Fowler's true spirit,
when you can play the real deal

Something isn't passing the smell test !

Sean, I don't know if you follow or play chess, but are you trying to employ the famous Merion Defense ?  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat, You just have completed a three-move checkmate!  

[Forrest Richardson]

George — Well said, until this part: "Surely a learned man such as yourself can see the difference between attempting to emulate the spirit of someone else's style and emulating a style of golf. Or perhaps not." "See" the difference? Or, "know" the difference? I suppose either way the result is similar.

As for Tom's insightful remark, I would suggest we all ask ourselves the same question as it relates to our conversation here — "Why would anyone want to engage in conversation on line rather than in person?" I can think of several rational answers — and also several to Tom's question relative to Del Paso/Fowler.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rich, I ask you for some help here. Not with Fowler, but in helping me understand why it is that your always quick to be critical yet, never offer any help in the form of content other then a quick slam or insert of criticism that is always sent, "IMHO."

The fact is what credibility do you have in regard to research of golf other then showing up for a tee time? While I will always be a student of this game and this subject, I know that I know as about as much that can be expected for a working class electrician from La Habra. But for someone with your education, this stuff should be a snap for you to add some positive slant or insight and not be critical of others that are equally, if not more intelligent then you. (Tom MacWood for example)

Get with it, go search out some information on Fowler so we can help this really nice gal. Or is it just too beneath you?

[George Pazin]

Rich -

If you've read the thread, then you've seen that I did in fact agree with Sean that any opening attacks were not warranted.

If you've read the thread, you've further seen that I stated that the folks you love to belittle tend to view statements like "design in the spirit of" in a highly skeptical light. This is probably the biggest difference between us & Sean. He seems much more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to Mr. Henry (& by extension, Kyle Phillips) than the rest of us - kudos to him for his faith in the common man, I guess we're just a tad more cynical. Some might even say this is borne of experience.

If you've read the thread, you can easily infer that I flat out DON'T BELIEVE YOU when you so cavalierly say that you're always looking for ways to improve Dornoch, at least in the manner that seems to be forthcoming at Del Paso. Mr. Henry's post sounds a lot more like redesigning a course than tweaking. Talk is cheap, actions speak louder than words, etc., etc. If I knew more cliches, I'd spout 'em. When you call in Kyle Phillips to redesign Dornoch in the spirit of those who preceded him, I will concede that you were consistent in your beliefs all along.

You can denigrate my comments all you wish, your opinion of my posts matters not in the slightest to me. It is, after all, your opinion and nothing more. I don't generally like to waste my time cheering on or taking cheap shots at others' posts, but will do so if the occasion warrants, so by all means, go ahead & keep spouting. I appreciate Tommy's words, but that's not why I'm posting.

While we do need to encourage frank & open discussion on this site (& all of life, really), I'm not sure how much pussyfooting around situations like this help anyone. That is what I was trying to convey to Sean, not any defense of anyone's tactics. If you choose to read Mr. Henry's comments as positive, well, again, that's your opinion.

[George Pazin]

Forrest -

Wish I could say I understand your opening comment, but I don't. I do find the statement "well said, until" kind of curious, since that was my opening comment. I guess you didn't think much of the rest.

As for why we choose to engage in conversation online instead of in person, well, I'm not going to be with you, Tom M, Tommy, Patrick, Rich & Sean anytime soon, so that's my reason. What's yours?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

George,
It occured to me that we are in the beginnings of the cold winter months, and its probably really biting cold and rainy just across the Firth, plus it allows for all of about 6 hours of sunlight, if it can peak through the dark heavy clouds. This means no golf today for Rich, and thus, hopefully, the attitude. I would hate to think it was to spite any of us for our endeavors.

[Forrest Richardson]

The point of asking the question about conversation is to point out that all things in life are not ideal — nor are they supposed to be. Pseudo approximations are OK in the real world — in manmade environments and with artifacts built by mankind the authenticity of something is often the approximation of an existing condition, space or formerly created object.

When we see great landscape design it is often from nature or other designs — true also in golf. And conversation by phone, pen, smoke signals and maritime flags is no different. While it is not quite authentic, it is, without question, "OK" and acceptable. It signifies progress many times. Other times it is taboo.

I do not consider the adoption of style and continuation of a design legacy to be taboo in all instances. If Fowler's original design can be uncovered and if what is found is appropriate — great. Embrace them. But, if like the transformation of The Old Course from so many holes to so many new ones, the change is a continuation of the site and its demands, then behold the old while embracing the new.

[SPDB]

George - Please don't mischaracterize what I'm saying. I'm only keeping this going because to me it appears that everyone here (except, of course, Rich and Forrest (and Neal Meagher for about 4 minutes)) has taken leave of their (common) senses.

As far as what is on the surface (not in the recesses of Tommy and Pat's brains), everyone is too eager to jump to conclusions based on inferences drawn in an entirely self-serving way. Whether these inferences later turn out true is of little value, since it is equally possible that they could be wrong.

Suit yourself, but Rich is keeping me going.

[Jeff Goldman]

Tommy or somebody,

   I have read the comments about M. not agreeing with Fowler's principles but respecting him etc., as well as others here talking about the spirit of Fowler, but can anybody tell me what those principles were?  I.e., What kind of courses did he build?  

Jeff Goldman

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

I fear that the "concept" of what is transpiring is escaping your grasp.

If a club is about to embark on what Kevin Keeley quoted as a
$ 10,000,000 project, and if that  project will plow under 14 of the 18 holes, is it safe to say that the core and soul of the golf course is being destroyed ??

A simple YES or NO will do.

Consciously or subconsciously you've adopted a defensive position related to Merion, because to agree with us regarding Del Paso, would force you to agree with the likes of Mr Naccarato when it comes to Merion.

Hence, I understand your resistance and reluctance to see the heart of the problem.

Mike Hendren quoted something I wrote, perhaps you should re-read that quote in the context of Del Paso and Merion, there is a common denominator.

[SPDB]

Pat - You've truly lost touch with reality.

If I have taken the same view of Del Paso as I did of Merion, it is because I am a sucker for consistency, a concept that seems totally lost on you (e.g. I'm totally unfamiliar/I have all the facts).

Why are you referring me to Mike's post, when it only quotes  a post that appears right above it? Flattery? Self-importance?

You and I are talking about two different things. I'm not talking about the substance of Del Paso's project, so I don't know why you keep asking me about it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

For a brignt guy, you're either in denial or just not grasping the issue at Del Paso.

Could you answer the question I posed above, it's very basic and only requires a YES or NO answer.

Thanks.

P.S.  I still owe you dinner for our Merion bet,
       the question is, will you collect before you lose
       The Creek bet on the 5th hole skyline green, especially
       now that the winds have blown the leaves off of all of
       the trees ?  

[SPDB]

Pat - If you read my post #78, you'll see that you and I are talking about two different things. I'm not going to get into a discussion about the merits of the project at Del Paso when I know so little about it.

I question whether you even read my posts before you respond to them.  

Pat - with the windstorm of the past week, the 5th at the Creek may now be a skyline green. I've given you aerials, which are all you need to determine line of sight. What do I get when I win?

[Forrest Richardson]

Pat — Did the "heart and soul" of TOC go away the day Robertson worked on behalf of members and his own sense of style — including Old Tom's — and built the Road Hole?

A simple "yes" or "no" will do. And, by the way, I owe you no dinner or drink that I recall.

[RJ_Daley]

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?dtype=a&mapdata=xU4YXdELrnC1W3a3EokQzTKFkP7R0zQVu60AdOCmdnYp404j5lROckzdVLeazrVV1%2bAFXUwfBIi%2biu6tNk6Tbw3XkL2%2bEGLkTObqEJdPzKNWBMvnNxnVut1uPkmpBDJsr%2fVM8QjV%2b%2f0BwBN4W96Sd%2bNZKY86dwDAceDK8wVUWq4OxLqIhNkM%2f1tGqNeb36o2GNF5Yg%2bcqXnLPF1aGGA6cNNmpRzse7Zv1WeWoRiX6bGgFqR8FXPwfeazm3zxzF%2bA0mwZsGdHJH9j2JK893IeglpPXUF9sfIsWY6OjsQxQ7FgGJKPca0ZvBsl7ogPVGr7aUoNtl1E64oN%2fjhoXo98uiqgh52BheTWZ%2bCHUT0%2bUPJzq94RLX2Bjq9g976PPbsym%2f4SOL%2bd3So5mR8NyvtJk5HIZK58E%2f6zXbb1BZgOxGror4ytPZ%2baHmTRnaPrhKsVW1SPXAxXb%2b61%2feynrGZ6CszdnpF5%2fkcQaOaJKtVAoorw19kVrKtj8A%3d%3d

I posted the url link to hopefully give an aerial of the Del Paso CC.  Looking at the history of the redesigns there, I have to question what is left of the original Fowler work.  I can't even figure out the routing.  But it surely seems like it is landlocked and tree infested.

          par yards  slope c.r.
Middle  72  6300  122  70.60
Forward  74  5866  129  73.80
Other Blue 72 6591 131 72.00      

I read Tommy's remark about the routing not ever having the sun in one's eyes.  That is a start as to describing what we are even talking about in terms of qualities and character.  I read a few call the question; "what is the spirit and design ideals of Herb Fowler to be preserved".  It seems that his original designs in CA didn't last too long becasue they are (NLE) like Lake Merced and Ambassador Hotel, and his remodels were remodeled.  It is not mentioned if he worked in collaboration with others here in the US like he did in England with Abercrombe and Simpson.  How much of the enduring work in England was the other two gents, as contrasted to solo work just by Fowler?  I don't know the answers.  It sounds like Russell Talley may.  But, I do wonder what we are really talking about if we are concentrating on the merits of the decision to remodel.  I fully understand and agree that there is no restoration or sensitive restoration that will likely take place if the above work descriptions by 'cliffhenry' are correct. I do think it is disingenuous to say they will retain the "spirit of Fowler" yet describe the extensive work to be done.  That sure sounds like a marketing spin to me.  But, who else commenting here knows the golf course, its merits, unique qualities (other than avoiding sun in eyes in routing) which are Fowler's?  Are the greens spectacular and set well for interesting approach shots after thoughtful tee shots?  Does the course have interesting strategy due to use of topo and hazard placement that exhibits some real craftsmanship of high merit.  Do the hole designs offer the golfer interesting options that spring from some basic expressed ideals of Fowler?  What would the course offer if just trees are thinned or removed to reveal hidden periphery features (if any).  There was some comment about the soils and drainage.  Is the course in distress due to poor, petered out or compacted soils, or lack of infrastructure to the point that it can't merely have the crust scraped off like one of those famous California skin dermabrasions/dermaplannings?  If resurfacing takes place, does that set into motion all sorts of new drainage issues brought about by modern codes and restrictions in this apparently land locked residential area.

I think we are hung up on the diverse and strongly held basic instincts many of us hold about so-called restorations that turned out to not be truly such.  Contributors to this thread seem to be defending their basic instincts and values more so than the on-the-ground issues, that most of us really don't know in Del Paso's case.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Forrest RIchardson,

I don't know how you can draw an analogy between the destruction of 14 out of 18 holes, and modifying/creating one hole.

Remember too that TOC was 22 holes and a number of other configurations and that it evolved over time.  It wasn't designed from the get go, as an 18 hole golf course, as Del Paso was.

Despite not answering your question, I'll still buy you dinner.

RJDaley,

There are soil and agronomic issues, but I don't know that I would make the quantum leap that a thorough redesign will fix them, but a restoration wouldn't.

[Forrest Richardson]

Your recollection of TOC is, at best, missing several hundred years worth of change. It was not originally 22 holes, nor was the Road Hole among its most dramatic changes. I like filet.

[Forrest Richardson]

Pat — I failed to see that word again — "restoration".

Explain this as it relates to a playing board that changes with the wind, owners, erosion, settling, people influences, economy, growing conditions, amount of play/wear and tear, extreme weather, management style, trends and thousands of other extremely worthwhile affects. (I just partially described "golf" in case you were not aware.)

Restore what? To when? To what level?

It's all a large grey area. "Restoration" is posisble only in very specific instances and this, I believe, is not one. The course may be "sensitively remodeled" as was pointed out. It may be fixed and in process pay hommage to a particilar architect's style. It may also be interpreted in the form of a particular era or architect. A few features — maybe even 50 — can certainly be "restored", at least partially and approximately.

But restored?