[Jim Sherma]

Playing an outing here next Monday and interested in what the group thinks about it. Did a search and did not find much on here other than broadsides against the idea of Arthur Hills renovating a Flynn (reported that the routing was maintained while the greens and fairways redone). Did not find much that actually discussed the finished product or whether or not the Flynn course in it's then current state was anything special that warranted being preserved or restored.


Looking at the photo tour on their website the course looks nice enough. The land does appear to have some movement but nothing very dramatic.

[Bernie Bell]

I think the routing that Hills worked with was only half Flynn, but others on here know better.
There's more elevation change than might be apparent from photos.  I rode as a guest but I thought it would be a nice but not flat walk.  Par 70 so total yardage is a little deceiving.   
I like the course ... never played it before the renovation, so "what might have been" is mostly lost on me ..... I like Arthur Hills renovation work that I've played in the area ... so sue me   ...  ample greens with movement but nothing too crazy ... nice variety in the 5 par 3s (up/down; long/short) .... the few guys I know that play there competitively seem to like the finishing stretch .... club has a nice vibe for my taste .... not one of the muckety local options but the course definitely holds its own . . . to my eye  . . . I'm curious what others think

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jim, I played both before and after Hills' work. It is a nice routing on a relatively hilly piece of property. The greens are generally quick so stay below the hole. The course seems to hold water so the fairways don't bounce much, but that would affect me more than you. There are bunches of trees so bring your straight ball. It is a nice course and good family club.


You playing anywhere else?

[Jim Sherma]

Driving down for a charity outing. Should be a nice day out, and I don’t have to play my foul balls.

[Jerry Kluger]

I don't know why but a bunch of courses in the DC area hired Arthur Hills to do a renovation of their courses and that included Manor.  Problem is that he used the same basic formula on all of the courses which made it really boring.  My experience at Manor has always been similar to Tommy's, i.e. the course is always soft as they care more about how green the course is rather than how it plays. 

[Mike_Trenham]

Craig Disher was a member until Hills arrived.  He knows the history better than anyone.

[Jim Sherma]

I played Manor CC on a beautiful fall day yesterday and have the following takeaways:

• A course tour is available at their website, https://www.manorcc.org/tour/
• The course and club is a nice day out and well worth a play - conditions are what you would expect for a nice club in a major market
• The land that the front 9 is on is much more interesting than the back 9
• The William Flynn routing is very solid with good flow across the available features
• The Arthur Hills greens and shaping was very consistent with other stuff of his that I've seen
• Greens that stood out to me as having nice interest are 1, 5, 8, 16 and 17
• Unfortunately the bane of run-offs and collection areas with drains at their low spot were stark reminders that these were not examples of classic shaping (back left of 3 stuck out to me as the archetype of this)
• The course is land-locked and I'm guessing that there was intent to add challenge to the greens since there was nowhere to add meaningful length to the course
• Tree management does seem to be happening - while there are still a lot of treed corridors to play through they are noticeably thinner than what you see in the club's photo tour linked above 

If the club was making the reno vs resto decision today I imagine that they would not go down the road they did (the score card gives Flynn top billing over Hills showing that they believe that heritage is a bigger selling point to the fact that Hills re-did all of the shaping). Obviously the marketplace has changed in terms of how a club's architectural history is rewarded when compared to the decision to hire Hills.


The Hills work is not bad in and of itself. However, the course certainly does not play, nor look like, a classic Flynn. I can't help but feel that there will come a time when they decide to roll-back the changes and reclaim something more in line with classic architecture that is their heritage. 

[MCirba]

"The Arthur Hills greens and shaping was very consistent with other stuff of his that I've seen."

You should have been a foreign diplomat, Jim.  

[Carl Nichols]

I agree with Jim's (and Bernie's) assessments.  It's a good course and definitely worth playing, but as Jim aptly put it, "the course certainly does not play, nor look like, a classic Flynn."  I don't have a sense for whether they even could reclaim something like the original design if they wanted (or whether that would be an improvement).  I do know that several DC area courses that had Hills renovations in the mid-90s to mid-2000s have done additional work since then.   

[Craig Disher]

I was a member at Manor for many years and was involved in the discussions that led to the hiring of Hills. I can't find much fault with his final product except that the original Flynn plan offered a course that would have created a very different discussion about Manor. Flynn's front nine was never built although the hole corridors that he designed and cleared were used later by Harry Collis to build a very different course. Generally, Flynn's plan was a clockwise route through the property, Collis and the later version designed by club employees and members went counter-clockwise. When Hills was hired, Flynn's drawings were available to the club and Hills who decided not to use them. Flynn's design of the front nine was brilliant. I think anyone looking at the plans and walking the property - as we did several times with some who were on this site - would have seen how easy it would have been to build it over the nine that existed. I've lost contact with Manor but before I left the area as a member I recall that most were very happy with Hill's work. The conditions were far better which was probably due to the much needed tree thinning. But in retrospect, I still believe it was a great opportunity lost.

[Jonathan Cummings]

I was a member at Manor for many years and was involved in the discussions that led to the hiring of Hills. I can't find much fault with his final product except that the original Flynn plan would have created a course that would have created a very different discussion about Manor. Flynn's front nine was never built although the hole corridors that he designed and cleared were used later by Harry Collis to build a very different course. Generally, Flynn's plan was a clockwise route through the property, Collis and the later version designed by club employees and members went counter-clockwise. When Hills was hired, Flynn's drawings were available to the club and Hills who decided not to use them. Flynn's design of the front nine was brilliant. I think anyone looking at the plans and walking the property - as we did several times with some who were on this site - would have seen how easy it would have been to build it over the nine that existed. I've lost contact with Manor and before I left the area as a member, I recall that most were very happy with Hill's work. The conditions were far better which was probably due to the much needed tree thinning. But in retrospect, I still believe it was a great opportunity lost.

Wow Craig - a little embarrassed I had no idea of that about Manor.  As you know dad was also a longtime member.  Dad, St Paulie, Freize an Gude were a legendary 4-some there, more in the men's grille than on the golf course!  I played there a bunch and enjoyed the course very much.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()