Am I right in thinking that for many of his designs and remodels Braid didn’t spend any more than a day on site - simply walking the land, pegging out tees and greens, and sketching out bunkering schemes on the train back to his day job at Walton Heath? That’s certainly the impression I was left with having read the Moreton & Cumming book (admittedly some time ago). Does that mean there is a significant difference between his ‘usual’ approach and that of his full-time contemporaries such as Colt and Mackenzie, who would typically spend more time on site and have a much greater input during the construction phase? Looking at the Mackenzie Chronology, he seems to have been on site on at least 8 different occasions during the construction of Bury GC, for example.
Braid’s approach may have been different on a few of his higher profile commissions (and perhaps Colt and Mackenzie did some ‘flying visit’ jobs as well), but it strikes me that the sheer volume of courses he had a hand in and the fact that he also had a full-time job as a club pro as well as his playing commitments make comparisons of their relative skills across the full body of their respective works difficult. Would Colt’s portfolio be as impressive if he hadn’t given up the Sunningdale secretary role? Or Mackenzie’s if he’d continued his medical practice?
Hello James
Good observation, the circumstances of available time of course impacted upon the works all practictioners could devote to the craft, Braid had a day-job which certainly restricted his design work. But his work is no less impressive for it, some might say even more impressive despite. That itself may have been a contributor to his low fees (as not his sole source of income) and propensity to accept smaller jobs that could be fitted in around his scarce time. But to have 520+ design attributions (so far and growing) given that lack of availability is incredible productivity.
Whilst that is the case for some of Braid's work that he had a few or only a single visit, the capability he had to do such brief visits is often cited not so much to say he just dropped "18 stakes in a day" (which was I believe an accusation thrown at Tom Bendelow initially, and one also directed at Old Tom Morris) but to note his incredible talent in possessing a near photographic memory for holes and topography.
Given he had only 90 days available to be away from Walton Heath (by his contract) he used his time incredibly efficiently and would relate perfectly layouts, topography, routings and bunker positions/styles to map makers on his return (having considered carefully what he saw on his return train journeys). I do not believe it was his preference to work such a way, but a necessity/problem that he was able to solve by his mental and visual genius.
It was such a notable and rare talent that it is worth mentioning, and as you say many writers have done so, but it has morphed into some sort of urban myth that he always worked this way; which, from his logs and more throrough research, is absolutely not the case.
BTW - At the other end of the scale are two international projects where he worked solely from topographical maps as he wouldn't travel; St Andrews GC of NY (4 Holes and advice on bunkering and trees) and at Singapore Island (36 Holes).
But that was not unique, Donald Ross is believed to have not visited some of his projects at all (please excuse me Ross experts, if I have fallen into another urban myth there)
Returning to your observation, you may recall from our previous disscussion on Sherwood Forest that on jobs which had; the scope, budget, and importance to him that he visited multiple times prior, during and post construction (for revisions).
On a recent post re. Gleneagles (Queens) I noted he visited 9 time in one year alone, and when researching courses and reading George Payne's incredible book (which utilises Braid's personal ledgers including train expenses) he quite often made multiple visits to his major works. At his precious Henley GC (the "Home of
Advanced Golf" TM) he returned to personally demonstrate and supervise the building of bunkers during the winter.
His selection of trusted and enagaged construction partners was also key to some of his best work (yes I know its not "design & build").
He used local people sometimes (as at Henley GC where he personally trained the supervising Director of Construction, Ernest Fryer) and had long associations with Hawtree & Taylor, and John Stutt (who said his instructions were most precise and detailed).
So a compliment has become a myth, and sometimes a schtick easily and conveniently misused in criticism of his almost unique talent and work practice.
As I said previously when he had time, money and land he flew very high.
And on those numerous lesser projects he provided good strategic golf of incredible variety (and not formulaic) that has stood the test of time.
To have over 400 courses still with his work in evidence on the ground today, is some testimony to that quality and relevance.
But his body of work is not just about quanitity and longevity, his best stands up with the very best IMHO.