It wasn't St. Andrews that had the most influence!

[RSLivingston_III]

Just to add fuel to the flames, it is a safe bet to say Old Tom Morris is the most important and influential person to have visited the game and the Old course is the most influential course to architecture.
A couple of R&A members that write Golf History have told me that they were of the understanding that much of the gorse got hacked up by the excessive play on the course during that time.
Let the comments fly.
R

[TEPaul]

I've heard many wonderful things about Old Tom Morris from a lot of the people of that day from the writing they left us with but Old Tom as a great early architect wasn't one of them that I've ever seen. Old Tom was probably basically a one day "lay out" architect on many of the other courses his name is attached to and those old "lay out" guys basically offered a simple routing scheme, period. On some of the better known courses his name was attached to like RCD, as Paul Turner just said, basically nothing much is left from Old Tom today.

But who the hell really knows--as Tom Fazio implies if some of those old guys had the equipment he has they probably would've done what he does. I bet if Old Tom had a couple of D-8s he'd have been hell on wheels---I mean hell on tread tracks! He probably would've invented "framing" too!  

[RSLivingston_III]

Just doing some research and it looks like 2 days was an average layout time for Tom. Blairgowrie and County Down are listed as such. He did spend 11 days at Royal North Devon.
He is also credited with concept of elevated greens after his work at Dornoch and County Down. There is also a comment from Morris pushing "sanding, and the shifting of the play from one part of the ground to another" at Luffness circa 1890. They were paying for course maintenance, surely a new concept.
Just a few more fun facts.
 

[T_MacWood]

Forrest
"One decade back it was at its easiest, the whins and rough that made trouble in the olden days having been trodden away by thousands and thousands of players."

~~ Bernard Darwin 1908

Two different events.

[RSLivingston_III]

You have to remember in those days they had to play the ball out of the gorse. An 18-24 oz Lofter, Rut Iron or Niblick can take off those medium and smaller branches.
Sorry to add details in bits and pieces, but Morris is credited with widening the the Old as part of reducing wear on the course. It coincided with his having the course played in alternate directions as the other method.
R

[ForkaB]

As one who has spend more time in Scottish whins (gorse) than perhaps everbody else on this site combined , let me offer my humble opinion that the idea of gorse being reduced by the golfing actions of players is absolutely ludicrous, regardless of what Darwin or others may have said. Unchecked, gorse grows to well over 6 feet high, with branches the size of a man's wrist.  No human being could possibly damage such a plant with any golfing implement that has ever been invented.  Somebody removed that gorse, purposefully and systematically--perhaps Playfair, perhaps Robertson, perhaps Morris or perhaps proto-redanmans with the 19th century version of the chain-saw, in the middle of the night.

PS--most of the brilliance of Dornoch's routing can be attributed to Morris, who also "discovered" one of the finest "natural" holes in golf, the current 14th (Foxy), which remains largely unchanged today (except for new tees).  Yes, most of Old Tom's courses were "over-written" (by Braid, Colt, MacKenzie and others) in the early 20th century due to the introduction of the Haskell ball which requried more length to be included in architecture.  Nevertheless, I think that our understanding of how much of Morris still remains is very rudimentary, and I suspect that the answer (if and when revealed) will turn out to be not consistent with the knee-jerk dismissiveness of some of the posters on this thread.  When you look at the inventory of "his" courses, one cannot be but amazed at their breadth and quality and of his impact on the game--quite possibly in line with Mark's opening gambit on this thread.

Those who think otherwise, may just be in denial.

[T_MacWood]

Whins, although agressive, has a fairly short life span, approximately 30 years. It was most likely a combination of factors that led to the loss of the whins. The construction of the New course out of a forest of whins adjacent to the Old course, in combination with the increased play.

Guy Campbell discusses the Old Course in 'The History of Golf in Britain.' Robert Chambers was his great grandfather. He describes a single pipe going out and coming back - with only one hole cut (or nine holes played twice). He claims it was mid-18th C. when the course was exapnded (double greens and two holes cut). Originally there were two crossovers.

He also mentions the belt whins "now steadily and regrettably disappearing". No mention of Old Tom removing the whins or his contribution as an architect.

He also discusses Dornoch...it appears they were playing over the links long before Old Tom arrived on the scene.

[ForkaB]

Tom

You are right that whins do die, however........

....you obviously do just not understand that they are randy beasties, and whilst one geriatric clump is dying , there are tens of adolescent ones lurking in the undergrowth just waiting to take their rightful place.  There is absolutely no way that the whins of St, Andrews could have been cleared except purposefully.  Come visit Scotland sometime, and I'll show you.

As for Dornoch, yes, golf was played there for 2-300 years prior to Old Tom being invited up to give them a proper golf course.  For all I (or you) know the local native americans might have been playing some form of golf with pebbles and clam shells and old cypress branches near Monterey in the 1600's too, before Drake and Sutter and Robert Louis Stevenson and Samuel Morse and Clint Eastwood ruined their idylic existence.  But, that's not the point--aren't "proper" golf courses what this thread and this site are all about?

[TEPaul]

"Nevertheless, I think that our understanding of how much of Morris still remains is very rudimentary, and I suspect that the answer (if and when revealed) will turn out to be not consistent with the knee-jerk dismissiveness of some of the posters on this thread."

Rich;

Why do you say things like that? Old Tom Morris is perhaps in a handful of most famous people in the annals of golf--revered in many ways by almost everyone who came to know him. He was written about endlessly by those who wrote about golf (and architecture) then and later. Why would you suppose that most all of them would have overlooked the fact of his architectural talent if almost all of them felt so strongly about him for other reasons? Do you really think something is suddenly going to turn up 100-150 years later to reveal that Tom Morris was a great early architect? It's not exactly as if no one has taken an interest all these years in Old Tom Morris and TOC---it seems to me practically everyone who's ever written about golf and architecture in the early era in the region has. Those people who knew him and what they wrote about him is what we depend on for information about him. I don't think anyone now needs to begin to create some glorified revisionist history about his architectural contribution at this point without paying close attention to those who actually knew him and wrote about him. When one reads all the reports of that early time particularly architecturally the thing that seems to come across quite clearly is just how rudimentary things, including architecture, were in Old Tom's time. Many even refer to most of Old Tom's time as the "dark ages" of architecture and probably rightly so!

[TEPaul]

I will try harder to find where it was I recently read that Robertson was alloted 25 pounds (I believe it was--possibly by Playfair) to clear back whins and gorse and widen out TOC. 25 pounds was probably not an insignificant amount of money to work on a golf course in the 1830s-1850s.

[T_MacWood]

Rich
I reckon the small plants don't take too kindly to the hacking and trampling.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom Simpson is the one who referred to that period as the "Dark Ages" and frankly some of what he referred to he got wrong and didn't even know what he was talking about.  Many of the things he said Morris did, Morris didn't do.  And many of the things that he loved about golf architecture were actually done by Morris and he didn't even know it.

If this thread accomplishes anything, it shows how so many different conclusions can be draw from the works of early golf architects (I guess no different than today).  Every point I raised was drawn out of a book or article or reference of some kind.  I have no reason to believe all the other points raised by everyone else didn't have the same.  Yet many of our "facts" seem to contridict themselves.

One more point that really wasn't emphazied is that there was essentially NO money spent of golf courses during much of Old Tom's days.  He only charged 1 pound for desing services for 50 years and many times only designed 9 holes or 12 holes or 15 holes,...depending on what the club could afford.  

[TEPaul]

Mark:

Again, Old Tom Morris was a most significant man in the annals of TOC and golf but for you to say now that it's not really TOC and its unique evolutionary architecture that's most influential but Morris himself, I think you'll need to do a lot more than simply state that. You'll pretty much have to prove it. Again, an aweful lot of significant people in the history of early architecture knew Morris and loved the man. Why almost all of them failed to give him some credit for TOC you're now claiming he deserves is beyond me. Why would all those people be misguided or wrong? Morris certainly had an architectural influence on TOC in his tenure there and probably more influence than others---but more influence than the old evolutionary golf course itself? I find that a real stretch.

[Brian_Gracely]

Where does architecture stop and greenskeeping begin?  Does adding width to existing playing areas make you an architect or is that simply a function of improving the playability of an area as greenskeeper?

In the case of Ross, I believe the majority of the skills he learned from Old Tom was clubmaking and greenskeeping.  TOC and Dornoch gave him plenty of self-reference for future design.  

[ForkaB]

Tom MacW

You reckon incorrectly.

Tom P

Why do you think that Old Tom's period was the "dark ages?"  Just because soembody else told you so?  Look at the evidence and think for yourself, young man!  You've got it in you, I know.

Before that, try re-reading Mark Fine's posts on this thread, particularly the last one.  It might help you get started.

Brian

The design that Donald Ross grew up with at Dornoch was Old Tom's.......

[Forrest Richardson]

Brian,

I believe the term "architect" is used now, but certainly not back then. Morris and Robertson were the first to purposefully modify golf courses, thus establishing an era in which man influenced the layout of courses rather than nature doing most all the work.

Today there is a distinction: Greenkeepers and architects. We meet often, but both professions know their focus.

[T_MacWood]

Mark
What exactly did Wethered & Simpson get wrong?

You said that Morris believed in the concept of width to create strategy...when did he say (or write) this and what exactly did he say?

[Paul_Turner]

I recall Rich quickly dismissing Morris on "The Survivor" thread a few months ago!  So what's changed Rich, eh?

[RSLivingston_III]

Rich:
With regards to playing out of the gorse, prior to the 1890's rules you HAD to play the ball. I don't have all my copies of the rules with me but I believe the unplayable option didn't come into effect until the 1890's R&A rules.The 1860's era rules from the Honorable Company would be handy right now.
When I come over this summer for the hickory tournaments in Scotland and England you are welcome to experience hitting gorse or gutty balls with a restored set of 1870-80 era Robert White (of St. A) Irons. You just need to find the course that will allow us to hack at the gorse. Maybe up at Dornoch.

[ForkaB]

Paul

My recollection is that I made a strong point that Morris should win and then voted him off symbolically because I knew how far the groupies like you of arrivistes like Colt would go to keep their man in the fray.

hick

I think you are generally right about no "unplayable lie" rule in the good(?) old days--I remember reading in Darwin's bio of Braid how the latter took 6-7 shots to get back on the grass after slicing it onto the railway tracks at the 16th in the last round of an Open at TOC.  However.......this only supports my belief that the gorse was purposefully and systematically removed from TOC.  If and when you propel your ball into the middle of the gorse when you are next in Scotland, at Dornoch or wherever, you will find that IF you find your ball, getting a stance, much less a swing at it, will be impossible unless you bring along a chain saw and break all sorts of rules as well as branches.  I would be very pleased to watch you or any of your fellow hickorygoflers trying to extricate yourselves and/or your balls from gorse bushes, but please do not be offended if I decline to participate directly in the activity.

[TEPaul]

"Tom P
Why do you think that Old Tom's period was the "dark ages?"  Just because soembody else told you so?  Look at the evidence and think for yourself, young man!  You've got it in you, I know."

Rich:

That's just another one of your patented no-brainer horseshit responses! Somebody told me so? Yeah, that's correct Rich, an awefully lot of people told me so because I bother to read about the history and evolution of golf architecture. The evolution of golf architecture and what happened and what didn't happen where and when just fascinates me. But I wasn't around over there then when Old Tom was around, and presumably either were you or Mark Fine, and so the best way to understand that era, Old Tom, his contribution to TOC and architecture in general at that time is to read what those who were there had to say about it.

Golf architecture was in very rudimentary stage in it evolution back in 1865 when Morris returned to TOC. TOC was an extremely evolutionary golf course as well coming well out of that time before golf architecture existed.

I do depend on those that were closer to that era and TOC and Old Tom Morris, such as Tillinghast, Macdonald, Mackenzie, Darwin and numerous others who wrote about golf architecture and that time.

If you or Mark Fine have some information that's uniquely revealing to tell us about Old Tom Morris's contribution to architecture that made him more influential than TOC itself then please tell us all because I'd be just fascinated to know how so many could've missed it all these many decades!

Why don't you look at the evidence and tell us what you think it means. I suppose you too think people such as Tom Simpson and the many others who knew and admired Tom Morris and wrote about him were lying about his influence on golf architecture for some mysterious reason.

Why did they call that time from perhaps the 1850s up until about 1907 in America the "dark ages" of golf architecture? Because around 1850 was the first known evidence of man created golf architecture out of mostly natural linksland courses. Towards the latter portion of the 19th century was the time golf left the linksland, went inland and some really rudimentary, penal, unnatural looking architecture was made. Willie Park Jr is credited with a breakthrough out of the so-called "dark ages" with Sunningdale and generally someone like Leeds or Macdonald are credited with the breakthrough out of those rudimentary "dark ages" of golf architecture in America.

In my opinion, the so-called early Heathland architects are the ones who were probably the first accomplished architects of man-created architecture. As significant as Old Tom Morris was to the history and evolution of golf itself I just don't believe I'd put him even remotely in that category.

Someone above said Old Tom Morris was probably a glorified "keeper of the Green" in the basic field of maintenance/architecture at TOC, among the other significant things he did in that early age of golf. I think that sounds about right. If you disagree with that then let's here exactly why.

[ForkaB]

Tom

Being called a "no-brainer horsehit(ter)" by you is like being called a true artist by Picasso.  I am hono(u)red!

In historical terms, "dark ages" usually imply some sort of decline from an earlier ideal (i.e. the end of the flourishing of the Indo-European civilisations around the end of the first millenium).  How can the period of 1850-1907 be called the "dark ages" of golf course architecture when, as you rightly note, GCA did not really start until 1850?  It is this sort of fuzzy/non logic which makes me sceptical of any of your mostly unfounded claims.

I call them "unfounded" becuase I think that you (and I and all others with an interest in GCA) are operating in a real intellectual vaccuum, in that we rely for opinions on what things were like in the "dark ages" to accounts of those did not live for a significant time in those ages, and had virtually no influence on golf or GCA at that time.  Why, for example, do we believe what MacKenzie has to say about this period when he spent most of it as a non-golfer, doctor and military man?  It is like relying on shadows from fires within a cave to understand what is actually happening in the cave.  And, vis a vis "dark ages," do you not think that architects like MacDonald, Tillinghast, MacKenzie and Thomas had a vested interested in calling their era a "golden age?"

The facts are that nobody really knows what sort of GCA was really going on in the 1850-1907 period, because most of the courses built then were at least somewhat over-written to accomodate the Haskell ball.  I, for one, have seen no serious discussion as to what that "overwriting" entailed, outside of a few instances (i.e. Muirfield, Dornoch) where you can see the old routings and compare them to the new.  In those cases, I think there is ample evidence to show that Old Tom Morris, for example, did some amazing things with the land he was given.  The routing and green sites at Dornoch are largely his work, despite substantial alterations and changes over the past 100+ years.  I (or any one else) can stand on that course and see the features that Old Tom designed and or found.  There is a lot of his work underlying Colt's Muirfield.  Much of his work at Lundin/Leven (from which CBM borrowed so many of "his" ideas) still remains.

The answer, young Tom, is in the dirt, and not in the dusty tomes of possibly self-serving writers or very variable quality who, in any case, were not trained historians.  Even the best of them, Darwin, was just an essayist, who would have shined on this website, and in popular print, but would never have been able to hold down a chair in architecture at Oxford or Cambridge.  Unlike, for example, JakaB.........

From what I can see, on the ground and in the dirt, there was a lot of good, perhaps even "golden" GCA that was produced in the "dark ages."  Prove me wrong, if you can, but please don't try to do so just by quoting some slightly older person than you who never took the time to look at the dirt either, or if he did, didn't know what he was looking for.

Slainte Mhar

[TEPaul]

"Tom
Being called a "no-brainer horsehit(ter)" by you is like being called a true artist by Picasso.  I am hono(u)red!"

Rich:

Thank you my little expatriate, East Coast, West Coast, No Coast, middle school existentialist friend! We do have an almost perfect understanding and appreciation of each other but let's keep that between only us for the greater good of dynamic Golfclubatlas.com discussion!

PS;

Do you see how you spelled "honored" above? That only goes to show you will never be completely comfortable and at peace in any culture or ethos!

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Disregard, or at least minimize the importance of the word ethos at the end of my last post. I may be the only person who can actually live comfortably and at peace in an ethos.

[TEPaul]

Rich said: (I can't believe he said it but he did)

"In historical terms, "dark ages" usually imply some sort of decline from an earlier ideal (i.e. the end of the flourishing of the Indo-European civilisations around the end of the first millenium).  How can the period of 1850-1907 be called the "dark ages" of golf course architecture when, as you rightly note, GCA did not really start until 1850?  It is this sort of fuzzy/non logic which makes me sceptical of any of your mostly unfounded claims."

Rich:

Listen now my little horseshitting no brainer--we're talking about a bunch of carousing, fornicating, independent thinking, grandiloquently authoring, early golf and golf architecture addicts of the 19th and early 20th century here in the use of the term "dark ages" to describe a time of perhaps 50-60 years in the evolution of a "sport" known as golf and the fields it was played upon. They weren't exactly trying to describe the f....ing history of the world!