[T_MacWood]

"Potential phantom 7th hole? Just because you haven't been able to figure out where the 6th and 7th holes were on the property doesn't mean that they were phantom holes."

Tom MacWood:

I know exactly where the par 5 6th and undeveloped 7th Tillinghast described was. I said the 7th must be a phantom hole in your mind because you know Tillinghast described it (not the constructed hole but its 'undeveloped' requirements over an enormous dip and a stream of clear water) but you obviously don't know where it was and you obviously can't even imagine where it was.

"I don't know where they were."

Yes that has been pretty clear all along. You have even apparently concluded that #7 that Tillie described was off the property or that I said it was off the property. I've said Crump was clearly able to buy any land he wanted out there from that very large tract of Sumner Ireland and that is exactly what he did through those years there until he died. So why are you assuming that 7th hole had to be off the property or I'm implying it had to be off the property? Perhaps you shouldn't automatically conclude the side of a golf course routing map is the corner of Crump's property at any particular time.

More speculation....great. Crump secretly owned the land adjacent to his porperty, so when he routed your 7th on what appeared to be someone else's land it was in fact land he owned in secret. The plot thickens.

You know there is an easy way to check on this, simply go the county have them check their property records.

"Now let me ask you a question. The stick map shows two version of the 3rd hole. According to Tilly that hole was well under construction, describing the green complex in detail. In fact Tilly said several of the greens were ready for preperation. Why the two iterations for the 3rd on the stick map?"

Obviously because Crump drew two versions of the 3rd hole on that map. Do you see anything wrong with that? We certainly do know he began to build one of those two versions that are on the map and that's what Tillinghast was describing. And we know he began building them before H.S. Colt arrived.

You make it sound like there were two versions prior construction. Routing, clearing and construction began sometime before March. At hat time Tilly reported fairways were nearly ready for Spring seeding and several greens were ready for preperaration. The second par-3 on the stick map had to have been added after Tilly's report.

Crump was building a par-3 including the green complex then inexplicably routed another hole, a little longer, with a green located right smack where 4th tee was...another hole which was also well under construction. Is this normal? What could be the logical explanation?


Let me ask you again, where do you think the par 5 6th and the undeveloped 7th Tillinghast described in the April 1913 Golf Illustrated article were? They had to be somewhere, don't you think or do you disagree with that too?    

I don't know where they were, but I agree they were somewhere. Hopefully some day we will be able to figure it out.
 

[T_MacWood]

Tom MacFudd, since you apparently have no ability to even imagine these kinds of things here are a couple of cute stories about intial routing.

About the third day Bill Coore was here with me looking at Ardrossan Farms he got out there real early one morning and when I got there I couldn't find him. So I called him and asked him where he was and he said he wasn't sure but that there was a road way below him. So I figured that out after a while and found him sitting on a great green site but I told him that the both of us had been told we shouldn't be looking over in that area. He just said it was a great site for a golf hole and  we should ask for it.

Another time while he was walking around French Creek in the initial routing stage Roger Hansen called him up and Bill said he found a great landform for a hole. Roger asked him what it looked like but when Bill described it Roger didn't recognize it even though he'd owned the land for years. When Bill described it in more detail Roger realized Bill had walked right off the property and right onto a New Jersey State Police practice shooting range next to French Creek. So, Roger told Bill to run for his life before somebody shot him by a mistake.

But since you've never been on a site obviously in the initial routing stage you probably think Bill Coore is an idiot too.

Down at Newark Del on a site I'm consulting on for the Love Co I got all tangled up in the woods and trying to climb over brambles and bushes and old barbed wire fence lines and walked onto the next property for a while not realizing it.

Again, no way you could understand any of those stories because you have no experience with it and it shows.  

But I'm pretty sure Crump knew exactly where he was with that undeveloped 7th hole Tillie described. The only problem is you don't know where he was, and you probably never will realize it.    

Oh, I forgot the best one of all. Dick Youngscap bought X amount of acres initially at Sand Hills and Bill routed about 130 potential holes. Then Ben shows up one time and found two great landforms for holes. Only problem was Dick Youngscap didn't own the land Ben walked on to. But they were great landforms for holes and so Dick Youngscap bought them from the guy who owned all the land out there he was buying from for Sand Hills and that area where Ben was off the property is now part of holes #14 and #15.

I guess you think Ben Crenshaw's an idiot too, huh?  

No I don't think Crenshaw is an idiot, not do I think Crump was an idiot.  

Those are fascinating stories but I'm not sure they explain the illogical actions you are trying to put upon Crump.

Is it a good idea to begin construction on a golf course before completing a routing? Being of sound mind and surrounded by good people that doesn't sound like something Crump would do. Tilly described seven holes in his April article. You have the 7th finishing somewhere out on an adjacent property with no apparent way of getting home.

Is it your opinion that Crump had finished routing at least a nine hole loop? And if this is the case, how would he get home from your 7th?

[TEPaul]

"Is it a good idea to begin construction on a golf course before completing a routing? Being of sound mind and surrounded by good people that doesn't sound like something Crump would do."

Tom MacWood:

No, to begin construction on a golf course and bring holes into play before finalizing or completing a routing is a terrible thing to do. It's a potentially grave mistake and that's precisely what Crump did do. I've mentioned that on here numerous times over the years with Pine Valley.

Crump eventually brought fourteen holes into play and he had not finalized exactly what he wanted to do with the remaining unfinished four holes. Until the day he died he was still somewhat undecided and he really was in a corner or box in that area of #13, #14 and #15 tee and it's remarkable it all worked out as well as it did. (However, if I think Pine Valley has one design or routing glitch, it is definitely that #15 tee is just way too close to #14 green. There's no question of that in my opinion. Still today they have netting up in the trees next to #15 tees and balls are always flying in there off #14 green. If there is a place on Pine Valley that FORE has been yelled thousands of times---that's it. I can see why Father Carr and Smith claimed he still wasn't sure about #15---or apparently #16).

If you read anything about his opinion of #15 and #16 just before he died and what those two friends who knew best what he felt about Pine Valley you can't help but tell he was still undecided or not completely content with them. Until the end he still toyed with #16 being a par 5 as it had once been. I've said that on here numerous times. He really did not finalize his routing for years while he constructed that course.  

"Tilly described seven holes in his April article. You have the 7th finishing somewhere out on an adjacent property with no apparent way of getting home."

I didn't say it was on the adjacent property---you did. He may've owned that property or certainly had easy access to it or to buy it. There is no question at all that Crump was definitely never limited in what he could buy from that huge Sumner Ireland tract of land. Did he even have a clubhouse site at that time?

"Is it your opinion that Crump had finished routing at least a nine hole loop? And if this is the case, how would he get home from your 7th?"

You do have a decent point there and we all talked about this a few years ago. Tillinghast described in the Golf Illustrated article in 1913 only the first seven holes, and #18, no more. The rest he said weren't even cleared. However, in an article probably published years later he did say he published a full report in March 1913 and described in detail the first four holes which had been completed entirely to Crump's own plans and personally directed building, and also the plan for the first nine holes and the tenth and eighteenth, all of which remained as Crump determined with the exception of the ninth (a hole by the way I've said for years is unquestionalbly Colt's in every way--eg routing and bunkering. #9 is the only hole on the golf course that had bunkering built exactly to Colt's plan.

So there is some inconsistency in those two reports from Tillinghast. As for historical accuracy I'd tend to go with the wording of the article he wrote in April 1913 and not the one he may've written years later in the 1930s that was obviously his recollection of what he wrote years earlier.

Nevertheless, Tom MacFudd, in the April 1913 issue of Golf Ilustrated he did describe a par 5 6th and an undeveloped 7th over an enormous dip with a stream of clear water.

So where were those two holes Tillinghast described? Was he dreaming? Was he lying? Or were they being looked at that way by Crump at that time? And if they were they had to be somewhere. So Where were they? I've told you where I believe they were. So far you don't seem to have any idea.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I"ve always been fascinated by the 14th and 15th holes.

I contend the following.

The netting has become necessary as the hole has been lengthened.

A great view of the 14th green and 15th tee appear on
page 62 of Geoff Shackelford's "The Golden Age of Golf Design"
The picture is circa 1922 and indicates that the hole played to a manageable length of 162 yards.

What's interesting about that picture is that the 15th tee seems far removed from the 14th green.

So much so that I have to question if today's tee is in the same place as the tee depicted on page 62.

The other fascination I have with # 15 is the heroic carry required on the drive.

If one looks at page 66 in the same book, you can see that there is no alternative or short tee.  This picture is circa 1925.

The question I would ask is:
Was there another tee, across the bridge, on the 14th tee side of the water ?

The way the land is cleared on the far left side in the picture on page 66 would seem to indicate that a tee might have existed on that side.

Your thoughts ?

[T_MacWood]

"Is it a good idea to begin construction on a golf course before completing a routing? Being of sound mind and surrounded by good people that doesn't sound like something Crump would do."

Tom MacWood:

No, to begin construction on a golf course and bring holes into play before finalizing or completing a routing is a terrible thing to do. It's a potentially grave mistake and that's precisely what Crump did do. I've mentioned that on here numerous times over the years with Pine Valley.

Apples and oranges. Your hypothetical scenario for the front nine - building seven holes without any aparent way home - is not equivalent to what occured on the back nine. When Crump began construction on the back nine he had a plan to get from point A to point B. That plan changed when he discovered (or Tillinghast discovered) the 13th hole. I don't think anyone in their right mind would begin building a golf course or a nine hole loop without knowing how he was going to get home. That is a rediculous idea.

"Tilly described seven holes in his April article. You have the 7th finishing somewhere out on an adjacent property with no apparent way of getting home."

I didn't say it was on the adjacent property---you did. He may've owned that property or certainly had easy access to it or to buy it. There is no question at all that Crump was definitely never limited in what he could buy from that huge Sumner Ireland tract of land. Did he even have a clubhouse site at that time?

Either he owned the land or he didn't. Unless Perin was lying in his letter from April, 1913 and the widely reported 1917 purchase of adjoining land was wrong...he did not own that land in 1913.

"Is it your opinion that Crump had finished routing at least a nine hole loop? And if this is the case, how would he get home from your 7th?"

You do have a decent point there and we all talked about this a few years ago. Tillinghast described in the Golf Illustrated article in 1913 only the first seven holes, and #18, no more. The rest he said weren't even cleared. However, in an article probably published years later he did say he published a full report in March 1913 and described in detail the first four holes which had been completed entirely to Crump's own plans and personally directed building, and also the plan for the first nine holes and the tenth and eighteenth, all of which remained as Crump determined with the exception of the ninth (a hole by the way I've said for years is unquestionalbly Colt's in every way--eg routing and bunkering. #9 is the only hole on the golf course that had bunkering built exactly to Colt's plan.

To believe Crump only routed seven holes - with the seventh hole stopping on land outside the survey map of his property - before commencing construction is to believe Crump was an idiot. Crump was not idiot. How did he get from your 7th back home?

So there is some inconsistency in those two reports from Tillinghast. As for historical accuracy I'd tend to go with the wording of the article he wrote in April 1913 and not the one he may've written years later in the 1930s that was obviously his recollection of what he wrote years earlier.

Have you read the March 1913 article? I would think that would be an important bit of information when trying to determine what happened.

Nevertheless, Tom MacFudd, in the April 1913 issue of Golf Ilustrated he did describe a par 5 6th and an undeveloped 7th over an enormous dip with a stream of clear water.

So where were those two holes Tillinghast described? Was he dreaming? Was he lying? Or were they being looked at that way by Crump at that time? And if they were they had to be somewhere. So Where were they? I've told you where I believe they were. So far you don't seem to have any idea.  

No I don't think Tilly was dreaming. I don't know where they were. Hopefully some day someone will figure it out.

I'm still waiting for your explantion for the two 3rd holes on the stick plan. In your first explantion you made it sound like there were two versions prior to construction, which makes no sense.

Routing, clearing and construction began sometime before March. At that time Tilly reported fairways were nearly ready for Spring seeding and several greens were ready for preperaration. The second par-3 on the stick map had to have been added after Tilly's report.

Crump was building a par-3 including the green complex and then inexplicably routed another hole, a little longer, with a green located right smack where 4th tee was...another hole which was also well under construction? Is this normal? What could be the logical explanation?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Mac & Tom Paul,

Following this conversation (?) I believe that the two of you are spending a great deal of time searching the specifics of each other comments for points of disagreement rather than considering what the other has written on its face value, thereby missing important points.

Let me illustrate with the following exchange that took place on this page:

Tom Macwood answers a post of Tom Paul with, “No I don't think Crenshaw is an idiot, not do I think Crump was an idiot… Is it a good idea to begin construction on a golf course before completing a routing? Being of sound mind and surrounded by good people that doesn't sound like something Crump would do. Tilly described seven holes in his April article. You have the 7th finishing somewhere out on an adjacent property with no apparent way of getting home... Is it your opinion that Crump had finished routing at least a nine hole loop? And if this is the case, how would he get home from your 7th?”

Tom Paul responded by saying, “You do have a decent point there and we all talked about this a few years ago. Tillinghast described in the Golf Illustrated article in 1913 only the first seven holes, and #18, no more… However, in an article probably published years later he… described in detail the first four holes which had been completed entirely to Crump's own plans and personally directed building, and also the plan for the first nine holes and the tenth and eighteenth, all of which remained as Crump determined with the exception of the ninth…”

Tom Macwood then responds, “Apples and oranges. Your hypothetical scenario for the front nine - building seven holes without any apparent way home… I don't think anyone in their right mind would begin building a golf course or a nine hole loop without knowing how he was going to get home. That is a rediculous idea… To believe Crump only routed seven holes - with the seventh hole stopping on land outside the survey map of his property - before commencing construction is to believe Crump was an idiot. Crump was not idiot…

Tom Mac, whether Crump was an idiot or not, you did ask Tom Paul if Crump had designed the front nine in full and he showed Tilly’s article “The Genius of Pine Valley,” which he wrote for the May 1933 issue of Golf Illustrated how, “In March 1913, I published a full description of work already accomplished and described in detail the first four holes… and also the plan for the first nine holes and the tenth and the eighteenth all of which remained as George determined with the exception of the ninth…”

That is a pretty clear-cut answer that Crump HAD a “way home” at the end of the front nine loop. Why ignore Tilly’s factual statement? Even if your conclusion was correct, and based upon Tilly’s writing’s it doesn’t appear so, wouldn’t the converse also be true? Wouldn’t it be equally stupid to design the first and last hole of a nine-hole loop without knowing how he would get out and back to it? Yet that too is what Tilly wrote he did when in 1933 he mentions how Crump had planned “the tenth and the eighteenth.”
I freely admit never having stepped a single-toe on that wonderful golf course in New Jersey, but it is quite obvious even to me that Crump was unique man who was searching for the absolute best golf holes he could find and made changes as he went.

In addition to all of this, you both have quoted and then ignored how Tilly wrote in 1913, right after his description of the barely cleared seventh hole that, “The remaining holes are yet to be cleared, but the work will be pressed hard…”

What holes are these if not at least the 8th & 9th holes? Tilly definitely then did refer to all nine holes in that April 1913 article in the American Golfer.
 
Secondly, you are both misquoting. From the article(s) that you are referencing as proof of the other being wrong.

Tilly, writing as “Hazard” in the April 1913 issue of The American Golfer, announced the course and wrote about Pine Valley and Crump’s design. It is this article that you both appear to be quoting from, not from “Golf Illustrated article in 1913” or “April 1913 issue of Golf Illustrated” (both by Tom Paul) or the “March 1913 article” (Tom Macwood).

You are both accusing the other of inaccuracies and yet use your own while doing so.

Tom Paul, you mentioned that, “So there is some inconsistency in those two reports from Tillinghast. As for historical accuracy I'd tend to go with the wording of the article he wrote in April 1913 and not the one he may've written years later in the 1930s that was obviously his recollection of what he wrote years earlier.”

Why do you state this? I assume it is because you have assumed that the April 1913 article was the one he was referring to in his May 1933 recollection and the differences in hole descriptions in both. This assumption may very well be wrong.

Tilly wrote for several different journals and newspapers during those years, including for the Philadelphia newspapers. There are many instances where he had articles appear in Golf Illustrated and other journals at the same time. It is highly possible that the article he was referencing was not the American golfer article and that in the one he was speaking about he gave more information, and if it was an account for a Philadelphia newspaper, probably would have been written AFTER the American Golfer article which was probably written in late February (see my earlier posting that you quoted from), this would make sense.

Why do I believe there is another article by him on this same subject? For several reasons. First, he mentions in the 1933 article not just that he earlier mentioned the plan for the “first nine hole” but also for “the TENTH.” This is too specific a mention to just write off as a lapse in memory. Tilly kept, and this is a second reason, copies of everything he ever wrote and published in his personal files. I have this information from family members and it is also reflected in the contents of his personal library which he sold in 1939. It would have been quite easy for him to refer to the original article.

I think if you both better consider what the other is saying that it would be far less argumentative and far more of a discussion.

[T_MacWood]

Phil
When I wrote the 'March 1913' article I meant the 'March 1913'. Have you read it?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

I apologize for my incorrect assumption as it appeared you were refering to the same article that Tom Paul was mentioning.

To answer your question, "When I wrote the 'March 1913' article I meant the 'March 1913'. Have you read it?" I am wondering exactly which article you are refering to?

Is that his column from the American Golfer written as "Hazard" where he writes, "The new course in clementon is being rapidly cleared of scrub trees and underbrush. The committee is prepared to push the construction work to completion as soon as the plans are definitely fixed."

If not, please be specific as to which article you refer and exactly what Tilly wrote that is germane to the discussion.

[T_MacWood]

No, it wasn't in American Golfer. I think Tilly wrote for the Philadephia Record and that is probably where that March article appeared.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tilly wrote for several Philly area newspapers, magazines and various journals throughout his life. I have copies of some but probably no more than  athird of all of those. Unfortunately I am unaware of any on-line archive or database that I can view them from remotely.

That is a shame because there are gems of info to be found in journals of that type. For example, I have several poor copies of some of his articles from the Record and Country Club Life, etc... In them are found some detailed information about his Aronomink course, including photos of several holes. He was very proud of that course and deeply disappointed when just a few years later they moved and hired Ross to design the present day course.

I am convinced that he wrote a good deal about Pine Valley for the "locals" and there may be much info there that will confirm some of what is known and more that will surprise.

I am planning atrip to Philly next spring to try and find copies of all of them and scan them into my database so that we can make them available, as we are shortly about to do with a great deal of his and his father's other writings, on the Tillinghast association website.

[TEPaul]

"Was there another tee, across the bridge, on the 14th tee side of the water ?
The way the land is cleared on the far left side in the picture on page 66 would seem to indicate that a tee might have existed on that side.
Your thoughts?"

Pat:

In that photo in GeoffShac's book there are two area across the bridge from #15 tee that were cleared and never used. The first area to the left of #13 green and all the way down to the water. I believe that was probably cleared when a par 4 hole was planned when the 13th green was about 150-175 yards short and right of where it is now. I believe the second area was cleared for the possibilility of either a par 3 running in the direction of the 15th hole or probably for that iterations I've described a number of times for #14 that was an awesome cape hole from about where the present 14th tee is to a green about where the beginning of #15 fairway is. I measure that cape hole to have had a carry directly at the green of perhaps 240 yards downhill as the aggressive route or about 300 yards if one played to the fairway that is that second cleared area.  The hole also had a shorter tee in the first cleared area.

But there never was a tee for the 15th hole in either of those cleared areas. The tee for #15 as built was always from the tee near #14 gree across the lake.  

[TEPaul]

Philip Young wrote:

"Tom, (MacWood)
I apologize for my incorrect assumption as it appeared you were refering to the same article that Tom Paul wasmentioning.
To answer your question, "When I wrote the 'March 1913' article I meant the 'March 1913'. Have you read it?" I am wondering exactly which article you are refering to?
Is that his column from the American Golfer written as "Hazard" where he writes, "The new course in clementon is being rapidly cleared of scrub trees and underbrush. The committee is prepared to push the construction work to completion as soon as the plans are definitely fixed."
If not, please be specific as to which article you refer and exactly what Tilly wrote that is germane to the discussion."

Phil:

The article I've been quoting from all along is the April 1913 article in Amercian Golfer. I've called it Golf Illustrated but it's American Golfer.

The other article I quoted from is from the article of Tillie's in 1933 when he mentions he reported in March 1913. I always thought perhaps Tillie meant that April 1913 article of American Golfer but perhaps he meant another one in March 1913 I am not aware of.

Tom MacWood mentions a Tillie article from March 1913 that it appears he's seen. I don't know what article that is. Maybe MacFudd can tell us or quote it, if he really is aware of it instead of just vaguely referring to it.  

MacFudd:

You do admit that Tillie did mention a par 5 6th hole and a 'undeveloped" two shot 7th hole over a enormous dip with a stream of clear water, don't you?

It's pretty hard to deny that because we've quoted it a number of times. It's in American Golfer April 1913, that everyone can see.

So if you admit he said it what do you think about that enormous dip and the stream of clear water at the bottom of the dip? Do you think Tille was dreaming when he described that hole iteration that way? Or do you think perhaps Tillie was lying when he said that and described that iteration that way? Or do you think that routing iteration that fit that description (and was obviously never done or used) was actually out there somewhere? And if you do agree Tillie said that and described it that way, which of course you should given all the actual evidence in that article etc, it must have been out there somewhere, don't you think? So, where the hell do you think it was and in which direction did it go?  

I know you probably don't want to answer any of those questions because just answereing any of them will probably make you look like and idiot after all you've said on here about that hole (or two, including that par 5 6th)) but one of these days you're gonna have to answer those questions or look like an idiot anyway if you don't.

Where do you think those two iterations Tillie described in American Golfer in April 1913 (the par 5 6th and the undeveloped 7th with a drive over an enormous dip with a stream of clear water) WERE ON THE LAND??  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Look at the picture on page 62.

The tee appears further removed from the 14th green.

In addition, it appears to jut further into the lake.
More so than on page 66.

Look at where the bridge ends on the 15th tee side of the lake in both pictures.

On page 62 it appears to be further away from the bridge entrance.

In 1925 that had to be more than a heroic carry, it had to be a herculian carry.

Are you positive that NO tee existed on the far side of the pond on # 15, near the lower 14th tee ?

Even that carry is heroic

[TEPaul]

Pat:

First of all, I think those photos in GeoffShac's book are misdated, and if you look at them all carefully, I think you can see a couple of reasons why. And yes, I'm almost positive that the 15th hole never used a tee other than those just to the left of #14 green. The one that is protected by netting in the trees (the one that has been the tips until they recently added about 35 yards to the hole with a new tee behind and to the right of #14 green) I don't think was there when Crump was alive. It's about 15-25 yards farther back than the tee you can see in those photos in GeoffShac's book.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Although few seem to realize it despite my explaining it on here for a few years there are a number of areas that are cleared in those early aerials of Pine Valley that were areas that Crump opened up with the idea for various hole iterations and other ideas that were just never used. That's one of the reasons some of those cleared areas on those early aerias don't exist any longer.

You can see them behind #12 tee, behind and to the right of the green on #15 (basically the same area), way to the right and short of #13 green, to the left of #13 green down to the water, that swath at the end of the "nature walk" from the 15th green to the fairway, the area all along the left of #13 fairway, the area past #12 fairway and green etc, and there are a few others.

Some on here appear to believe those cleared areas were supposed to be permanent. I don't think some of them were. When Crump decided not to use them for various hole iterations they were to be closed up. However, I think there were some he wanted permanently that don't exist any longer and those are the ones the club, I feel, should consider restoring. And then there was the question of the various areas beginning to erode and slide that had to be vegetated to prevent that.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I understand that.

What I have trouble understanding is the very heroic nature of the carry from # 15 tee.

There is no alternate route.

If one doesn't carry the hazard, they must retee and try, try again.

It's a fairly heroic shot today, but, in 1918-1925-1930 it must have been next to impossible.

Are you sure that there wasn't an alternate tee ?

I would ask the same question with respect to # 5.
What was the original length of that hole ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I remember the foot pad for the 15th hole tee behind the 14th green and across the water from many years ago.

When was it originally constructed ?

Page 66 doesn't show it.

But, on page 62 a penisula appears to be behind the 14th green.

With respect to Merion, look at page 68, and the old 10th green, the new 10th green, the 1st and 12th greens.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

That's exactly the kind of thing I mean. You can see that thing is not there in the 1925 photo but it is in the 1922 photo which means those photos are misdated. It means obvously the 1925 photo is older than the 1922 photo. They probably just flipped them in the book by mistake. The photo on p. 62 is probably 1925 and the one on p. 66 is probably 1922, and not the other way around.

But anyway, that little footpad, as you're calling it, is what they've used for years to play back to the green for balls that go into the water hazard back there. You know the way it is---eg one option is you've got to get behind the "last point of entry" (into a water hazard), although you can always play stroke and distance in golf.  

[T_MacWood]

TE
I don't know where the 6th and 7th were (or the 8th and 9th). If I was a betting man I'd bet on a diligent researcher like Phil figuring it out in the end. Speculation upon specualtion upon speculation is obviously not the answer.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Or, it could have been removed after 1922.

But, I agree, the dating of photos isn't always a perfect exercise.

[TEPaul]

"TE
I don't know where the 6th and 7th were (or the 8th and 9th). If I was a betting man I'd bet on a diligent researcher like Phil figuring it out in the end. Speculation upon specualtion upon speculation is obviously not the answer."

Tom MacWood:

Then lets see if Phil can figure something out and let's see if it makes any sense. First of all, has Phil ever seen Pine Valley? No, he said he never has. If not does he know what the land looks like? Could he identify the topography Tillie is describing if he's never seen the land? I guess not, huh?  Do you also notice Phil is not accusing those who do know the site of speculatoin on speculation on speculation?   Why do you suppose that is?

You've never seen it either have you? No you haven't, so how do you expect to identify the topography Tillie was describing as the par 5 6th and the undeveloped 7th over an enormous dip with a stream of clear water? And why are you accusing someone who does know the site and the topography out there of speculatoin on speculation on speculation if you don't know anything about the topography of the site and what Tillie was describing with that hole with a drive over an enormous dip with clear water if you don't know the site? That's what I'd like to know for starters.  


But what we do know is what Tillie was describing for the 5th hole---eg a short shot from app the tee of the present 5th hole (it was either on or just to the right of where it is now if one looks at the first topo). Tillie describes that as a short iron to a green on the hillside beyond a very pronounced depression and over a creek.  If one looks out from around PV's 5th tee that could've been a shot to the left hillside, straight ahead to the first part of the present hole below or perhaps even to the right across the creek (now a pond) across from where Crump built his bungalow.

If one looks on the first topo one sees a number of itearation lines in those various directions but one notices Crump circled a green site on the hillside to the left.  

So if that is where he was planning his 5th green when he was out there with Tillie, and perhaps in early February or March before he was even given that topo survey map on which he made his first stick routing, then one can assume the 6th tee must have been near that early iteration of Crump's short iron 5th hole green.  Are you with me so far?  

THEN, if one understands that land and its topography it's not very hard to see where Crump HAD to go with that par 5 6th hole. Basically there aren't many options where he could go from there with a par 5 and then have that par 5 be followed by a 7th hole from a tee with a drive over a stream of clear water.

Tillie says he cleared some of that area where that 6th hole par 5 iteration was and if one looks on the aerials one can see that that is where the 5th hole eventually went and where the par 4 6th hole went (the present 6th hole) which in another iteration was Crump's 8th hole because instead of continuing to entertain any ideas of that par 5 6th and the 7th over an enormous dip, Crump decided instead to take the 6th hole from a tee next to that short iron par 5 on the left on the hillside over the ridge to a green to the right of the present 10th and then the 7th from a tee next to the right of the beginning of what would eventually be the 11th to a green near John Ott's house to the left of the present 9th fairway. From there he used the present 6th which was listed as the 8th on that first stick routing. From there his 9th hole iteration on the stick routing is what became the present 7th hole!  

That's the way routing iterations happen on site, MacFudd, but never having seen such a thing take place on site on a construction project there's not much possibility that you'd understand that. Obviously not understanding this kind of thing you just assume it's all speculation on speculation on speculation.  

[TEPaul]

And since you don't know much obviously you are incapable of answering a few necessary questions and you'll obviously continue to refuse to answer them. Was Tillie dreaming in what he described in that April 1913 American Golfer for the 6th and 7th? Did he just imagine an enormous dip with a stream of clear water below that wasn't actually there?? Was he lying? Did he just make up the fact there was an enormous dip with a stream of clear water below out there in that part of the property?  

And if not those two hole iterations must have been there somewhere on that land, wouldn't you say??  

Maybe you'll figure this out someday and maybe you never will, Elmer MacWood . Maybe Phil can help you figure it out or maybe you'll figure out you should start to listen to people who know that site and its topography and those early routing iterations and consider more carefully what they are saying.  

Or maybe you'll just continue to speculate that Tillinghast was dreaming or lying when he described that par 5 6th hole and the undeveloped 7th with a drive over an enormous dip and a stream of clear water that he described in the April 1913 issue of American Golfer.  

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
Or, it could have been removed after 1922."

Pat:

I'd sort of doubt they'd remove it after 1922 and then put it back again because it's there now.  

You can also see that the tee on #15 in the 1925 photo is smaller than the tee on the 1922 photo and that doesn't make much sense either, does it? I believe the photo labeled 1925 is probably 1922 and the photo labeled 1922 is probably 1925.

[Brian Phillips]

Brian:

What you said is a fair statement but what do you mean by Colt's original routing?

What is that? Are you implying some routing by Colt that contains nothing of what was done in a routing or design sense before Colt arrived? If so, such a routing does not exist simply because Pine Valley did not develop that way. That would also mean that Tillinghast would have to be considered a man who totally and accurately was capable of predicting the future.  

I believe it would be worthwhile for you to explain what you said about who may've done that routing map that we bought--or more appropriately who may not have done it. I think that's interesting in the timeline of all this particularly regarding Colt's whereabouts in July 1913 (the date on that map).

Sorry Tom Paul,

Didn't realise that this had gone on so much.  

When I say the 'original' routing I mean the map that was recovered by the club.  As we discussed a number of the holes were already completed even though Colt still had the routing drawn up the way he wanted the course to be built. So to summarise, the 'original' Colt routing was done after the stick routing...

Do we really want to talk about the map on here in public?

Brian

[TEPaul]

"Do we really want to talk about the map on here in public?"

Brian:

I don't know.

But I can tell you the Colt map is fairly similar to the Colt hole by hole booklet and it's fairly easy to go through that Colt map and see what the differences are between it, it's bunkering and particularly its almost totally amorphous green details and the way the golf course was eventually built. In this way there is no question Jim Finegan's analysis of that Colt hole by hole booklet is correct.

Guys like MacFudd can argue with me about the details of PIne Valley until the cows come home but the problem with that is he's never seen the golf course and how can anyone who's never even seen a golf course be that familiar with all it's little details? And more importantly how can anyone who's never been to a golf course like Pine Valley have much idea what the details of the topography of that entire site look like.

Maybe MacWood actually thinks there was an enormous dip and a stream of clear water below out in that 6th green area that somehow mysteriously vanished.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()