News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #125 on: December 05, 2006, 08:15:18 PM »
"You have described him several times a s a humble man and I trust that this is a correct assessment based upon your knowledge of the man and PV. So what would push a "humble man" to try and build Pine Valley?

Could it have been the example of seeing his friend Tilly succeed and his looking at it and saying to himself that "I too can do it, and maybe even better."

I'm looking for his motivation as that, at least I believe, will provide the answer to some of the questions regarding Colt, especially the one of why he and others would credit Colt and to do so at his suggestion (your conclusion)."

Phil:

These are of course interesting questions.

Tom MacWood has implied that some of what I've said on here about the creation of Pine Valley is just speculation. I can assure you it's not.

However, to ask me to tell you what I think really did motivate or drive George Crump to do what he did down there the way he did it really would be sheer specuation on my part.

I certainly can't look into the man's mind and certainly not as well as those who knew him and knew him well and after-all they were all completely shocked and saddened by the way it all ended for him.

I'm sure you realize Crump put a gun to his head on January 24th 1918 and ended his life and right in the midst of perhaps the greatest kudos the world of golf has ever given the creator or architect of a golf course. Pine Valley was undeniably world famous before it was even finished and while Crump was alive and still living and working there.

Tom MacWood's very good essay on Crump, the man, and his life and legend speculates Crump may've been depressed that the agronomy of his course failed the way it did and shot himself for that reason.

Personally, I think that type of assumption is remarkably simplistic and perhaps naive. He had plenty of obstacles to overcome with a project like that one and agronomic problems a time or two were probably not that big a deal. Agronomic problems seemed to be a way of live back then anyway.

As beloved as Crump seemed to have been by his friends and those who knew him, it would be hard to deny that Crump's life from the beginning of 1913 on was anything but normal. Eccentric or just downright strange would be more like it.

Men like that basically don't just vacate their residences and move to the woods first in a tent and then in a small bungalow for the next and last five years of their lives.

Was Crump dealing with demons? Obviously he probably was for whatvever reason. Was it the death of his wife, or perhaps some form of closeted depression, perhaps exacerbated by alchohol that led him to his untimely end? Was it lack of money in the end? I doubt it.

And what of this story about the poison from a tooth abscess going to his brain and killing him suddenly? That story was eventually put to rest by the fact of the uncovering of his death certificate and the listing of the cause of death as suicide by a gun shot to the head.

I had heard before and had it confirmed this summer by a man who knew him that in the end it was not unusual to see Crump around PV with a towel in his mouth. Did the extreme pain from tooth problems lead him to shoot himself? Who knows? Some of the dentists I know say one cannot underestimate the seriousness of tooth problems and the accompanying pain, particularly back in that day. I have a feeling Crump's premature death may've been the result of a life of depression of one kind or another that his dedication to the project of PV may've even forestalled for a time.

But who really knows? Why did he do PV the way he did? Who knows but the way he did it certainly does indicate a man who was seriously driven by something and that it may've been demons of one kind or another seems not at all surprising. A man like that just basically doesn't repair to the woods the way he did at 41 years old.

His death certificate says he killed himself in Merchantville. I do not believe that was the case. For thirty years I've heard that rumor of his suicide and it always included that he shot himself with a handgun in his cabin at PV. And last year I found an interview with George Govan who lived at PV with his family in the early days. The Govans and Crump were the only ones who lived there initially and the Govan interview in 1990 confirms that Crump was found dead in his cabin at PV.

Did he do what he did because he saw Tillinghast do it? I think that is highly unlikely. I doubt anyone has any idea why he really did PV the way he did.  Did he know that he was creating what would be considered the greatest golf course in the world?

Who knows, probably not and even if he did know that may not have had all that much to do with it.



« Last Edit: December 05, 2006, 08:29:37 PM by TEPaul »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #126 on: December 05, 2006, 08:48:12 PM »
I'll try and restate...after Colt's visit there was a cohesive course routed 80-90% the same as today's course.  That's the art of routing a course!  Finding a few excellent holes scattered over great terrain isn't the same.

(There does look to be more than one drawing style on the stick plan)

The stick diagram has the 12th in roughly the correct position,  but 13 and 14 aren't all that close.  The stick 15 has a green at the current 11th site.  

The stick 16th plays from near the current 11th green in roughly the right directon but the green isn't in the correct place; it's short and would currently be in the pond.  

The stick 17th plays from there and is somewhat similar but is shifted about a fairway width to the left with a green in front of the current 11th tee.

The stick 18th is close, but for some reason it plays as a slight dog leg left to right.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2006, 09:19:27 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #127 on: December 05, 2006, 08:58:08 PM »
Tom MacWood:

It would help if you'd refrained from sounding like a broken record and it would also help if you'd refrain from just avoiding the obvious. I don't blame you for just avoiding what I said to you in post #120. It spells it out crystal clear. If you can't understand it there's nothing me or anyone else can do for you on the subject of the creation of Pine Valley. But again, if you want to call my assumptions and conclusions speculation, that's cool too---God knows I sure think most of what you come up with is speculation.

Ah, sorry, not speculation but fabrication. Long live William Morris, the English Arts and Crafts Movement and "Arts and Crafts Golf". ;)


TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #128 on: December 05, 2006, 09:22:53 PM »
"(There does look to be more than one drawing style on the stick plan)"

Paul:

I doubt the drawing style has all that much to do with the first routing. What's important is who did the routing on the ground and Crump's note on the map doesn't leave much doubt as to who that was.  ;)

"The stick diagram has the 12th in roughly the correct position,  but 13 and 14 aren't all that close.  The stick 15 has a green at the current 11th site."

The 12th is very close to Crump's original 10th. His 11th and 12th are very similar to Colt's 13th and 14th. Neither of those holes by Crump or Colt were ever built. Crump's 15th began close to where the 15th began on the second map and did go to the green site that is today's 11th.  

"The stick 16th plays from near the current 11th green in roughly the right directon but the green isn't in the correct place; it short and in the pond."

I pointed all that out on here about two years ago although I may've deleted some of it as too revealing at the time  

"The stick 17th is somewhat similar but is shifted to the left with a green in front of the current 11th tee."

The shifting of the 17th green and the centerline of the hole is really miniscule. It was the same hole but was shifted slightly right to make room for the 11th tee and hole and the 10th green placement, both by Colt.

"The stick 18th is close, but for some reason it plays as a slight dog leg left to right."

The 18th hole has nothing whatsoeever to do with Colt and was very well described by Tillinghast as it is today before Colt arrived at PV. You should see what Colt called for with that green and green-end---it wasn't remotely like the 18th.

Again, Colt was responsible for up to five holes in routing sense if one includes the 5th which is from Crump's original tee. #15 and 16 are a combination of Crump and Colt and the rest of the holes are Crump's unless you include what Tillinghast says he did on #7 and #13, and perhaps the 14th to Govan.

The greens and the course's bunkers have little to nothing to do with what Colt recommended and drew no matter how much you seem to want to claim it. Its just not the case unless you want to claim that if someone puts any bunkers on a hole anywhere he must be responsible for the bunker placements on the course no matter how different they got built.  Crump's bunkering on that course is very different from anything Colt drew and left there. If you ever see the booklet, you'll understand.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #129 on: December 05, 2006, 10:08:23 PM »
Tom

The 17th is shifted a good 40 yards left.  I superimposed one map on the other and it's clear (I think I sent this to you a 2-3 years ago).  It has to really, considering where that stick 17th green is.

The 15th on the stick map doesn't start near where the 15th starts on the  blue/red map.  It starts way up the current 15th fairway.  I don't think you can credit Crump with routing that hole, other than adding the island tee.  Nor the 16th really,  that's Colt's routing.

The stick 18th does show a considerable shift in the fairway to the left for the tee shot.  

Colt obviously has strong stylistic influence on PVGC with the scale and stye of the hazards.  That's pretty obvious with the similarities to the heath courses, you just have to compare old photos.  

The essential strategies/shapes of the majority of holes is present on Colts plan eventhough bunkers shapes and positions were changed.   If anyone who knows the course, looked at Colt's plan they would immediately recognize it as PVGC.  Not so with the stick plan!

Do you not credit Colt for pulling the majority of the course together into a cohesive routing?  That's the skill of routing, no?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2006, 11:18:48 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #130 on: December 06, 2006, 06:46:36 AM »
TE
It appears every time you don't want to deal with a question or don't like the direction of the conversations you lash out and bring up all sorts of extraneous issues....try to stay on topic.

Ian
You are right about the date...March 1913. That was the date that Finegan believed the routing was made too. TE Paul made a very important discovery, that date was not when the routing was drawn but the date the topo map (the routing was drawn on) was made.

You are right about Crump's notations but we have no idea when they were made and as Paul observed there appears to be two hands on that stick map.

Without knowing the precise date the stick drawing was made(logically it would have to be between March 1913 when the topo was made and May 1913 when Colt arrived) we are forced to make an educated guess between - it seems to me - two possibilities:

1. It was made by Crump and perhaps one of his partners before Colt
2. It was made by Crump & Colt in May (an early routing version)
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 07:15:40 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #131 on: December 06, 2006, 09:45:54 AM »
Tom MacWood:

The reason I believe the stick routing map was Crump before Colt arrived is there just isn't anything on it that we are sure Colt recommended when he arrived.

Probably the most telling is the 2nd hole. That is the hole that led me to conclude in the first place that the blue lines on the second topo map were Harry Colt's as there is no denying the famous remark by Crump "NO Good" when Colt attempted to shift that green left and place the tees for the 3rd hole on app the middle of what is today the wonderful 2nd green---perhaps one of the most unique greens and green surfaces in existence. There is no blue lined shift left on the 2nd hole on the stick routing map, and no blue lined tees for #3 on the present 2nd green.

I'm not lashing out at you at all. It just gets frustrating when someone seems incapable of even reading what I write in response much less understanding it. I'd probably be more tolerant if you were dealing with the information I am but obviously you aren't.

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #132 on: December 06, 2006, 10:09:48 AM »
TE
No one knows precisely what Colt recommended when he arrived. We know at some point he recommended moving the 5th green and we know at some point he recommended moving the 2nd. When precisely he recommended these options God only knows.

The stick map shows the 2nd much like it was built (as opposed to Colt's recommendation to the left) and the shorter version of the 5th. We also know according to Tilly in April 1913 the pre-Colt course had a 6th that was a long par-5 and the 7th was a par-4 requiring a drive over a ravine and stream. I don't see either on the stick map.

The stick map could be an pre-Colt version of the routing or it could be an early routing map made by Colt & Crump. It is really impossible to say with any certainty.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 10:19:35 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #133 on: December 06, 2006, 10:34:55 AM »
"Tom
The 17th is shifted a good 40 yards left.  I superimposed one map on the other and it's clear (I think I sent this to you a 2-3 years ago).  It has to really, considering where that stick 17th green is."

Paul:

The 17th hole was eventually shifted perhaps 20-30 yards right but it is still the same hole. The 17th green was originally about where the 11th tee now is simply because the 11th hole at that time did not exist at all where it is now. In Crump's original routing the 11th hole was similar to what became Colt's 13th hole---a hole that was never built.

"The 15th on the stick map doesn't start near where the 15th starts on the  blue/red map.  It starts way up the current 15th fairway.  I don't think you can credit Crump with routing that hole, other than adding the island tee.  Nor the 16th really,  that's Colt's routing."

No, the 15th doesn't start on Crump's original plan where it did on the blue/red map. It starts much farther up the present fairway closer to the road. The present 15th doesn't start within 150 yards of where it does on the blue/red map or on Colt's booklet hole drawing either. Frankly, I think Colt's 15th green is perhaps 50-75 yards to the right and below where the present 15th green is. Colt's green looks to be about where the middle tee on #16 is. That Colt green is drawn very close to the left side of the 11th fairway and that's exactly where the present middle tee is on #16. So, when that hole was eventually done it was fairly different from either or the first two maps, particularly if the green is that far to the left and up the hill. As I'm sure you know that was one that Crump was never happy with and that fact was the last thing he mentioned to Father Carr before he died.

The 16th hole is a combination of a shortened tee and the remainder of the hole is along the line of where Crump had his initial 16th which was a fairly long par 5. To the end Crump entertained the idea of pushing the green on #16 much farther out and along the side of the lake and making it a par 5 again. If you look carefully on the stick routing you can see another stick line out in that direction past the circle (green). Isn't it interesting how Crump kept going back to some of the holes and green sites he'd originally routed on the course?

"The stick 18th does show a considerable shift in the fairway to the left for the tee shot."

There is a shifting of the center line but to me that is a very inconsequential adjustment architecturally. It was simply to move things right to get out of the way of the 10th green.  

"Colt obviously has strong stylistic influence on PVGC with the scale and stye of the hazards.  That's pretty obvious with the similarities to the heath courses, you just have to compare old photos."

I would not agree with that at all. The style and size of the bunkering at Pine Valley looks nothing like what Colt drew which were much smaller and traditionally placed bunkering than anything that was built on the course. Crump's decsion to do massive sand areas on that course and sort of island fairways was unique to him and should never be credited to Colt----at least not when one looks at what Colt drew in the hole booklet and on that map we bought on EBay. The size and scale of the red line bunkering (Crump) is notably diferent than anything Colt drew or recommended down there, in my opinion.  

"The essential strategies/shapes of the majority of holes is present on Colts plan eventhough bunkers shapes and positions were changed.  If anyone who knows the course, looked at Colt's plan they would immediately recognize it as PVGC.  Not so with the stick plan!"

The essential strategies of the majority of the holes at Pine Valley either existed before Colt arrived or were altered and developed differently after Colt had left.

Again, the holes that I firmly believe are solely Colt's are #5, #8, #9, #10, #11. That's five holes. #15 and #16 are a combination of Crump and Colt. The rest of the holes at Pine Valley are not Colt's routing or design. That would total five to Colt, two in combination, and eleven to Crump and perhaps a collaborator such as Tillinghast (7 &13) and one to perhaps Govan (14).

"Do you not credit Colt for pulling the majority of the course together into a cohesive routing?  That's the skill of routing, no?"

That's an interesting question indeed. Yes, I think I sure would credit Colt for pulling the course together in a sense and more than would seem warranted by the amount of actual holes he came up with.

I think those who really understand routing will understand the significance of what the change he made to #5 meant in a general sense and that is probably precisely why he was always given so much credit for what he did on that hole.

In my opinion, that change on #5 alone essentially got most of the routing to fall into place (excluding #12-15 which frankly at that point is an area enough isolated and confined that there wasn't all that much latitude out there left to change them in a dramatic routing sense anyway. In other words Crump really did built himself right into a box in that #12-15 section before figuring out how to unravel that situation. It's frankly amazing they pushed #13, 14 and 15 as far out there as they eventually did. And those holes are nothing at all like Colt's and are up to 150-200 yards farther out then anything that was thought of in the first half of the creation of Pine Valley.

What Colt's recommendation on #5 did, in my opinion, is immediatley throw out Crump's #6 and #7. Crump's #8 thereby became #6 and Crump's #9 thereby became #7. Colt's #8 and #9 essentially took the place of Crump's #6 and #7 on the first map (stick routing) on the front nine. Colt's #10 and #11 essentially threw out and took the place of Crump's #13 and #14 on the back nine. That's four holes of Colt's and when you add the 5th which was the key piece in the jigsaw puzzle that again adds up to five holes for Colt.

And again, you cannot look at that Colt map that we bought and just assume that it looks quite close to the way the course turned out and that most of the course should therefore be credited to Colt. The point is the majority of the holes on that Colt map were not Colt's.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 10:55:12 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #134 on: December 06, 2006, 10:58:58 AM »
"TE
No one knows precisely what Colt recommended when he arrived. We know at some point he recommended moving the 5th green and we know at some point he recommended moving the 2nd. When precisely he recommended these options God only knows."

Tom MacWood:

The point is Tillinghast described the 2nd hole exactly as it is before Colt arrived, so how could that hole be Colt's in any way? The history and story of the 5th hole is well known and what Colt recommended regarding that one. As I explained above in detail, Colt's recommendation on the 5th is the very thing that could've unraveled most of the routing. This is why I believe routing is like doing a masive jigsaw puzzle, only one gets to make the pieces (if they fit and conform to various landforms, for instance).

Not to have you think I'm lashing out at you again :) but these are precisely the very things you could never understand unless you take the time to understand all the land that is Pine Valley as I have over the years and you never have simply because you've never been to Pine Valley. This is of no real difference than the reaction that almost everyone has when they first see ANGC in person---eg the land looks so much different than you think it does when you see it in photographs or on TV. ;)
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 11:26:31 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #135 on: December 06, 2006, 11:14:36 AM »
"We also know according to Tilly in April 1913 the pre-Colt course had a 6th that was a long par-5 and the 7th was a par-4 requiring a drive over a ravine and stream. I don't see either on the stick map."

What Tillinghast described as the 6th and 7th in April 1913 was a very early iteration by Crump that was not the last iteration of #6 and #7 by Crump before Colt arrived. The clearer iteration by Crump was a 6th hole going up over the ridge to a green that was app. 30 yards right of the present #10 green. From there Crump had a 7th hole that went from the short right side of present #11 to a green app where John Ott's house is. The next hole, the 8th, is the same hole that is the present 6th.

Originally, the 7th hole as described by Tillinghast in 1913 (in a form just being cleared) when straight out in the opposite direction of the present 7th. That hole would have basically gone through what was known later as "Parrish's house" (Dormie House). It is not even certain that Crump owned that land that Tillinghast described as the 7th at that time. That alone tells a potentially pretty interesting story---ie Sumner Ireland probably told Crump he could use any part of his land he wanted to and just buy it if he needed it for holes. That is exactly what Crump did do in 1917---buy close to 400 more acres of Sumner Ireland's land! Some say that was bought for protection but an article in a Philadelphia newspaper of 1917 quotes Crump as saying he bought that additonal land to build a golf course specifically designed for championship women golfers!!!  ;)

But Crump turned around and went the opposite direction with his 7th hole (his 9th on the stick routing) and that does show up on the stick routing.

Later on the blue/red map Colt turned the green on #7 short and left into the line of drive on the 8th hole and Crump changed it back to what he had on #7. Or was that the idea of Tillinghast on #7? (Tillinghast wanted to turn the 7th into a double dogleg and that is exactly what Crump was doing when he died (it was only partially completed--eg the green alteration)). That fact alone raises the question of who really did come up with the 8th hole---Crump or Colt or perhaps in some form of collaboration. We can certainly see that Crump must've nixxed one Colt version of #7---eg the Colt map (the one we bought on EBay) shows a 7th hole by Colt that's no more than 420 yards in length. As built by Crump the hole was over 550 yards long---one of Crump or Tillinghast's "True Three shotter"----eg unreachable in two shots as called for by Crump with his two par 5s.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 12:15:57 PM by TEPaul »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #136 on: December 06, 2006, 12:08:07 PM »
Tom

Use the scale and measure the distance between Colt's 15th green and his 11th green.  It's v close to the distance between the two on a modern satellite aerial.  No way that it's 50-75 yards off to the right and down in the hollow.  

The 11th fairway is wider at that point on the auctioned map compared with the blue/red one. Which is why, on the auctioned map, it looks closer to Colt's 15th green.  Check the blue/red one the fairway of the 11th has a slightly different shape.

The 17th is routed the same from a tee on the 16th green to a green in front of the 11th tee??  It goes in the right general direction but it's still different.

Regardless of the waste areas.  There are many similarities between the rugged bunker style and the heath course bunkers say at St George's Hill.  You have to think of the state-of-the-art at the time, the natural inland style was only just starting.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 12:18:34 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #137 on: December 06, 2006, 12:39:26 PM »
"The 11th fairway is wider at that point on the auctioned map compared with the blue/red one. Which is why, on the auctioned map, it looks closer to Colt's 15th green.  Check the blue/red one."

Paul:

First of all, I'm sort of wondering why you call it "Colt's 15th green"? How do you know it was Colt who recommended or marked that green on the ground or on the blue/red line map? Why don't you call up Tom MacWood and have a chat with him about some of his ideas on the ramifications of speculation?  ;)

The auctioned map's #15 green looks slightly closer to the present 15th green postion than the blue/red line map but neither one of them is close to where that green was built.

The distance from the 15th green to the 16th tee is the second longest separation of green to tee at PV. I'll step it off one of these days but it's not insignificant and the distance between the green and tee on both those maps is miniscule as is the distance from the 16th tee to the left side of #11. The 15th green on both those maps is also way off relative to the 12th hole (the tee on both those maps for the 12th hole is right next to the 11th and it wasn't built within 100 yards of that point). Colt's version of #12 was 400 yards right up over the ridge.

But if you really want to see why it is so different simply check out the old clearing lines on the old aerials to the right of the 15th green that was built.

Most don't even understand the significance of many of those old clearing lines at Pine Valley. If one understands them they too tell a most interesting story of not just various routing iterations but also some of the things that were in Crump's mind at various times. Some of what was in his mind re; those clearing lines are mentioned by Carr and Smith in the "Remembrances".

Frankly, no one really knows what stage of development the 15th hole was in when Crump died. For all we know that green may've been placed, designed and built by the Wilsons, Flynn and Govan (foreman who it has been mentioned came up with the 14th hole).

The long and short of all these threads and discussions and debates about Colt and Crump and Pine Valley is that even if Mr Finegan apparently may not have understood exactly why, his observation that there are far more differences in what Colt recommended for Pine Valley than there are similarities to the way it was built and is now is undeniably correct. And no matter how you or anyone else couch or torture the observable facts that we are both looking at there is just no way that you or anyone else will ever get around that reality.

The reality of Pine Valley is Colt did much less than those who at first long ago thought he routed the entire course. And on the other hand, the reality is that Colt did far more then those who apparently fairly recently thought he was really only responsible for the 5th hole.

I believe Colt has finally gotten his just due and gotten his deserved credit for exactly what he did do there. I believe Crump and those others he collaborated with have gotten their due and deserved credit for what was done there both before Colt arrived and most importantly all that was done different from Colt's recommendations in those YEARS the course was worked on every day AFTER Colt left for good in 1913.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 01:06:30 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #138 on: December 06, 2006, 01:18:05 PM »
Paul:

I think the best and most factually accurate way to look at the real story of the entire creation of Pine Valley would be this way;

If Pine Valley was asked to list a single architect for the golf course it would unquestionably and undeniably be George Crump. If the club was asked to list two architects it would be Crump and Colt. If the club was asked to list three architects it would be Crump and Colt and Alison. If the club was asked to list all those who had some signfiicant part in the design of the course over the years it would look something like this;

Crump, Colt, Alison, Tillinghast, Govan, Maxwell, Wilson/Flynn, Travis, Fazio!  ;)

Furthermore, if the club wants to know precisely how and by whom, or in what combination of architects every hole was routed and how every hole and every feature on every hole was designed and by whom or in what combination of architects and when, there is only one thing for them to do---and that is to turn to the one man who knows the entire story and chronical better than anyone else on earth---Thomas Edwin Paul. ;) :)  8)  :-*

BUT, even if that is not what they want, even if they told me they do want it, that is precisely what they are about to get. I will give the comprehensive creation report just to them and they can do whatever they want with it. And if some uninformed joker like Tom MacWood through his important and informed local source ;) or anyone else wants to call it speculation or any other label, so be it---it doesn't matter----until and unless they can absolutely prove me wrong!   ;)
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 01:31:04 PM by TEPaul »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #139 on: December 06, 2006, 01:20:21 PM »
Tom

I can measure the distance from the 11th green to 15th green and compare the blue/red topo with a modern aerial...the green marked "XV" is in the right place.  
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #140 on: December 06, 2006, 01:28:47 PM »
"TE
No one knows precisely what Colt recommended when he arrived. We know at some point he recommended moving the 5th green and we know at some point he recommended moving the 2nd. When precisely he recommended these options God only knows."

Tom MacWood:

The point is Tillinghast described the 2nd hole exactly as it is before Colt arrived, so how could that hole be Colt's in any way?

Thats not what I'm questioning...I'm questioning your speculation regarding who is responsible for the stick drawing.

The history and story of the 5th hole is well known and what Colt recommended regarding that one. As I explained above in detail, Colt's recommendation on the 5th is the very thing that could've unraveled most of the routing. This is why I believe routing is like doing a masive jigsaw puzzle, only one gets to make the pieces (if they fit and conform to various landforms, for instance).

Not to have you think I'm lashing out at you again :) but these are precisely the very things you could never understand unless you take the time to understand all the land that is Pine Valley as I have over the years and you never have simply because you've never been to Pine Valley. This is of no real difference than the reaction that almost everyone has when they first see ANGC in person---eg the land looks so much different than you think it does when you see it in photographs or on TV. ;)

As I said before if I spent two hours at PV or not does not alter what is fact and what is speculation.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #141 on: December 06, 2006, 01:31:24 PM »
Tillie described the 2nd as a cleek (2 iron/4wood) approach which is a bit odd.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 01:33:21 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #142 on: December 06, 2006, 01:35:56 PM »
"Tom
I can measure the distance from the 11th green to 15th green and compare the blue/red topo with a modern aerial...the green marked "XV" is in the right place."

Paul:

That would be fine. Let me know what distance you come up with that way and how you do the scaling and then when next there I'll just go out there and walk off the distance between those two greens a couple of times. I hope you aren't thinking of trying to deny the reality of what the distance on the actual ground really is.  ;)

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #143 on: December 06, 2006, 01:37:36 PM »
"Tillie described the 2nd as a cleek (2 iron/4wood) approach which is a bit odd."

So what, Paul? Do you deny that Tillie was a bit more than a little odd himself?  ;)

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #144 on: December 06, 2006, 01:43:34 PM »
"We also know according to Tilly in April 1913 the pre-Colt course had a 6th that was a long par-5 and the 7th was a par-4 requiring a drive over a ravine and stream. I don't see either on the stick map."

What Tillinghast described as the 6th and 7th in April 1913 was a very early iteration by Crump that was not the last iteration of #6 and #7 by Crump before Colt arrive. The clearer iteration by Crump was a 6th hole going up over the ridge to a green that was app. 30 yards right of the present #10 green. From there Crump had a 7th hole that went from the short right side of present #11 to a green app where John Ott's house is. The next hole, the 8th, is the same hole that is the present 6th.

Is that right...I don't recall Tilly saying it was a early iteration....I believe that is your speculation. Tilly did say the 7th was less defined but he was very clear as to its general nature...including the tee shot over an enormous dip with a stream. Where is long 6th followed by the 7th over the stream on the stick map?

Originally, the 7th hole as described by Tillinghast in 1913 (in a form just being cleared) when straight out in the opposite direction of the present 7th. That hole would have basically gone through what was known later as "Parrish's house" (Dormie House). It is not even certain that Crump owned that land that Tillinghast described as the 7th at that time.

Is this a fact or is this more or less a guess on your part? I don't see any evidence of this on the stick map, do you?

That alone tells a potentially pretty interesting story---ie Sumner Ireland probably told Crump he could use any part of his land he wanted to and just buy it if he needed it for holes.

Probably told Crump he could use any part of his land? It would appear based on his survey he was concentrating on the land he purchased...unless you know something I don't know. Is this a case when the lines between fact and specialtion are being blurred?

 That is exactly what Crump did do in 1917---buy close to 400 more acres of Sumner Ireland's land! Some say that was bought for protection but an article in a Philadelphia newspaper of 1917 quotes Crump as saying he bought that additonal land to build a golf course specifically designed for championship women golfers!!!  ;)

But Crump turned around and went the opposite direction with his 7th hole (his 9th on the stick routing) and that does show up on the stick routing.

Later on the blue/red map Colt turned the green on #7 short and left into the line of drive on the 8th hole and Crump changed it back to what he had on #7. Or was that the idea of Tillinghast on #7? (Tillinghast wanted to turn the 7th into a double dogleg and that is exactly what Crump was doing when he died (it was only partially completed--eg the green alteration)). That fact alone raises the question of who really did come up with the 8th hole---Crump or Colt or perhaps in some form of collaboration. We can certainly see that Crump must've nixxed one Colt version of #7---eg the Colt map (the one we bought on EBay) shows a 7th hole by Colt that's no more than 420 yards in length. As built by Crump the hole was over 550 yards long---one of Crump or Tillinghast's "True Three shotter"----eg unreachable in two shots as called for by Crump with his two par 5s.

This is all very interesting but we are no closer to determining who produced the stick map and when.

« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 01:45:10 PM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #145 on: December 06, 2006, 01:47:32 PM »
"Thats not what I'm questioning...I'm questioning your speculation regarding who is responsible for the stick drawing."

Yes, Tom MacWood, that's perhaps the fifth time you've said that on here. And for perhaps the fifth time I will tell you that the answer to your question of why it is not speculation as to who was responsible for the layout of that stick routing is in a number of posts above and frankly over and over again since it seems you continuously fail to understand the answer to your question.


"As I said before if I spent two hours at PV or not does not alter what is fact and what is speculation."

If you spent two hours at PV I'm quite sure it would not alter the fact you think what I'm saying is specuation but if you spent perhaps two years at Pine Valley thoroughly familiarizing yourself with the golf course and the available material about its creation I'm more than confident you would begin to understand why it isn't speculation.
 

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #146 on: December 06, 2006, 01:49:54 PM »
TE
Is it possible that the stick drawing was made in May 1913 by Colt & Crump?

TEPaul

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #147 on: December 06, 2006, 01:55:54 PM »
"Is that right...I don't recall Tilly saying it was a early iteration....I believe that is your speculation. Tilly did say the 7th was less defined but he was very clear as to its general nature...including the tee shot over an enormous dip with a stream. Where is long 6th followed by the 7th over the stream on the stick map?"

Tom MacWood:

Tillinghast did not say it was an earlier iteration, I did. If you'd like to know why I suggest you take a careful and close look at the stick routing map. The long 6th is not on the stick map and either is the 7th Tillinghast mentioned. Can you imagine why" ;)

Do you even understand where the enormous dip with the stream is?

Mike_Cirba

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #148 on: December 06, 2006, 01:56:50 PM »
I sense there's some information that Tom Paul knows that he isn't willing to divulge here.  

Would that be a fair assessment?

T_MacWood

Re:Pine Valley history Book...
« Reply #149 on: December 06, 2006, 02:01:30 PM »
I don't know why the 6th & 7th aren't on the stick map, but I'm sure you'll tell us why...of course it will most likely be speculation.

Based on your previous post I think I can guess what you'll say. You'll say the reason its not on there is because the dip was outside the property lines...which was another good reason to hire Colt.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2006, 02:02:40 PM by Tom MacWood »