bethpage (black)

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Obviously GD wants to sell magazines, but I don't believe the story was fabricated. There is legitimate doubt. There is no conclusive evidence that one man is responsible over the other and there is information that points to both men being involved. It seems likely there was a collaboration, perhaps one was a more influencial force than the other, time will tell.

What is more troubling to me, I haven't seen any comment from the Tillinghast Society about the alterations to Tillinghast's or Tilinghast-Burbeck's original design.

Rick
What is the Tillinghast Society's position on Tilinghast's original work being altered or not restored accurately?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

First you tell us it may not be Tillinghast's work, then you ask the Tillinghast Society for their opinion on Tillinghast's work being altered or not restored accurately.

Why aren't you asking the Burbeck Society/family ?

And, if it's not Tillinghast, why have you been so critical of Rees's work at Bethpage ?

When you theorize a collaboration occured, what exact role did Burbeck play.  Did he have any hand in the routing or the design of individual holes ?

What was Burbeck's prior experience with respect to routing a golf course and designing golf holes before Bethpage ?

Have you seen Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Ridgewood, and Quaker Ridge ?  Do you see any of Burbeck's work in these golf courses ?  Do you see any of Tillinghast's work at Bethpage ?

Rick Wolfe,

Do you feel that Tillinghast's personality and ego would have permited a joint effort, a co-authoring of the routing and design at Bethpage ?

Did Tillinghast ever undertake a joint venture at any other project ?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

First you tell us it may not be Tillinghast's work, then you ask the Tillinghast Society for their opinion on Tillinghast's work being altered or not restored accurately. I believe you might be confused, please read 'The Bethpage Mystery' under My Opinion. As I just said there is evidence that both men were involved. I also believe the Tillinghast Assoc. has come out and officially stated their belief it is a Tillinghast design (am I mistaken) - based on that, my question to RW is fairly straightfoward.

Why aren't you asking the Burbeck Society/family ? I don't believe there is a Burbeck Society and I don't believe the Burbeck family is a credible group when it comes to discussing golf architecture. I'm not even sure the son plays the game.

And, if it's not Tillinghast, why have you been so critical of Rees's work at Bethpage ? Read my opinion piece.

When you theorize a collaboration occured, what exact role did Burbeck play.  Did he have any hand in the routing or the design of individual holes ? No one knows for sure, read my opinion piece.

What was Burbeck's prior experience with respect to routing a golf course and designing golf holes before Bethpage ? Read my opinion piece.

Have you seen Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Ridgewood, and Quaker Ridge ?  Do you see any of Burbeck's work in these golf courses ?  Do you see any of Tillinghast's work at Bethpage ? I have thoroughly researched the history of Bethpage and in particular the development of the Black course. I do not believe anyone disputes what I have presented as far as the changes to the original design in preperation for the US Open - that is why I am very interested in the Tillinghast Assoc's views on alterations to his work.

I have played Winged Foot, looking back at it I don't recall anything that looked to be Burbeck. Is that the smoking gun?

[TEPaul]

What's always concerned me about this Bethpage Black Tillinghast/Burbeck issue is some otherwise pretty good to good architectural analysts have done an inadequate job of both looking at and reporting about who designed that golf course!

From everything I've read, and I think I've read it all since this issue surfaced with Whitten's article before the 2002 US Open, no one has been able to conclusively prove who designed that course, although so many of those good analysts are acting like they can.

The first and fundamental place to start is what does the word or perception of the word "design" mean exactly? Does it mean route the course AND design its features? Some people apparently don't understand that distinction or even realize there should be one. Logically routing AND designing would almost have to be included since in the minds of most thinking golfers the two are intricately intertwined.

Doak gave an excellent answer on that in my opinion. He said he felt that the routing is extremely significant and if someone did that and not much else that should be considered a very significant contribution and at the very very least that distinction should be made.

I think that question is the first place to start to reanalyze the Black. And what do we know about that at this point that's conclusive? For anyone to say, no matter how good they are that the routing looks to them like Tillinghast so then it's conclusively Tillinghast just isn't good enough. I'm sorry, but that'll never be good enough for me, and I don't think it should be for anyone.

I'm definitlely not saying that Tillinghast did not design that course--the "features" do look a lot like his overall style. But the routing? That's nowhere near as easily identified or identifiable.

Again, I'm not saying that Tillinghast did not do it all. And I'm not saying that Burbeck did nothing or something signficant. All I'm saying, as did Tom MacWood, is that none of us really know at this point and let's stop acting like we do!

In the next post I hope to give a good example of how not to take something out of the context it should logically be kept in to prove a point or make a conclusion.  

[TEPaul]

"In locating and designing the green, which can only be gained by a most precise approach from the right, I must confess that I was a trifle scared myself, when I looked back and regarded the hazardous route that must be taken by a stinging second shot to get into position to attack this green."

In my opinion, that remark by Tillinghast is probably the closest to something conclusive of anything that's left that he both routed and designed the Black. But does it say that conclusively? No it does not, that's for sure. It certainly strongly implies he might have routed and designed the 4th hole, though, if it even says that. But when you look very carefully at that remark you can see that he didn't really say that. He was obviously there and since he was and since he was such a well known designer someone could certainly assume he must have done both.

But what immediately preceded that quote supplied by RickW of the Tillinghast Society is also very interesting and also from the same paragraph of Tillinghast's;

      "It was my good fortune to be selected by the Commission as its consultant course architect to aid it's engineering force in the development of these courses, and let me say right here that never have I received heartier support and cooperation than from Joe Burbeck, the state engineer, who was in daily direction of the entire work from start to finish.
       Now it was Burbeck's idea to develop one of those layouts along lines, which were to be severe to a marked degree. It was his ambition to have something which might compare to Pine Valley....."

I'm particularly perplexed and interested in the middle of the first sentence in the second paragraph---'.....to develop one of those layouts along lines, which were to be severe to a marked degree.'

Tillinghast did have a unique, somewhat odd writing style but if he meant Burbeck had a vague idea about producing a course something like Pine Valley, it would seem Tillinghast might have said--"Now it was Burbeck's idea to develop one of those layouts along THE lines of a course as severe as Pine Valley." The latter would seem to imply that Burbeck may have had some very general or even vague idea of something that looked vaguely like like Pine Valley that he passed on as a recommendation to Tillinghast to route.

But....'along LINES (caps mine), which were to be severe to a marked degree'.

That almost looks to me like "lines" (notice without the "the") might be the object of that Tillinghast sentence. If it was what could "lines" mean? Could it have meant stick routing lines.

Obviously Tillinghast advocates who want what's been produced so far to conclusively prove that Tillinghast did everything at the Black won't like what I just said but I think it's interesting, and given the unfortunate lack of what has been produced so far that really is conclusive I think that point is almost doubly interesting.

I hate to say it too but those who imply that there's no possible way that Burbeck could have routed the Black are not really giving the poor man a chance. And they shouldn't do that at this point!

Did anyone ever know that Crump could design a golf course before he did Pine Valley? Did any know Hugh Wilson could?

Simply in the name of really good and honest architectural research which this website and those that participate on it as well as the other good analysts out there can do, and should be expected to do, everyone should, as Tom MacWood said, leave the question of who designed Bethpage Black, all of it, an open issue until more that is conclusive comes in.

I can certainly see why Tillinghast advocates would want to see this issue concluded---I would feel the same way if I were them. But Bethpage Black is a very significant golf course in American architecture and the exact attribution for it should be clear and detailed. Hopefully it will be someday.

I would also like to hear from the Tilly Society as to why they think Tillinghast referred to himself as a "consultant" at Bethpage. They certainly know far more than us about Tillinghast and it would be nice to know if Tillinghast ever referred to himself that way on anything else he was ever involved in with architecture.

And if not what they think that means.

PS:

RickW:

I can understand how strongly you feel about these things--truly I can--but I certainly don't think any of us by continuing to question, delve into and discusss this Bethpage issue are calling Albert Tillinghast a liar. That is all the more clear to me the closer you look at HIS words and also the seemingly unusual things he HIMSELF said about Burbeck.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Trying to parse Tillinghast's every word is not useful in my opinion. It is one piece of the puzzle, but not a very conclusive piece. (Tillinghast admitted Burbeck was involved and obviously Tillinghast was involved and involved for a very good reason, he was an extremely talented architect) And you can not look at a term like 'consultant' and try to put into a 2002 context, I think that can be very misleading too  - you have to look at what 'consultant' meant in Robert Moses world of 1934.

I'm not going to criticize Ron Whitten for his article on Bethpage it was extremely well researched, and as far as historical research is concerned, he has problably forgotten more than I'll ever know. My essay and research would not have been possible without his previous work. I'm not going to criticize the Phil the Author either, he has probably done more leg work on the subject than anyone. I'm not going to criticize Rick Wolfe, the information he has gathered (and shared) on Tillinghast was key to my research. I wouldn't have even considered writing the essay if I didn't have it as a resource.

Determining who is the architect on old course can be very difficult, its not always cut and dried. People do the best they can with the information they have, and even if we all have the same info, we aren't all going to come to the same conclusion - it isn't an exact science. Some times it comes down to an educated guess. I try to gather as much information as possible and put it together in a thoughtful and logical way, but I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again - often. Well actually not that often.  

We've already debated who did what without a crystal clear conclusion (and there is apparently little new info to sway us). I don't think there is much doubt both men played a roll in creating the golf course, and there is no doubt that the result was historical in terms of a great work of architecture. I'm more concerned about the recent changes that were made and what the Tillinghast Assoc.'s stance is on preserving his work.

[Rick Wolffe]

It is clear that Tilly was very pleased with his working relationship with Joe Burbeck.  And it is clear that Tilly considered himself the Architect and designer.  It is also clear that Tilly considered Joe Burbeck the superintendent and engineer in charge of construction on a daily basis.  

Please don't take me wrong in implying those on this panel are calling Tilly a liar.  But Tilly claimed the Bethpage courses as one of his designs.  To not acknowledge his design credit is to dispute his claim.  

Tilly's contractual title was consulting architect.  If you boil this "mutch ado about nothing debate" to its bottom line -- Tilly claimed credit for the design.  Burbeck never did!  In fact over all the years Burbeck worked at Bethpage he never took credit for designing the golf courses.  The only one that has, is Burbeck's son and Golf Digest.

Tilly has also been credited and acknowledged for this design by numerous independent, respected and very credible golf historians.  My earlier post notes the reference from H.B. Martin in which Martin attributes the design to Tilly and further states that Tilly was most proud of his work at Bethpage.  Does anyone take issue with Martin's writings and conclusions?  Martin was a contemporary of Tilly and had first hand knowledge not second hand interpretation.

I don't think anyone will ever be able to define if any or how much designing was done by Burbeck.  In the same vein, no-one will ever know precisely how much design time was spent by Tillie on Bethpage or for that matter any of Tilly's designs.  I think most on this panel would agree that over countless golf course projects, course constructors have plenty of opportunities to change, modify, make better, make worse and revise the original concepts and designs of the one with the role of golf architect.  Many of those changes are made working with the architect, many are made without the architect.

In the written record, Tilly gives tremendous credit to Burbeck for his contributions to the project in his role as Superintendent with direct oversight of all aspects of the engineering and construction.  Burbeck accomplished a great monument to public golf.  I would hope our interpretation of history and Bethpage should give them both their due.

Oops, time for dinner.  I will be back for a few more thoughts.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

Frankly, I'm a lot more interested in keeping this thread on the subject of who did what on Bethpage Black originally and not have this thread bifurcate into another immense dialogue on Rees Jones and the 2002 Open.

I recognize that there apparently isn't any new evidence to analyze at this point but even that is not a certaintly. Going back over historic research and preceding analyses I find is one of the very most valuable things to do. Geoff Shackelford and I were talking not long ago about some of the amazing things you hit upon, particularly in aerial research, you completely missed or misread the first, second, third or even fourth or fifth time around.

And although you might not like to parse words I surely do. It may never be conclusive surely but it can lead various  assumptions very interestingly down some lines and threads that ultimately may turn up some remarkable truths. The whole point is to not just stop and use some assumption or idea as the final conclusion.

I'm also not much trusting of indirect or second-hand source writing sometimes from some periodicals and such unless it's patently clear and verifiable elsewhere if that seems necessary to pursue. And I'm very interested in words too, particularly some of the nuances of them. For instance, did this author Martin, if he happened to say that Tillinghast "designed" the Black, understand the distinction between routing a course and designing of the golf features of a course following a routing? We don't know at all if he did so why wholly rely on his use of that word given all this apparent evidence of a Burbeck participation in whatever way?

As for the use of Tillinghast's own use of the word "consultant", you bet I'm interested in it's meaning and even the naunces of it. Why would I care what it means today? I only care what it meant to Tillinghast, or Moses or anyone else involved at that time of original construction. What would they care what the word would mean today?

I would very much like to know if Tillinghast ever did use the word consultant elsewhere in his career--at least there could be some interesting comparison of his modus operandi to another project. We also know Moses was one of the greatest promoter of that time. If he was trying to promote Bethpage as a Tillinghast course why would he call him a "consultant" instead of "THE architect" which clearly in that day, as in ours, was extremely definitive and conclusive? Why wouldn't he try to promote Tillinghast if he was interested in  Bethpage's popularity?

There is so much of this and that floating around about this significant course at this point I think any avenue should be looked at by those who care. Why not, as long as one isn't trying to use that avenue to create some easy assumption and turn it into an easy conclusion. There's been enough of that already.

[TEPaul]

"And it is clear that Tilly considered himself the Architect and designer.  It is also clear that Tilly considered Joe Burbeck the superintendent and engineer in charge of construction on a daily basis."

Rick:

Is it that clear? It's not to me. Would you please then point me to where it's conclusively proven that Joe Burbeck did not or could not have routed that golf course or even have had something significant to do the the DESIGN of it?  And would you point to me where it's conclusively proven that Tillinghast did do that routing (all of it) and also all the design of the features?

What do you make of Tillinghast's mention of Burbeck's ideas about Pine Valley? Was that nothing? Would he have said that if Joe had simply said; "Mr Tillinghast don't you think it would be neat if you made this layout along the lines of Pine Valley?"

If you can point me to anything conclusive I'll drop out of this issue and you won't hear from me on it again.

Thanks

[Rick Wolffe]

I am always interested in the world or word according to TePaul and would not want anyone to feel like dropping out of this debate

As I said in my last post, I don't think anyone will ever be able to define if any or how much designing was done by Burbeck.  In the same vein, no-one will ever know precisely how much design time was spent by Tillie on Bethpage or for that matter almost all of Tilly's designs.  This is probably true for many, many, and many of the courses of the golden age by Ross, MacKenzie, Raynor, et al.  There is a generally accepted convention that there is an architect of record or designer of a golf course.  Tilly was hired and paid for his services as a designer.  He was not hired to build the course or supervise construction.  This may explain the title "Consulting Golf Course Architect" in some sense.  Although, I would note that Tilly was not the sole contractor on the design and construction on many of his other golf courses.  My bottom line on this is that Tilly claimed he was the designer.  The golf writer and historians of the time, like the respectecd H.B. Martin, gave Tilly the credit for the design.  I have to go with the word of Tilly on this one.

In regard to Tilly's acknowledgement that it was Burdeck's idea to develop a course as tough as Pine Valley, I accept that at face value and interpret nothing more.  It says what it means.   It is just what it says.  There is a defined term of architecture called the "owner."  Designers and constructers work for the owner.  Burbeck had a management role and represented the owner.  It was the owner's (Burbeck) idea, objective and instruction to Tilly to design a pine valley experience in the Black.  Tillie was asked to design this and he did.  Did not Steve Wynn have an idea to build a pristine woodland perfect golf course in the Nevada desert?  Did not a noted golf architect follow his owners direction?

In regard to Tom MacWood's question on what the Tillinghast Association thinks -- my opinions are my own.  I am one member of the Tillinghast Association and on this matter do not speak for the Association as a whole.  As an aside I think Tom's In My Opinion piece on this matter is pretty good and fairly balanced, except for one item on GD which I will get to in a moment.  I have played the Black after the design work done by the Rees Jones team of professionals.  I was at the Open last summer.  I personally think the Black is a great golf course in its present condition.  (I really like the Red too, as it is pretty much pristine Tillinghast) I like the total package, admire the professionalism, talent and result of the Rees Jones Master Plan for Bethpage.  I do not know enough of the history of the course, its evolution over 70 years to opine on the pros and cons of different styles or looks to the bunkering.  I am sympathetic to the need to modify an original design as long as it is keeping to the Tillinghast concept and design intent for the hole.

I have to go out and de-ice the front walk.  I have one more thought on the so-called thorough Golf Digest research.  I will be back.

[ChipOat]

Is it accurate to compare the Tillinghast/Burbeck relationship at Bethpage Black as roughly equivalent to MacDonald/Raynor at NGLA and (later) at Piping Rock, Lido and The Creek?

Or do we think that Burbeck had much more to do with the finished product at BB than Raynor did at NGLA, PRC, Lido and Creek?

If the former, than it would seem that precedent would award AWT the designation as architect of record for Bethpage Black.

Also, if Dr. Mac, as (co??) router is still considered the (co??) designer of ANGC despite all the ensuing amendments, then it seems to me that AWT, as acknowledged router of BB (right??), deserves the designation as architect of record.

I don't really care.  However, I AM interested in Burbeck's contributions to BB in the same way I'm interested in Joe Valentine's impact on the Merion layout we know today.  After 1930, I'll bet Valentine's changes are not insignificant (e.g. 2nd and 14th greens).

But the existence of this thread, and the GD article, make me think we'll never really know.

[TEPaul]

Rick Wolffe:

I swear you really don't need to look at this as a debate--not from me anyway.

Even the Tillinghast Society should recognize that the last word and certainly the details on it are definitely not in by any means on this great golf course which clearly will be always known as a Tillinghast (and hopefully to the accurate extent).

There's no real reason to just end the discussion and search for material and documentation now, certainly not on Golfclubatlas.com You should welcome it even if someday it does reveal that Joe Burbeck may have done more than was reported before the Open of 2002.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Rick
As only a single member of a group I don't mean to put you on the spot, but does the Tillinghast Association have a stated position on accurate preservation/protection of his work? Has the Association ever objected to alterations to his work?

Personally I look at the old photos and the aerial of the original Black and I can't imagine why anyone would not want to faithfully restore his design (injecting a Winged Foot style to the green complexes, why? If Tillie wanted WF at Bethapge he would have designed/built WF there, no?), with the exception of additional yardage to account for our modern game. What was wrong with his original scheme?

[rick wolffe]

I have a fundamental question on the thoroughness and fairness of the GD research.  Frankly, I perceived the article to be a classic example of "word twisting" to justify a preordained conclusion.  This twisting was just brought to my attention by a member of the Tillinghast Association.

But Who am I to question the great and almighty wizard of GD?

One of the major premises to the GD/Whitten article is that the proof was there all along.  That one had to merely read the Official Bethpage State Park History. I quote from GD/Whitten,

  "It turns out that Burbeck is right.  His father did design Bethpage Black.  The evidence has always been out there, if anyone had bothered to dig for it.  It's in the official history of the Long Island State Parks, published in 1959.
  "The four golf courses constructed as work-relief projects were designed and constructed under the direction of Joseph H. Burbeck, the Superintendent of the park,' the book reads, 'with A. W. Tillinghast, internationally known golf architect, as consultant."
  Tillinghast reduced to a consultant role?  It has been easier to buy into the legend that Tillinghast sweated all the details.  We all figured the Black is too good a golf course to have been designed by a nobody." -- Ron Whitten, GD, June 2002.

Well here is how the actual passage from that Official History, which by the way was published a year earlier in 1958 not 1959 as cited in GD, and which by the way is no more than a short promotional brochure piece of several pages in length.  

  "All five courses were designed and constructed under the direct supervision of Joseph H. Burbeck, the Superintendent of the Park, with the expert consulting service of two internationally known Golf Course architects, A.W. Tillinghast on the first four courses and Alfred H. Tull on the new fifth course."

For Pete's sake, what am I missing here.  What the heck!  Did GD not just make up their quote?

If so, what right does GD have to creatively revise this quote to suit their purpose?  First they changed five courses to four, second they left out the word "direct" in "direct supervision," third they left out "designed and constructed ... with the expert consulting service of A.W. Tillinghast and ...," fourth they referred to Tillinghast as just a "consultant," and fifth they conveniently dropped all references to the fifth course and Alfred Tull the other expert consultant.  

Perhaps I should give GD the benefit of doubt, and by some quirk of chance they got a second edition version of the Brochure printed a year later in 1959 (this is a total stretch as I understand that there was only the one version of the brochure printed a year before in 1958).  Even if this was the case, the GD quote does not say that Burbeck designed the courses!  All the GD quote says is that Burbeck supervised the design!  Again the quote does not say Burbeck designed the courses!  It says he supervised the design!!!

Well, please pardon me for I am going to get a little irreverent now.  And no offense is intended.

Wasn't it in Mark Twain's "Huck Finn," where Huck said there is no point in telling small lies?  If you are going to lie, you might as well tell a big lie.  Geezz, a better quote may have gone,

 "All five courses, the clubhouse, polo fields, sporting fields, road system, sewer system, parking lots, logo and anything else within the 1300 acres were originated, designed and constructed by Yours Truly, with just an itsy bitsy bit of help from a couple of drunk, down and out, and depressed depression consultants -- Tillie the terrible and Cliffy Wendehack -- whom by the way were really of little to no help and a general pain in _ss if and when they ever showed up for their paychecks.  And twenty years later when they were gone another public works no-show job was created for the kiddie's pal, Al Tull."

Sorry guys, I lost my head for a bit.

[rick wolffe]

Tom

The Association has not played an advocacy role to any great extent other than what has been published on the web site.

Perhaps, as we grow the Association we can play more of an advocate of restoration of the classic golf courses.  Although, we may have a dificult time balancing the pendulum between sympathetic resorations versus pure historical restorations.

I think it is safe for me to say that the Association would like to see more restorations in general, than overpoweing redesigns of the original.

[TEPaul]

rick:

You should begin to transition the Tillinghast Society to have an arm that advocates and advises Tillinghast courses on restorations and you should make Tom MacWood the Society's chief researcher no later than yesterday.

[TEPaul]

Chip:

I don't think it would be particularly accurate to compare Burbeck's contribution to Joe Valentine of Merion (Valentine was definitely not an engineer). It may be accurate to look into a comparison of Burbeck to Toomey or William Flynn's contributions to the eventual creation of Merion, however. A comparison of Burbeck to Raynor might be interesting too, perhaps at NGLA but at Piping Rock apparently C.B. got pissed right out of the box (at the polo bullies) so it should probably be assumed that a lot got left for Raynor to handle but that could probably be documented better by Piping Rock or GeorgeB.

These just might be some interesting analogies someday as it might show more clearly how golf courses really did get routed and designed and the importance of detailing those two steps at least. The Bethpage routing situation seems much more up in the air at this point than any of the other courses mentioned. This seems to be a routing issue as it seems possible that may have been done in some form before Tillinghast ever arrived--at least that's what I recall being reported, but it would be interesting to revisit those timelines and what exists in establishing them (or not). Could it possibly be something as interesting as the long-lasting Colt/Crump routing question and issue?

[frank_D]

per TEPaul the individual who does BOTH routing AND design is the architect - this seems to me to be the issue  - as EACH (Tillinghast and Burdeck) could have interchangeable done either - with or without the help of the other - on different details

F Y I - the results to date are based on my reading of the responses (i appologize in advance for any misrepresented responses)

TILLINGHAST
jimmyVA
patrick_mucci
TEPaul (#2)
Michael Moore
Phil_the_Author(with reservation - pending further discovery)
rick wolffe
chipoat(based on comparison to macdonald/raynor analysis)

BURDECK
[ron whitten via GD article]
doug_wright

UNKNOWN / NOT DETERMINED
TEPaul(#1)
Tony Ristola
frank D

REES JONES
Tom MacWood(based on "fingerprints")

[Phil_the_Author]

TEPaul wrote:

 "The Bethpage routing situation seems much more up in the air at this point than any of the other courses mentioned. This seems to be a routing issue as it seems possible that may have been done in some form before Tillinghast ever arrived--at least that's what I recall being reported, but it would be interesting to revisit those timelines and what exists in establishing them (or not)."

I strenuously disagree with this conclusion! Everyone seems to be getting confused with the idea that work was done at Bethpage in the summer of 1933 and that Tillinghast did not do any work before the beginning of 1934 and therefor the routings must have already been done. These thoughts are incorrect.

The timeline is as follows:

April 1932 the Bethpage Golf Club opens. This was essentially the re-opening of the Lenox Hills Golf Club course under a new name as was required in the lease agreement signed with the Yoakum estate. Two weeks after the opening it was announced that plans were being made to develop a second golf course by the "Commissions Architects".

Summer (August?) of 1933, some MINOR land clearing may have begun. Nothing major could yet occur as there was NO legal ebtity to authorize and pay for any work yet.

August 26, 1933, Chapter 801 of the laws of 1933 was signed into law. This allowed for the creation of a Bethpage Park Authority and for funds to be requested through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation on the basis of a self-liquidating project. The request for the loan was TURNED DOWN because with so many funds being requested nationwide that the loan could not be considered because "Too large a part of the requested loan was needed for the acquisition of land in comparison with the amount for construction which would require the use of unemployed labor". This official reply to their request was not received by them until early OCTOBER 1933. Without these funds NO WORK could be done.

Robert Moses then performed some of his legendary magic and had the Long Island Parks Commission acting as the still not formed Bethpage Park Commission issue $1,000,000 in purchase money bonds. Based on this, the comptroller for New York State could now purchase $100,000 in bonds. The Yoakum estate agreed to accept this $100,000 in cash along with the other $900,000 in Park Authority bonds and finalized the sale of the property to the state of New York on May 18, 1934.

Now that the State OWNED the property they could now qualify for and did start receiving federal funds under the auspices of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Without any source for major funds before this date, very little and certainly no MAJOR work could be done to build three brand new golf courses! This was the reason for the delay in the opening of the Black Course, the LAST one finished, from 1935 to 1936, as they were unable to seed the course in time and had to wait out the long winter.

What these facts show is that the actual design and layout of the course(s) could not and did not take place until after A.W. Tillinghast was brought in as the course architectural consultant. IT appears that the contract and title as "consultant" was used  because there was no ownership as of yet and the commission would have been prevented from engagiging an "architect" to design on properties not owned by them!

The first course done was the Blue course. Of the three new courses, since this was done first it would logically be the one with the most direct designing by Mr. Burbeck if he had been doing the design/routing. The fifth hole which we now know as being possibly the second REEF hole built, because of its designation as such, had to have been a Tillinghast design. The idea that Burbeck employed the idea of building a REEF hole out of some possibility that he liked the design is absurd on its face. With only one other in existence, and that having been built a number of years earlier, why all of a sudden the urge to build another, and especially when Mr. Tillinghast himself is there and claim it as his own? That is ludicrous to consider that he would do so.

One other point about the REEF hole. Many on this site who have played the courses of Bethpage over the years think that this 5th hole of the Blue is the one that exists today. It is not. With the addition of the Yellow Course in the late '50's, much of the original Blue course destroyed to create two new course, the "new" Blue and the new Yellow. The actual REEF hole is to be found as the tenth hole of the Yellow Course, and the only portion of it that remains is the green. The barrier wall and pond are now things of the past.

All of the above history, I have carefully researched and documented by trips to numerous archives and archival collections, as well as from documentation from the management of Bethpage State Park itself.

I am planning a trip to another archives in March where I am now convinced that the actual "smoking gun" of proof (not that I need any, but for those demanding such) exists and access to view and copy such has been granted to me.

I am looking forward to seeing this "mystery" of a public relations ploy put to rest once and for all. I am especially looking forward to seeing the true designer of the Black be given his/their due. I amalso hoping that a study can be done to heap the praise long overdue Mr. Burbeck for the monumental accomplishment that he performed in overseeing and bringing into being Bethpage State Park as its first Park Superintendent.