1916 Amateur @ Merion

[Steve Sayers]

PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC LEDGER
SUNDAY MORNING
SEPTEMBER 3, 1916

‘WHERE GOLFERS OF AMERICA WILL PLAY FOR THE TITLE’
  By William H. Evans

At 8:20 tomorrow morning over both the east and west courses of the Merion Cricket Club four men will start the big field entered for the twenty-second amateur championship of this country…

Among the entrants are players who have won every big event ever held in this country and the holders of state championships by the dozens.  The oldest men are Byron Heard and George S. Lyon, both of whom have passed the sixty year mark, and the youngest is Robert Jones of Atlanta who is only 14.

The article continues and presents descriptions of each hole on both the East and West courses.

Notes:

The official starting list published with this article shows an 11:15 AM starting time on the Merion West course for R.T. Jones Jr., Atlanta.  He was paired with R. Sanderson from Upper Montclair in this second to last group.  

Jones’ second starting time that day on the Merion East course was at 2:55 PM.  This allowed less than three hours and forty minutes to complete the morning round at the West course and return to tee off on the East later that afternoon.  Another interesting item was that each starting time was separated by just 5 minutes.

Also of note is the routing and some of the tee and green locations.

In another section of this article comments about William Flynn’s greenkeeping work at Merion are included. The newspaper account spells Fylnn’s name with an ‘i’ throughout

‘EXPERT WORK AT MERION’
‘Flinn Has The East Golf Course in Rare Condition for Play’

The diagram of the east course should be of interest to every one who would go to Merion this week to witness the golf championship.  It is the work of William S. Flinn, the very efficient greenkeeper at Merion.  He is familiar with every blade of grass on both courses and the pits, traps and other hazards are carefully placed on the diagram.  The actual contour of every green is shown and the map is as accurate as it is possible to make it.

The excellent condition of the two Merion courses is due to Flinn, acting under the direction of Winthrop Sargent, chainman of the greens committee.  Flinn is a course builder himself, has made a specialty of chemistry of soils and is an excellent sample of the intelligent, up-to-the-minute greenkeeper.


 
 

[Jeff_Mingay]

The map of the course is most interesting. The sequence of the outgoing holes as we know them today is:

1 (with old tee), 2, 6, 7, 4, 5, 3, 8, 9

The old ten green is across the street, on the clubhouse side (NLE); 11 green hadn't been moved across the creek yet; 12 tees hadn't been moved back yet either, and the green at that hole is also on the clubhouse side of Ardmore (NLE); and the old par 3 13th (NLE) is in play.

14-18 appear to be similar to the holes there today.

Very interesting... particularly the sequence of holes on the front nine. You could actually play that sequence these days.

[SPDB]

I'm just shocked that 8 hours has gone by and this thread has elicited a solitary comment (too busy or I'd make one myself). Just an observation.

[T_MacWood]

Steve
Thanks for finding this...this should help unravel the evolution of the course. I'll be interested to get G. Bahto's opinion of this version of Merion.

[TEPaul]

It should be noted that Merion East was a golf course that was, in many ways, a virtual experimental laboratory on early golf agronomy due to the almost weekly collaboration (by letter) of Hugh and Alan Wilson, William Flynn and Howard Toomey on early golf agronomy with the U.S. Dept of Agriculture's Charles Piper and Russel Oakley that focused on the problems and solutions of the early agronomics of Merion East and elsewhere. These letters spanned from 1912 until Hugh Wilson's death in 1925 and number about 2000 letters. These efforts essentially established the early collected and recorded work on golf agronomy (the National Green Section Report) which eventually both created and merged into the USGA's Green Section of which Charles Piper became the first chairman.

Merion East, in the opinions of those who probably understand its evolution best who include Bill Kittleman and Richie Valentine believe that the golf course's actual architectural creation took about 20-22 years to complete with its final phase ending around 1932-1934.

[TEPaul]

Who actually designed and created Merion East and West? The answers to that question are not much more certain in some of the specific detail in a phase or two than the long term creation of PVGC but we do know that Merion East and perhaps to a lesser extent Merion West, like PVGC, was somewhat of a constant collaboration of a number of people. We do know most of Hugh Wilson's part in this from the time he spent six plus months in Europe in 1910 studying and sketching architecture in preparation to create Merion East, to the work of the Merion Committee for the construction of the course, to those who initially advised them, to those who worked on the crew and to some extent those who stopped by Merion from time to time to comment and advise.

Unfortunately, the sketch drawings of Hugh Wilson from Europe that may have been the raw material for the architectural ideas and concepts of some of the holes of Merion East are now lost as are the drawings of C.B. Macdonald and perhaps Devereuax Emmet that were the raw material for the architectural ideas and concepts of some of the holes of NGLA.

Wayne Morrison and I have searched everywhere we can think of to try to uncover those Wilson European concept drawings which it is virtually certain he returned with from his half year golf architectural trip to Europe but so far we've found nothing on them. It's odd, given Wilson's recorded almost daily work on the course's agronomy spanning about 13 years, that there isn't more evidence of his counterpart concern for the course's actual architecture and its creation and slow development. But these things seem to appear out of the oddest places. Those so-called agronomy letters are incredibly voluminous and indicative of many things from that early time but even they reappeared at the USGA's Green Section in the last three years from the attic of a Mid-Atlantic regional USGA agronomist who apparently inherited them at some point in his career and just happen to notice them as he was cleaning out his attic!

We are fairly certain Hugh Wilson's daughter is still alive and living in Conn. She would have to be around 85 years old now. We sure would appreciate any help from anywhere, particularly on the very early architectural concept ideas of Merion East. The course took only a little over a year to construct and open for play in its original form but that was enough different, particularly in its mid-section, to be interesting. How it developed from there we are much more certain of as we do have William Flynn's hole drawings which are the same as the way the course eventually came to be.

[Mike_Cirba]

I've felt for some time now that William Flinn (sic) was the architectural genius behind the course that Merion evolved into during those initial 15-20 years and this article seems to lend credence to that fact.

Could it have been that the blueblood membership felt obliged to give full credit to their fair-haired boy, Wilson, rather than the rough-hewn, Bostonian Irishman who, heaven forbid, was simply the hired help?  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Sometimes in analyzing these things people back in that day, compared to the way we look at these things now, did not even remotely tend to make distinctions between who may've designed a course and who was actually responsible for constructing that design, depending on who that person was, of course. This is very much the case with Kittansett who always thought Hood designed that course probably because he apparently hired local crews to construct the course to Flynn's (and Wilson's) plans. We've proved that now after all these years.

It seems pretty illogical to me to assume that since Hugh Wilson was selected by Merion Cricket Club to travel to Europe and to spend a full six plus months there studiying and sketching designs and design concepts for the specific purpose of creating Merion East that he would've just had someone else do the design of the course for him when he returned. Does that seem logical to you? If he spent all that time and effort why wouldn't he have designed the course? We have just about nothing that would indicate he didn't design it! There've been some like Tom MacWood who seem to assume that people like Macdonald and Whigam may've designed Merion East but where is the evidence of that? He tends to point to some articles that Macdonald and Whigam visited Merion East, and indeed they did, we know that, but so what, particularly in light of the fact that Hugh Wilson was there basically every day? It's what he was doing everyday--it's what the club asked him to do! We know that from those agronomy letters, and plenty of other evidence all around the club both then and now to that effect. Is it really sensible to think all those people were lying to create some story?  Just because architects like Macdonald and Whigam, or Colt and Alison or Perry Maxwell showed up to look and comment and perhaps advise is there anything at all someone like Tom MacWood can point to that might indicate what they did? Not that I've ever seen!

We do know that a man by the name of Pickering was the construction foreman for the initial construction of Merion East. Pickering apparently was Flynn's brother in law.

We do know Flynn was the initial greenkeeper and obviously worked on the construction of the course. We know Flynn had designed a golf course previous to coming to Philadelphia. And we know who the parties responsible for the West course were---that's basically in those agronomy letters and other evidence at that club both then and now.

We do know that Flynn became involved in design again very early on and Joe Valentine became the greenkeeper under Flynn's tutelage as Flynn got into designing other courses around 1915, sometimes alone and sometimes with Hugh Wilson. Does all that seem like Wilson would NOT have been the one primarily responsible for the designs of Merion East and probably Merion West too? Not to me it doesn't. I think most of this just revolves around plain old common sense since there's plenty of evidence to support it and basically nothing to the contrary except some magazine and newspaper articles that mention visits by various people in only a very general sense!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

I completely agree that Hugh Wilson was responsible for at least the bare bones and original routing of the course at Merion East.  I don't mean to imply otherwise, or diminish his contributions.  I also don't lend much credence to the influencing role of MacDonald, or Colt, or anyone else at Merion beyond Wilson, Flynn, and Valentine.  I agree that they were just part of the same gang who would visit and perhaps share their views in some very loose, collaborative sense.  

It's just that as time and the course progressed, my sense is that Flynn played the predominant role, particularly around the seminal changes in the 20s that brought the course to where it is today.  

Ron Whitten has a theory that Wilson perhaps was not the best at bunkering and he holds as evidence the fact that Seaview CC, that Wilson originally designed, brought Donald Ross in very early to re-do all the bunkering.  Certainly Cobbs Creek also has very little in the way of interesting bunkering.  

Do you have any sense, other than the anecdotal tales of Valentine holding bedsheets in position for Wilson to inspect, of who is responsible for most of the bunker placement at Merion today?  

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom MacWood;

Yes, you're right.  That's what I get for not reading carefully.

I'd still stand by my contentions that the Merion East that was on the ground by say, 1933, was as much Flynn as Wilson.    

[T_MacWood]

"There've been some like Tom MacWood who seem to assume that people like Macdonald and Whigam may've designed Merion East but where is the evidence of that?"

TE
You often have an extreme reaction, or over-reaction, to information that, for whatever reason, has been wiped from the historic record or for the most part ignored....especially if it has to do with a Philadelphia landmark.

I simply pointed out that Macdonald and Whigham advised the folks at Merion when the course was being laid out and constructed.

It seems to me Merion East was a group effort, designed by a number of people over a number of years. I personally believe Flynn (and have stated this often) should be given more credit for the perfected version of the golf course than he is currently given, but I also believe when studying the early version of the course one should not ignore the contribution of Macdonald.

The feature that stood out to me is what appears to be a Principal's Nose.

[Steve Sayers]

Why was the hole sequence on the front 9 changed?

[SPDB]

Tom - Where do you make out a principal's nose?

[T_MacWood]

There appears to be a PN in the middle of the 5th fairway.

[SPDB]

The 5th hole on the previous routing or the current 5th? Either way the bunkers on Flynn's map are still there. They are the huge mid-hole bunker on 4 (old 5), and the approach bunker on 5 (old 6) (which incidentally has been recaptured with fairway).

What I am interested in is the creek on the old map. It doesn't correlate to the movement of what's there today.

[SPDB]

It's interesting, I suspect one of two things happened (or both), the bunker (or bunkers, I don't really see 3) stayed the same (although it changed shape) and the fairway lines moved.

Or if that is another bunker below the one you reference, that is not there today. Perhaps the two merged, or perhaps the center bunker disappeared and the one below it expanded upwards toward where the former bunker sat.

[Steve Sayers]

SPDB

If you provide your e-mail address, I’ll send you a jpeg that may be easier to analyze.  The sketch does indicated there were three bunkers on No. 5

e-mail: LuLuGolfer@comcast.net

Steve

[wsmorrison]

If any 3 bunkers in the fairway can be considered a "Principal's Nose" then I guess you can say that the bunker complex on the original 5th, now the 4th, is a PN.  If you say that it is it is due to the advise of Macdonald and Whigam, then I would say that Tom MacWood has made an unsupportable guess without foundation at this point.  

The original PN complex on the 16th hole at St. Andrews (Corner of the Dyke) is about 180 yards out and 170 yards short of the green.  

The complex of 3 bunkers on the original 5th at Merion was about 200 yards short of the green.  The "rumpled sock" shape bunker or what Tom MacWood called a "boomerang" shaped bunker is a bit further down from that spot at about 235 yards short of the green.  The tees were lengthened between 1916 and 1924 by 40 yards so that the hole's yardage increased from 555 to 595.  This is why I use the yardage from the green rather than from the tee as the green site is constant.

The bunker that exists today did not evolve from the original bunkers but was independently created when much of the course was remodeled between 1916 and 1924.  Not only was Ardmore Avenue taken out of play on 10, 11, 12 and possibly 2 (tee may have been near the 1st green) but a number of holes were significantly changed, especially the bunker schemes and some greens remodeled (#8 for example).  

The routing was generally great from the very begining (discounting the increased impact of Ardmore Avenue-there was probably a greater than a 10-fold increase in the number of cars between 1912 and 1924) but the course really became the masterpiece it is today due to the rerouting with the added acreage and intra-hole design changes done between 1916 and 1934 (the 1st hole was changed for the 1930 Amateur).

[TEPaul]

"TE
You often have an extreme reaction, or over-reaction, to information that, for whatever reason, has been wiped from the historic record or for the most part ignored....especially if it has to do with a Philadelphia landmark.
I simply pointed out that Macdonald and Whigham advised the folks at Merion when the course was being laid out and constructed."

Tom MacWood:

I have no idea at all what you mean by me having an 'extreme reaction' or 'over-reaction' to any information. I have less idea what you mean by 'information wiped from the historic record'. What information?

If you think you pointed out to us here that Macdonald and Whigam came to Philadelpia and visited and perhaps advised either Hugh Wilson and the Merion committee or George Crump in the creation of PVGC I can assure you that you did not. That information has been part of the records around here since the beginnings of both courses. But there was not then and is not now anything specific that I've ever seen, or apparently anyone else has seen about what they did architecturally at Merion East. If you have something specific to add that they may have done to Merion East why don't you just produce it.

Frankly, your remarks as well on this website of PVGC's attempts at any time to wipe away the historical record of Colt's contribution to that course is a joke. The mistake Finegan made in his history book about that routing topo that hangs on the wall in the clubhouse is an innocent error. Frankly he was probably the first one to even consider that date on that topo.

I've been around PVGC for over two decades now and I can tell you that well before I ever even became interested in golf architecture the rumor from and around PVGC was always that Colt routed that golf course. It's ironic, isn't it, that we can see now that he most certainly did not route the whole golf course? So, in a sense that rumor that he did route the whole course has been somewhat diminished in the last few years since more detailed information has come out--and from right here on this website, of all places! If I were to bet I would say that the rumor that floated around PVGC for decades that Colt routed the golf course obviously came from the fact that Colt's hole by hole drawings have always been sitting right there in the PVGC archives. Probably just the fact that the club actually knew they were there created the rumor that he routed the whole golf course. Probably no one really looked carefully at those hole drawings until Warner Shelly, a member who lived there for over fifty years, began to analyze those Colt hole drawings carefully when he wrote his history book and then Finegan a few decades later analyzed them carefully when he wrote his history book.

So for you or Paul Turner to implt that PVGC has tried to minimize Colt's contribution to that golf course is simply not the case, basically you have no idea regarding what that club felt Colt's contribution was---which, again, was that he routed that golf course. You're both also calling into question the veracity of Tillinghast and everyone else who was around there at the time of Crump's involvement with that course and was around there at the time of Crump's death. And in my opinion, that kind of overwhelming evidence is certainly not a case of me over-reacting to anything. Once again, Tom, I feel when you either come up with some information on certain courses or are given that information you often just aren't very good at analyzing that information correctly.

[TEPaul]

"It seems to me Merion East was a group effort, designed by a number of people over a number of years. I personally believe Flynn (and have stated this often) should be given more credit for the perfected version of the golf course than he is currently given, but I also believe when studying the early version of the course one should not ignore the contribution of Macdonald."

Tom MacWood:

Flynn should be given more credit by whom? The fact that you've never been here is obviously the reason you wouldn't be aware of these things but in the last few years Merion, the club, has definitely embraced William Flynn's contribution to Merion East, most particularly in the later stages of its creation. All the evidence of his drawings have now been laid out in sequence and compared to the timelines on the golf course, and so the club is more than accepting of those historical facts that we and the club now has in hand. The only phase of Merion East's architectural creation that lacks real supporting evidence is the earliest phase.

I realize you think Macdonald had architecutural input into Merion East but if you think that's true why don't you show us some specifics other than some newspaper or magazine article that says he visited the course and advised someone?

[TEPaul]

SPDB:

The creek that's there today between present #4 and #5 shows up on that diagram just the way it was and is. By the way that creek's flow was enhanced by the Valentines. Richie told me that about two years ago.

What is this? Tom MacWood notices a 2-3 bunker set that spans about a 45-50 yard wide fairway, calls it a Principal's Nose and assumes this means C.B Macdonald might've had a significant hand in designing Merion? Would you really trust the opinions of someone who said something that tenuous?

[wsmorrison]

"It seems to me Merion East was a group effort, designed by a number of people over a number of years. I personally believe Flynn (and have stated this often) should be given more credit for the perfected version of the golf course than he is currently given, but I also believe when studying the early version of the course one should not ignore the contribution of Macdonald.

The feature that stood out to me is what appears to be a Principal's Nose."

I may be wrong, Tom, but I interpreted this to mean that you tied together your thought about the presence of a Principal's Nose on the original 5th as indicating the contribution of Macdonald.  This is what I was referring to in my comment where I thought you were jumping to an unsupportable conclusion.  If I am mistaken, I apologize.

I don't at all think that we have idolized anyone including any "Philadelphia golf legends" nor its "heritage."  I hope you don't think we are blind to objectivity and have abandoned sound research methods.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

What specific advice on hole design did MacDonald and Whigham offer ?

[TEPaul]

"Wayne/TE
I can appreciate protecting your Philadelphia golf legends and heritage, but you both have a tendency to over react.
I pointed out that Macdonald and Whigham advised the Merion design committee (a known fact) and in TE's eyes I've suggested Macdonald designed Merion."

Tom MacWood:

You've got to stop saying to us were protecting Philadelphia golf legends. What are you driving at with remarks like that, I'd really like to know. We're just researching these courses, nothing more. I couldn't care less if we found that Macdonald and Whigam had a huge influence on the design of Merion East--Macdonald was one of the most signficant influences in golf architecture at that time but some newspaper article that mentioned they visited Merion and offered advice really doesn't say anything very specific does it? So what does it mean to you if they came down here for a day or two a few times? Macdonald went over to PVGC too and said some things that were reported in the newspaper. And you didn't point out to us that Macdonald came to Merion and visited and was reported to have advised. That's been a fact known around here for ever. We're trying to figure out who did what everyday when that course was built and worked on for a number of years. If you're aware of a 'number of people collaborating on the design of the course' please do tell us who they were and what they did, or just stop saying we're protecting someone. That's ridiculous.

And what does this Principle's Nose remark of yours indicate? That bunkering on that hole is a very wide second shot carry bunker scheme, nothing more.

[wsmorrison]

"TE/Wayne
Do you think the fact that the old 7th was described as a Redan, and the old 10th was described as an Alps, and the old 5th appears to have had a PN-like feature lends weight to the Macdonald/Whigham advise claim?"

No.

"Does advise translate into ultimate design credit?"

No, it means and indicates absolutely nothing.

"Does an observation of PN feature translate into an unsupportable guess?"

I don't think it is a PN feature.  It is not conceptually similar to the Principal's Nose at TOC.  If you think this feature indicates a Macdonald influence, then I think you are not on solid ground and the supposition (if you are making it) is very weak.