[Mike_Cirba]

Wayne,

Thanks for taking the time and effort to publish that letter.  

It seems clear from Platt's perspective that by the time of the letter in late 1924;

1) Park made some revisions to the original course, most notably to the 8th and 9th.  

2) The new course has been completed, which is 18 holes (which 90% shoots down my theory about the courses being completed in stages).  

3) Platt thinks the new course is a "Willie Park masterpiece" "one of", which indicates he knows of others and is not unfamiliar with the architect or his work or stature.

I should also mention that J. Wood Platt is somewhat a god of Philadelphia amateur golf.  Finegan's book on the history of GAP includes an entire chapter about Platt and his exploits, so it's unlikely that he would be mistaken about any of this information.

The only reason I say 90% above is because it's still not 100% certain that 36 holes existed at the time of the letter.  

Let's say Park came in and basically tore up most of John Reid's original 18 hole course and made changes such that now the "old" course was simply 9 holes (he mentions changes to 8 & 9, but nothing on the back nine) and the "new" course incorporated elements of one of the original nines but also added a brand new nine for a total of 27.

Again, this is PURE SPECULATION, and at this point, seemingly very LOW percentage, but it's still possible based on the evidence.

However, based on what evidence is available at this point, which is more significant than I would have guessed, it's a Park.
 

[wsmorrison]

Glad you found the information helpful, Mike.  I don't know the South course, are 8 and 9 particularly good holes today?

See you tomorrow at 6pm!

[wsmorrison]

Ron Prichard was kind enough to email me about his feelings for Willie Park, Jr. and a perspective on how architects relate to one another today and in yesteryears.  Ron may be the very best at doing outstanding research and applying an informed "big picture" approach to analysis.  Ron's perspectives on the history of golf course architecture are worthy of a serious presentation.  Pat was kind enough to invite Ron to speak at one of his gatherings and it was fascinating.  He's a great guy and a great talent.  

Ron's words:

"Interestingly, when I first visited and walked the club my interest was in examining the traces of Willie Park Jr's. work.
I've been involved with restoration work on a couple of his golf courses, and indeed there should be signifigant pride accompanying possession of his work.

People too often confuse the combative relationships between the marquee architects of our day, with the spirit of that time, (Park jr., Flynn, Ross, Tillinghast, Thomas). From my studies, my feeling is that they  held kinder thoughts of one another, had worked together under various circumstances; and were less protective of their efforts.
 
In our day when we rate everything including the brands of toilet paper, we create this state of competition which bleeds into every aspect of our lives.
 
Fortunately, as I read the comments on GolfClubAtlas, about and by some of the architects such as Bill Coore, Tom Doak, and Gil Hanse; I sense what I hope is more tolerance and appreciation for one another's skill and efforts."

[Mike_Cirba]

Wayne,

Actually, 8 is sort of an ok hole, but 9 is a very good uphill par four to a green that's sharply elevated and shelved into a hill.  

I suspect the #8 that Platt is talking about is another hole that parallels #9, but today plays as #14, which is a downhill sweeping par five along the entrance road, but that's only a guess.

Is it tomorrow or Thursday?

p.s.  Does anyone now what the Hagley has on Philmont?

[mike_malone]

 Regardless of who designed and/or built PN it is certainly a very enjoyable and high quality golf course. When you get away from the clubhouse the holes and the routing are among the best in Phila. It sure has the same feeling ( there I go getting touchy/feely ) that I get on the other Flynn greats in the area.

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

Oops.  You're right, its Thursday not tomorrow.  I'm in NYC tomorrow--I better not forget that.

I'll have to take a look at the South if they let me back there  

[Mike_Cirba]

All,

Does anyone know what exists at the Hagley museum for Philmont?  I'd love to see an aerial circa 1925 and then another one from say 1935.

Wayne,

I'm looking forward to it!
Mike

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

I have photocopies of the 9 photos of Philmont (1924-1939) in the Hagley.  I'll bring them on Thursday.  Craig has photos from 1924 and 1938--I'll bring those too.  Anything else?

Eckstein,

I'm not sure if he has.  I'll ask him.  He likes to study all architects even if he's not working on their courses.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

I have photocopies of the 9 photos of Philmont (1924-1939) in the Hagley.  I'll bring them on Thursday.  Craig has photos from 1924 and 1938--I'll bring those too.  Anything else?

Wayne,

That sounds great.  At minimum, I should be able to tell you any differences between the 24 aerial and what's on the ground now so that should help matters.

As far as "anything else", do you have anything in your grab bag from Cobb's Creek?  

See ya then!
Mike

[wsmorrison]

No, nothing from Cobb's Creek GC.  There's a lot from another club with Cobb's Creek running through it though  

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I hate to bring a legal analysis into this but the standard of proof in a civil case is "by a preponderance of the credible evidence." There is no current credible evidence produced by the club to attribute the North to Flynn. There is credible current evidence to attribute the course to Park. The club is faced with the reality of doing intensive further research to support their position. Let's see what happens.

[Mark_Fine]

Guys,
For what it is worth, I just finished up playing a round of golf with a Philmont member who is on the Grounds Committee, Golf Committee and on the Board.  He will remain nameless (but some here might guess who he is).  He said he believes less than 10% of the membership would even know who Flynn was let alone that he may or may not have designed their golf course.  Except for a handfull of members, he didn't think anyone would care if it is a Flynn course or a Park course.  They are more worried about their clubhouse and sorting that out.  However, since their centennial is coming up they have hired an historian to investigate the matter just to see what they can find (I believe Andy is spearheading this effort).  

Seems all our back and forth arguing here really only concerns us and the members are not bothered what happens.  

Go ahead Wayne, take it out of you book.  I don't think they will even notice.  

[wsmorrison]

The concerns or interests of the Philmont membership has no bearing whatsoever in what Tom and I will include or not include in our book.  Why should it?  We are disseminating our research findings and not worrying about how a particular group feels about the results.  

[Ian Andrew]

Mark,

"If Kittansett for example still wants to call themselves a Hood course, let them'

I can never agree with this Mark. It's more important to get the facts straight and out in the open rather than keep a club happy. The job of a historian is to find and report the facts, not to be careful about whom they may offend. There is never any harm done to a course by correcting who designed it - it's still the same course - there is harm when an architect does not get credit for their work.

While I'm enjoying the two threads for the discussion, I think the accusations have been awfully strong when were all just trying to find the right answer.

[Mark_Fine]

Ian,
Wayne and I exchanged emails privately and I think we have things sorted.  I respect his position and you are correct in that I may have been more worried about the club's perception than I should be.  I also like Andy Karff.  He has done a lot for Flynn and I was looking for a way to ease the pain and give him the opportunity to see what he can dig up to support his claim.  Fortunely as I stated earlier, there will only be a few other people at Philmont that will even notice and/or care.  I presume the same goes for Kittansett once they officially recognize the change.  

[Mike_Cirba]

The ironic thing here is that the club hasn't traded William Flynn for Joe Schmoe....it's freaking Willie Park Jr., for crying out loud.

Probably neither name means much to the 90% of the membership that could care less, as Mark points out, but for those of us who do, one could reasonably argue that they've traded up, or at least distinguished themselves in the Flynn-rich Philly region by having a course pedigree of a man who should be more widely known as probably the first of the great modern golf architects and strategists.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

At least some members of Philmont have a sense of humor about this situation as I understand that they now refer to the North as a "Faux Flynn."

The South, notwithstanding the mistaken Park attribution, was  regarded as the lesser of their two courses. The club championship is played on both courses at match play. The club hosts a prestigous invitational- The North-South, with play on both courses.

Mark

Will Labbance be the sole researcher on this project since he is writing the club history?

[Mike_Cirba]

From Ran's review of Maidstone;

Willie Park, Jr. is a largely forgotten figure among golf course architects. Yet, his design style without doubt bridged the gap from the straightforward Willie Dunn era to the Golden Years of the 1920s. Certainly, his work at Sunningdale Old in 1899 and Huntercombe in 1901 had a profound influence on many subsequent architects, including Hugh Alison, J.F. Abercromby and Sir Guy Campbell. In fact, after seeing Huntercombe in 1901, Walter Travis wrote in Golf Illustrated that it was:

'...easily the best laid out links I have ever played over anywhere. There, in order to negotiate the round properly, you must be a master in the art of both scentific slicing and pulling, and be able to get the full measure of every conceivable stroke that occurs in the game, or else can be subject to some penalty - in short, every shot has to be played for all its worth. That is GOLF.'

Travis's remarks sum up Maidstone as well, though Park didn't design Maidstone for another twenty-one years.  In fact, around the world in 1922, Park may well have been the architect of choice. (interesting that Philmont North was designed around this time - my comment)  For instance,  he had recently completed Woodway Country Club in Connecticut, having been selected ahead of Donald Ross, A.W. Tillinghast and Seth Raynor!

While at the height of his powers, Park was given his finest piece of property in North America when Maidstone acquired the 80 acres of the Gardiner Peninsula in 1922. The south end of this peninsula is framed by a 1,000 yard  stretch of sand dunes with the Atlantic Ocean just over the other side and the soil is sandy throughout.

[Robert Thompson]

Ian,
Wayne and I exchanged emails privately and I think we have things sorted.  I respect his position and you are correct in that I may have been more worried about the club's perception than I should be.  I also like Andy Karff.  He has done a lot for Flynn and I was looking for a way to ease the pain and give him the opportunity to see what he can dig up to support his claim.  Fortunely as I stated earlier, there will only be a few other people at Philmont that will even notice and/or care.  I presume the same goes for Kittansett once they officially recognize the change.  

This is an interesting point. There is at least one course in Canada that claims to be a Stanley Thompson design, thought the club knows that isn't the case and it has been proven by Ian, myself and others.
At some point being affiliated with a particular architect became branding. I didn't know the Flynn brand was so powerful, but the Thompson brand is certainly a selling point in Canada.

[wsmorrison]

Mark,

Kittansett has recognized Flynn's work, had the Flynn drawings facsimile copied at great expense and are hanging them in the clubhouse.  I think the club, which still owes a great deal to Hood and others in many ways, has come to regard the design as Flynn as they had the routing.  Most members, as you say, could care less and/or have no knowledge.

Merion and TCC, Brookline are other interesting examples of accepting facts and embracing them.  Their positions in golf are as solid as any club and they are secure in learning their evolutionary histories of the golf architecture and letting the facts speak for themselves.  That is the correct approach and the one to expect absent a bias.

[TEPaul]

Are there any other courses on that list (above) of courses Willie Park Jr did in America that are in dispute as to whether Park Jr actually designed them?  

What is the possiblility that noted Philly golfer, Woodie Platt, wrote Philmont bigwig, Ellis Gimble, a complimentary letter about Philmont's new Willie Park masterpiece, and went into some detail about the golf course and just completely got the name of the architect wrong?  

What is the possiblily that Philmont would transcribe Platt's letter into their minutes back then if he got the name of the North course's (the new course) architect wrong?

Why did Philmont assume all these years that Park Jr designed their South course when Park Jr had not been in America for ten years before it was built and would not be in America until about 5-6 years after it was built?

In my opinion, Bob Labbance's suppostion about how all this happened is about the most logical one I've heard. As far as getting to the truth about who designed their South Course (1909) and their North Course (1924) the best thing Philmont did was hire Bob Labbance to write their Centennial history.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Tom

Your questions should be directed to Bob Labbance asap!

Steve

[TEPaul]

"Tom
Your questions should be directed to Bob Labbance asap!"

Steve:

What questions? We've been talking to Bob about this for well over a year and we gave Joe Logan his number and Joe  interviewed him for that Inquirer article.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Tom

I understand Bob is still trying to find a Flynn connection...somehow,someway... unless the club(Andy K) is throwing in the towel now after Joe's column. I haven't heard that they are just yet.

Steve

 

[wsmorrison]

Steve,

I'm organizing a protest during the next Flynn Cup (local event) complete with signs, torches and catchy chants (haven't thought of any yet) that demands Philmont secede from the event.

At the Flynn Invitational (national event) we will be having a ceremony including the lowering of the Philmont flag to a bugle dirge, folding it neatly for return to the club along with a blank admissions form to the Willie Park, Jr. Society

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()