A FLAT Alps hole??? So says Ran...

[CHrisB]

Taking these two sources at their word, the hole required a long drive and a long, high pitch to a green completely surrounded by trouble, and enough blindness to mask the result until the golfer “scales the last rampart.”

David,

Based on this description, do you think Lesley would consider #7 at Augusta National an Alps Hole? Do you?

Is every "long drive and high pitch" hole with fronting bunkers that hide the putting surface an Alps Hole?

[CHrisB]

David,
I understand your point. I guess what I'm having trouble with is the idea that just because a hole resembes an Alps, then it follows that it must have been designed with the intention to resemble (or even be) an Alps.

That's why I brought up the 7th at ANGC. I can imagine Lesley looking at the 7th at ANGC and noting that it also resembles the Alps at Prestwick, if he gives the same reasons as he gave for the original 10th at Merion. But that doesn't mean the 7th at ANGC was (re)designed to be an Alps hole. And it doesn't mean that it actually is an Alps hole.

(In fact, if I go out to my home course here in central Texas and use loose definitions and words like "resembles" and "principles", then the 9th is an Alps and the 6th is a Cape--but I know they're really not!)

It is possible (isn't it?) that Wilson et al. built the original 10th at Merion, had it cross Ardmore Avenue to be of adequate length for a par 4, built a fronting bunker so an aerial approach would be required and running shots across Ardmore Avenue would not be an option, built a mound behind the green to prevent play on the 1st interfering from play on the 10th and vice versa, and then when it was all over they looked at it and said "You know what? That hole has some similarities to an Alps hole!"

I'm just trying to figure out why holes at Merion were ever referred to by anyone as Alps or Redan when there seems to be no real evidence that they were ever even close copies of the originals.

My gut tells me that if Wilson et al. set out to build an Alps and a Redan, then they would have built truer copies of the originals (as CBM's were, at least at first). The fact that people came in later and started labeling holes doesn't mean that Wilson et al. had those labels in mind when they designed and built Merion.

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

You are incorrigible.

You're right, I didn't mention "creating a sense of anticipation and excitement".  I imagine every architect is trying to some degree to do that on every hole they create.  I anticipate and get excited when approaching the 17th at Sawgrass.  But that doesn't make it an Alps hole.  Adding it to the definition of an Alps hole, in no way adds to differentiating an Alps hole.

The photo was from the 1916 Amateur - are you saying the hole wasn't in use then?  Or are you saying the mounds that were in Flynn's drawing were removed some time prior to that, and that those mounds constituted the Alps?  Does the drawing indicate how high they were?  Lesley doesn't mention mounds.  He mentions pitching over Ardmore.  He mentions deep bunkers.  No mentions of mounds.  So, you're relying on one writer who saw ramparts.

Talk about putting words in people's mouths.  Did I say Lesley lied in his description?  No.  I accept his description.  But, his description is not of an Alps hole as defined by CBM.  I speculated (as you are want to do) that he may have gilded the lily in calling the hole he described an Alps.  

The only thing we know for sure is that that hole and others were called by popular names even when they didn't exhibit many features of the namesake.  As a modern example, I played at Venetian Golf Club in Florida and they've named their holes.  One is named Elysian Fields although it bears no resemblence at all to its namesake at TOC.  But then it was named by a reputable architect, who should know, so it must be an Elysian Fields hole.

[TEPaul]

"I’ll leave you with one question, and address the rest at a later date:  Is it possible that Pine Valley’s 12th was also inspired by the underlying characteristics of Macdonald’s Cape Hole?"

David:

Not to take this thread into some inapplicable area but since you asked me that question above, I'm answering that and I think you'll find it interesting (that is if we don't immediately devolve the subject into some implication that those people back then who had to do with these decisions were lying or had no idea what they were talking about. If that happens on here I won't be part of it).

The 12th hole at PVGC was apparently some inspiration from Crump to in some way copy the 16th hole at Myopia. This information is recorded in writing from one of Crump's two best friends and the two who knew better than any other what Crump was doing and thinking at PV.

Obviously you may not have seen when that was discussed on here in some other thread. It was odd because Myopia's 16th hole is a par 3, but after some pretty interesting research I believe I proved that at one time (when Crump knew it) the 16th at Myopia was a short par 4 like the 12th at PV is. Perhaps the most important thing about it is it is a real "runaway" green which is precisely what Crump wanted to accomplish with his 12th at PV.

Is either Merion's present 10th or PV's 12th a cape hole? Well, Tillinghast may refer to them that way because he had his own particular definition of a cape and a dogleg hole and the distinctions between the two.

But in my opinion, given the slightly different topography between them Merion's 10th and PV's 12th in their inherent strategies could hardly be more similar---other than the fact that Merion's 10th doesn't exactly "run away" from the golf because its topography doesn't allow it to as does PV's topography.

[TEPaul]

I probably shouldn't even comment on this thread because I haven't even read all these long posts in the last few days, except to say that it seems to me to be a real waste of our time and energy to imply that a man like Lesley was lying or even totally misinformed if and when he described some of Merion's holes as an "alps" or a "redan".

It shouldn't be up to us to start speculating if he was lying or if he was misinformed, it should only be up to us to try to figure out why they used those names and definitons for various holes back then because we certainly do know they did.

On that note, it seems to me that a few years ago there was a real misperception on here, and even amongst some of this site's best contributors that any of those Macdonald template holes should actually look like it's prototype either abroad or at NGLA.

That is not the point at all, and George Bahto is the first to confirm it. Of course they could look similar but they certainly didn't have to. The point of them was that the principle was similar in strategic concept or shot demand or shot value.

Not just that, and also confirmed by Bahto, but Macdonald and Raynor may've even attempted to vary the look of those template holes for pretty obvious reasons.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Had Lesley EVER been to the UK and Prestwick, in particular, prior to 1912 ?

I didnt copy the exact dates or trips, but as I recall he was a frequent floater, making multiple trips before and after 1912.  

I dont know if he was ever at Prestwick or not, but I am not sure that matters, especially since at the time he layed out and constructed the course, Wilson likely had not been there either.

David,

Of course it matters, and it has nothing to do with HIW.

If Lesley had never seen the 17th at Prestwick, how could he draw any comparison to the 10th at Merion ?

If he was basing his comment on hearsay, third party references, then his description of the 10th at Merion is seriosuly flawed and probably invalid.

Bryan,

......

Further, I am a bit taken aback that you think that Robert Lesley, the president of Merion, a USGA officer, and head of the GAP, was lying when he described the hole!  I am sure that many in Philadelphia will not agree.  And Tillinghast lying as well??  Interesting.

David, that's disengenuous.

Just because someone is incorrect doesn't mean that they're lying.  That's your attempt to go to extremes in order to further your position.

Being WRONG and LYING are distinct from one another.

If Lesley NEVER set foot on Prestwick, then his interpretation and description is merely INCORRECT, and not a lie.

The only thing for certain is that those who were there and in a position to know thought this an Alps hole.  You are in no position to second guess them 90 years later.

Sure he is.

If those who reference # 10 at Merion as an "Alps" had NEVER been to Prestwick and seen # 17, their reference and categorization of # 10 as an "Alps" is incorrect,  invalid

[Anthony Butler]

Being WRONG and LYING are distinct from one another.

Recent events have shown that these two are not as distinct from one another as you would believe. In many cases, people attempt to provide themselves with plausible deniability in the event someone accuses them of lying. Many of the rich and powerful from Martha Stewart, to Scooter Libby to a succession of our recent presidents take action or make statements that provide them with some kind of cover in case they are caught out.... which the increasing freedom and sharing of information makes all but a certainty.

"I didn't receive any information about that stock, it was relayed directly to my assistant."

"It depends on what the meaning of is is."

"I handed that information to my chief of staff and couldn't tell you who he spoke to about it."

"No reports of that nature crossed my desk."

I am not sure what happened in this case, but I'll bet if you dug the guy up, he'd have a great explanation.  

[TEPaul]

First of all, guys, it is probably pretty unlikely that both Hugh Wilson and Robert Lesley by the early teens had never been to GB to play golf. Given their ages and particularly the type of men they were (their positions, their means, their culture etc) it would be pretty unusual if they had not been to GB to play golf before that time. One should realize that people like that went to Europe all the time. Probably as much or more than any of their somewhat counterparts today do. In clubs like Merion back then a real strong sense of Anglophilia reigned that's for sure, and I can definitely prove that.

Lesley and Wilson may not have gone over there to dedicatedly study golf course architecture but for men that wrapped up in early golf, at a very minimum, not including other interests in Europe, for neither of them to have NEVER been over there before the early teens would be truly surprising to me, somewhat of a shock actually. Not to mention Merion's other central figure in all this, Rodman Griscom---he probably went all the time for free since his father owned a steamship company.

As I mentioned earlier Griscom was big in the Lesley Cup as was Macdonald and of course Lesley started the thing, and the Lesley Cup was sort of the defining moment in golf and collaborative architecture back then for guys like the ones we discuss on here.

Those guys were all definitely extremely familiar to one another for that reason alone.

[CHrisB]

This is a thread about holes that do not fit in exactly with the physical description of the Alps hole.  Sll the holes mention here fail if we use Bryan's "principles" as a guide.  So why is it only this one to which everyone seems to react?   Chris Brauner mentioned his "gut feeling" above.  Isnt it possible that people are letting their "gut feelings" overshadow their reasonableness?

David,

I let my gut feeling overshadow my reasonableness all the time! Especially on reachable par 5's.

If your contention is that Wilson et al. were attempting to re-create some of the playing characteristics of an Alps hole with the original 10th at Merion, then that is not unreasonable. In fact, when I re-read Lesley's quote he only says that the 10th hole "resembles the Alps hole at Prestwick; in principle, that is a two shot hole with a cross bunker guarding the green". He's not saying it's an Alps hole, just that as you say it resembles an Alps in principle.

Maybe back in 1911 it was a much bigger deal to have a cross bunker guarding the green (they are so commonplace now but more rare back then) than an intervening hill to clear (which is so rare now but a more common back then). So Lelsey focused on that in his comparison--still a big stretch, but I can see why he said it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Anthony Butler,

If Wilson never saw the 17th at Prestwick, he wouldn't be lying, he'd be misinformed.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

I think once again you and I are trying to answer different questions.   You are apparently concerned with whether he had the proper foundation to make the comparison.   You could just as easily ask whether H. Wilson had the proper foundation to try and build an Alps hole.  

If  they never saw the 17th at Prestwick, they'd have a shakey foundation.

And, I'm not sure that they examined the 3rd at NGLA.

Certainly, the 10th at Merion doesn't resemble either one,  in form or in substance.

My concern is more about influences and inspiration, and whether or not we think the hole is actually an Alps is irrelevant to this question.

Influence and inspiration for what ?
NO "ALPS" hole was built.
Nothing resembling an "Alps" hole was built.  

My concern is whether they (including Wilson) thiought it was in any way modeled after an Alps hole.  

David,

Nothing about the 10th at Merion resembles the 17th at Prestwick or the 3rd at NGLA.

If they were trying to model a hole after those two, they failed miserably.

[TEPaul]

Should I start a separate thread proposing that Merion restore Merion East to its 1912 splendor?

Then we can all go play the old 10th and tell for ourselves if it was some kind of Alps hole or not.

Or failing that you guys could just shut the f... up on this excruciating argument of whether the old 10th was an Alps or wasn't an Alps.

Frankly, I already told you all about four years ago that Lesley was misquoted in the press about calling the 10th an "Alps" (most all those Philly newspaper reporters back then were about 3/4 soused most of the time anyway). Merion never called that 10th hole "The Alps" hole. I already told you four years ago they called it "The Poconos" hole because the fronting berm was quite low and some Jewish guy on the crew bascially designed and built most of it anyway. Frankly, if you guys had any observational skills at all you couldn't help but notice that those three fronting bunkers were an exact replica of Mah Jongg pieces.

[Anthony Butler]

Anthony Butler,

If Wilson never saw the 17th at Prestwick, he wouldn't be lying, he'd be misinformed.

Well, if he was trying to build an Alps hole that replicated the 17th at Prestwick, either through direct observation or something that was shown to him, I'm not sure he did a very good job.

[Anthony Butler]

Merion never called that 10th hole "The Alps" hole. I already told you four years ago they called it "The Poconos" hole because the fronting berm was quite low and some Jewish guy on the crew bascially designed and built most of it anyway. Frankly, if you guys had any observational skills at all you couldn't help but notice that those three fronting bunkers were an exact replica of Mah Jongg pieces.

I thought Merion was a restricted club...

[Patrick_Mucci]

David Moriarty,

If you saw or played the 17th at Prestwick you'd have to question the applicability of the phrase "principles".

Prestwick's 17th is dramatic, the type of hole you don't soon forget.

Perhaps the reference to an "Alps" hole was more of a marketing or public relations strategy than an architectural one.

You could use those "general principles" to describe an abundant number of holes that bear no resemblance to the 17th at Prestwick or the 3rd at NGLA.

Perhaps it was an error typical of novices.

[TEPaul]

"I thought Merion was a restricted club...  "

Back in that day it was, Anthony.

That's why the Jewish crew member of Merion that built the "Poconos" hole was fired and his Mah jongg bunkers were removed and the hole was moved to the other side of Ardmore Ave, and the 10th hole of Merion was ridded of any kind of name at all, Alps, Poconos, whatever.

This is also why Merion never refers to its holes by template names, particularly Macdonald's template names and particularly some Jewish crew member's template name from the Poconos.

There is not much question that Macdonald in the ensuing years became a world class curmudgeon, cursing and railing against everyone. David Moriarty is right, Merion and Philadelphia attempted to expunge any trace of Macdonald and his influence from the record of the actual building of Merion. They just didn't do a great expungement job. Basically 96 years later they've been caught red-handed at it.

There was obviously a ton of cool stuff, daring, wacko, mislabeled architecture, whatever, going on at Merion in the early days and certainly during that time when Merion East was under construction between spring 1911 and Sept 1911.

The club had a committee of total novices running all over the property, constantly running intruments they had no idea how to use on a drawing board (Francis), throwing bedsheets all over the site and waving their arms, trading real estate for the 15th green and 16th tee in the dead of night after midnight bicycle rides. The club had a totally soused foreman (Pickering) who was obviously practicing one of the most remarkable feats of "flask architecture" the world of architecture has ever known on the course when the rest were running around maddeningly on the other end of the property.

They had some young Irish kid out of Boston who was trying to learn to draw, a bunch of Italian crew members nobody could communicate with who were building bunkers on their own. Actually, the remarkable "White Faces of Merion" is what happens when you get a young Irish kid (Flynn) speaking some obscure form of Boston Gaelic to an Italian immigrant (Guiseppe Valentino) who doesn't speak a word of either American English or Boston Gaelic.

They had a committee chairman who was constantly sickly anyway who was building some greens in mudholes and tearing them up because he had some outlandish idea they should have decent turf on them. Not to mention the fact that this very committee chairman tried to pass off on everyone, including his brother and business partner that he was in GB two years before he actually went over there---and when he finally did go two years later probably not for the reason they sent him, but only for the purpose of hieing on over to Paree for some extended noocky and to cheat on his long-suffering wife. And to top off the shame of all that the lying young wench artist tries to drum up some sympathy for himself by trying to claim he almost went down on the TITANIC!!

It was just a remarkable time and a remarkable collaboration.

Personally, I think this restoration in the last number of years that Merion refers to as "back to the future" (to restore the course to its glory day of the Grand Slam of 1930) is for the birds.

They should've restored the course to its original glory day of Sept 14, 1912!!

They got rid of about three holes that you could actually take out a car on a drive or approach shot (what better risk penalty could you have on a golf course?), they got rid of a great little par 3 from which you had to go through the clubhouse to get to the next tee and during which you had the opportunity to get completely soused in the interim and they got rid of probably the best Jewish Mah jongg bunkers (a special form of combination Jewish/Chinese/game piece bunkers) the world of golf architecture has ever known and in my mind that's all a crying shame. They should all be restored immediately.

And they almost successfully managed to attribute the course to the wrong person, and one who was nothing more than just a normal run-of-the-mill member, and who was also a bed-wetting novice, mind you in an architectural sense, that is.

The golf course should be attributed to C.B Macdonald who deserves most all the credit for it, with a major assist from his son-in-law Whigam, and I CHALLENGE anybody to PROVE that it should be otherwise.

[Anthony Butler]

"I thought Merion was a restricted club...  "

Back in that day it was, Anthony.

That's why the Jewish crew member of Merion that built the "Poconos" hole was fired and his Mah jongg bunkers were removed and the hole was moved to the other side of Ardmore Ave, and the 10th hole of Merion was ridded of any kind of name at all, Alps, Poconos, whatever.

This is also why Merion never refers to its holes by template names, particularly Macdonald's template names and particularly some Jewish crew member's template name from the Poconos.

There is not much question that Macdonald in the ensuing years became a world class curmudgeon, cursing and railing against everyone. David Moriarty is right, Merion and Philadelphia attempted to expunge any trace of Macdonald and his influence from the record of the actual building of Merion. They just didn't do a great expungement job. Basically 96 years later they've been caught red-handed at it.

There was obviously a ton of cool stuff, daring, wacko, mislabeled architecture, whatever, going on at Merion in the early days and certainly during that time when Merion East was under construction between spring 1911 and Sept 1911.

The club had a committee of total novices running all over the property, constantly running intruments they had no idea how to use on a drawing board (Francis), throwing bedsheets all over the site and waving their arms, trading real estate for the 15th green and 16th tee in the dead of night after midnight bicycle rides. The club had a totally soused foreman (Pickering) who was obviously practicing one of the most remarkable feats of "flask architecture" the world of architecture has ever known on the course when the rest were running around maddeningly on the other end of the property.

They had some young Irish kid out of Boston who was trying to learn to draw, a bunch of Italian crew members nobody could communicate with who were building bunkers on their own. Actually, the remarkable "White Faces of Merion" is what happens when you get a young Irish kid (Flynn) speaking some obscure form of Boston Gaelic to an Italian immigrant (Guiseppe Valentino) who doesn't speak a word of either American English or Boston Gaelic.

They had a committee chairman who was constantly sickly anyway who was building some greens in mudholes and tearing them up because he had some outlandish idea they should have decent turf on them. Not to mention the fact that this very committee chairman tried to pass off on everyone, including his brother and business partner that he was in GB two years before he actually went over there---and when he finally did go two years later probably not for the reason they sent him, but only for the purpose of hieing on over to Paree for some extended noocky and to cheat on his long-suffering wife. And to top off the shame of all that the lying young wench artist tries to drum up some sympathy for himself by trying to claim he almost went down on the TITANIC!!

It was just a remarkable time and a remarkable collaboration.

Personally, I think this restoration in the last number of years that Merion refers to as "back to the future" (to restore the course to its glory day of the Grand Slam of 1930) is for the birds.

They should've restored the course to its original glory day of Sept 14, 1912!!

They got rid of about three holes that you could actually take out a car on a drive or approach shot (what better risk penalty could you have on a golf course?), they got rid of a great little par 3 from which you had to go through the clubhouse to get to the next tee and during which you had the opportunity to get completely soused in the interim and they got rid of probably the best Jewish Mah jongg bunkers (a special form of combination Jewish/Chinese/game piece bunkers) the world of golf architecture has ever known and in my mind that's all a crying shame. They should all be restored immediately.

And they almost successfully managed to attribute the course to the wrong person, and one who was nothing more than just a normal run-of-the-mill member, and who was also a bed-wetting novice, mind you in an architectural sense, that is.

The golf course should be attributed to C.B Macdonald who deserves most all the credit for it, with a major assist from his son-in-law Whigam, and I CHALLENGE anybody to PROVE that it should be otherwise.

Tom,

A couple of clubs in Australia (including both Royal Melbourne and Royal Sydney) also employed this charming method of excluding candidates. It's surprising the number of great courses have been built right next to some of our most 'revered' clubs due to their selective admission policies. Quaker Ridge (No Jewish members at Winged Foot). Charles River Country Club (TCC not keen on Irish Catholics.) NGLA (CB MacDonald to loud for dozing members in Shinnecock clubhouse).

Judging by your description of the early days of Merion, the committee would dreaded being sat down by the non-Gentile members and asked "Come, come... what is all this foolishness?"  

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

After some reconsideration of this debate, let me restart.  I understand that you have repeatedly stated that you didn't say it was an Alps hole - that rather, "they" said it.

As you are well aware, it is not I who came up with the notion that the 10th was based on Alps Hole principles, but rather the commentators who were there and who knew what was going on much better than you or me.  Same goes for the supposed Redan.  

Like it or not, those who where there thought the 10th presented characteristics of the Alps hole.  Lesley said so, and he was definitely in a position to know.  Same goes for Tillinghast who noted that holes at Merion "present the characteristics of the famous Redan and the Alps of Prestwick."

You also said:

 

I think at this point they were probably all still trying to work out what was important and what wasn't in some of these concept holes.

and,

My concern is more about influences and inspiration, and whether or not we think the hole is actually an Alps is irrelevant to this question.

and, finally,

If he had just said that Lesley was wrong, then my response would have been the same as it has been to you.   Whether they were wrong or right is not my concern.  My concern is whether they (including Wilson) thiought it was in any way modeled after an Alps hole.

In the context of the above, I understand that Lesley and Tillinhast said it was an Alps hole (to some degree).  I understand that you have not said it is or it isn't.  You seem to imply that you think it was at least inspred by the Prestwick or NGLA Alps holes. (correct me if I got this implication wrong).

Early in this thread Tom D said that Macdonald said an Alps could be flat - all that is required is a forced carry over a green-side bunker.  George Bahto seems to confirm this from a Raynor perspective.

Where that leaves me, is wondering about the usefulness of named template holes.  If an "Alps" hole need only have a cross bumker in front of the green, and no "mountain" (Alps) feature to carry, then the name seems meaningless.  It is not descriptive.  How would anyone know what one Alps hole looks like compared to another if there is no agreed minimum content requirement.  As a corollary, is any hole with a forced carry over a green-side bunker an Alps hole (or, only if the architect says he was inspired by the Alps hole)?  

And, back to Merion, Lesley and Tillinghast said it was an Alps (however reduced in content, feature, or principle compared to Prestwick).  No one has said (so far as I recall) that Wilson said it was an Alps, or inspired by the Alps.  Is there any evidence that he, or the committee, said they were inspired by the Prestwick (or NGLA) Alps in building the 10th?  Or is it, at this point, only third parties.

As an afterthought, if Tom D et al build a hole at Old Macdonald that they say is inspired by the Alps, what will the reaction be if it is on a flat piece of land?

[TEPaul]

I just can't imagine what else there could possibly be to discuss re the old 10th hole at Merion being and Alps or not---I really  can't, unless of course someone has forgotten something that was mentioned about it 75 posts ago and in that case we could always start all over again.  

[TEPaul]

"Good questions and ones I wonder about as well. I try to think of these things in the context of the times, when what we think of as golf course design was really in its infancy and that they were trying to figure these things out, including how to refer to holes and features and concepts and such."

David Moriarty:

Those are the type of statements I support and those are the kinds of remarks that need to be framed into questions and discussed, in my opinion.

[Jim Nugent]

As an afterthought, if Tom D et al build a hole at Old Macdonald that they say is inspired by the Alps, what will the reaction be if it is on a flat piece of land?

Among others, I'm curious to see how OM's Road Hole turns out.  Didn't Tom say he wasn't sure the drive had to be blind?  

[ForkaB]

Jim

If the OM consortium decide to build a "Road Hole" the drive MUST be blind and the green MUST have a road behind it.

If however, they just decide to do some sort of paean to CB's 7th at NGLA, all they have to do is build a green with a deep fronting bunker.  That's all Charlie did in Southhamnpton, as Pat Mucci has told us, amen brothers.....  Such simplicity in design theory should lead to lower construction costs and architects fees, one would think, which is good.

Rich

[Jim Nugent]

Rich, that is how they handled number 4 at St. Louis CC as well.  I only learned this is McDonald's & Raynor's homage to the Road Hole by reading Ran's profile here on GCA.com.  Even knowing this, the resemblance seems strained to me at best.  

It would be interesting to go through the various famous template holes, and see if we can figure out what are the real irreplaceable elements of each.  From this Alps discussion and the earlier one on Redans, there are lots of differing ideas about them.  

[TEPaul]

Jim:

Instead of having these endless debates about what exactly constitutes any of those so-called template holes of Macdonald or Raynor you should know, as the rest on here should come to know, that it was never really Macdonald or Raynor's intention to necessarily make any of those template holes look exactly like its prototype in GB or one at NGLA or anywhere else.

Their whole idea in making those template holes was to copy or reproduce the "concepts" or the "principles" of those holes, probably the concepts and principles of the prototypes in GB.

When those men such as Macdonald spoke about copying architectural concepts or architectural principles what they were really referring to is how those various type of holes would play similarly, not necessarily what they looked like.

This can be confirmed by George Bahto who probably knows more about Macdonald than anyone around and it can also be confirmed by Macdonald himself in his book.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim:

Instead of having these endless debates about what exactly constitutes any of those so-called template holes of Macdonald or Raynor you should know, as the rest on here should come to know, that it was never really Macdonald or Raynor's intention to necessary make any of those template holes look exactly like its prototype in GB or one at NGLA or anywhere else.

Their whole idea in making those template holes was to copy "concepts" or the "principles" of those holes, probably the concepts and principles of the prototypes in GB.

When those men such as Macdonald spoke about copying architectural concepts or architectural principles what they really really referring to is how those various type of holes would play similarly, not necessarily what they looked like.

This can be confirmed by George Bahto who probably knows more about Macdonald than anyone around and it can also be confirmed by Macdonald himself in his book.

Tom,

I agree, but you can't argue that they didn't also try to make them look similar to the originals where possible?

If not, then why are most of these holes visually obvious upon first seeing them as to their sources?

Plus, I would think in the case of an Alps, not having a blinding fronting hillside it would be very difficult to capture the "principle", or "concept", or much of anything else.