[Jim Nugent]

David says in his essay that, "The Board of Governors also announced to the members that “experts are now at work preparing plans for the course which will rank in length, soil, and variety of hazards with the best in the country,” and the Inquirer reported the same."

From David's dates, it appears that the Board made this announcement in January 2011.  Correct? 

If they were preparing plans for the course in 2011, how could the plans have been done by November 2010?   

[JESII]

From David's dates, it appears that the Board made this announcement in January 2011.  Correct? 

If they were preparing plans for the course in 2011, how could the plans have been done by November 2010?   

Jim,

That's a hell of a question...



Sybil,

By 1911, Pat had already forgotten what "phylum" meant in high school...

[Lou_Duran]

Patrick,

My suggestion that a Merion course profile would be helpful was not rhetorical.  For those of us who have not been to Merion, probably a considerable majority on this site, reading about the individual holes while reviewing aerial photography would add to our understanding.  Then, if people like you would be so inclined to identify the design features of individual holes which resemble Macdonald's or Raynor's work, we would have better information to evaluate the various arguments.

Since you have personal experience, can you answer my previous question for my edification:  does the quarry come in to play primarily on #16 green and #17?  I was reviewing the Google map of the course and it was not clear.   

[Rich Goodale]

Lou

Since the cat seems to have Pat's tongue, let me (as a one time player of Merion) say that the quarry comes into play mostly on the drives on 16 and 18 (both forced carries, but with the latter being more demanding--~240 yards from the tips, and the former more stunning).  17 is the best of the the three holes (IMO), but carrying the quarry only involves not topping your tee shot.

Rich

[TEPaul]

Lou:

The quarry comes into play on the second shot to #16. You have to miss it real bad to have it come into play on #17 but it DEFINITELY comes into play on the tee shot on #18!!

Do not ask Patrick about Merion's quarry. I doubt Pat even knows what a quarry is.

[Jim Nugent]

Patrick,

My suggestion that a Merion course profile would be helpful was not rhetorical.  For those of us who have not been to Merion, probably a considerable majority on this site, reading about the individual holes while reviewing aerial photography would add to our understanding.  Then, if people like you would be so inclined to identify the design features of individual holes which resemble Macdonald's or Raynor's work, we would have better information to evaluate the various arguments.

Why don't we have a Merion profile?  I would love to see one. 

[DMoriarty]

David says in his essay that, "The Board of Governors also announced to the members that “experts are now at work preparing plans for the course which will rank in length, soil, and variety of hazards with the best in the country,” and the Inquirer reported the same."

From David's dates, it appears that the Board made this announcement in January 2011.  Correct? 

If they were preparing plans for the course in 2011, how could the plans have been done by November 2010?   

Just so there is no confusion, the Board' announcement was undated, but was placed in the Sayres scrapbook at the bottom of the same page as the newspaper article announcing the same information.   And as far as I can tell the scrapbook was chronological.

The announcement does not say that they had just started preparing the plans.  Rather, it noted that "experts are now at work preparing the plans . . ."     In other words, they may have been already preparing the plans.

The holes were arranged some time before Nov. 15, 1910, when the deal was first announced.   The purchase was announced as completed in early January 1911.  The evidence suggests that Wilson and his Committee went up to see M&W (who were "experts) shortly thereafter.    One possibility is that the Committee took up the routing plan Francis had been working on with them, and they continued to work out the details of how to incorporate the holes into the ground with M&W.  Another possibility is that this plan was sent up to M&W for their advice and review, and that Committee was going up to work out the details of how to incorporate the holes into the ground with M&W.

Either way, Macdonald and Whigham spent three days with Committee in NGLA, and it seems to have been at around this time. 

If they did not at least have the routing by this time, how could they have announced that the course would rank in length soil and variety of hazards with the best in the country?

[TEPaul]

WELL, research has finally paid off!!

Wayne found the so-call "LETTER" of THE MAN himself to the MCC search committee in June 1910 over in some old files at MCC.

We agreed, that being a member of Merion Wayne himself will post information on it and about it any way he and Merion sees fit but the long and short of it is it should definitely put to sleep about five plus years of speculation on Macdonald's part in the architecture of Merion East culminating in this recent essay on here, "The Missing Faces of Merion" from a few people out there that Macdonald had more to do with the routing and design and the architecture of Merion East than the club ever previously gave him credit for when they thanked him in reports by Hugh and Alan Wilson and the Merion history books.

As we have seen on this thread and other recent ones that the conclusion of that essay ("The Missing Faces of Merion") was that, Merion G.C., for various heretofore unknown or unadmitted reasons, did not acknowledge that Macdonald (Whigam) routed and designed Merion East and Hugh Wilson and his Construction Committee basically just "constructed" the course to Macdonald's routing and design.

This will finally put an end to that unsupportable notion, assumptions and conclusion as most of us suspected eventually something we would find certainly would.

It's over now David Moriarty, and even if this was not a subject any of us saw a need to look into (because we actually trusted the words and reports of the Wilsons as we've been saying on here for the last five years!!), you did do some interesting research that some of us and I'm sure Merion G.C. thank you for, and you were responsible for getting Wayne, who knows more about the history of the architecture of the Merion courses than anyone, to go the last mile on determinative (or is it "dispositive?" ) research material.

Why don't you launch into a five year examination next of who really routed and designed Pine Valley, David Moriarty and Tom MacWood? If you want to do that next, please get in touch with some of us of the "Philadelphia Syndrome" FIRST, and this time I guarantee you we will help you both in any possible way we can and maybe the next time you'll understand we have nothing we're trying to protect or be defensive about! 

[wsmorrison]

New York, June 29, 1910
Horatio G. Lloyd, Esq.
c/o Messrs. Drexel and Co.
Philadelphia, Pa

Dear Mr. Lloyd:

Mr. Whigham and I discussed the various merits of the land you propose buying, and we think it has some very desirable features.  The quarry and the brooks can be made much of.  What it lacks in abrupt mounds can be largely rectified.

We both think that your soil will produce a firm and durable turf through the fair green quickly.  The putting greens of course will need special treatment, as the grasses are much finer.

The most difficult problem you have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage you propose buying.  So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House.  The opinon that a long course is always the best course has been exploded.  A 6000 yd. course can be made really first class, and to my mind it is more desirable than a 6300 or a 6400 yd. course, particularly where the roll of the ball will not be long, because you cannot help with the soil you have on that property having heavy turf.  Of course it would be very fast when the summer baked it well.

The following is my idea of a  6000 yard course:

One 130 yard hole
One 160    "
One 190    "
One 220 yard to 240 yard hole,
One 500 yard hole,
Six 300 to 340 yard holes,
Five 360 to 420    "
Two 440 to 480    "

As regards drainage and treatment of soil, I think it would be wise for your Committee to confer with the Baltusrol Committee.  They had a very difficult drainage problem.  You have a very simple one.  Their drainage opinions will be valuable to you.  Further, I think their soil is very similar to yours, and it might be wise to learn from them the grasses that have proved most satisfactory though the fair green.

In the meantime, it will do no harm to cut a sod or two and send it to Washington for anlaysis of the natural grasses, those indigenous to the soil.

We enjoyed our trip to Philadelphia very much, and were very pleased to meet your Committee.

With kindest regards to you all, believe me,

Yours very truly,

(signed)  Charles B. Macdonald

In soil analysis have the expert note particularly amount of carbonate of lime.

[Mike_Cirba]

What?!?!  No mention of an Alps?     

Nice work, Wayne!

[Lou_Duran]

Wayne,

Did you authenticate the letter including the signature professionally?  You didn't whiteout the word "Attachment" and failed to include the card of the course and a routing plan drawn to scale with the caveat that precise elevation changes were unavailable to be considered? 

Are you suggesting that this letter is the extent of M & W's initial input and recommendations? 

[DMoriarty]

Wayne,

Thanks for making it over to the Cricket Club and taking a look.   I won't kid you.  I'd rather I have retrieved these documents myself, but as that turned out to be impossible, I am happy that the document (documents?) will finally see the light of day. 

As for the letter, thanks for posting the text.   One can see that there is no description of a routing.

The reference to the land next to the clubhouse is interesting.  Probably the site of the original 12th and 13th greens, as I think that was the only other land around the clubhouse.

That also helps clarify something I never quite understood about the Francis letter.  The part where he said they fit the first 13 holes "with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue."  He is probably referring to the RR property as well.  They needed it to fit the first 13 holes. 

But, TEPaul promised that all our questions had been answered.   This answers one.   Surely there was more at the Merion Cricket Club?

The HCD subscription agreement?   

Merion's written agreement with HDC?   

Merion's bond/subscription agreement with the golfing members?

Papers documenting the Formation of the Merion Cricket Club Golf Association?

The Barker Routing?

A Wilson Routing?

Additional correspondence regarding the land and/or the course?

What else did you find?



Thanks again, Wayne for going over there and taking a look. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

I can think of a couple of things off the top of my head;

1) Macdonald didn't recommend the purchase of land based on any routing he'd done in his June visit.

2) Macdonald didn't route the course before the end of 1910 because we know he didn't return until April 1911.

3) Macdonald didn't recommend purchase of the Dallas Property, which happened in August 1910, and was evidently part of a clear decision to expand the purchase beyond Macdonald's recommendations, probably based on an initial routing put together by the Committee.

In fact, it's very difficult to imagine exactly what Macdonald and Whigham made their remarks about, in terms of land, without the acreage of the Dallas Property, or the land atop the hill on the northside.

It's likely that Wilson and the Committee started trying to piece together a routing at that time and basically said, "yo...what's up with that!?" when they realized that you can't build much of a golf course on what Barker and Macdonald/Whigham had recommended to them, which would have ended below the hill in 15/16...a full 200 yards from today's 16th tee, on the south end by the creek where it cuts across 12, on the eastern end by the tracks, and by the western end by about the 3rd tee.   

I can't imagine what they were thinking, frankly.     

That's just what we can readily deduce from what this letter tells us;

We also know, because Hugh Wilson and the Site Committee told us that they wanted Macdonald & Whigham's agronomic and construction expertise, that this was the topic of discussion at NGLA when Wilson and the Committee came to visit later, as well seeing and playing the course Macdonald built (which I'm sure elicited much discussion) as well as discussion that gave them a "good start in the correct principles of laying out the holes."

If we accept the definition of "laying out" that you and David stated earlier, it means that the routing was already done prior to their visit, which is likely but not proven by that statement alone.   In fact, I would still disagree with your usage of the term.

We know now that Tillinghast saw the plans sometime before April 30, 1911, and then wrote about them in the Philadelphia Inquirer.   Discussion about whether a "championship course" could be built in Philly with unnamed golfers was also part of that discussion. 

Later, when the course, opened, Tillinghast told us that Macdonald "advised" the Committee, but also gives clear attribution to Hugh Wilson and Committee for "conceiving" of the holes, and their problems.     We also clearly know that it was a slow, painstaking, careful process, as 18 months after beginning, most of the holes were still "rough drafts" with very little in the way of bunkering.

We also know that the only man who we know for certain saw the plans, Tillinghast, wrote in 1934 that Hugh Wilson "planned and developed" the (east) course at Merion.   He said it was sad that so few were aware of that fact.

We also know that HJ Whigham, some 5 years later after many of the others were dead and Tillinghast had retired from the game provided the only mention of anyone ever that attributed the Merion course to anyone other than Hugh Wilson and Committee.   

[wsmorrison]

I am thrilled that Merion Cricket Club allowed me access to their files.  It was a very unusual opportunity that will not be made available to others.  There is a close relationship between the Golf and Cricket Clubs and that's how I got access.  Merion Golf is helping Merion Cricket with the development of their archives.  I hope that there isn't a rush for researchers to try and gain access to these private records of private clubs.  It is of course a very sensitive matter to make such club documents available to the public and we should not expect that these materials are disseminated.  The members of this site should respect the private nature of club documents and not expect to have access to them. 

I don't have permission to post anything that I discovered today and I wouldn't want to publish detailed club minutes on this site as it would simply not be appropriate to air additional private club documents here.  I'm not a member (the Cricket and Golf clubs split more than 60 years ago) and I respect their privacy.  Forgive me if the only thing I post is the transcript I made of the Macdonald letter.  I hope the contents of the letter puts to rest most of the issues.  I believe it does.

The Barker routing was noted in the file and the letter included but the drawing does not exist in their files.  There was no Wilson routing. 

[TEPaul]

"But, TEPaul promised that all our questions had been answered.   This answers one.   Surely there was more at the Merion Cricket Club?"


David:


You just said this answers one question but it seemingly doesn't answer "all our questions". I think you should understand, at this point, that Wayne Morrison has now uncovered the one and only source material piece that the MCC search committee and the MCC Board in 1910 EVER MENTIONED regarding Macdonald's contribution to their club at that time-----ie that "Letter". They never mentioned anything else. The existence of a routing or design plan from Macdonald always was speculative on your part and we've always known that and others should as well. I don't believe any of us here, certainly including Wayne Morrison, needs to go on some wild goose chase all over this area and all through the files of these clubs looking for SOMETHING ELSE that NO ONE EVER said existed in the first place!

This subject of Macdonald doing more and not getting enough credit for it was your subject and your interest with perhaps Tom MacWood joining you or you joining him in that endeavor.

Now, I think Wayne has done enough on this issue and on this essay or yours. It was never his issue or our issue. If you want to pursue it now or in the future I think you should do it on your own and on your own time and effort because Wayne has done his best for now, he's done enough, and the source material he found----eg Macdonald's "LETTER" really does answer the question of the existence of a Macdonald routing and design which was the primary conclusion of your essay, at least in our opinions here.

As I have always felt and have always said on here----that Alan Wilson's report was what I stood beyond until some evidence to the contrary turned up to refute it! This essentially justifies the validity of that source material of the original creation of Merion East (as well as Hugh Wilson's report), that we think was the best, and also, very much overlooked and dismissed or even disrespected throughout all this. Alan Wilson's report on the creation of Merion East and West that was asked for by Merion's first history writer, the 35 year long club secretary and treasurer and Vice President in 1912, William R. Philler, has now been validated more than ever by this recent discover by Wayne of Macdonald's 1910 letter to the MCC search committee.

Personally, I think it may be quite interesting and perhaps eventually very revealing that he addressed his letter to Horatio Gates Lloyd and not Rodman Griscom who asked him to come to Merion and not to the chairman of the search committee, Robert Lesley!

[David Stamm]

I would like to commend everyone's efforts in this. The work that has gone into this by all parties is inspiring. This has been a very educational experience that I've enjoyed. Well done all!

[Patrick_Mucci]

From David's dates, it appears that the Board made this announcement in January 2011.  Correct? 

If they were preparing plans for the course in 2011, how could the plans have been done by November 2010?   

I think the answer lies in the way many things were done in those days and even today.

It's the process of taking the general routing and the individual hole concepts and converting them to formalized plans.

Enter Mr Francis.

I believe that Francis converted rough plans to formalized plans and then implemented those plans in the field.

He tells us that he spent long hours at the drawing board and adjusting instruments in the field.

That sounds to me like the creation of formal plans and the converting of those plans from paper to the ground.

Anyone who's been on a construction site nows how the land is shot and modified to fit the engineers/surveyors plans.

It's not something that happens overnight.

I submit the following potential time line.

Rough drafts, routing and individual hole designs are crafted in 1910.
Francis converts the rough drafts into formalized plans and field guides.
Francis surveys and transitions the formalized plans and individual hole concepts from paper to the ground.

That's the way many, if not most, courses were designed and built.

Why would Merion be an exception ?[/color]
 

Jim,

That's a hell of a question...

I hope you're equally excited about an answer.[/color]

Sybil,

By 1911, Pat had already forgotten what "phylum" meant in high school...


That's why I take refresher courses every two decades.[/color]

[JESII]

The only conclusion I can make right now is that CBM was appropriately acknowledged for his assistance to Merion...and Whigham's eulogy was hyperbole.

It does not seem to eliminate any other speculation about the development of the course...including my own speculation that the crew began their own routing and hole conceptions much earlier than June 1910...

[Patrick_Mucci]

I am thrilled that Merion Cricket Club allowed me access to their files. 


It was certainly a nice accomodation on their part.[/color=green]

It was a very unusual opportunity that will not be made available to others. 

That's unfortunate .... and puzzling.[/color]

There is a close relationship between the Golf and Cricket Clubs and that's how I got access.  Merion Golf is helping Merion Cricket with the development of their archives. 

TEPaul and I discussed that within the last few days.[/color]

I hope that there isn't a rush for researchers to try and gain access to these private records of private clubs. 

I'm not sure I understand that comment.
Had you not attempted to obtain access you never would have found the letter you were looking for.  If there's more valueable information to be found, why wouldn't they want it revealed ?[/color]

It is of course a very sensitive matter to make such club documents available to the public and we should not expect that these materials are disseminated. 

What puzzles me is:  Why keep them secret ?
[/color]

The members of this site should respect the private nature of club documents and not expect to have access to them. 

Do others feel that your repeated warning would seem to create an element of suspicion ?[/color]

I don't have permission to post anything that I discovered today and I wouldn't want to publish detailed club minutes on this site as it would simply not be appropriate to air additional private club documents here.


Why you were allowed to "selectively" release one document ?[/color]

I'm not a member (the Cricket and Golf clubs split more than 60 years ago) and I respect their privacy. 

I think everyone does, but if valuable elements relating to the history of golf and Merion lies within the walls of the club, why would they want to keep it a secret ?[/color]

Forgive me if the only thing I post is the transcript I made of the Macdonald letter. 

It's certainly a valuable find.
It's unfortunate that more information can't be obtained.[/color]

I hope the contents of the letter puts to rest most of the issues. 
I believe it does.

It adds clarity to specific issues, but, I don't think it puts many of the issues to rest[/color]

The Barker routing was noted in the file and the letter included but the drawing does not exist in their files. 

When you say the Barker routing was noted, was there any further information related to it ?  Dates, descriptions, etc., etc.. ?[/color]

There was no Wilson routing. 

Was there any reference to a Wilson routing or the routing of any other individuals, like Francis ?

If Francis spend hours laboring over a drawing board, perhaps his work lies somewhere in those files.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shivas, MPC, et. al.,

It may be important to examine MacDonald's hole selection in the context of what was built on the site.

Were MacDonald's individual hole recommendations implemented ?

He stated:

"The following is my idea of a  6000 yard course:

One 130 yard hole                          # 13 ?   short
One 160    "                                    #   3 ?   redan
One 190    "                                     #  9 ?  
One 220 yard to 240 yard hole,       # 17 ?
One 500 yard hole,                          # 4
Six 300 to 340 yard holes,               # 1, 7, 8, 10 alps , 11, 15 eden
Five 360 to 420    "                           # 5, 6, 12, 14, 16
Two 440 to 480    "                           # 2, 18



Is this the only letter he wrote ?

[DMoriarty]

Patrick

This was June, and almost certainly before the Francis "swap."  So 16 was likely a shorter par 4.  Also, 14 and 15 had to be shorter. 



One 130 yard hole                          13     short
One 160    "                                     9      eden??
One 190    "                                      3     redan
One 220 yard to 240 yard hole,       17 
One 500 yard hole,                          4        long
Six 300 to 340 yard holes,                7,  8,  11, 14, 15, (16 (cape???)
Five 360 to 420    "                          1, 5, 6 road, 10 alps, 12
Two 440 to 480    "                           2, 18

Wayne

Is there a record of Merion sending Macdonald the contour map he mentioned?

Was there any other correspondence from Macdonald, Whigham, or Raynor? 

[DMoriarty]

Mike, you were pitching to yourself, and yet you struck yourself out. 

Shivas,

I can think of a couple of things off the top of my head;

1) Macdonald didn't recommend the purchase of land based on any routing he'd done in his June visit.

Strike One.  He inspected the land, said that a 6000 yd course would probably work, but that he didn't know for sure because they did not have a contour map in front of them.

2) Macdonald didn't route the course before the end of 1910 because we know he didn't return until April 1911.

Strike Two.  He said they couldn't tell for sure if the holes fit without a contour map in front of them.   Most of those fit in an envelope and could be mailed. 

3) Macdonald didn't recommend purchase of the Dallas Property, which happened in August 1910, and was evidently part of a clear decision to expand the purchase beyond Macdonald's recommendations, probably based on an initial routing put together by the Committee.

Strike Three.   This letter was written June 29, 1910.  TWO DAYS LATER, on July 1, 1910, the Site committee recommended purchase of 120 acres, which included the Dallas Estate and the land behind the clubhouse, based largely on M&W's views as expressed in the letter.

In fact, it's very difficult to imagine exactly what Macdonald and Whigham made their remarks about, in terms of land, without the acreage of the Dallas Property, or the land atop the hill on the northside.

That is because you are confused about which land they inspected.  It included the Dallas Estate.

If we accept the definition of "laying out" that you and David stated earlier, it means that the routing was already done prior to their visit, which is likely but not proven by that statement alone.   In fact, I would still disagree with your usage of the term.

Not sure what visit you are referring to.   The routing plan was in place before Nov. 15, 1910.   I imagine the layout occurred in April 1911, because of weather and such, but don't know for sure.  Definitely after January.

All the rest is your same ol' . . .

[Peter Pallotta]

This is very neat - that the arguments and debates have led to the Macdonald letter coming to light. Well done, and congratulatons.

Professor Schmidt -

The letter, taken on its own and without reference to any other fact, document or speculation, suggests to me the following:

That Macdonald was providing a sense of POSSIBILITIES only.  "My idea of a 6000 yard course" is not much more than a mathematical formula i.e. the adding up of yardages for a standardly-configured golf course (of Par 3s, 4s, and 5s) so as to total the yards available. I see no indication that it was more than that: it's Patrick and David who are attaching concepts/templates to those various yardages, not Macdonald himself -- who could have easily (and predictably) done so if he wanted to or was prepared to. Apparently he didn't, and wasn't.     

That this was an introductory letter about preliminary subjects, i.e. what the soil was like, what 'golfy' features such as the quarry and the brooks were available, and whether/how the property would drain properly. 

That Macdonald was aware he was being asked for ADVICE only, and didn't assume or presume to expect more.  He suggests to Merion that THEY send a sod to Washington, and that THEY talk to the soil experts. Yes, he may have been used to giving orders; but not to men like those at Merion. 

And that in Macdonald's mind at this point, his letter was probably ALL the involvement he would have with Merion. The generous sign off and the lack of any mention of possible FOLLOW-UP is striking.

That's what the letter, on its own, suggests to me.   

Peter

[Mike_Cirba]

David Moriarty,

That last post of yours might be the single most ridiculous set of disproven assertions I've ever read on this discussion board.   

Your theories have gone down in flames, and while your research was extremely interesting and valuable, your preconceived notions that drove it led to a blindness to see any other conclusion but the one you tried to make the facts fit.  Couple that with a complete lack of any real proof of your assertions, and only some loose-fitting circumstances that made for an interesting read and it's not really surprising that it collapsed of its own weight.

Your absolute refusal to face that reality at this point is stunning, but I'm really not sure why I'm surprised. 

The jury has ruled, the audience has filtered out of the courtroom, and you're beginning to argue to empty seats.

It's over.

And that's a FACT.

However you want to spin it.

[Mike_Cirba]

"The most difficult problem you have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage you propose buying.  So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House."

In other words, it's theoretically possible, guys.  Why would they need a contour map if they'd just walked the property, David?

Perhaps because they just took a perfunctory walk around and didn't realize that what they were shown was all of 85 acres of today's present course (less the 21 acres of the Dallas Estate, which they clearly did NOT recommend, less the RR-owned 3 acres near the clubhouse, and less the land they didn't own that makes up today's 11thgreen/12thtee, and less the 5 acres they didn't own that makes up today's 15th green and first 200 yards of the 16th hole), and even then they weren't really sure just by a gut feel if that limited of a property could even house a 6000 yard course.

Still, they tried to put a nice face on it, and say...geez...you guys might be able to fit a sporty, "first class" 6000 yard course if you can aquire those couple of acres by the clubhouse...however, without really knowing the parameters of the land in question, because you don't even have a map to show us, it's difficult to state for certain.

"The opinon that a long course is always the best course has been exploded.  A 6000 yd. course can be made really first class, and to my mind it is more desirable than a 6300 or a 6400 yd. course, particularly where the roll of the ball will not be long, because you cannot help with the soil you have on that property having heavy turf.  Of course it would be very fast when the summer baked it well."

Really guys...this won't be so bad.   With your sluggish inland conditions, it will play longer.

"As regards drainage and treatment of soil, I think it would be wise for your Committee to confer with the Baltusrol Committee.  They had a very difficult drainage problem.  You have a very simple one.  Their drainage opinions will be valuable to you.  Further, I think their soil is very similar to yours, and it might be wise to learn from them the grasses that have proved most satisfactory though the fair green.

Yep, David...it sure sounds like Charlie was taking project ownership and a high degree of interest in this one.   

No wonder they went their own way.   Talk about a polite brushoff.


David...even if I concede that the Dallas Estate is part of what the Committee showed them while walking the property, it's clear that M&W didn't recommend it, or find it, as some type of routing exercise that your White Paper asserts.   That land was apparently already considered for purchase by the committee, most likely in trying to put together some type of initial routing in conjuction with Hugh Wilson and his team.

What is indisputable is that Merion did NOT buy their property based on some hypothetical, "expert",  proposed routing by Macdonald and Whigham.   

That isn't strike one.   That's a no-hitter.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()