Wayne Morrison departure from GCA.com reflects badly on all of us

[Dr Katz]

My Dear Mr Kelly---Dr Jack Daniels works for me

[Dr Katz]

I beg your forgiveness---Mr Kelley please inform Mr Ferrell Dr Jack Daniels works for me

[Bradley Anderson]

One thing that I have always strayed away from on this forum is making any kind of a statement that might relfect on the integrity of a golf club or the golf course superintendent of that club.

It does baffle me how anyone could write something that calls into question the very heritage and corporate identity of a club without making any contact with that club first. I think it is extremely bad form to do that.

Members of country clubs regard their club as an extension of their home. This is lreally like a family matter, isn't it?

Merion has opened its club up to the entire world for evaluation time and time again. My goodness, there isn't another club on the planet more deserving of first right of refusal to objecting to having their legends publically challenged than Merion is.

I will repeat what I have said on other threads about this issue. The veracity of those who have defended Merion is entirely approriate.

[TEPaul]

Katz, you insufferable charlatan, are you still on this website? I thought we got rid of your sorry incompetent, malpracticing ass a couple of years ago!!!

[George Pazin]

I'm just wondering how many people read certain posts and think, "What the heck is that guy reading? He's sure not reading what I'm reading."

No need to name names, I'm just starting to wonder if maybe English isn't my native tongue after all.

[Matt Dupre]

Tom,

I respectfully disagree, in that I cannot interpret your questions and concerns as disproving any points raised in the essay - they only provide your perspective on the facts as you know them, and beg for documented back-up.  That's my primary contention - while Mr. Moriarty can back up his conclusion with a timeline and documentation, his detractors say he isn't right and tell everyone to wait for proof.  If that's the case, you would have been better served by stating the points you expected to disprove and providing a timeframe when you would be able to do so.  While there were intimations, there was nothing definitive.

Matt

[TEPaul]

Bradley:

If you have never met Merion's super, Matt Shaeffer, you have got to do it. What a great sense of humor he has and like all the time! I want to have the honor of introducing you. If I went over there and actually asked him what he thinks of all this mess on these Merion threads I know exactly what he'd do. He's just stand there with that wry smile on his face and shake his head slowly for about a minute. Then he would probably say; "YA Know, why don't you just stop wasting time and come out here at 6am every day and go to war on my grass with me?"

[Andy Troeger]

Bob/Kalen/Andy/Tom

You may well have a point, you had nothing to do with it – it’s been a total waste of my time.

Nothing worth fighting for, I’ll just live in my little world, what a waste of 4 pages.

Sorry Guys did not intend to cause you a problem and I apologise to all those who feel the same way. I should not have used the wording ‘It reflects badly upon all of us’.

This post started with the hope of persuading Wayne to stay but has now got me wondering if I want to be a part of GCA.com.
 

Melvyn,
See Tom's most recent response to you. I again agree with what he's said. You've caused me no ill, and I applaud your intention. I hope you choose to stay as well; your contributions are beneficial to the group.

[TEPaul]

"I respectfully disagree, in that I cannot interpret your questions and concerns as disproving any points raised in the essay - they only provide your perspective on the facts as you know them, and beg for documented back-up.  That's my primary contention - while Mr. Moriarty can back up his conclusion with a timeline and documentation, his detractors say he isn't right and tell everyone to wait for proof.  If that's the case, you would have been better served by stating the points you expected to disprove and providing a timeframe when you would be able to do so.  While there were intimations, there was nothing definitive."


Matt:

I'm sorry but David Moriarty does not and apparently cannot back up his conclusion or his contentions with any factual documentation. It is simply conjecture on his part. There is no routing by Macdonald presented by him and there's no documentation or evidence presented by him that there ever was one. His timing and logic of the Francis event is merely conjecture on his part. There is no documentation provided by him that it took place in 1910 or that Francis was "tweaking Macdonald's routing before November 15, 1910. His triangle theory has been completely disproved by truly factual evidence from surveyors. His only response is they must have been wrong. He has provided no documentation that Hugh Wilson could not have done the routing and design with his committee in 1911. It is only his conjecture that he must have been too much the novice to do it. This is not fact at all or documentation from anywhere or anyone other than Moriarty's own notion, none of it is documentation or factual, merely conjecture and it does not square with Merion's documentation that hopefully will be provided soon.

[Tim_Cronin]

Gentlemen,
   I come late, and blessedly so, to this catfight. I have not read the original Merion discussion, if that is the right term, but I must say that if it has carried on so heatedly that a wonderful contributor to other threads has decided to leave because of the tone of the argument, then the argument is quite out of hand.
   Good luck in trying to get the poop off your shoes.
   As for me, I look forward to eventually getting in touch with Wayne on the history of Flynn's involvement with a couple of courses in the Chicago area. But I'll do so privately, out of the line of fire.
   Wishing you civility now and in the future.

[TEPaul]

Oh boys, Boys, sssszzzt, BOYS!! By the way Boys, maybe you should all stop arguing about who's fault it IS or whose fault it ISN'T that Wayno Morrison, arguably the world's most accomplished combined golf architecture analyst/Pissboy left this website. Perhaps he has not really left after-all. I found him asleep in a little used shoe closet about 11:13 last night where he'd apparently been for up to 37 hours. Somebody on here must have just ASSUMED he left the site. I think he's still here even if we may not be able to easily find him at any particular point in time. For instance, yesterday he said he was in Princeton most all day doing some incredibly top-notch business/finance stuff and after that he apparently went out with some politically conservative Princeton professors and did some Class A possum-giggin' under the light of the silvery moon. That may be the case but I haven't yet figured out how he could've been asleep in that shoe closet throughout approximately the same time. I think the whole thing should be submitted to some tautological test. Maybe he won't leave, maybe he just won't post. But who the hell really knows, as Wayno is one of the most spontaneous guys any of you have ever seen. So spontaneous, in fact, it seems like he can be in two places at the same time.

Frankly, he just might be $UPERMAN.

[Willie_Dow]

Hang in there Wayne, the ground my be muddy but there are many of us who need your input .

Put your rubbers on !

[Dan Herrmann]

I knew I was in the presence of somebody that knew a LOT more about GCA than I the first time I played with Wayne.

We were playing the 11th hole at Rolling Green.  A really beautiful, difficult hole.  We get to the green and Wayne says, "look back an tell me who's work this reminds you of.."  I made a naive "guess" and he spent about 5 minutes explaining the correct answer.   Wayne is first and foremost a teacher and a mentor.     To me, he's pure class, and I want to be just like him when I'm as old as he is

There's a lot more I could say, but I'll pass because I respect him too much.

[K. Krahenbuhl]

I knew I was in the presence of somebody that knew a LOT more about GCA than I the first time I played with Wayne.

We were playing the 11th hole at Rolling Green.  A really beautiful, difficult hole.  We get to the green and Wayne says, "look back an tell me who's work this reminds you of.."  I made a naive "guess" and he spent about 5 minutes explaining the correct answer.   Wayne is first and foremost a teacher and a mentor.     To me, he's pure class, and I want to be just like him when I'm as old as he is

There's a lot more I could say, but I'll pass because I respect him too much.

Well put Dan.  You've echoed my exact thoughts.

[Bradley Anderson]

Tom Paul,

That would be great to meet Matt Shaeffer. I would like to do some kind of golf trip this fall with a bunch guys on our green committee, and coming out your way would be one hell of trip.

Do you have a golf course out there that favors a really bad slice off the tee?

You have, behind the scenes helped me and encouraged as a golf course superintendent. No one on this site would even know that. I have never called Wayne, but I have no doubt that he would have helped me as much as you have.

People who think that you two are disputatious are just crazy.

I've learned so much about what is golfish from what you and Wayne have posted on this site. For a long time I just keyed in on your posts and Wayne's.

Pass this on to Wayne: that a weed picker appreciates him here and would like him back.

[Mike_Cirba]

There are no facts of David Moriarty's that anyone every questioned.

We only questioned his conclusions, that he based on his interpretation of those facts.

I am incredulous that someone can come here and say that they've now "read the Merion thread" and have it all figured out in a day.

Heck, it took us about 3 months each to type it!


Steve,

I say this because you are my friend.

I see you questioning David as to why Macdonald himself didn't ever claim to have designed Merion.   As a lawyer yourself, I know you can intuitively sense where he's going with his initial answer, and you have more odds of actually getting a reality based response or a serious, reasonable dialogue going on these matters with.....oh...never mind.

Some months ago I saw where this whole thing was going and announced that I'd had enough of this thread.    Sean Arble, who was uninitiated in the futility, ridiculousness, and assininity of the first Merion discussions told me he was enjoying it and essentially pulled me back into the fray.

I think Sean is a wonderful contributor, but I would also say that 95% of you out there have no idea of the backdrop to this sad tale, nor the behind the scenes manuevering, politics, and agendas coming to the surface here.   Like the Titanic Iceberg that Hugh Wilson narrowly averted, you're only seeing the 10% on the surface.

So Steve...before you get sucked into this vortex, I have just three words for you...

Run...RUN...RUN!!!!

Save yourself Man...


To see David come back here after several years portraying himself as the victim is almost too frustrating to watch.

To see people here who I respect having more sympathy for David than for a guy like Wayne who has been so generous with his time, so generous in his help of those visiting town, and so generous in his sharing of his voluminous broad-based research that dwarfs the teeny-weeny agenda-driven, positivist paper that David wrote is simply unfathomable.

[Lou_Duran]

Matt Dupre,

Since you have read the relevant material and it is still fresh enough in your mind to render a very clear opinion, can you provide an executive summary of David's conclusions, the facts he provided, and the irrerfutable evidence?

You say, "It’s obvious to me that a significant amount of work went into it, and that if follows a fairly common formula – identify an idea or conclusion, and support it with research, facts and logic."  But what happens when the "facts" and the logic do not support the initial idea?  Shouldn't a conclusion be the culmination of the research instead of leading where it goes?

You talk about agendas.  How do we know what is in men's hearts?  The best we can do is to draw inferences from what is presented with the knowledge that there is a great probability of being wrong.

I have not seen Merion, but I am told by people whose opinions I trust that it bears very little resemblance to anything that Macdonald or Raynor have done.  The single claim by Whigman (that CBM designed Merion) has been discussed sufficiently and I don't think carries much weight.  If Merion does not look like a Mac/Raynor course and if CBM never claimed credit for it, what would drive someone to devote hundreds of hours to show that it was?  I trust that is is only intellectual curiousity.

As to Wayne Morrison leaving, that's his doing.  He will either be back or he won't.  The issue of collective responsibility for an individual deciding to do something else is mindboggling.

And I agree with George Pazin.  Sometimes I think our reading comprehension is very poor or the elasticity of our language is such that communicating with any precision is impossible.  Perhaps it is one of President Clinton's legacies- "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is".  I do think we have a tendency on this site to promote mere opinions and theories as facts.                 

[Mike_Cirba]

By the way, Steve...

Matt Dupre must have really read those threads carefully if he thought your question about Macdonald never claiming responsibility was fresh and new.   I know you were simply asking it as one of the germane, overriding points that has never been answered to any degree of reasonable satisfaction, and the fact that it is simply preposterous to think Macdonald would have simply neglected to ever mention it when the course hosted 3 US Amateurs and a US Open during his lifetime.   Yet Matt thinks it's the first time it's been asked!   

Going back over the 5 years of this crap, that inconvenient truth has probably only been pointed out 6 or 7 hundred times. 

[Thomas MacWood]

David and Phil,

I think any responsible editor who have required a Merion contact first to see if their archives or even MCC had any information to the contrary.

I realize that David's essay is a work in progress and regret that it took the course that it did on this site. When will the revision take place now that "broad based peer review" has taken place? I would imagine there will be many asterisks given that MCC won't permit further access and/or publication beyond that which WM has provided.

I objected to Ran's use of the word "excellent" in the heading as well to no avail.

My basic reaction from the beginning was why didn't CBM himself write about his consultations with the Merion committee. I find it difficult to imagine that CBM did not publicize his Merion involvement if it was indeed more than just a consultation.

Steve
You made quite few statements there. Did CB Macdonald write about his other consultations?

Based upon your research of the early years who in your view designed Merion, and what role did Macdonald play?

What is your feeling about the timing of Wilson's trip to the UK?

Did you complain to Ran about his 'excellent' description? What do you make of Ran's architectural and historical accumin?

[Mike_Cirba]

Steve,

Run like Hell, man....

As tempting as this is to answer, and as reasonable as you might think your conclusions are to anyone with an objective, unbiased viewpoint...

RUN!!!!   

[Thomas MacWood]

Matt Dupre,

Since you have read the relevant material and it is still fresh enough in your mind to render a very clear opinion, can you provide an executive summary of David's conclusions, the facts he provided, and the irrerfutable evidence?

You say, "It’s obvious to me that a significant amount of work went into it, and that if follows a fairly common formula – identify an idea or conclusion, and support it with research, facts and logic."  But what happens when the "facts" and the logic do not support the initial idea?  Shouldn't a conclusion be the culmination of the research instead of leading where it goes?

You talk about agendas.  How do we know what is in men's hearts?  The best we can do is to draw inferences from what is presented with the knowledge that there is a great probability of being wrong.

I have not seen Merion, but I am told by people whose opinions I trust that it bears very little resemblance to anything that Macdonald or Raynor have done.  The single claim by Whigman (that CBM designed Merion) has been discussed sufficiently and I don't think carries much weight.  If Merion does not look like a Mac/Raynor course and if CBM never claimed credit for it, what would drive someone to devote hundreds of hours to show that it was?  I trust that is is only intellectual curiousity.

As to Wayne Morrison leaving, that's his doing.  He will either be back or he won't.  The issue of collective responsibility for an individual deciding to do something else is mindboggling.

And I agree with George Pazin.  Sometimes I think our reading comprehension is very poor or the elasticity of our language is such that communicating with any precision is impossible.  Perhaps it is one of President Clinton's legacies- "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is".  I do think we have a tendency on this site to promote mere opinions and theories as facts.                 

Lou
What is your opinion regarding the impact of Hugh Wilson's trip overseas, and the timing of that trip (1910 vs 1912)? Is the timing of trip germain to the history? Why or why not?

[Mike_Cirba]

Lou,

You too, my friend.

RUN!!!   

The most dense Black Hole in the universe has less sucking power and is more productive to enter than trying to engage this nonsense.

Like Lot's wife should have done, don't look back!   

Someday, when we reach a better place on some future shore, you'll thank me.

[Bradley Anderson]

Steve
You made quite few statements there. Did CB Macdonald write about his other consultations?

Based upon your research of the early years who in your view designed Merion? What role did Macdonald play?

What is your feeling about the timing of Wilson's trip to the UK?

Did you complain to Ran about his 'excellent' description? What do you make of Ran's architectural and historical accumin?


Tom,

Do you think that CBM only consulted on the routing of Merion,or are you with David M in asserting that he must have routed Merion because Wilson didn't route Merion?

[Thomas MacWood]

Mike
There is no reason for Steve to run like hell. I just wanted to know what he was basing his opinions upon. You have to admit his post is packed with opinion. It seems to me there have been a lot of opinions expressed and not much substance to support the opinions. Inquiring minds would like know.

[Mike_Cirba]

Bradley,

Do you really think you'll get a straight answer?    

As long as the rest of us keep engaging this nonsense, it will never end.

David Moriarty and Tom MacWood have offered their opinions.

Let's just see how they ultimately stand up to historical review.

Continuing to argue this is pissing into the wind.  You have a better chance of pushing a rhinocerous backwards up Mount Kilamanjaro than to engage in a productive dialogue here.