Another Merion thread

[Jeff_Brauer]

TePaul,

Any crazier than todays athletes giving up all their fame and money for sex drugs or rock and roll?  Stuff does happen.

As to my last point in Post 161....I think we will never agree on that.  I'm not sure exactly what you disagree with, but anyone who is trying to stop the continuous look at history clearly has something to hide, plus, eventually, it will all come out anyway.  If you don't think its more messy than romantic, take a real look at the timetables of gca. 

For example, Raynor carried the squarish style on for 20 years after Colt and others went to rounded edges.  Bendelow still practiced well into the golden age (albeit seemingly getting better)  I would bet that Tom might have done a Medinah one day and a cheap muni the next, so even within one career there is ebb and flow.

And, they all seemed to learn from each other.  Just think, in those days, when most courses were in the NE, it would be a lot easier to travel to see the newest big thing, rather than having to go to places like Sand Hills and Oregon.

While I think there is a tendency for all of us to try to place simplistic labels on history to draw conclusions, I think it is messy messy business and not at all the simple time lines it gets simplified to be. 

I agree with TMac that the original deep thinkers were out of NY.  The Philly guys say as much, as Merion was an attempt to get a championship course as good as already existed in NY.  The Philly guys did some serious catching up, though!

[TEPaul]

"As to my last point in Post 161....I think we will never agree on that.  I'm not sure exactly what you disagree with, but anyone who is trying to stop the continuous look at history clearly has something to hide, plus, eventually, it will all come out anyway.  If you don't think its more messy than romantic, take a real look at the timetables of gca."

JeffB:

If that's the way you look at it, I know we'll never agree on that. If you actually think any of us or anyone at Merion has anything to hide we definitely won't ever agree on that. It's not really that hard to figure out----it ain't exactly rocket science. Like most people, they don't really go for people who insult their friends and their members for about five years first and then demand access to their archives like their entitled to it.

Call them snobs, call them elitists, call them and us defensive or call us all anything you want to but just like most anyone they just don't really like assholes!      

[Jeff_Brauer]

TePaul,

Truly, not every word written here is about Merion.......

[Peter Pallotta]

Re-reading it, I was struck by one line in the 1914 article by Verdant Greene, i.e. "He goes back to England soon, where it is assumed he will apply for reinstatement to the amateur ranks."

How would Mr. Barker have benefitted by having his amateur status back? Would that have made more of a difference to him as a golfer or as a golf architect? I'm trying to understand how Mr. Barker primarily saw/thought of HIMSELF.

Meanwhile, a couple of little tidbits from articles that "bookend" this one, one from 1910 and the other from 1920. A bit of the "life and times" of Mr. Barker.

"The Eastern Professional Golfers' Association has started a movement looking toward the securing of donations on behalf of the wife and child of the late Willie Anderson. The family were left practically destitute. Donations may be sent to Herbert H. Barker, Secretary of the E. P. G. A., Garden City, L. I., N. Y. The Association also intends securing contributions from professionals for the erection of a monument".
 
"Of his [Gordon Lockhart] ability as a player there is no doubt. He has shown conclusively that he is easily the most finished amateur in Great Britain, but whether he will be a success as a pro [in America] remains to be seen. Some years ago Herbert H. Barker, highly rated as an amateur, turned professional and came to America, at one time holding the Garden City berth. He made a fair showing in some of our big tournaments but was never up with the topnotchers".

[TEPaul]

"TePaul,

Truly, not every word written here is about Merion......."


JeffB:

No, you're absolutely right about that. My mistake. Your last paragraph was basically about Tom MacWood. If you're interested in the guy or what he has to say on here, believe me, in my opinion, and apparently in the opinions of plenty of others, if you want him, you can definitely have him! 

[TEPaul]

Peter:

Your post #178 raises some points that are definitely worthy of looking into.

It seems to me that for whatever reason the time that Barker was feeling disrespected over here and certainly around the time he left, American golf (particularly the USGA's attitude) had gotten about as anti-professional and pro amateur and basically as "Victorian" that way as anybody ever had including the other side (actually the other side always seemed way more liberal that way to me). It might have had something to do with the USGA president at that time----eg his name may've been Watson----apparently he and his administration went on something of a "amateur status violation" witch-hunt for some reason. A lot of people in golf and architecture got caught up in it---Travis, Quimet, Tillinghast etc, etc.

I hate to say it---I really do, but there was this odd saying back then that went like this----"Anyone who works with his hands, isn't one of "us"."

There was a lot of fallout over stuff like that in the snobbish areas in America. One of the most interesting examples, actually a number of decades later in this city I live in was Jack Kelly, Grace Kelly's father. He was a really rich guy but a lot of people around here with that old fashioned mentality said things about him like; "We don't want any part of him no matter how rich he is because he's bascally an Irish brick-layer and that means he works with his hands."

Poor Grace Kelly, who I think definitely was one of the most beautiful women in history, couldn't take it any more even if one of "them" (Bill Clothier) was dying to marry her (they were actually engaged) and after her stint in Hollywood she ran off and married a European prince and in the process probably did in her future happiness. One thing she did in was the Philadelphia "aristocracy's" impression of her---eg basically they never forgave her for dumping Bill Clothier practically at the alter.

I think they totally deserved what she did. My only regret for her was that those who knew her say she wasn't that happy with the way it all turned out in the long haul. That she actually died on that same road that was the same place as one of her most famous scenes was too bizarre.

[Thomas MacWood]

Peter
Thats very interesting information. If I'm not mistaken I believe that EPGA was the precursor to the PGA. The PGA was more or less founded by the founding members of the EPGA - mostly Brits. Britain had already formed a PGA, and they wanted to form a similar organiztion.

The part about his playing career pretty much matches what Verdant Greene wrote.

As far going back and becoming Amateur, that really doesn't surprise me. Amateur golf in Britain was by far the more prestigious. The best amateurs in Britain had a priveleged lifestyle. Barker had a tasted of it early on. He was on the fast track to being one Britain's elite amateur golfers, following men like HG Hutchinson (who captained the English International team he was on in 1907), Mure Fergusson, Low, Colt, Fowler, Darwin, Laidlay, Ball, Paton, Hilton, Alison, Hutchison, Campbell, Maxwell, the Blackwells, the Fairlies, etc.

These men basically ran the game of golf, they held all the key postions in the R&A, they were the most prominent writers on the game, and they were taking over golf architecture. Through their connections I bet they maximized their incomes as well, especially in comparison to the average pro.

I found this blurb from British Golf Illustrated in 1935, the columnist had inquired in a previous issue whatever became of HH Barker, a pro in Yorkshire wrote in:

"It was with interest I read your article in last week's GI, and especially the remarks and photographs of HH Barker, and I am sorry to say that he passed away about ten years ago.

He did well financially in America as professional, but only lived a few years after his return to Huddersfield. About twelve years ago I was drawn against him when we played a county match with the amateurs he was trying to be reinstated as an amateur at that time. I remember I beat him, and it gave me some pleasure, for when I was a lad at school HH Barker was quite an idol in Yorkshire golf."

[Mike_Cirba]

Wow!

Nice variety and imagination!!   

I have to wonder if this isn't the reason Barker's so little remembered as an architect, or why so little of his work has survived without being wholly revised?   

Certainly the geographic expanse of his work in the short time frame suggests strongly that he spent as much time onsite as early Tom Bendelow or Willie Dunn.

The recent efforts at making him some forgotten genius are quite funny, actually.


Tom MacWood,

Once again, I'm going to copy our exchange from the recent "Southern Courses" thread.   My fundamental question remains;

What courses of Herbert Barker's were already "on the ground" that distinguished him as a successful architect when Connell brought him to Merion in June of 1910?

When David's essay states;

...Prior to that, he may have been the best-known professional golf course architect regularly practicing in America, and was probably second only to C.B. Macdonald among both amateurs and professionals.  At the time he planned the course for Merion, Barker claimed to have already planned upwards of 20 courses.  In the July 1914 issue of Outing magazine, the great British champion Harry Vardon wrote that Barker’s Mayfield Country Club in Ohio was the best course in America.

According to Tom MacWood, Barker’s other designs include Country Club of Virginia (Westhampton Course,) Waverly Country Club in Oregon, Spokane Country Club, Rumson Country Club, Columbia Country Club (1910), a remodel of Detroit Country Club, Mayfield Country Club, Country Club of Asheville (NC), a remodel of East Lake Country Club, Youngstown Country Club, Raritan Valley, Arcola, Brookhaven, Druid Hills (Ga), Winnetka (with H.S. Colt,) Roebuck Country Club, a remodel of Newport Country Club, Palm Beach Country Club, Westhampton (Long Island, with Seth Raynor.)   He also had reportedly planned or remodeled three courses in or near Philadelphia. " ,

..this is completely and intentionally and knowingly misleading, as virtually NONE of these courses existed in June of 1910!

It's similar to David's usage of modern quotes about the brilliance of the routing of Merion, when he wrote in the first paragraphs;

While the course’s bunkers and features are beautiful and its list of great tournaments impressive, Merion East’s most impressive characteristic may well be its brilliant routing.   In the 1989 Edition of Merion’s excellent club history, Golf at Merion, Desmond Tolhurst described the routing as “masterly.”  The holes fit “onto the land as compactly as a jigsaw puzzle” so that “players only had to step a few yards between any green and the next tee.”  Indeed, the original course, historic clubhouse, and outbuildings all fit snuggly onto land measuring just less than 120 acres, and the small parcel was bisected by Ardmore Avenue. 

The routing utilizes virtually every natural feature on the small site to its fullest potential, and is perceived as a brilliant study in the utilization of natural features to create compelling and strategic golf holes.   

As Tom Doak wrote in his Confidential Guide to Golf Courses:

Somehow Merion has an aura of perfection that other courses lack—every nook and cranny of the property is so well utilized, it is about the only course I know of where a self professed golf architect would be hard pressed to suggest any concrete changes that might improve the layout.   For that reason, I believe it is one of the first courses any young golf architect should study, and I am in awe of Hugh Wilson, the man who designed both Merion courses but practically nothing else.

Jack Nicklaus was more succinct when evaluating Merion East:  “Acre for acre, it may be the greatest course in the world."


He wrote that knowing full well that the Merion East routing that exists in modern times is considerably different than the course that opened in 1912, with fully seven of the holes either partially or fully re-routed, almost wholesale rebunkered, and other greens completely rebuilt.

Yet, in both the Herbert Barker case as well as the Routing Plaudits case, he tries to deliberately mislead the reader into thinking something is true when it isn't.

You both do that, frankly.


Here is our earlier exchange again.   

If you have information on the great work that was on the ground already built that Barker did prior to June 1910 that cemented his reputation nationally as a golf course architect, please provide it.


Tom

Which of Barker's designs were open by June 1910, when he submitted a proposed routing to the development company who were negotiating with MCC?
 
Mike
In the south or nationally? Nationally, courses Barker designed or redesigned that opened in 1909-1910 (that I know of today) would be CC of Viriginia, Waverly, Spokane, Newport, Columbia, Rumson, Skokie and Springhaven. I'm certain some of these courses opened before May and some after May. Arguably his most famous design was under construction in 1910 ~ Mayfield. Mayfield's moto was "beat Myopia."

Tom,

Thanks for the information.   I don't want to take this thread too far off-track, but what I'm hoping to better understand is exactly how well known Barker might have been as an architect by June 1910, which courses would have made his reputation at that point, and possibly why his proposed routing was seemingly not considered.   

As you know, some of these dates are tricky, because a design might be done in one year and the actual course didn't open until 2-3 years later.   So, in this case, I'm trying to see what he actually had built "on the ground" that was open for play by that date.

Of the courses you listed, I understand that Waverly had an existing course from 1896, so I'm assuming it was a re-do, and Spokane didn't purchase their land until 1910 so I'm assuming these two courses didn't much figure into the thinking of anyone at MCC.

In New Jersey, Barker did the routing for Arcola in 1909, but the course didn't open until 1911.   In the case of Rumson, this is another perplexing one, because an existing course was being played in 1910 (formerly Seabright CC), and Barker became the pro there in April 1911, after apparently leaving Garden City.    It's difficult to determine who did what when there.

I'm guessing Skokie was also a re-do, as a nine-hole Bendelow course existed in 1904, and I don't believe it became 18 holes until Ross came in the teens.   Am I understanding that evolution correctly, or did Barker have a larger role?

Two I haven't been able to determine the timeframe on are his work at CC of Virginia (where i know he was the professional before leaving this country in 1915), and Newport, where again a nine holer existed (by Willie David) previously, and the standard story is that Ross then turned that into 18 later.   Any info you can provide on those would be helpful.

The one course I think might have an MCC connection is Springhaven.   In early 1910 it was reported that Barker had been consulting with the club and had recommended the addition of fifty bunkers to the course, which the club said they would build as soon as weather and logistics permitted.   

Still and all, do you think it would be fair to say that Barker was probably better known for his playing abilities and the fact he was the pro at the famous Garden City club at this point (June 1910)  than for any architectural achievements, most of which came later in the south?

Thanks...this is indeed interesting to explore, and I had no idea previously that he was so prolific.   I'm just trying to determine the actual timeframe of his achievements and how that related to how the MCC Committee might have viewed him at the time.

Mike
I'm not interested in turning this thread into another Merion thread.

Tom,

I think it's fundamental to ALL of our discussions of US golf architectural history to accurately determine;

1) How many courses built before NGLA opened were architecturally worthy or renowned as such.  I contend that was very, very few.

and

2) How many "professionals" and other "experts" were actually known to be golf course architects by 1910, or whether they were known more as top amateurs, foreign-born professionals, and dabblers into all things golf from agronomy to clubmaking to their golfing contemporaries throughout the country at that time.   I contend the latter.

When it's stated that;

"According to Tom MacWood, Barker’s other designs include Country Club of Virginia (Westhampton Course,) Waverly Country Club in Oregon, Spokane Country Club, Rumson Country Club, Columbia Country Club (1910), a remodel of Detroit Country Club, Mayfield Country Club, Country Club of Asheville (NC), a remodel of East Lake Country Club, Youngstown Country Club, Raritan Valley, Arcola, Brookhaven, Druid Hills (Ga), Winnetka (with H.S. Colt,) Roebuck Country Club, a remodel of Newport Country Club, Palm Beach Country Club, Westhampton (Long Island, with Seth Raynor.)   He also had reportedly planned or remodeled three courses in or near Philadelphia. "

I think it's important to our accurate historical understanding of events to determine accurately when all of this actually took place, because courses like Columbia didn't open until 1911.

I think this is the crux of where we disagree on quite a few matters.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

One other thing, which I find truly funny, but which David might find "creepy".  (this is surely the first time in the history of golf course criticism/discussion/debate that the word "creepy"  was used, which is in itself hysterical and indicative of how self-important and self-referential the author considers himself. )

Since it seems now clear and obvious  to both of you guys that CB Macdonald and HJ Whigham never came up with a routing for Merion as you both previously assured us they did, I have to chuckle watching you both scramble into the Barker camp! 


Now, after writing that Barker's routing must not have been used, both of you have spent the past few weeks here trying to make the case that it was...or might have been...or, asking us to prove that it wasn't.   I'm just catching up after being away from here for a bit, but it is hysterical to witness. 

Frankly, your efforts to resurrect Barker, Lazarus-like,  as some forgotten architectural genius in an effort to pull you and David's Merion theories out of the dustbin of history is about as much of a reach as efforts by Rush Limbaugh to portray Barack Obama as a practicing Muslim!   

too funny!!   

 

[Thomas MacWood]

Mike
That is one super long post. I'm still having a hard time understanding ultimately what point you're trying to make.

Are you trying to prove Barker was not one of the two top architects in country when Merion approached him? That Barker was basically a nobody in June 1910...that the powers that be at Merion really were clueless, and we should probably ignore any involvement he may have had.

As far as your question which of his courses were completed in June 1910, that is not as important as how many courses he was actively engaged with in June 1910. In June in 1910 he was working at or had worked at Columbia, Mayfield, Spokane, Waverly, Rumson, Skokie, Newport, CC of Virginia and Springhaven...that I know of today. Most of these courses were among the elite clubs in their respective cities.

Obviously he had something going for him. What he had going for him (which you seem to be ignoring) was his involvement in the well publicized cutting-edge redesign of GCGC, with Walter Travis. He was able to use that involvement as a springboard. If you add Merion and GCGC to that fairly impressive list above, it seems to me Barker had an architectural domino affect working for him. Barker was a hot commodity in June 1910.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Its quite possible that Connell heard of Barker through some other reference rather than general acclamation from the media as to Barkers greatness.  As I understand it, he was in the land development business, was not directly tied to MCC, and may have very well have heard of Barker through some landscape architects he used, or perhaps just by being a golfer.

It always sounded to me like he brought in Barker independently simply to get the process started and see if the block of land set aside could possibly work.  And Barker responded with what sounds like a crude stick routing, which could be not a lot more than a first blush attempt to see how many holes might fit on that 120 acre property.  The club wanted the second opinion of CBM.

However, the routing probably had some substance to it. If not, how could CBM, based on his visit only a few days later confirm that the scheme could work, if only the land by the rr was obtained?  And, has been discussed, for at least some areas of the property, it would be fairly natural to just route four holes back and forth, even if holes were lengthened later.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom,

Since it seems now clear and obvious  to both of you guys that CB Macdonald and HJ Whigham never came up with a routing for Merion as you both previously assured us they did, I have to chuckle watching you both scramble into the Barker camp! 

I don't recall making this assurance...when was that? I don't recall anyone making this assurance.

Frankly, your efforts to resurrect Barker, Lazarus-like,  as some forgotten architectural genius in an effort to pull you and David's Merion theories out of the dustbin of history is about as much of a reach as efforts by Rush Limbaugh to portray Barack Obama as a practicing Muslim!   

You may have missed it but I've been singing the praises of Barker for several years now. I've been interested in Barker for a long time. If you do a search you'll find several threads I've started in the past.

too funny!!   

You've been making a lot of strange and baseless claims about me over the last few months....not too funny. What is your problem? I recommend a break, it will do you wonders.
 

[TEPaul]

Just as a general word of caution if this site is going to attempt to recreate the career list of and architect's work. It would be really misleading to include Merion on Barker's career inventory. Even if he was used by an independent developer to promote the sale of land to MCC via a stick routing and a Philadelphia reporter mentioned that Barker had "advised" MCC. If THAT was ALL a researcher had there may be some reason to ASSUME he had done something that was reflected in the East course. But sans that stick routing it would only be speculation.

However, that is not ALL there is on any Barker involvment. We do know from the records of the club that not only was anything from Barker NOT considered but we know who did the routing and design and construction of the golf course. The latter in anyone's logical research would take Barker out as having had anything to do with Merion architecturally.

JeffB, what was that project up here where I met you some years ago? Did you give those principles any ideas of what you thought about the land? If you did that what you offered would be more than what Barker did for Merion. Would you want that golf course to be attributed to you in any way in your career inventory?

[Mike_Cirba]

"Apparently not content with Barker’s routing plan, the Site Committee brought in two renowned amateur golfers and golf course designers, C.B. Macdonald and H.G Whigham, to inspect the site."  -  David Moriarty's IMO piece


Tom,

Why was Barker's now suddenly important work at Merion so minimized and virtually cast aside by you and David in his paper?  

Jeff,

Please recall that M&W's letter to the Merion board did not reference any such plan of Barker's, but instead talked about a hypothetical "first rate 6000 yard course" where he discussed approximate hole lengths that would makeup such a course.

He most assuredly did not reference any existing plan, but looked at the land for suitability of soil, available acreage, and general topography and then offered a very hedged "recommendation" as to next steps (i.e. soil samples, discussion of drainage with Baltusrol, etc.).  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Their research claims are not funny and therefore YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

Their research method is known as the new cutting edge School of "Tautological Architecture Analysis."

If you are such an idiot you do not know what "tautology" means, let me help you out. It means---"A law that can be shown on the basis of certain rules to exclude no logical possibilities."

David Moriarty wrote a post on here a few years ago going through examples of this "tautological" method of his. The post was about 50,000 words and it was a mind-bender.

Immediately following his post, Sully (JES!!) wrote a response of one line that perfectly summed up this method and Moriarty's enormous post explaining his tautological method. Sully's post said:

"That is about the biggest load of crap ever seen on this website."


Now, MikeC, THAT was FUNNY!

[Thomas MacWood]

Just as a general word of caution if this site is going to attempt to recreate the career list of and architect's work. It would be really misleading to include Merion on Barker's career inventory. Even if he was used by an independent developer to promote the sale of land to MCC via a stick routing and a Philadelphia reporter mentioned that Barker had "advised" MCC. If THAT was ALL a researcher had there may be some reason to ASSUME he had done something that was reflected in the East course. But sans that stick routing it would only be speculation.

However, that is not ALL there is on any Barker involvment. We do know from the records of the club that not only was anything from Barker NOT considered but we know who did the routing and design and construction of the golf course. The latter in anyone's logical research would take Barker out as having had anything to do with Merion architecturally.

JeffB, what was that project up here where I met you some years ago? Did you give those principles any ideas of what you thought about the land? If you did that what you offered would be more than what Barker did for Merion. Would you want that golf course to be attributed to you in any way in your career inventory?

TE
Three questions.

Who did the routing and how close was it to Barker's routing? Why have you and Mike taken such a serious issue with anything relating to Barker if you were so confindent he had nothing to do with the golf course?

Trying to hijack a thread on California Golf (completely unrelated to Mr. Barker) in order to open up a debate on his qualifications just seemed a bit odd to me.

Mike
To my knowledge David is the first person (and the only person) attempting to chronical the history of Merion, who has acknowledged Barker's involvement at all. Every other account has ignored him completely.

Is it the job of the historian to minimize or maximize the involvement of individuals? I've always been under the impression they should just present the facts as they find them.

[DMoriarty]

Just as a general word of caution if this site is going to attempt to recreate the career list of and architect's work. It would be really misleading to include Merion on Barker's career inventory. Even if he was used by an independent developer to promote the sale of land to MCC via a stick routing and a Philadelphia reporter mentioned that Barker had "advised" MCC. If THAT was ALL a researcher had there may be some reason to ASSUME he had done something that was reflected in the East course. But sans that stick routing it would only be speculation.

Speculation?   We KNOW that Barker did a Routing for the Merion Property.  That is not speculation.  So far, BARKER's is the ONLY ROUTING that we know for sure was every drawn up.    You have made some unsupported and therefore pointless claims  about your fanciful interpretation of some supposed Merion records, but that is barely dust in the wind.   Meaningless. 

And even there are other routings drawn later, we do not yet know to the extent to which these were derivative of Barker's original ideas, and/or M&W's original ideas.   

One fact is largely discounted: Five Months after Barker inspected the course and drew out his preliminary routing, Merion's Board saw fit to report Barker's involvement to the Members.  And the press coverage (which had to have come from someone in the club) was still talking about Barker's involvement.   

If Barker's routing was totally superfluous and totally and immediately discounted, then why was everyone still writing about his involvement five months later?

___________________________________

"Apparently not content with Barker’s routing plan, the Site Committee brought in two renowned amateur golfers and golf course designers, C.B. Macdonald and H.G Whigham, to inspect the site."  -  David Moriarty's IMO piece


Tom,

Why was Barker's now suddenly important work at Merion so minimized and virtually cast aside by you and David in his paper? 

Mike, Why are you trying to hold Tom MacWood accountable for my paper?   

I have said from the beginning that my paper may have given Barker short shrift.  It was not my intention, and I hope  to correct that. 

You should make up your mind though.   You go from claiming I tried to over-aggrandize Barker to saying I virtually cast him aside in the blink of an eye.   

Neither accusation is at all accurate.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TePaul,

I didn't say Barker should be credited with Merion - I will bet that a substantial percentage of courses built then and now may have had routings done by a couple of other gca's - either in design competitions, freebies to secure the work, freebies from a design build company like American Park Builders (who paid the gca a nominal fee) or preliminary studies like the one commissioned by Connell at Merion.  And, those almost always change, so no, Barker shouldn't get credit at Merion.

That said, given the L shaped parcel was substantially in place, I will guess that some elements of the Barker routing - were either used in subsequent versions.  As stated, the L was only 2 or 4 holes wide, and there was a creek between what became 4 and 7, further suggesting four fw corridors.  Now, they may be elongated, reversed or whatever and I can see why someone might say his holes weren't used at all.  But, I think there would be some similarities in routing.  As always, I could be wrong and am not trying to imply the Barker routing entitles him to credit.

Mike,

I might be misremembering a summary of CBM's letter, either the board letter, or maybe even David M's summary.  But, I do recall the mention that CBM had no topo in front of him, and I also recall mention of the small parcel between CH and Railroad being necessary.  I recall that because I would have thought it was that estate out behind 2 green and was surprised to hear it wasn't.

That led to my comment that CBM must have been looking at the Barker routing.  I mean, do you think they refused to show it to him on his site visit?

[Thomas MacWood]

Their research method is known as the new cutting edge School of "Tautological Architecture Analysis."

If you are such an idiot you do not know what "tautology" means, let me help you out. It means---"A law that can be shown on the basis of certain rules to exclude no logical possibilities."

TE
Wow! Thats quite a word. Maybe I'm the idiot and not you. I've never seen that word before and had no idea what it meant, I'm not sure I understand it even now.

But like they always say better to have a tautological research method than to have no research method at all.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

I might be misremembering a summary of CBM's letter, either the board letter, or maybe even David M's summary.  But, I do recall the mention that CBM had no topo in front of him, and I also recall mention of the small parcel between CH and Railroad being necessary.  I recall that because I would have thought it was that estate out behind 2 green and was surprised to hear it wasn't.

That led to my comment that CBM must have been looking at the Barker routing.  I mean, do you think they refused to show it to him on his site visit?

Jeff,

At the time that M&W visited Merion a few days after Barker in mid-June 1910, there is no evidence to suggest that the Merion committee was even yet in receipt of the Barker report and rough sketch.

Barker sent his report directly to Connell on June 10th, after his one-day visit.   We don't know when Connell provided it to Merion.   We only know they had it by July 1st, after M&W had come and gone.

We also don't know that Connell ever sent the "rough sketch" to Merion because no proof of that exists.

[Mike_Cirba]

You should make up your mind though.   You go from claiming I tried to over-aggrandize Barker to saying I virtually cast him aside in the blink of an eye.   

Neither accusation is at all accurate.

David,

No, you sought to virtually dismiss Barker's role when you were trying to promote the idea that Macdonald and Whigham did the routing of Merion.

In fact, you wrote;

"After inspecting the site, Macdonald provided his (and Whigham’s) written opinion “as to what could be done with the property."  With Macdonald’s letter, the Site Committee now had two written recommendations about what to do with the property; first from Barker, and then from Macdonald and Whigham. The Committee must have preferred the latter, because according to Merion’s Board, the Site Committee’s report “embodied Macdonald’s letter,” and the Committee’s recommendation was based largely upon the views expressed by Macdonald. "



Now, with that theory completely refuted, you and Tom go back to trying to elevate Barker, who isn't mentioned in the Merion letters beyond the 7/1/1910 report of the committee citing Connell bringing in Barker "on his own accord" (he is referred to simply as "the Garden City professional"), and copied Barker's letter to Connell verbatim.   That's the last mention of Barker in any Merion correspondence I'm familiar with.

In fact, we don't even know for certain that Connell ever provided the Merion committee with the "rough sketch"!   All that exists in the archives is the contents of the Barker letter to Connell, reproduced under the letter from the Site Committee to the Board of Governors of Merion.

So, with no choices left but to suck it up and admit that Hugh Wilson and Committee designed and laid out and routed Merion East, just like the "legend" says, we see this sudden rush by you and Tom and Patrick to elevate the only other remotely possible alternative candidate, HH Barker.

It's comical.   You guys should hear yourselves.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

Am I dreaming that the summary letter from the search committee to the MCC board summarized the CBM report, which was private, in part by saying something to the effect that he thought our plan would work, but we needed to get a small parcel by the RR?

Like I say, that line, if I recall it correctly indicates that CBM was looking at something.  Without a routing - his own or Barkers - how could he know that a 2(?) acre parcel behind the farmhouse was needed to squeeze in a par 3?  I suppose he thought it was a good idea, and perhaps they thought they could get a platform and station from the railroad and needed a direct walk to the clubhouse!  

I am not going to get dragged into another Merion thread beyond this.  I don't think anyone denies that Barker did a prelim routing for Merion.  No one denies it couldn't have been used as is, because different land parcels were acquired, swapped, etc.  If any subsequent committee or advisor looked at it, I am saying they MIGHT have likely found a few holes/corridors they thought they could use in some form.  I don't think anyone is trying to credit Barker for Merion based on that.

So, what is everyone getting their panties in a wad about?  Its an honest question, because I really don't know.........

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff,

Please see some edits/additions I made above.

Those three acres M&W recommended eventually included a good bit of the original 12th hole (the approach and green)and all of the 13th.

If you look at an overhead of the property, it was a good idea, because you'll note that the "connective tissue" on the north side of Ardmore Avenue is pretty narrow indeed without it, and I'm sure it was a logical recommendation based on thinking about how to expand the course beyond the acreage that Connell's company was willing to sell for golf.  If you recall those acres were not owned by Connell, but by the rail company.


As far as the Macdonald letter, this is what he wrote;


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.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

We've all missed the most important historical aspect of all in this ongoing debate about Merion.

You stated, ""After inspecting the site, Macdonald provided his (and Whigham’s) written opinion “as to what could be done with the property." 

Do you realize that atlong last we historians can report to the world the origin of the phrase "what could be done with"? How many times people have told others "what they could do with" something and here is where that thought actually originated!

Most apropos I think... 

[Mike_Cirba]

Phil,

Too funny!

I'll tell yuz whatcha can do with that inland piece of crap, road-intersected, L-shaped, heavy clay based, with a big quarry hole in it piece of property!