[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Can you tell me any course besides Merion where Flynn drew plans but wasn't the primary architect?   Would you not agree that Merion is different by definition, given Flynn's role and ongoing employment as Greenkeeper, and then later as co-architect for later changes, and then later as chief architect, for later changes?

Anthony,

Interesting to see the name of Arthur G. Lockwood in your list of winners of the Mass Am.   Years later I discovered that he designed the original nine holes of Brookside Country Club near the Hill School in Pottstown, PA, about 10 miles from where I live.   

Tom & Tom,

Why bring up any newfound architectural attribution for any course here if one is unwilling to then provide their sources?    It really isn't very considerate of those following along at home.

While understanding the animosity that exists here, I would think that Tom MacWood would be proud to show what he's found and I think some of the frustration on both sides is the making of blanket, knowingly controversial statements without providing anything in the way of support.

I think it's healthy to challenge each others' research.   One just wishes that full disclosure was the order of the day.   I do know there was a lot of screaming (and insults) when Wayne and Tom said they needed to get full permission from Merion Cricket Club before disseminating meeting minutes on here, and that to me just seemed to be common, respectful courtesy necessitated by the fact that both of them have affiliations and personal relationships at the clubs in question.   

For the life of me I'm trying to understand the parallel here that is causing stonewalling on a 1890s newpaper article?   

[Thomas MacWood]

Mike
If you check my posts from last night you will see I did provide where the Campbell attribution came from....along with quite a bit of other info on Myopia. That is as far as I will go...I may have provided too much. I'm not interested in helping TE in any way. Sad but true. However I will be glad to provide the documentation to the club, if they have any interest.

In the past I have been very generous with information on this website and privately, and I will continue to be, except in cases where it appears TE will benefit. If you or TE object to this stance, and feel the need to respond with insults...in the words of that sage Curious JJ, 'Bring it on Bitch!'

By the way we aren't writing the history of the world here. This is a casual exercise in hopes of stimulating thought, conversation and a little learning on Massachusetts golf architeture, not unlike the one we did with Philadelphia. You were quite helpful bringing out a number of attributions on that thread. I don't recall anyone demanding you provide your sources. And of all the threads on the best courses by region that one by far went the smoothest. For two primary reasons: TE did not participate, ironic since he lives in Philly and two, no one tried to hijack that thread in hopes of making it a platform for their personal issue or agenda.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Sorry you feel that way.  I would hope that your findings would speak for themselves.

btw...if you're curious about any of the architectural attributions I provided on the Philadelphia thread, please just ask and I'll do my best to provide you with whatever I have.    That goes for anyone else here, as well.

In fact, if there's a reason I'm still here after all these years, it's the historical discovery and discussion and even sometimes collaboration that still always piques my interest.

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

Mike:

That's like Herbert Lagerblade. He designed Chippanee Golf Club, Briston, Connecticut and it turns out he was in the first group of the day in the final round of the '13 U.S. Open.

I think he also tried to make the cafeteria food fight an Olympic sport.

Anthony

[TEPaul]

"Mike
If you check my posts from last night you will see I did provide where the Campbell attribution came from....along with quite a bit of other info on Myopia. That is as far as I will go...I may have provided too much. I'm not interested in helping TE in any way. Sad but true. However I will be glad to provide the documentation to the club, if they have any interest.

In the past I have been very generous with information on this website and privately, and I will continue to be, except in cases where it appears TE will benefit. If you or TE object to this stance, and feel the need to respond with insults...in the words of that sage Curious JJ, 'Bring it on Bitch!'"


Tom MacWood:

No problem at all and there sure won't be any insults from me on this--just opinions. As far as I can tell from what I have on Myopia, the club is not aware Willie Campbell designed their first nine holes in 1894 (their first nine holes is not exactly Leeds' "Long Nine" either)---eg the club apparently believes it was done by Appleton, Merrill and Gardner.  But I'll ask around to see if some of the club's historians are aware of some Campbell contribution to Myopia in the beginning. Otherwise your attitude and actions regarding Campbell and Myopia is just another example of you marginalizing yourself but you are very good at that. It's not a matter of helping me, it's a matter of helping Myopia if you have anything solid but you probably don't. If this Campbell contribution in 1894 is something like your efforts on behalf of Macdonald at Merion in 1910-1911, I think you can forget about it, as I doubt Myopia is anymore interested in that kind of blatant speculation than Merion is. Is this another example of your "Throw some spaghetti against the wall to see if if sticks" theory of architectural analysis?

This is another golf course you seem to want to revise the architectural history of you've never seen, isn't it? Herbert Leeds spent around thirty years working on that golf course and the world of golf architecture totally understood that but yet you suggest the club just throw his chronicle of those years out and start again. That's really brilliant!?! 

But again, if you don't want to share anything on Myopia that's cool. It was probably dumb of me to ever assume you might.

[SPDB]

Tom M:
I think the first Wollaston course was at Merry Mount in Quincy. The second course, however, was in the Norfolk Downs section closer to Milton, I think near the Neponset River.

What about my questions re: Oyster Harbor date and inclusion of Oakley?

I think you should also include Berkshire Hunt - 1926 (Stiles)(n/k/a Cranwell)

[Brad Tufts]

I say while wincing:  I always thought Leeds was responsible for the original course at Essex CC as well, but I'm far from 100% sure.  This was before the Dunn/Travis contribution.  I will check their club history this week on that.

I always thought Leeds was associated with (originally at least) Myopia, Bass Rocks, Essex, Kebo Valley, and Palmetto.

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

SPDB
Discovering Donald Ross lists Oyster Harbor as 1927

Brad
I think Leeds at the first version of Essex County is correct.



Anthony

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I think Woodland needs to be added to your list, at least from the early pictures I've seen.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom M:
I think the first Wollaston course was at Merry Mount in Quincy. The second course, however, was in the Norfolk Downs section closer to Milton, I think near the Neponset River.

What about my questions re: Oyster Harbor date and inclusion of Oakley?

I think you should also include Berkshire Hunt - 1926 (Stiles)(n/k/a Cranwell)

You're right about the Old Wollaston it became Merry Mount GC. I'm pretty sure they were playing golf at OH in 1927. The construction was well underway late in 1926. From what I've seen Oakley is very ordinary golf course, and that may be putting it kindly.

[Thomas MacWood]

Brookline - 1894 W.Campbell, 1898 Windeler, 1911-1913 Windeler, 1927 Flynn

Essex County - 1894 W.Cambell, 1907 Willett/Caner/Dunn/Travis, 1911-1917 Ross

Salem - 1925 Ross

Charles River - 1921 Ross

Myopia Hunt - 1894 W.Campbell, ? Leeds

Brae Burn - 1912 Ross

Vesper - 1895 ?, 1899 Findlay, 1919 Ross

Belmont Springs - 1909 Ross

Winchester - 1902 Findlay, 1916 Ross

Oyster Harbors - 1927 Ross

Berkshire Hills - 1926 Tillinghast

Eastward Ho! - 1922 Fowler

Sankaty Head  - 1921 H. Emerson Armstrong

Longmeadow CC - 1921 Ross

Dedham Country and Polo - 1915 Ross, 1921 Fowler, 1923 Raynor

Kittansett - 1922 Wilson/Flynn/Hood

Taconic - 1896 ?, 1927 Stiles

Worcester - 1914 Ross

Thorny Lea - 1925 Stiles

CC of New Bedford - 1902 ?, 1923 Park

Tedesco - 1903 ?, 1912 Ross

The Orchard - 1922 Ross, 1927 Ross

Cedar Bank - 1927 QA Shaw

Woods Hole - 1898 ?, 1919 Winton, 1927 Stiles

Concord (9 holes) - 1913 Ross

Whitinsville (9 holes) - 1925 Hatch/Ross

Berkshire Hunt - 1926 Stiles

[BCrosby]

What is left of Oyster Harbor? It hosted a bunch of state wide tournaments for a while. It must have been well thought of.

Bob

[Thomas MacWood]

Campbell definitely laid out Essex County....and Myopia and redesigned Brookline, all in 1894. Campbell was the pro at Essex County and Brookline in 1894, and later became the pro at Mypoia.

July 13, 1894 Boston Globe 'Nothing too good for the Essex County Club'

"This spring golf links of nine holes were laid out under the experienced direction of Willie Campbell, professional golf champion of this country. These links are one and three-quarter miles round and are probably the most perfect in America at the present time."

[DMoriarty]

David,

Can you tell me any course besides Merion where Flynn drew plans but wasn't the primary architect?   Would you not agree that Merion is different by definition, given Flynn's role and ongoing employment as Greenkeeper, and then later as co-architect for later changes, and then later as chief architect, for later changes?

I don't think so.  As I said above, I have only seen a few plans by Flynn.   Somewhere around here I have plans he drew up for one of the Philadelphia Country Club courses and maybe another course, but I cannot remember what they show and am not sure whether they were ever followed.  But I dont think this makes any difference.   

A couple of questions for you:

1. When it comes to a renovation plan of an already existing course, should we just assume that everything in the plan was designed by the renovator? Or should we take a closer look at what was there before?     

2. When more than one individual was involved in planning a course, but only one plan is drawn up, should we automatically give all the credit to the one who drew the plan, or should we consider the contributions of the others?   

3. Take Cobb's Creek for example.   I haven't followed the threads carefully, but I assume you think that that Wilson was involved in planning the course.    As far as I know, there were no golf course plans drawn up by Wilson for Cobb's Creek.  Assuming that someone else did a plan (found or not) should we completely cut out Wilson from consideration just because he was not the one who actually put paper to pen? 

As for the rest of your post, in the past I do not recallyou raising this concern with Wayne Morrison or Tom Paul, and for months (years actually) they have been making claims (sometimes false claims), and they have steadfastly refused to produce any support..   

Never mind the charade with the sources regarding Merion, these guys claim to be experts on Flynn, yet for years now they have not let potentially critical eyes set sight on their Flynn Manifesto, which will apparently remain nothing more than a 2000 page vanity piece.   

[DMoriarty]

Sorry you feel that way.  I would hope that your findings would speak for themselves.

Are you serious?   TEPaul repeatedly and mercilessly insults him and attacks him, stalking him from thread to thread, and you expect MacWood to provide information so TEPaul can go up to Myopia and to his USGA cronies and pretend that actually he has something to offer.  I say NO WAY.

Think of all Tom MacWood has contributed to this website and to all of our knowledge of GCA.   Yet TEPaul treats him like he is an absolute disgrace and an idiot.   Especially ironic when one considers that if you cut through the ever-flowing river of B.S, there is very little of substance in TEPaul's posts, and even that little bit is often either flat-out wrong, or derivative, broad-brushed, shallow, remedial, and REPETITIOUS, so as to render it largely worthless. 

[As an aside, this is exactly what TEPaul and Wayne are trying to do to me.  Borrow, use, and adopt most of my research and analysis, while at the same time portraying my essay as worthless and entirely false.    Something tells me that much of the super-secret Merion Report will ring familiar when it comes to issues like the reason the club needed to move, how and when the transaction came about, Lloyd's role in brokering the transaction, the identity of the sellers, the importance of the RR land lease and the Dallas Estate purchase, Wilson's trip abroad, Macdonald's involvement before the land was purchased, the REAL purpose of the NGLA trip, Macdonald's guidance and help with the design (minimized by them of course), and much more.  In fact I'll bet this is part of the reason it is super secret.]

Bottom line is that TEPaul constantly portrays himself as the gatekeeper and spokesperson for Merion, the USGA, Myopia, and who-knows-what other clubs.    So long as this is the case, I'm with Tom MacWood.  In fact I wish Tom MacWood would stop doing TEPaul's work for him.    If TEPaul is such an authority, let him try to figure some of this stuff out. 

This is what concerns me about the USGA Archives.   TEPaul constantly (and falsely) represents himself as the spokesperson and gatekeeper (he won't even let Bob Crosby answer questions addressed to Bob) for the Archives, yet he as proven repeatedly that when it comes do dealing with research and researchers, he is a complete and total scumbag.  Yet we are leaving the history of g.c.a. to this guy.   As I have said before, YIKES!

[TEPaul]

David Moriarty:

Once again, I am not the gatekeeper of Merion, Myopia, the USGA Architecture Archive or anything else I can think of. I've never remotely said or implied such a thing. You're the only one who's done that! 

Tom MacWood is perfectly capable of picking up the phone and calling Myopia if he wants to but he seems to expect them to seek him out. That's interesting, to say the least. You're perfectly capable of picking up the phone and calling Merion and I believe you've already done that. I have nothing whatsoever to do with any of that. If they don't feel like speaking to you, well, as they say; "What're you gonna do?"

There're a number of people working on the USGA project, I'm just one of them, and they are all more than capable of speaking for themselves about it. But the fact that they apparently haven't said much to you does not surprise me. All of us have been assigned various clubs as contacts and obviously that's why I'd like to see what Tom MacWood thinks he has on Myopia about Willie Campbell. But if he doesn't want to produce anything that he claims about Campbell, again, as they say; "What are gonna do? "   

That last post of yours seems to be your most hysterical to date. Now that your fifteen minutes in the sun with that ridiculous essay is basically over there apparently isn't much left for you to do other than rail against us or me. I couldn't care an iota, keep on railing, it's sort of amusing actually. Other than being an on-giong piece of shit you obviously have some problems you probably need to deal with outside this website. There must be someone out there in California who can help you with your persecution complex.

[DMoriarty]

David Moriarty:

Once again, I am not the gatekeeper of Merion, Myopia, the USGA Architecture Archive or anything else I can think of. I've never remotely said or implied such a thing. You're the only one who's done that!

Of course you have said that.  Many times.   Have your posts become so redundant that not even you read them any more?  In this very thread you have been demanding that Tom MacWood provide you with information on Myopia, so you could provide it to Merion.  According to you, if MacWood or I want to communicate with Myopia or Merion, then we have no choice but to go through you.  Would you like more examples?   There are plenty.  But I'd rather not pollute another thread with your garbage.  You do plenty enough of that yourself. 

You're perfectly capable of picking up the phone and calling Merion and I believe you've already done that.

I have not picked up the phone and called Merion, although Wayne has periodically called me.

There're a number of people working on the USGA project, I'm just one of them, and they are all more than capable of speaking for themselves about it. But the fact that they apparently haven't said much to you does not surprise me. All of us have been assigned various clubs as contacts and obviously that's why I'd like to see what Tom MacWood thinks he has on Myopia about Willie Campbell. But if he doesn't want to produce anything that he claims about Campbell, again, as they say; "What are gonna do? " 

However many may be involved, you are presently the only one making a mockery of the entire project and embarrassing yourself and everyone involved.  I would think that for their sake and for the sake of the project you would try to straighten up, but I guess you probably couldn't if you tried.   Too bad, American golf deserves better.

What are gonna do? Here's what you should do:

Go up to Myopia and tell them that Tom MacWood  knows far more than you about their history and is a far more capable researcher than you, and provide them with MacWood's contact information and tell them he has some terrific information about their early history, and they should consider contacting him.  Then you should stay as far away as possible from any communication so as to not muck it up.

Of course your ego would never let this happen.  Just like Wayne's ego will never allow me to have anything to do with putting the last few pieces in the puzzle at Merion.  But if you were really concerned with understanding the history of golf course design in America, it is exactly what you would do. 

That last post of yours seems to be your most hysterical to date. Now that your fifteen minutes in the sun with that ridiculous essay is basically over there apparently isn't much left for you to do other than rail against us or me. I couldn't care an iota, keep on railing, it's sort of amusing actually. Other than being an on-giong piece of shit you obviously have some problems you probably need to deal with outside this website. There must be someone out there in California who can help you with your persecution complex.

 I don't care for you, but even so I'd rather not be cruel.   So I suggest we leave "problems you need to deal with outside of this website" off this website.   

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom,

I think Woodland needs to be added to your list, at least from the early pictures I've seen.

Mike
Woodlands is a big mystery. The original course dates back to 1896. In 1907 it was expanded to 18. I've seen Ross's name associate with the course, but the club insists he had nothing to do with it. They claim it is Stiles, but according to the Stiles biography he never listed the course and they can't find any connection. If I'm not mistaken Stiles father (or maybe it was his older brother) was a prominant amatuer golfer in Boston, maybe he was responsible in 1907. Just a guess.

Does anyone know who did what and when at Woodlands?

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

The original Wollaston, is where William Flynn first came in contact with golf as a caddie. It was very near his boyhood home.


The Bob Labbance-Kevin Mendik Wayne Stiles book says:

"Wollaston is listed as a remodeling of 18 holes on the 1927, 1929 and 1931 course lists with Claude H. Hart and R.R. Freeman as contacts."

"It was konw for its fine turf and undulating terrain from day one. And for the wind. The course was expanded to 18 holes by 1900. Harry Vardon visited Wollaston during his first tour of America in April of 1900, and played the old nine, shooting 80 for both rounds. Bobby Jones and Francis Ouimet played an exhibition match there on the newly opened Stiles course in 1923.
 
"By 1924, Stiles had completed work on the course, but the club eventually sold the land to the County of Norfolk in the mid 1970s. The Stiles design was completely built over by George and Tom Fazio in the mid 1970s and is know today as The Presidents Golf Club."

The current Wollaston Golf Club is in Milton on land purchased in 1969.

Anthony

[TEPaul]

David Moriarty:

Obviously I don't think much of you either and I see no reason to discuss anything to do with architecture with you on here anymore, particularly after the charade you pulled on this website with Merion.

But how the hell do YOU know MacWood knows more about Myopia than I do? You'd pretty much need to know something about it yourself to undertand that and you don't.

I've offered to get MacWood involved in some of these things a number of times but he won't do it. Perhaps because you and Tom MacWood have a real inflated sense of your own importance you think these clubs are going to call you up and solicit your advice on their histories but I've rarely seen it work that way. One pretty much needs to get in touch with them and try to develop a relationship first. At least that's the way most of the rest of us have done it, unless or until one develops something of a respected reputation for this kind of thing as perhaps the likes Bob Labbance, Brad Klein, Dan Wexler, Goeff Shackelford, Jim Finegan, Bill Quirin and Philip Young have. Apparently you two don't agree with that or understand it. If that's the way you continue to approach this stuff I doubt either of you will be very productive.

I would have been be glad to tell Myopia that he would like to be in touch with them but it would help to know what it is he has before I do that. He won't even explain it, he continuously skirts the issue of Campbell every which way to Sunday. I don't believe any of these clubs are interested in dealing with people like you two just because you say you have something that can revise their architectural history. That charade was pretty much the story with this whole Macdonald/Merion thing with you two. The club was initially pretty interested in seeing information that Macdonald had more to do with their course than they realized but after those who have something to do with that club actually saw your essay and the way you carried on in the discussions of it they weren't interested. These people aren't dumb, Moriarty, all of them are more than capable of recognizing completely tortured logic and a total lack of anything important to their course's architectural history. The way you developed your assumptions and conclusion in that essay is a joke to people who know that club and the history of its courses. Because of that there probably wont't be a next time in that type of attempt with any of these clubs familiar with this website.

I'd be glad to do as you suggest in that last post and leave you alone. There's no need to say a thing to you on here anymore as far as I'm concerned, particularly about golf architecture but if you feel the need to call me a scumbag on here including underlining it and as long as you continue to try to mock me and my relationship with Merion, Myopia and the USGA Architecture Archive because I'm part of them, then it's pretty safe to say you'll hear from me. At least I'm involved with them and other clubs which is more than can be said for you and MacWood. What the both of you should probably do is dial down bigtime on your attitudes of self-importance on here and failing that produce something worthwhile and something actual other than just these unsubstantiated claims about what you know or have about some of these courses that you think should matter to them and their histories----eg observe MacWoods' latest attempt to show he's some kind of "expert researcher"! He is now trying to prove that Myopia's Herbert Leeds might have been homosexual. 

Man alive, isn't that just incredibly interesting and somehow relevent to the architectural history of that great old golf course? I'm sure Myopia just can't wait to learn more about that from some self-possessed dude who never comes out of his Ivory Tower in Ohio and who's fixated on his own self-importance as a golf architecture researcher and anaylst!

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

Again from Labbance and Mendik:

"Although Stiles does not claim credit for the design of the golf course on any list, the Club's centennial book includes the following notation: "Woodland is not, nor has ever been a 'Donald Ross golf course' The first architect of record was Wayne Stiles; those who followed are credited with remodeling work."

They add that Ross was there in 1928 suggesting that sometime between 1907 and 1928 Stiles laid out the course. Woodland might be absent from his list because prior to 1916 architects would have lost their amateur status if compensation was received for work.

Anthony

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike
Woodlands is a big mystery. The original course dates back to 1896. In 1907 it was expanded to 18. I've seen Ross's name associate with the course, but the club insists he had nothing to do with it. They claim it is Stiles, but according to the Stiles biography he never listed the course and they can't find any connection. If I'm not mistaken Stiles father (or maybe it was his older brother) was a prominant amatuer golfer in Boston, maybe he was responsible in 1907. Just a guess.

Does anyone know who did what and when at Woodlands?

Tom,

Although the original course dates to 1896, the present course dates to 1904, with construction initiating in 1901.   

A club member, Alfred Howard, who was described as "the moving spirit of the club", was named the head of a committee to create a new golf course on land near the original course.

It opened a full 18 holes in 1904 at a playing distance of 6,147 yards, and reportedly in good condition after a full $12,000 was spent on it in 1903 alone.

The course had many natural features that were apparently well-utilized, including significant but reasonable elevation changes and a deep ravine.   Fred Pickering did the construction.

All of the holes were named, and the 13th green was a punchbowl.   Some of the names were derived from Civil War battles, such as "Little Round Top", and "Gettysburg", although I'm not sure why exactly.

From an account by Arthur Lockwood, himself a top golfer in Boston at the time and I believe a member;

"The officials of the club feel very grateful to the well known professionals Alex Findlay and Donald Ross, of the Oakley Country Club, for the many helpful suggestions given during the construction and laying out of the course."

"The club has engaged as professional, that promising young player Alex Ross, who has figured so prominently in the last two open championships."

"The present membership of the club is one hundred and sixty, and the limit has just been raised to two hundred.  The initiation fee is $20, with a similar sum for the annual subscription."


I'm not sure about Stiles involvement or later iterations of the course, but this is what was built initially.

[Mike_Cirba]

I should also mention that Pickering was credited with constructing Woolaston as well.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Good stuff there on the records from those clubs. We are particularly interested in any available info and background on Fred Pickering for obvious reasons. Apparently Alex Findlay thought a lot of Pickering's construction ability.

At some point, I'd like to see some threads on here that concentrate on some of those early construction foremen such as Pickering, Pine Valley's Jim Govan and Maxwell's Wood et al.

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

The Fred Pickering the man, who although nearly 30 years older, married the older sister of William Flynn? Scandalous!

Anthony

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()