Robert White

[TEPaul]

"But before Macdonald and Whigham came along, the men who built (or actually laid the course on the ground) were often given the lions share of the credit, while the person who planned the course was often ignored.   It should be of no surprise that the people doling out the credit were the same ones who built the courses-- the clubs themselves.


In fact the reality of that time with those so-called "amateur/sportsmen" designers was the exact opposite of the remark above.

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

This is a good thread that I don't want to take afield, but can you tell me the month/year of NGLA's "coming out" first tournament, the number of folks who played there that day, the purpose of the event, and the month/year the course opened  to members?

If we're talking prior to 1910, which we are, NGLA is a non-starter here.   While many knew of Macdonald's efforts, and a few had seen it, it didn't yet have the renown it would later.   

Also, most of Macdonald's study of the courses abroad came during his 1906 trip...long after he designed Chicago, which was lacking at best.

[DMoriarty]

David,

This is a good thread that I don't want to take afield, but can you tell me the month/year of NGLA's "coming out" first tournament, the number of folks who played there that day, the purpose of the event, and the month/year the course opened  to members?

If we're talking prior to 1910, which we are, NGLA is a non-starter here.   While many knew of Macdonald's efforts, and a few had seen it, it didn't yet have the renown it would later.   

Also, most of Macdonald's study of the courses abroad came during his 1906 trip...long after he designed Chicago, which was lacking at best.

Your the one claiming they were not golfing there until 1911.  On what basis?

[DMoriarty]

"But before Macdonald and Whigham came along, the men who built (or actually laid the course on the ground) were often given the lions share of the credit, while the person who planned the course was often ignored.   It should be of no surprise that the people doling out the credit were the same ones who built the courses-- the clubs themselves.


In fact the reality of that time with those so-called "amateur/sportsmen" designers was the exact opposite of the remark above.

How so?  What are the facts to which you refer?

Mike Cirba,

I forgot to add that the rest of your post entirely contradicted by the historical record. 

[TEPaul]

NGLA opened for general play in Sept. 1911. It's recorded at NGLA and it's a widely known fact, and widely reported.

However, Macdonald had at least two fairly well known try outs on the course that were also widely reported but the course was in really rough shape agronomically. An example of the nature of it is one of Behr's reports on NGLA since he was one of the participants in one before the course offiicially opened for play in Sept 1911.

NGLA probably should have opened in 1909 but essentially Macdonald had at least one and probably two "grow-in" wipeouts. (a "grow-in" back then generally took one year, as in the case of Merion East)

At first he was trying to grow grass on straight sand. That didn't work and so he had to bring in something like 10,000 cart loads of soil and start the "grow-in" year all over again.

Ironically, a few years later George Crump experienced the same problem for basically the very same reasons.

[DMoriarty]

Tom,

The clubhouse opened in September 1911, and they had their first official invitational tournament then.  But by all accounts I have read they had been playing golf on the course since 1909, at the latest.   As you may recall, they had planned to use the Southhampton Inn (or Hotel?) as their clubhouse but it burned down in 1909.    So they  did not have a clubhouse at all until 1911, when their new clubhouse was "formerly opened."   They had some trouble growing grass early on, but I'd like to see the proof that they had two grow-in "blow outs" between 1909 and 1911 that kept the course from opening.    It seems much more likely that the "formal opening" refers to the opening of the clubhouse, and that they had been golfing on the course for a few years by then.   

After all, while your "gentlemen/sportsmen" may have thought that a tent was a good enough place for a professional, I doubt that they thought it was appropriate for themselves.

[TEPaul]

"How so?  What are the facts to which you refer?"

You're joking again, right?

Those so-called "amateur/sportsmen" were the ones who routed and designed those courses. They didn't actually build them themselves. They hired people to do that and they oversaw them do that to their design requirements in the process. 

The only one of those guys we've mentioned who got involved with a professional architect was Crump with Colt. Colt was there for about a week once and never came back. What Colt really did is unraveled some real routing glitiches for Crump that he had gotten pretty screwed up with. In the process of unraveling PV's routing I'd say Colt was responsible for 6-8 of the hole routings but not for the green designs or for the hole architectural feature arrangements with the expection of perhaps #10 and definitely #9 and #11.

Leeds used to walk around and flip white chips where he wanted bunkers or inserted little wooden stakes to outline them.

Did you think he actually took off his suit and got his hands dirty?? Jeeesus, spare me!

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba,

I forgot to add that the rest of your post entirely contradicted by the historical record. 

David,

Would you disagree with George Bahto's take on NGLA's history in "The Evangelist of Golf"?

That's where the timelines I refer to appear.

[Thomas MacWood]

"TE
85% of the best courses of the 90s and 66% of the best courses of the 00s were either designed by Scots or partially designed by Scots."

Mr. MacWood:

Of course they were, if one wants to completely speculate on and completely exaggerate what they did.

TE
A predicatable response reflecting your limited knowledge. No speculation or exaaggeration - I'm just trying introduce a measure of reality to the proceedings. You've been trying to perpetuate the amateur/sportsman myth for a long time on this site. No doubt there were a number of talented amateur architects who were important to the development of American golf architecture, but they had help.

You have consistantly ignored, dismissed and discredited the contrubitions of professionals and seasoned amateurs who assisted your favorite mythical figures. Its time to give credit where credit is due, and its about time you deversify and expand your list of amateur/sportsmen. There were more than the five or six you mention ad nauseum.

[TEPaul]

"They had some trouble growing grass early on, but I'd like to see the proof that they had two grow-in "blow outs" between 1909 and 1911 that kept the course from opening.    It seems much more likely that the "formal opening" refers to the opening of the clubhouse, and that they had been golfing on the course for a few years by then."

Then call up George Bahto and ask him unless you guys thinks his research is seriously flawed too. Or you could just go to NGLA and read all about it.  NGLA opened for general play in Sept. 1911.

This is certainly not to say that the world of golf architecture was not aware what NGLA was. For God's sake, Pine Valley was considered to be world famous about five years before the 18 hole course was opened to general play.

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh...and this;

http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1910/ag43d.pdf


Is it any wonder that CB Macdonald didn't/couldn't spend much of any time at Merion when he had all this on his hands back at Southampton, and it is also any wonder that the Merion Committee was suitably grateful for the time he did spend going over their property just a few weeks prior to this at the invitation of Rodman Griscom?

He didn't get it opened to the membership until the middle of 1911.

[Thomas MacWood]

Best of 1890s
Newport-Davis
Shinnecock Hills-Davis
Chicago-Macdonald, Foulis
Myopia-Campbell, Leeds
Glen View-Tweedie
Onwentsia-Foulis, Tweedie, Whigham
Brookline-Campbell

Best of 1900s
Myopia-Campbell, Leeds
Brookline-Campbell, Windeler
Chicago-Macdonald, Foulis
Ekwanok-Dunn, Travis
NGLA-Macdonald
Garden City-Emmet, Travis

TE
85% of the best courses of the 90s and 66% of the best courses of the 00s were either designed by Scots or partially designed by Scots.

Not sure it is supposed to be, but Myopia is on their twice.     

While you can't count him as Scottish, CBM had vast experience in Scotland, and had Whigham and others. 

David
I mentioned Myopia, Chicago and Brookline each twice. They were among the best courses of the 1890s and the 1900s, further evidence that the 90s were not a complete failure.

[Andy Hughes]

TomM, as this at one time had something to do with Robert White, could you repost the picture of the par 3 at Wolf Hollow (today's Water Gap CC). I believe people would be impressed, and I don't believe anything at all has actually been shown of what he could do.

[TEPaul]

"TE
A predicatable response reflecting your limited knowledge. No speculation or exaaggeration - I'm just trying introduce a measure of reality to the proceedings. You've been trying to perpetuate the amateur/sportsman myth for a long time on this site. No doubt there were a number of talented amateur architects who were important to the development of American golf architecture, but they had help.

You have consistantly ignored, dismissed and discredited the contrubitions of professionals and seasoned amateurs who assisted your favorite mythical figures. Its time to give credit where credit is due, and its about time you deversify and expand your list of amateur/sportsmen. There were more than the five or six you mention as nauseum."

Mr. MacWood:

It is just very hard to imagine why you continue to say those things. It really does exhibit almost a total misunderstanding of a most significant time in the development of American architecture and a most unique group of "amateur/sportsmen" designers, who they were and what they did and how. It is really pretty shocking you don't understand this better at this point, as it's pretty hard to miss that most everyone else does.

In some cases, most cases actually, with those "amateur/sportsmen" designers they got into a good deal of friendly collaboration on their projects, and almost always with other "amateur/sportsmen" designers and the reason for that is most all of them were friends from golf anyway. The Philly school is the one best noted for that.

Leeds, on the other hand had a total modus operandi of interviewing very good golfers who played Myopia or just watching them or listening to what they'd done. Leeds was pretty much of a loner as far as the type of colloboration of some of the others with their fellow "amateur/sportsmen" designers.

I don't want to just constantly argue this point with you, because it's become such a bore but it's just shocking how wrong you are. I guess that's precisely why you have this trend going now where you've gone from course to course to course claiming everything a club has said about their architectural attribution is seriously flawed.  

Aren't even you beginning to get the impression how ridiculous this theme of yours both is and sounds?

[DMoriarty]

A quote from the article you linked:

"At present the greens are a little on the rough side, as is naturally to be expected, seeing that they are only a little over two years old, but they are sufficiently advanced to compare favorably with many others which have been down for years, and in the course of another season or two will unquestionably approximate perfection. With the exception of one or two holes the fair green is also good, and it is only a question of another season before these will be brought into prime shape and the whole course in first class condition."

Hardly sounds like a "grow-in blowout."   In fact it sound like the course was in better shape than many, and getting better.   

________________________

Tom Paul,

George details grow-in problems in 1907-1908.  According to Bahto, Robert White (nice tie-in to the topic) wrote that the problem put them back 18 month, not four years. 

[Peter Pallotta]

David
re: NGLA's formal opening (with a clubhouse) and golf being played there before that opening. Just some snippets from Golf Illustrated, from April 1909, March 1910, and June 1910:

April 1909
"The new course of the National Golf Links of America at Shinnecock Hills will be opened for informal play in June next [I assume they mean June 1909.]  The formal opening will not take place until the season of 1910. Work has been progressing very satisfactorily and the course, even now, is in very good shape."

March 1910
"Immediately alongside [i.e. Shinnecock] is the new course of the National Golf Links of America, now nearing completion, with rare natural advantages in soil and contour of surface. Here no money or pains have been spared to make each and every hole the most perfect of its kind, and so far the results justify the belief that the course as a whole will easily be the best in this country, if not in the world . . .which we are quite aware is saying a great deal."

June 1910
"The new course of the National Golf Links of America, near Shinnecock Hills, will not be formally opened until June, 1911."

I chose these basically at random, but it doesn't sound like they were just waiting for a clubhouse to open. In April 1909 work was progressing; in  March 1910 the course was still nearing completion, and the June 1910 announcement that the course opening would be delayed by a year (which annoucement I've copied exactly as it appeared, no shorter or longer) seems significant for its brevity.

Not sure what any of this adds up to, but I think it might put the August 1910 quote you use about the greens being "a little on the rough side" in a bit better perspective.

It doesn't seem surprising that this August 1910 article might be downplaying the agronomy issues given that in March the same magazine was already proclaiming the course the greatest in the world (!!!)

Peter
 

[TEPaul]

"Hardly sounds like a "grow-in blowout."   In fact it sound like the course was in better shape than many, and getting better."




It was a massive "grow-in" blowout, and delayed opening to general play by a year perhaps two. Generally when an architect imagines the timing of general opening for play he doesn't have follow that date by trucking in about 10,000 cart loads of soil but perhaps you don't understand that.

Matter of fact, the reason Macdonald was so keen on introducing Merion and Wilson to Piper and Oakley of the US. Dept of Agriculture is because they helped him solve his massive agronomic grow-in problems at NGLA.

You asked when NGLA opened for general play and they opened for general play Sept. 1911. Check it out or are you going to claim that everyone who disagrees with some of your notions as you try to learn this stuff and its histories is lying somehow?   

[TEPaul]

Peter:

The continuous newspaper accounts in the Philadelphia papers kept claiming that Pine Valley would open their course for general play soon for about 6-7 years! 

This is precisely why it can be dangerous to put too much faith in newspaper articles for historic accuracy. The best source for historic accuracy is the actual club records. They certainly don't claim they did something like opened their course for general play a year before they actually did! 

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
Leeds should be praised for his efforts, but he didn't do it alone. Like many of your amateur/sportsmen, he was a redesign specialist. Perfecting and tweeking is important, but so is routing. Is there a reason why credit can not be shared? And why drag the likes of Barker, Campbell and others through the mud. And this idea of yours that Colt was hired at PV as a publicity stunt. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Another of your favorite myths: The Philly School. No doubt architects like Thomas and Tillinghast learned a great deal from observing the Philly scene, and they went on to have great success in California and NY respectively, but the truth is there was no Philly School. Donald Ross was the most active architect in Philly, and arguably the most popular. George Crump imported talent from the UK. Merion went to Macdonald & Whigham and Barker. Flynn was a product of Mass.

When you wrote your article on the Philly School did you mention AH Smith, Heebner, Klauder, Meehan, Campbell and Reid? If not, why not?

[TEPaul]

Tom Paul,
"George details grow-in problems in 1907-1908.  According to Bahto, Robert White (nice tie-in to the topic) wrote that the problem put them back 18 month, not four years."


The course opened for general play Sept. 1911. 

[DMoriarty]

Tom Paul,
"George details grow-in problems in 1907-1908.  According to Bahto, Robert White (nice tie-in to the topic) wrote that the problem put them back 18 month, not four years."


The course opened for general play Sept. 1911. 

Bahto wrote:

"Soon after the official opening of the course for play, the old hotel burned to the ground."   

The hotel fire was in 1909, was it not?


The blow out occurred 1907-1908.  The course opened for general play in 1909, at least briefly before the fire. According to Bahto.
______________

Peter, I don't know about yours being a random selection.   There are multiple reports of play over the course starting in 1909.  There was a tournament of top golfers there in 1910.  There are multiple reports on the conditions of the course throughout and while it sounds like they were not perfect, they were far from a "blow out."  The blow out occurred in 1907-1908. 

Most importantly, this business about NGLA not being well known or extraordinarily influential before fall of 1911 is absolute agenda driven fantasy.  It has no support whatsoever.   The course was world famous by1910, and there were multiple reports in the golf trades and in the general press about its greatness.  For example, in 1910 Bernard Darwin wrote the following in the London Times:

Everyone has heard of the National Golf Links of America, that monument more enduring that brass . . . . Those who say it is the greatest golf course in the world may be right or wrong, but certainly not to be accused of intemperateness of judgment. . . . The National Golf Links is a truly great course; even as I write this I feel my allegiance to Westward Ho!, to Holylake, to St. Andrews tottering to its fall.

Hardly sounds like an unknown course that wouldnt be open for another year, does it?

It is these silly games that reveals TEPaul, Wayne, and Cirba for what they are.  No one in their right mind could actually look at the history and then honestly claim that NGLA was not extraordinarily influential before the fall of 1911.  It is beyond the realm of possibility.


 They began building in 1907.  In 1908 they had to rebuild the greens.   The course opened for play in 1909, with the hotel briefly acting as the clubhouse.   Then the hotel burned down. The new clubhouse was finished in Sept 1911 and was officially opened with an invitiational tourney then. 

Keep in mind that CBM was constantly tinkering with the course, and substantial changes were already being made during this time period.  For example, here is a photo from the 1910 article linked above:



Note that the green is right behind the bunker.  If I recall correctly, the hole had already been modified with the green pushed substantially back by 1911 or thereabouts.  So yes there was work going on the course.  Same as at Merion and most of these other courses.   They tinkered and tinkered and tinkered.   But they were golfing on the course in 1909.

_____________

By the way Peter.  Tell me what you think of that bunker style?   Overly-manufactured?    Unnatural?   A Macdonald bunker?

[Bradley Anderson]

I still think that in this early era there was a difference between what the professional architects were able to produce verses what the gentleman/amateur architects were able to produce. And it may not have been an issue of talent.

The gentleman/amateur architect was able to spend more time on the project without breach of contract elsewhere. He was able to scratch something and start over if it did not suit his ideals. He had the sympathies of the other men who were in on the deal because he was of the same class and one of them. He basically had every advantage. And if he needed help with something like seeding or drainage, he could solicit that help on his own.

Colt seems to be the architect who put the gentleman/amateur architect out of business. I wonder if that was because he had attained to the level of gentleman somehow?

[TEPaul]

"Most importantly, this business about NGLA not being well known or extraordinarily influential before fall of 1911 is absolute agenda driven fantasy.  It has no support whatsoever."

Who said that? I sure never did. If you're trying to claim I did show me where I said anything like that---ever? Of course the prospect of the excellence of the course was well known before it  opened for general play. As I just said Pine Valley was world famous about five years before it opened 18 holes for play in 1921 about eight years after it was begun.

I think you simply asked when NGLA opened for general play. It opened for general play Sept 1911.

Another interesting source of information about the agronomic problems of NGLA comes through some of those app. 2,000 agronomy letters between the Wilsons of Merion and Piper and Oakley. Obviously Macdonald was the first to seek out the golf agronomic counsel of those two botanist/agronomists (who had never really dealt with golf grass before) from the US Dept of Agriculture to help him solve his agronomic problems at NGLA. Macdonald continued to consult with them for years and since Merion knew Macdonald well for years too and Wilson had been introduced to Piper and Oakley by Macdonald, they talked about Macdonald and the agronomic problems at NGLA in a number of those letters.

[DMoriarty]

"Most importantly, this business about NGLA not being well known or extraordinarily influential before fall of 1911 is absolute agenda driven fantasy.  It has no support whatsoever."

Who said that? I sure never did. If you're trying to claim I did show me where I said anything like that---ever? Of course the prospect of the excellence of the course was well known before it  opened for general play. As I just said Pine Valley was world famous about five years before it opened 18 holes for play in 1921 about eight years after it was begun.

I think you simply asked when NGLA opened for general play. It opened for general play Sept 1911.

Are you claiming that Bahto had it wrong?   If so why did you site him above?

I asked on what basis Cirba claimed the course opened for general play in Sept. 1911.  Neither he nor you have provided that basis as of yet.



___________________________________________

I still think that in this early era there was a difference between what the professional architects were able to produce verses what the gentleman/amateur architects were able to produce. And it may not have been an issue of talent.

The gentleman/amateur architect was able to spend more time on the project without breach of contract elsewhere. He was able to scratch something and start over if it did not suit his ideals. He had the sympathies of the other men who were in on the deal because he was of the same class and one of them. He basically had every advantage. And if he needed help with something like seeding or drainage, he could solicit that help on his own.

What about in situations where the pro was in the employ of the club, like Campbell at the Country Club then at Myopia?   

Colt seems to be the architect who put the gentleman/amateur architect out of business. I wonder if that was because he had attained to the level of gentleman somehow?

On what is this based? 

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

You wrote, "Bahto wrote: "Soon after the official opening of the course for play, the old hotel burned to the ground." The hotel fire was in 1909, was it not? The blow out occurred 1907-1908.  The course opened for general play in 1909, at least briefly before the fire. According to Bahto..."

Unfortunately, both you & George are wrong.

This was written by Charles Blair McDonald and is dated January 4th, 1912. I am assuming that he is a credible enough witness for all when it comes to NGLA. "The Links were formally opened on Saturday, September 16th, 1911."

This is taken from the booklet he prepared and sent to all the members and that was titled "National Golf Links of America, Statement of Charles Blair McDonald." The quote above cam be found on p.20 par. 1 in the section titled "Formal Opening."

It opened for play in 1911...