[Thomas MacWood]

Poor Fred Pickering.   Poor Tom MacWood  

Fred Pickering was not a good man.  His family is far more knowledgeable and understands it better than you.  Since when are you taking the position of protecting legends and not disclosing everything?  I didn't disclose everything I know.  But I'll tell you one thing, the Pickering descendent I've spoken to and the relatives of his that are coming down to see Merion (something you've never done) are unconcerned about protecting his image.  They lived with the consequences of his actions.  If they don't have a problem with it, why don't you get off your high horse before you fall.

Now again we have you reiterating your trite and incorrect conclusion about us protecting local legends.  The way I see it and the way everyone on this site must sees it by now, we are protecting the truth against your unsubstantiated revisions and house of cards theories that are easily debunked by historical documents.  

You are attempting to revise now with Wilson and previously with Crump.  As for Leeds and Myopia, I don't know.  I never studied their history.  As for Creek Club, I do have knowledge there, much of it courtesy of the club historian who you ask favors of but do not return when you come up with info.  You say you have a 1923/24 aerial showing sandy waste areas between 9 and 12 and around 13 and 14.   I'm pretty sure you are wrong about that.  In any case, the sandy waste areas and some of the bunkering in the lower holes today are by Flynn.  They were not there when he came onto the job and we have his payment records and the board minutes (a source you never research because you don't work with the clubs).  These features were in place when Flynn finished.  I asked Pat if he liked those features and he replied in the affirmative.  I then told him they were by Flynn and you claim they are not, that they were there in 1923/24.  Well, they weren't there in 1926.  So whatever is there today is by Flynn.  Macdonald left the club and Raynor had passed away.  Who else did it?  Willie Campbell?  HH Barker?  Fred Pickering?

Wayne
You and you comrades have automatically shifted into attack mode whenever new information is uncovered and your legendary story is about to be re-written. I think that goes to your objectivity.

[wsmorrison]

Tom MacWood,

I think you have outstanding resources available to you and you do the difficult job of amassing raw material as well and perhaps better than any other person I know.  However the problem many of us have, particularly in the areas we have expertise in, is the way you analyze and interpret that raw data.  You make far too many mistakes and you back far too many revisions that don't bear up under scrutiny, sometimes even the most superficial due diligence.  The problem as I see it is that you spread yourself too thin.  You try to be an expert in far too broad a range of architects, courses and eras.  I can see that clearly since my concentration is Philadelphia golf and Flynn.  It is hard to gain an expertise on even these two subjects.  You try to do too much and therefore fail at times, sometimes spectacularly.  Dilettantes do not make the best historians.  You have the capacity to be a far better historian if you honed your analytical skills and stuck to fewer subjects.

You are right about some things but remain wrong about some significant matters dealing with the history of Merion, Pine Valley and Creek Club.  You may feel like you are being attacked and that we are simply trying to defend our legends.  That is not true.  If you narrowed your focus more and knew the subject matter better, amazingly your perspective would increase. for those subjects and you would not view our actions as anything more devious than protecting truth.

[Thomas MacWood]

One of the problems with concentrating on one man and having very little knowledge beyond that man is that its nearly impossible to see the entire story. History is a series of relationships and connections, and if you don't have a broad knowledge of all the players you are going to miss many of those connections. As example you completely ignored Barker because you had knowledge of him (and now as a result you would rather attack his reputation rather than acknowledge you may have missed something). The same is true with Peters and Toomey, you try to downplay their involvement and influence because you have very little knowledge of them. The reason you have been unable to track down the real reason Flynn went from Boston to Philadelphia is because you don't know where to look. That is also why you got the Heartwellville story wrong. No doubt you are very good at logically analyzing information (especially when your emotions are left at the door) but when you don't have the facts at your disposal its very difficult to piece the story together...in fact its impossible.

[TEPaul]

" You have the capacity to be a far better historian if you honed your analytical skills"



Mr. MacWood:

Wayne Morrison is right about that and here's why with your participation on the subject of Merion and Myopia.

It would be one thing if you or anyone produced this information of Barker and Merion and Campbell and Myopia if there was a complete dirth of information to the contrary----eg if, for instance, there was nothing at all to the contrary from the CONTEMPORANEOUS working record of those clubs about who actually designed their courses.

But there is no dirth of information from the contemporaneous working records of Myopia and Merion about who designed their courses. There is a lot of contemporneous working records (board meeting minutes) about who designed those courses and it was not Campbell at Myopia or Barker at Merion, it was others from the clubs themselves.

Obviously, you've never seen these records from either club and you certainly appear unwilling to take anyone else's word for it.

So, your suggestion are remarks that you made on here that Myopia should just throw out their own contemporaneous records and start from scratch. It is just amazing that anyone who calls himself an historian would say something like that or just deny that Merion's own contemporaneous records are relevent.

Wayne is absolutely right, this essentially proves that you have very bad analytical skills.

You can continue to say on here that Campbell designed the original nine at Myopia without ever producing anything at all as to why you say that but the fact is nobody really cares about this the way you're going about it, and certainly not the club. If you actually produced something, then at least it may be used to analyse things in light of what the club's records say to the contrary but no one can do that at this point because you have produced nothing. 

Produce something and it's likely it may be considered, but not until that happens. I suspect even you understand that.

[Bill Brightly]

I feel like I was in a bar called the Merion Thread.

I left that bar because a brawl broke out.

I went to another bar called Easy on Macdonald and Raynor...

but the brawl followed me...

[wsmorrison]

One of the problems with concentrating on one man and having very little knowledge beyond that man is that its nearly impossible to see the entire story. History is a series of relationships and connections, and if you don't have a broad knowledge of all the players you are going to miss many of those connections. As example you completely ignored Barker because you had knowledge of him (and now as a result you would rather attack his reputation rather than acknowledge you may have missed something). The same is true with Peters and Toomey, you try to downplay their involvement and influence because you have very little knowledge of them. The reason you have been unable to track down the real reason Flynn went from Boston to Philadelphia is because you don't know where to look. That is also why you got the Heartwellville story wrong. No doubt you are very good at logically analyzing information (especially when your emotions are left at the door) but when you don't have the facts at your disposal its very difficult to piece the story together...in fact its impossible.

You are confused.  You make specific revisions to histories that you have little knowledge of.  That is failure by design.  I may be making a primary study of Flynn and Philadelphia golf, but I do not neglect the big picture.  The specific comments I make are not about the peripheral studies but the specific studies I spend years at work on.  You think you have identified influences and see connections.  They are based on incomplete data and speculations.  You see solid lines where only faint dotted lines exist.  You do not know the real reasons for Flynn coming to Philadelphia any more than you have an idea about what Flynn did on the lower holes at Creek Club.  You masquerade as a broad expert when you are a dillettente that drops a lot of names, dates and connections that 99% of the readers don't bother checking out. They think because you write long winded posts with lots of names and dates that you must know what you're talking about.  You fool a lot of people.  You fooled Ran and Pat Mucci.  But the fact is, you do not fool everyone and your methods and conclusions are fair game.  They are what they are.  Some are quite good but where analysis is required, they often mislead and misrepresent.

I hereby admit that not everything in the Flynn book may be correct.  But we sure as heck made certain that we present fact as fact and suppositions as just that.  If we are wrong about some of the contents, it is inherent in documenting histories.  It isn't by systematic error.  We work with as many sources as possible including families and the clubs themselves.  Not every detail from every source needs to be fact checked.  If so, histories would never be published.  Tom MacWood has spent a lot of time and energy trying to discredit many of us in Philadelphia in general and our Flynn book in particular.  He is only succeeding in marginalizing himself.  If he exposes a few minor errors, so be it.  Who is made better off by this?  Who really cares?

Bill,

If you don't like it, don't read it.  Feel free to ignore.  You'll feel better and we won't have these admonishments to further clutter these threads.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mayfield, Columbia, Druid Hills, Arcola, Raritan Valley, Grove Park Inn, Westhampton, Rumson and the redesign of GCGC with Travis is a pretty good resume. Who had a better resume between 1908 and 1914? Based upon the quality of the designs would a reasonable person conclude they were laid out in a single afternoon?

Tom,

That's a fair resume of courses that opened between 1910 and 1914.   

You know very well that I'm challenging the supposition that by June 1910 Barker had accomplished much and you and David's contention in the Merion essay that he was the 2nd best architect in America at the time Mr. Connell had him come for an afternoon and submit a routing as part of his real estate deal is flat out erroneous and misleading.

Which of these courses you listed above was OPEN by June 1910?   None of them, Tom.

Also, if he only spent one day at land being proposed for sale to the Merion Cricket Club, which was made up of some of the biggest national and international movers-and-shakers in golf and industry, then pray tell why he would have spent longer at Arcola, Rumson or any other course where he wasn't hired as the golf professional?

The truth is Tom...the quality of most any of those courses is due to work that took place after Barker's one day on site.    I'm not saying that Mayfield is not a good course, and I've heard some very good things about Columbia, but please show me where in the historical record that Barker spent a great deal of time at either, or was there through construction, grow-in, etc.

[Bill Brightly]

Wayne,

I did not "admonish" anyone. But thank you for pointing out that I do not have to read all the entries, I had not realized that. Most helpful advice.

[Bill Brightly]

Kelly, I did see your resonse where you said you felt others are better suited to build a Redan. Thanks. Did you see my follow up question?

[Bill Brightly]

Got it Kelly. I don't drink Martinis, I missed your post while I was bobbing and weaving out of the way of MorWood-TeWayne tagteam match...

I know using "dogleg" is not a great analogy. I guess I am just such a fan of Redan greens that I was wondering if they might be one feature that can rise above a mere "template" if you know what I mean. In otherwords, can Redans be so well received that architects are not accused of "copying" or "pandering" when they build one?

Not to "sell" them, but although today's aerial game may have made the kick mound somewhat obsolete, the other features of the green complexes are just so good. It looks like a hook shot is best, but the green actually receives a fade better. Many have a spine the bisects the green and hitting the proper side is critical. I think they are the hardest green to select the proper club. It is a very unsettling visual off the tee. Miss the green and every approach is an adventure. Forget the Redan bunker, maybe that is an area that can be altered.

I guess I'm asking if Redans have to be left to MacRayonr school architects or not.

[Thomas MacWood]

Mayfield, Columbia, Druid Hills, Arcola, Raritan Valley, Grove Park Inn, Westhampton, Rumson and the redesign of GCGC with Travis is a pretty good resume. Who had a better resume between 1908 and 1914? Based upon the quality of the designs would a reasonable person conclude they were laid out in a single afternoon?

Tom,

That's a fair resume of courses that opened between 1910 and 1914.   

If that is fair resume why do you continue to tear him down?

You know very well that I'm challenging the supposition that by June 1910 Barker had accomplished much and you and David's contention in the Merion essay that he was the 2nd best architect in America at the time Mr. Connell had him come for an afternoon and submit a routing as part of his real estate deal is flat out erroneous and misleading.

In June in 1910 he was working at or had worked at Columbia, Mayfield, Spokane, Waverly, Rumson, Skokie, Newport, CC of Virginia and Springhaven...not to mention the redesign of GCGC.  How had a better resume...again you seem to have difficulty addressing this question?


Which of these courses you listed above was OPEN by June 1910?   None of them, Tom.

See above


Also, if he only spent one day at land being proposed for sale to the Merion Cricket Club, which was made up of some of the biggest national and international movers-and-shakers in golf and industry, then pray tell why he would have spent longer at Arcola, Rumson or any other course where he wasn't hired as the golf professional?

How do you know how much time he spent at Merion? Did Merion pay him for his services?

The truth is Tom...the quality of most any of those courses is due to work that took place after Barker's one day on site.    I'm not saying that Mayfield is not a good course, and I've heard some very good things about Columbia, but please show me where in the historical record that Barker spent a great deal of time at either, or was there through construction, grow-in, etc.

Interesting speculation....Barker must have been some kind of phenom to be able to produce those kind of consistant results in one day. If you are right, that did all of this one day, there has never been an architect in history who has done more with less time.

[DMoriarty]

There seems to be a prevailing attitude that by denigrating one man (or two men in this case) you can elevate another.

You are a fool, Tom MacWood.  You initiated this prevailing attitude, so please don't condemn it in others, even though that is not really what they are doing.  You simply perceive it that way.

The denigration of one man or committee in order to elevate another is precisely the method used to promote the missing faces of Macdonald and Whigham in the Merion essay by your protege with your assistance.  By trying to use the probable but not proven fact that Wilson did not go overseas until after course construction and other "evidence" you conducted a process to portray Wilson and his Committee as rank amateurs incapable of doing what they did, completely dismissing their talents, the prior experience of other gentleman architects (Fownes, Leeds and Macdonald).  You both ignored, despite my protestations, the considerable help of Fred Pickering, one of the most experienced golf course construction men in the world at that time.   All this to prove that only the great and powerful Macdonald and Whigham routed, designed and were the driving forces behind the new Ardmore course for Merion Cricket Club.  This isn't to say that Macdonald and Whigham didn't provide valuable assistance.  They did and were credited with exactly that by the participants.  That wasn't good enough for you, you thought the club minimized their contributions.  Well, they got it right and you got it wrong.  Where are your endorsers now?  Is Ran still standing behind that "excellent" essay?  Is Pat Mucci?  You and your protege are left standing unprotected against a very strong wind.

Wayne,

Not sure what posts like this accomplish, other than to heighten tensions.   

I did not try to slight Wilson, nor do I think I did.   I quoted Findlay's comments on Pickering's work at Merion.   My essay was based on the information available at the time of the essay.  I would be glad to incorporate any new information into my essay, but I would prefer to see it first.   No one ever claimed that club minimized their contributions at the time they made those contributions.  But over time the early reports were misinterpreted and confused until everyone who wrote about about Merion's history minimized their contributions, and this include the club.   No big deal, but let's not pretend that the story has not substantially changed.

I don't understand why you insist on maligning me while still hiding historical record.  Why not let the facts speak for themselves?  Isn't that what you assured everyone you would do when my essay came out?   I doubt Merion has anything to hide, so I cannot figure out who you think you are protecting by creating this huge cloud of doubt around Merion's early history.

Anyway, unless you are now ready to have a an open, frank, and discussion and examination of the source material, I see no point in posts like yours above.    Are you now ready for such a conversation?   If you are not, then is Merion?

_______________________________________

Mike Cirba,

Are you really writing about Barker again?   Why?  It has been covered and recovered?  He had designed a bunch of important courses by 1910, whether or not they opened. 

Why do you go on and on about what courses had opened before 1910?   Surely you can look up that info if you really want to know.    I have a feeling your point is again just part of your Merion agenda . . . but I don't understand the point you are trying to make even in this light. 

Let's pretend he never had a course open before 1911 (he did, but let's pretend.)  The evidence of his reputation is the fact that he got all these jobs in the first place!    Are you saying that while he was good enough for Columbia, Mayfied, Arcola, Druid Hills, Raritan Valley Grove Park Inn, Westhamption, Rumson and GCGC (with Travis) but not good enough for MCC?   Why not?   

Are you saying that Merion never would have used a routing from someone without a proven track record of opened courses?   That would be an odd argument given that the person who you think designed Merion described himself as having no experience beyond that of any other member.   

But this is not a thread about Barker.   I have an idea, let's move all this Barker business to the Cobb's Creek thread.   Since you are the one that keeps hijacking threads with this Barker nonsense, I think that would be fitting.   

What do you think?  Good idea?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom + David

Barker had exactly Zero original courses open in June 1910.

His rep was due to the fact that he was pro at Garden City, friends with Travis + had worked to implement Travis,s renovation plans there.

It was still a time when most thought all one needed to design a course was to be a golf pro from overseas.

[Mike_Cirba]

In case it isn't obvios I should mention that GCGC was known at the time as the best course in the country and Travis the top amateur player

That Barker was able to leverage those connections into a little side money is no surprise at all.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom + David

Barker had exactly Zero original courses open in June 1910.

His rep was due to the fact that he was pro at Garden City, friends with Travis + had worked to implement Travis,s renovation plans there.

It was still a time when most thought all one needed to design a course was to be a golf pro from overseas.

Mike
At least you given up trying to paint Barker as a no talent, who specialized in rudimentary 18 stake one day designs.

You're right, initially his reputation was based largely on his involvement with GCGC. Is being associated with one the highest profile architectural events of that time a bad thing? Reputation will only take you so far if you don't produce. CC of Viriginia was laid out in 1908. Waverly, Columbia, Mayfield, and Rumson were laid out in 1909. They were playing golf on at least half of those courses in 1910. That was followed in 1910 by Arcola, Spokane, Springhaven, Merion, Newport and Skokie. Barker definitely had momentum would you not agree? I don't believe all these clubs were idiots, do you? Many of them are still enjoying the fruits of his labors...I'd say they got their monies worth.

Have you come up with the architects who had a better resumes?

Are you still trying to make the point that Merion was misguided in approaching Barker and Macdonald & Whigham in 1910? How do you rationalize trying to tear down these guys when Hugh Wilson had absolutely nothing to hang his hat on in June 1910?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Why do you insist on saying that Merion approached Barker?   Wasn't that Joe Connell?

None of the courses you mentioned were opened by June 1910, with the possible exception of CC of Virginia, where the historical record seems very, very unclear.  (EDIT - After digging for a bit, it seems that Barker laid out CC of Virginia in 1908, and it opened sometime in 1910, month unknown.   It's the present day "Westhampton course", but other accounts claim that it was then completely redesigned by Donald Ross in 1921 and then revised by Fred Findlay in 1931.   I did also find a credit for Barker going down to DC to presumably design Columbia in 1909, which opened in 1911).

He did nothing at Merion, and I'm all ears to hear what he did at Newport and Skokie, because whatever it was, it seems to have escaped their internal historical record-keeping as well.

You remind me of one of those clubs who out of the blue just claim that they are Donald Ross courses.

Or perhaps more like Rees Jones who turns the bunkers at a classic course into his usual soft cone swirls and then claims it's a Rees Jones design!

Now we have Barker designing Merion, Newport, Skokie, Garden City, and Columbia!!   

Are we sure he didn't design NGLA, Myopia, and Pine Valley as well? 

[TEPaul]

"That was followed in 1910 by Arcola, Spokane, Springhaven, Merion, Newport and Skokie."


This guy is still claiming Barker designed Merion East after we've proven MCC never even mentioned some stick routing again a developer trying to sell MCC land asked for??

Really unbelievable!!   

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

What's the story with Columbia?

I did find a news article that said Barker was going down to DC to design a course (presumably Columbia) in 1909, but I can find nothing in the news accounts of the time in the Washington Post to confirm that.

Instead, by about 1911/12, after the course opened, I see a lot about Travis there, with his buddy Walter Harban who was a member of Columbia.

This was also the second course for Columbia, as they previously played at a different site.

The club's site lists the following history;

http://www.columbiacc.org/default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=232168&ssid=83542&vnf=1&ns=true


Could it be that Barker was going down there at the request of Travis to lay out Columbia according to Travis's plans??

What do you have beyond what is generally known?

[Thomas MacWood]

Mike
You've gone from exactly zero to maybe CC of Virginia....we seem to be making incremental progress.
CC of Viriginia, Rumson and Waverly all opened for play in 1910 - I'm not sure about Columbia or Mayfield.

I think it is about time you throw Joe Connell under the bus.

What original courses had Ross designed in May 1910?

Barker was asked to produce a routing for Merion in 1910. Was it used? No one knows. Barker designed Columbia. Barker redesigned Newport and Skokie. Barker was involved with Travis in the redesign of GCGC as you acknowledged in your post above as the springboard to his architectural career.

I appreciate your interest and I thank you for bringing well deserved attention to Barker....better late than never.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike
You've gone from exactly zero to maybe CC of Virginia. At least we're making incremental progress.
CC of Viriginia, Rumson and Waverly all opened for play in 1910 - I'm not sure about Columbia or Mayfield.

I think it is about time you throw Joe Connell under the bus...what was wrong with him?

What original courses had Ross designed in May 1910?

Barker was asked to produce a routing for Merion in 1910. Was it used? No one knows. Barker designed Columbia. Barker redesigned Newport and Skokie. Barker was involved with Travis in the redesign of GCGC as you acknowledged in your post above as the springboard to his architectural career.

I appreciate your interest and I thank you for bringing well deserved attention to Barker....better late than never.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

What's the story with Columbia?

I did find a news article that said Barker was going down to DC to design a course (presumably Columbia) in 1909, but I can find nothing in the news accounts of the time in the Washington Post to confirm that.

Instead, by about 1911/12, after the course opened, I see a lot about Travis there, with his buddy Walter Harban who was a member of Columbia.

This was also the second course for Columbia, as they previously played at a different site.

The club's site lists the following history;

http://www.columbiacc.org/default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=232168&ssid=83542&vnf=1&ns=true


Could it be that Barker was going down there at the request of Travis to lay out Columbia according to Travis's plans??

What do you have beyond what is generally known?

The Washington Post reported 8/8/1909 that the course had been planned by HH Barker, a professional golfer who declared it will be one of the finest in the US.

[Thomas MacWood]

Mike
You've gone from exactly zero to maybe CC of Virginia. At least we're making incremental progress.
CC of Viriginia, Rumson and Waverly all opened for play in 1910 - I'm not sure about Columbia or Mayfield.

I think it is about time you throw Joe Connell under the bus...what was wrong with him?

What original courses had Ross designed in May 1910?

Barker was asked to produce a routing for Merion in 1910. Was it used? No one knows. Barker designed Columbia. Barker redesigned Newport and Skokie. Barker was involved with Travis in the redesign of GCGC as you acknowledged in your post above as the springboard to his architectural career.

I appreciate your interest and I thank you for bringing well deserved attention to Barker....better late than never.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Columbia opened early 1911.

Why do you think they attribute their course to Travis?

Rumson is a strange one.   I spent some time walking around there a few weeks back and it's a pretty decent course on some really flat land.   It did open sometime in 1910, but by 1911 HH Barker was the full time professional.   It is truly one of the courses where he spent a good deal of time, apparently.    I'm not sure what happened to his Garden City gig but he moved on around that time.

I'm not sure it's helpful to our understanding to just state "Barker designed Columbia" and redesigned Newport and Skokie, although it's possible.    I just don't see any evidence in anything I've come across, Tom.

  

[Mike_Cirba]

The Washington Post reported 8/8/1909 that the course had been planned by HH Barker, a professional golfer who declared it will be one of the finest in the US.

Thanks Tom...that's helpful...I'll look it up.

[Thomas MacWood]

Travis redesigned Columbia prior to the 1921 US Open...we discussed that a couple of days ago.

You can't find any evidence? Do you have access the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune or Boston Globe? At least you have accepted Barker routed Merion.

What original courses had Ross designed in June 1910? Are there any other architects you would like to stack up against Barker? What were Hugh Wilson's qualifications in June 1910? Why not put Wilson under a similar microscope?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()